This is not rational thought.
President Bush, please take a new peek into Putin soul...you might have missed something.
In the great immortal words of Ronald Maximus Reagan, "Let the bombing begin in 5 minutes."
If your enemies are coming for you in the morning, you'd best go and get them tonight.
Iran has declared itself at war with Israel many times, and not one but several Iranian leaders have said that they want a nuclear war, because they can survive it whereas Israel can not.
To let these people get their hands on a nuke is the worst mistake Israel could make.
The irony is, Iran is filled with people who love America, hate their rulers, and are more receptive to the gospel than they have been for a millenium. Last I heard, Israel was not terribly friendly to the gospel.
Someone said, "a nation doesn't have friends; it has allies."
Israel should not depend on "friends" to do for it what needs to be done.
They call it "survival instinct" for a reason.
For a less rabid analysis, see:
Nuclear Proliferation and the Future of Conflict
by Martin Van Creveld
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0029331560/qid=1151183051/sr=1-14/ref=sr_1_14/002-4753117-6221614?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
From Publishers Weekly
Though the possibility of nuclear confrontation between superpowers has greatly diminished since the end of the Cold War, the possession of nuclear weapons by states whose conflicts are unresolved could turn out to be equally threatening, notes Van Creveld ( The Transformation of War ). He here considers the likelihood of conflict between North and South Korea, China and Taiwan, China and India, India and Pakistan, Israel and the Arab states, as well as the nuclear status of other countries currently developing the scientific, technological and industrial infrastructure that would enable them to build weapons of mass destruction. Van Creveld begins this academic study by describing the basic characteristics of large-scale warfare as it evolved before the introduction of nuclear weapons and the effect of the latter on both the countries that possess them and on those countries threatened by them. Finally, he assesses the impact of nuclear proliferation on the future of war itself, including the configuration of the armies that would be prepared to wage it. For specialists.
From Kirkus Reviews
A somewhat reassuring audit of the residual threat posed by nuclear weapons, from a military analyst whose previous predictions have proved chillingly prescient. With defense budgets in both the US and the erstwhile USSR in full retreat, van Creveld (History/Hebrew University, Jersusalem; The Transformation of War, 1991, etc.) focuses on the state of the atomic-arms art in a clutch of less-developed countries--China, India, Iraq, Israel, Pakistan, etc. Among other matters, his informed survey considers the impact of strategic circumstances on national nuclear policies, and provides estimates of each country's atomic inventories. For various reasons, van Creveld concludes that the use of A-bombs or their tactical equivalents by Third World nations is effectively foreclosed. In the case of Pakistan, for instance, the author contends that the development of a nuclear arsenal has made its rulers ``simultaneously more confident of themselves and less adventurous.'' Which is not to say that van Creveld believes the West to be home free. Indeed, he reiterates previous warnings as to the faltering capacity of even modern industrial powers to monopolize violence, let alone combat or contain terrorism, grass-roots insurgencies, and allied belligerencies. For the time being, however, van Creveld doesn't see any danger of nuclear holocaust at the hands of the less- developed nations. A perceptive study that affords a measure of cold comfort on the score of deterrence.
I seem to recall an old Moshe Dayan or Golda Meier quote that went; "We are not willing to all die to prove our critics wrong."..or something like that.
Another interesting discussion:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/02/17/DI2006021701604.html
Michael Karpin was online Tuesday, Feb. 21, at 3 p.m. ET to discuss his book, "The Bomb in the Basement: How Israel Went Nuclear and What That Means for the World."
Better clean up and disperse that huge hot pile at Dimona before you go talking smack.
Think Chernobyl for direct and plume radii.
bump
How ironic is it to hear read this kind of nonsense regarding the "threat" that exists to Israel from Iran -- when in fact there's a good chance Israel is going to disappear within the next 50 years due to a demographic crisis of its own making.
At the same time, and unknown to the Israelis, the Soviet Union mounted a disinformation campaign pushing Egypt to join Syria against Israel. At that time, the Soviets were providing military and economic aid to both Syria and Egypt. On May 13, 1967 a Soviet parliamentary delegation visited Cairo and informed the Egyptian leaders that Israel had concentrated eleven to thirteen brigades along the Syrian border in preparation for an assault within a few days, with the intention of overthrowing the revolutionary Syrian Government. This was a complete fabrication designed by the Soviets to destabilize the Middle East. Similar false information may have been given to Egypt by the Soviets as early as May 2.
That should clear everyone's sinuses.