Sunisle

As soon as you start citing failed academic Ilan Pappe and that preposterous fraud Edward Said, you have lost the argument.

I had thought to end this ridiculous waste of time with closed minded people who either have no idea what is happening to the Palestinians or do know and it serves their self interest to try to hide it.

However, to the person saying Edward Siad is a fraud and Ilan Pappe "failed"....prove it. Your saying something does not make it so; to childishly making these accusations without a smigeon of evidence is typical of Israeli supporters.

What particular claims - and in what books- do you find fraudulent statements? It's strange to claim this as every Zionist and his dog has tried to discredit Said...without success.

And just what has Pappe failed in?

Yes Tony, plucky little Israel's been out of fashion ever since parts and knowhow for atomic warfare arrived in Haifa 35 years back per favour of the US of A.

With so many nations now nuclear armed like Israel, the only peace possible in the Middle East is either the one based on unipolar missile diplomacy as the US is now battling with, or the one based on a balance of power, which indeed was practised between the US and the Soviets during the height of the Cold War. The fear of nuclear destruction reached such a stage that many philosophers believe that liason between the US and the USSR went on at times.

No need to go into more detail. During the Cold War there were volumes of it.

The balance of power theory is far from new, the 19th Century Concert of Europe after the Napoleonic Wars rather boringly full of it, until Bismarck and his Realpolitik turned up.

Surely there is no need to repeat again how Bismarck drew all the Germanic states into Prussia with hardly firing a shot - captured the whole of France in 1871 frightening the hell of the French with his big new long range guns. Cleared out after telling the French to behave themselves or he'd be back, but mostly remembered by German families as the first ever to grant pensions, especially for birthing mothers.

Although Bismarck could also be cruel if he did not get his way, most historians almost adore him, even these days when they look on the historical predictions that if Bismarck had been alive in 1914 WW1 would never have begun. And as Maynard Keynes observed and agreed later, it was only the nastiness towards the Germans during the Treaty of Versailles that brought on the rise of Hitler and the onset of WW2.

It is believed that holding the war trigger right now in the Middle East is Israel. Therefore in Realpolitik power balance theory to switch off the war trigger, Iran should be allowed to have nuclear rockets to match Israel.

Bushbred:

If you think that a desire to wipe Israel off the map is the sole rationale behind Iran's quest for nukes, you are naive.

The Iranians see themselves as a regional power and they have aspirations to control the Persian Gulf, from whence the world gets 60% of its oil. The Arab states of the Gulf are not happy campers at the prospect of a nuclear Iran, nor is Egypt for that matter. If Iran gets nukes, then watch out for a regional arms race with Saudi Arabia, Egypt and perhaps some of the Gulf emirates trying to get them as well. Not a pretty picture in such a strategically vital part of the world.

And I would think again, if I were you, about the amenability of the Iranians to the Western concepts of cost benefit analysis that underlie the theory of nuclear deterrence. After all, these are people who sent 15 year old kids out to clear minefields with their feet, armed only with AK-47s and a plastic key to heaven. These are people whose president publiclly dreams of a global cataclysm that will usher in the era of the Mahdi - the Islamic expected one. Their value system is not Western, and it would be a tragic mistake to think that they would employ the same calculus that we do.

Try to get out of your bushbred bubble, and figure out that the whole world doesn't look like Mt. Issa, Queensland.

sunisle

There is nothing that is typical of Israeli supporters. That statement together with your comments about every Zionist and his dog certainly do no credit to yourself.

Could you bring yourself to consider that the Israelis are trying to defend their rights to a tiny patch of land that their exceptionally hard work has converted from a poor producer of food to a land which can feed far more people than it could when they found it?

And could you consider just one teeny bit that the continuous Palestinian attacks on Israel may make it impossible for the Israelis to let their guard drop.

Or that certain nasty elements in the Arab world might just be exploiting the Palestinians for their own benefit. The very people who could have been offering them hope and a chance of a happy life if they spent the money on agriculture rather than missiles.

Ted,

I read a transcript of what the Iranian president actually said in Arabic. As I read it he is OK with Jewish living in Palestine as it was before 1948 and not 'nuking everyone' as you claim.

Although I find his statement backward, I can't help equating his comment to Israelis who are opposing a Palestinian state and just ok with 'Palestinians living in Israel' or 'ship Palestinians to other Arab countries'.

I don't think we can disagree on the danger of a nuclear Iran, but Israelis need to take a look inside too.

Peace,