There's less than half a dozen nations possessing serious nuclear arsenals (Israel being one of them), but "A host of countries are going to nuke Israel".
What he actually said was "china and russia and a host of others will most certainly nuke israel first chance they get..." So what? Many dispensationalist Christians (eg., Hal Lindsey) make essentially the same claim, and they are ardent Zionists to boot.
Why would I be interested in "debating" the followers of Jihad? I think they get entirely enough airing of their views, mosty irrational as they are, already :).
You haven't shown that this guy is a "arab," a "sowbug," or a follower of "Jihad." You have shown that you disagree with him, but that isn't the same thing!
Again, instead of indulging in racist propaganda techniques such as dehumanizing metaphors (eg, "sowbug"), allusions to imagined ethnicity (eg, "arab") or accusations of unsavory political affiliations (eg, "scurry on back to stormfront"), why don't you just respond to arguments on their own merits?
If it is not the case that "china and russia and a host of others will most certainly nuke israel first chance they get...," then why not?
Tell me, as a disiniterested observer, why you believe that scenario is so outlandish as to be comparable to "Interstellar Space Jews are controlling Western Leaders by mind control beams from an orbit around Venus".
To me it sounds quite plausible that Russia & China both pose a nuclear threat to Israel (and the US & the UK for that matter) but if you have good reasons to think they are not, then please share.
China might pose a nuclear threat if they weren't actually a "nuclear pygmy", and if they tipped over into the kind of irrationality you might find in a few other places. Russia? No. Large arsenal, but not suicidal.
Basically, you'll never see a nuclear exhange between the significant nuclear powers, for the simple reason that it would be too destructive. And strange as it may seem, Israel has the wherewithal to inflict unacceptable damage on any attacker if the conflict goes nuclear.
Put another way, the US is supposed to end up with something like 1300 warheads when all is said and done regarding armament levels, Russia about the same. Both of these arsenals are deemed to be large enough to effectively kill the rest of the world. China, in comparison, is a dwarf - far less capable than Israel which has at least 400 warheads, or something around 30% of the clout packed by the two "big ones".
Bottom line: you'd not nuke any of the major nuclear powers if you wanted your country (and your people) to go on existing.
Of course, none of the big league would want to nuke Israel anyhow, so the point is really moot. But running this kind of scenario with a "host" of countries lobbing nukes is actually at least as outlandish as the space alien cr*p :)).