androbot2084 wrote:
Israel has always used the argument that they needed nuclear weapons because that is the only way that they could defend themselves lest they become overrun by Arab countries. This works only if Israel has a monopoly on the atomic bomb. Now that Israel has lost their monopoly of nuclear weapons they rely on the strategy of deterrence which means mutually assured destruction in the event of a nuclear war. However deterrence can fail when faced with an enemy who is willing to die in a nuclear war. So now Israel wants to regain her monopoly of nuclear weapons in the middle east by waging a war with Iran.
We allow Israel to have nuclear weapons and threaten Iran over doing the same for the same reason that most states give concealed handgun licenses to law-abiding citizens and arrest crackheads and gang members for laying a finger on a gun. Notice that the Saudis and other Arab League nations that don't play well with Israel aren't worried about national security issues due to Israel's stockpile. Iran has been threatening to destroy Israel for 33 years now, they have been sending weapons to terrorist groups actively fighting Israel, and now in the midst of their increasingly hostile rhetoric they built a breeder reactor and underground refining facilities. If Iran does not cease it's nuclear program, war is imminent. If Israel strikes per-emptively, they can keep the casualties down on both sides. You are correct that mutually assured destruction would not work as well as it did between the US and soviets, and that's why even a Israeli pre-emtive strike is a lesser evil than MAD.
_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown
"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud