It is clear that when Joe Klein makes the statement (The only plausible use of an Iranian bomb would be as a deterrent against Israel's own nuclear weapons) that he neither understands the region in general nor the Islamic Republic of Iran in specific.

The use of a single nuclear weapon is not held solely to the use as a retaliatory weapon, particularly when your stated goal is the destruction of the state of Isreal. 

When you analyze it, Isreal can effectively be destroyed by a small number of nuclear weapons or even a single weapon of requisite size due to its small size and compact nature of its population centers. 

Iran on the other hand is comparatively vast and the population widely dispersed.  If Iran were able to build this weapon, then acheive plausible deniability by passing  this weapon off to Hezbollah for delivery to downtown Tel Aviv Iran could conceivably ride out any retaliatory strike by an Isreal which would be foreced to reserve at least part of its nuclear force to deal with other nations beside Iran.

And the worst of it is that the current Shia based extremist regime in Iran can view victory in defeat since the religious dogma of that sect see's that act as a guaranteed way to acheive its peculiar religious goals.  It is the equivalent of putting the Hale-Bopp comet cult in charge of nuclear devices. 

Klein is expecting a western rationality from a land and population who do not adhere to its logic.

"Netanyahu government's wild overstatement of the Iranian threat" that's an a amazing statement.
Why should Israel give up any land? They won the war.
There will never be peace with most Islamic states. They hate Israel and are hell bent on their destruction. Ahmadinejad is particularly crazy and suffering from worse Israel Derangement Syndrome than the left in America suffers from Bush Derangement Syndrome. And does anyone really believe that Obama is pro-Israel?
And isn't Joe Klein Jewish? Some loyalty. With friends like him they don't need enemies.
TSF Protests!

This might be a little off topic, but since we're on the topic of Iran, I just had to post this: The Obama administration has asked a federal judge to throw out a lawsuit against Iran filed by Americans held hostage at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran 30 years ago.

Aiding and abetting an enemy has no meaning at all for Obama, does it. Except he thinks of the U.S. as the enemy.

___________________________________ 

The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech

Is anyone really suprised by these ridiculous remarks? Just another example on how out of touch people are these days.

"My mom was a crackhead and my dad wasn't around, not to mention I only make 14.00 pr. hr. I still do not want a hand out and i'm fed up with all the liberal cry babys." -ME

. . .his secretary of state Hillary Clinton appears to have uncorked the bottle for anti-Semites among liberals and leftists.

Of course, Obama learned this behavior well at the feet of anti-Semite anti-American Jeremiah Wright.

Fortunately, the Israelis will soon bomb Iran and destroy, rightly so, its nuclear-bomb-making capabilities.

And in doing so, with or without U.S. and/or world support, the Israelis will have done the world, but particularly the Mideast, a huge favor.

Of course, ASS -- anti-Semite socialist -- Obama and his administration, including Rahm Emmanuel, will not be able to acknowledge this, either from ignorance or spite.

So, according to Klein, Iran only pursues nuclear weapons in order to deter an Israeli nuclear attack on Iran.

(Reality Check) But the only reason for Israel to attack Iran would be suspicion of an impending Iranian nuclear first strike.

On other words, Iranian development of a nuclear capablity -- combined with its incessant rheotric regarding the destruction of Israel -- is what makes it a real threat to Israel. 

But I'm not surprised that Klein can't understand the simple logic.  He seems to be convinced that armed, raving ideological and theologic lunatics are passive, and democracies are threats.

...use for an Iranian nuclear bomb.  You see, what we keep hearing is that the only possible use for such a weapon is as a deterrent against Israeli nukes.  However, Iranian nuclear weapons could very easily become Hamas nuclear weapons; in which case, it is likely that the weapon would not be used as a deterrent.

Deterrence is only useful when one can guarantee self-control over weapons.  If your enemy doesn't trust you to keep your weapons locker locked, deterrence becomes antagonistic.