Sdemetri,
The reason you want “disarmament” is that you want to remove Israel’s ability to deter attacks from the neighbors who want to destroy her.
The reason you suggest that Iran’s politicians only desire the destruction of the “the Zionist entity” is because you agree with their wish to dilute the Jews ability to defend himself on his own land. I don’t see anyone suggesting that Jordan, which is a Palestinian State, should simply absorb their Palestinian brothers and let the Jews live in peace. Instead they want to de-Jew the Jewish State.
You have Arabs and Persian, in the Middle East, concentrating their efforts on destroying Jewish independence. This is why Israel may, or may not have, developed nuclear capability. Israel has never expressed the will to destroy another people’s right to self-government. Israel has not denied the proven tragedies that dot the history of another people. Israel has not denied that Arabs come from Arabia or that Persians come from Persia. You do not see a world of people denying the Persians a right to Iran simply because they ethnically cleansed Babylon of the Babylonians (as people still harbor a grudge against Jews for the Canaanites) nor do you see Israel destroy the millennia old places of worship that foreigners built within its borders. Today, you do not find the great synagogues that were build in Sura, Pumbadesa or any of the other great centers of Jewish study and learning that resided in Persia since before the Persians came (BTW, Persians used to come to Rabbis for arbitration in civil cases. The Persian authorities recognized the incorruptibility of the rabbis and the sorry state of their own justice system. That’s a pretty good sign of Persian tolerance of foreigners in those days. Things have obviously changed). In Arab land the Jewish centers that had stood for centuries were quickly torn down. Where a great Church once stood there is now Muslim super cession or destruction (this includes the PA). Yet, in spite of the Muslim aggression against her, Israel has protected the Muslim, and Christian, holy sites. Israel has provided Muslims civil liberties equal to a Jew’s. Israel has carried out repeated, perhaps suicidal, attempts to make peace with those who make repeated calls for her destruction. Yet you seem to think it sensible that Iran, which still claims what you do not (that she is producing nuclear capability for peaceful purposes), is the party that requires nukes for its protection.
The only reason Israel is less under nuclear threat then Iran is because Iran has yet to develop the ability. Once Iran’s mullahs and their followers have nukes the shift to Israel’s detriment is pronounced. This, more then the hope for a Persian Youth Movement, is your desire. If these youths manage to mature and wisen up to the point that they remove the doomsday loving mullahs from authority in Iran, then we might discuss the wisdom of allowing Persians to have nukes. If these youths then show themselves to be reasonably liberalized we will not have issues with Iran developing its energy capabilities, its economy or its contacts in the world. Until then, the Iranian people, for allowing this mullahcracy to continue, deserve the challenges to their economic development and to her ability to wage nuclear war. If the mullahs get nukes then Israel immediately becomes hundreds of more times more likely to be nuked then Iran has ever been.
Have your little Persian Revolution and remove the mullahs. Then we can talk nukes. Persia has a history of tolerance that stretches from the Cyrus up to its last few decades before the Muslims took over. Then again, for a number of decades, the Muslim Persians were relatively tolerant of diversity (We are comparing them to the Babylonians, the Greeks, the Romans and the Byzantines. None of these are the best example of tolerance). If Persia can regain its tolerant spirit there is no reason for any of us to want to see it disadvantaged. Until then, we are enemies.
