dear nissim

passing the time is clear what`s the truth

but
i hope no country doesn`t attack to my country (with or without islamic republic(i hate this goverment))
cos iran will be very dangerous for attacker (!!)

and i(one iranian)want nuclear weapon till the country like (amrica -israel- pakistan-india-and many other ) have nuclear weapon

that`s all my friend

However, with regard to Iran, I believe that there are leaders there who would not hesitate to use these weapons for the purpose of domination. They would seek to dominate much of the Arab world, as they are gradually trying to do using their proxies Hamas, and Hizbullah. As you may know, a Hizbullah cell was recently discovered in Egypt, much to the surprise and anger of Mubarak.

Much of the Arab world is quickly coming to the realization that a nuclear Iran would be far more dangerous to them than Israel ever was, and believe it or not, this may result in an alliance of sorts between Israel and the Sunni Arab states. I personally would like such an alliance to be based more on economics than on military defense.

Eventually, if the stars become aligned just right, it may be possible to bring Iran into the fold, by transforming her into an economic powerhouse, instead of a threat. If she wants to dominate, let her dominate economically, and transform the Middle East in a positive direction, by which everyone there gets a place at the table, a stake in his or her future. Let Hamas and Hizbullah create jobs for their people, instead of pursuing ideological goals resulting in nightmare scenarios.

Even with Pakistan, things can go either way. If 100 nuclear weapons fall into the hands of the Taliban, we’re all in for trouble. If, on the other hand, we can find ways to realize a vision of hope there, a vision of peace, properity, and freedom, then there will be hope for the people, and for the nations of that region.

A lot is at stake. The game is on, and destiny’s clock is ticking impatiently as we speak. Those of us who believe in hope, must not hesitate to call it as we see it, to try to make sense of it all, and to take action that points to the possibility of peace. Those of us who want to be “right” instead of being sensible would not hesitate to let the whole thing go down in flames, just to prove a point, even though there will be no one left to get the point.

we are talking about dominance

But when it comes to nuclear weapons, what is there to know?

Here’s what I think I know: Nuclear weapons are not a joke, they are death. They are a dead end for the destiny of man. They are even more death in the hands of the wrong people, such as people who are hard of hearing, but who think they’ve heard the voice of God.

‘A horse, a cow, and a deer all eat the same stuff – grass. Yet a deer
excretes little pellets, while a cow turns out a flat patty, and a horse
produces clumps of dried grass. Why do you suppose that is?’

The American, visibly surprised by the little girl’s intelligence, thinks
about it and says, Hmmm, I have no idea.’?

To which the little girl replies, ‘Do you really feel qualified to discuss nuclear power… when you don’t know shit?’

we are very good friend in all nation language and believe

i hope we have a better world with or without nuclear weapon

i think we can`t have a world without nuclear weapon or more stronger !

we live in the real world

i wish real world can be better .

There is, like you say, a lot of hypocrisy out there. And no matter what we do, we’re not going to make things perfect.

However, that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t try. If we give everyone on earth a sense of hope, a place at the table, a stake in his or her future, then we will begin to turn the corner on world peace. Nothing more is needed and nothing else will suffice.

We should not get too bogged down in who is right, and who is wrong. Everyone on earth has a case to make, but going that route will get us nowhere fast.

What is needed is to take some action that brings us together, and that is what Selling a Vision of Hope is all about. I hope that one day we may be able to make something happen along these lines, even as others keep arguing about who struck John.

it`s only hyporisy and lie

You are living in an ideal world and even then you say it would be good for all to say that whats done is done and lets go in a new direction, regardless of the injustices of the past. yes that would be very great except that nobody will really follow that.

You make some good points, Faroosha. I do tend to be idealistic, but on the other hand, considering the situation we’re facing, it may well be that the ultimate form of realism is idealism. In other words, because our problems, like the economy, the environment, and the extremism, are global in nature, they will require global solutions, and only a sense of idealism, if it is given substance in reality, can make that happen.

I understand what you’re saying about fairness. Everbody is entitled to his share of the pie. However, given the risk we face, we may all have to forgo some of our notions of fairness, in favor of what is needed to sustain the planet, and to better the lives of all who inhabit it. And to do this, we may need to come up with a new framework for ideological discourse based on common sense principles, what I call An Ideology of Common Sense.

Instead of believing what we want to believe, why not believe in what makes sense? Instead of jumping to false belief and then rationalizing why we’re right, why not use rationality in the first place to arrive at what is worth believing in? If the world is already coming together technologically and economically, doesn’t it make sense to come together ideologically as well? In a more perfect world, common sense, the collective wisdom born of shared experience, will inspire our thinking and inform our speach. In our fractured world, common sense is the common denominator.

But it has been a pleasure to speak with you. We can disagree, but if we do so respectfully and sensibly, we will find common ground.

And Esra’a, I agree with you that the new Israeli government leans heavily to the right. The only silver lining that I see is that right wing governments have the credibility to cut peace deals. Menachem Begin, for example, was very right wing, but he cut the deal with Sadat. Ehud Barak was a highly decorated military man, but he pulled out of Lebanon. Sharon was also very right wing, but he pulled out of Gaza. There are, of course, no guarantees, but it would not surprise me if the current government proceeds to cut a peace deal. Stranger things have happened.