ARTICLE: Rebuke in Iran to Its President on Nuclear Role, By NAZILA FATHI and MICHAEL SLACKMAN, New York Times, January 19, 2007 More evidence of Ahmadinejad's declining stock. Meanwhile talk grows in Israel of a second Holocaust and pre-emptive nuclear strikes on Iran (Israel's getting bolder about admitting it's had nukes for decades). All I can say to Israelis is welcome to our world, for now it faces the same conditons and decisions we encountered half a century ago (and have lived with ever since): possible annihilation versus the chance to kill millions in a nuclear holocaust. The choice is very Old Testament, the escape route very New Testament. A magnificent power it is, the ability to extinguish entire peoples and wipe countries off the map. Historically, it clarifies the strategic mind (America remains the only country ever to use them--despite all the logical predictions of their inevitable re-use by "irrational" regimes over the subsequent decades). What Israel's got to figure out is whether they want peace more than death. The Core is defined by that decision, the Gap by its inability to confront it. America heard the threats of "we will bury you" when we didn't enjoy the strategic superiority that Israel has so long held, thanks in large part to all that military aid from us. But somehow we moved beyond those threats and fears and made peace with an enemy whose whole ideology centered on our destruction (yes, yes, we now all remember the Sovs as cuddly thugs with no ideologies whatsoever, so it was all just a fantastic dream). We did so by growing up and leaving behind our own apocalyptic fantasies (it always takes two to tango). Big question is whether Israel can do the same, or whether they instinctively, out of their own long history of defining themselves--as nationalists the Gap over are wont to do--primarily in terms of shared suffering at the hands of others (the source of all chips on all shoulders, with everyone's injustice being far worse than everyone else's--by definition), continue their eye-for-an-eye approach ("it takes a tank to raze a village" being Israel's patented counter-insurgency tactic) that has gotten them no strategic security to date--just more of the diabolical same from enemies whose death cult far surpasses its own in perceived righteousness (all killing is "justified" in the Middle East, according to the murderous logic of its practitioners). Of course, the whole Middle East is built around this vengeance model (the ultimate in infantile zero-sum logic, suggesting an evolutionary retardation of the most primitive sort), which is why, no matter Israel's many laudable achievements, it remains hopelessly trapped inside the Gap. Eventually, somebody sees a better deal to be cut with the outside world, and that somebody needs to be a Muslim state that shows real power and dignity can be achieved through brains instead of just oil and violence. Israel cannot prove that for the Muslim Arab/Persian world, that can only occur from within its ranks. But Iran moving to nukes is more pretext than problem: all it does is speed up the inevitable choices on all sides--just like for us, the Europeans, the Slavs and the Chinese. There is nothing new or unique in this dynamic, just the past refusing to die in a part of the world where its grip on minds is stunningly strong. Everyone's excuse for inaction remains the same: what he did! Strategically speaking, it is passivity and fatalism of the worst sort. America should not get sucked into this fatalistic logic by our own irrationals who will say either we act or it's the end of civilization and perhaps even the "end times." Nothing would end with the Middle East's strategic suicide--at least nothing that matters to the Core. The adjustment would be made, and we'd simply move on, calm in the knowledge that Darwinian self-selection still works to the benefit of all mankind.