Here’s David Makovsky at Huffpo on the greatest threat to the west. He and I actually concur on the physical threat. But then Makovsky, whom we exposed yesterday for his pretensions to interpreting the Palestinian mind, gets into his ugga-bugga motivational theory:
There is no doubt that the preeminent threat of our time is that radical Islamists– most of whom emanate from the Middle East– may get their hands on a nuclear weapon. All agree about the cataclysmic nature of nuclear weapons. During the Cold War, there was a sense that both the United States and Soviet Union made similar calculations about not using such weapons, and therefore deterrence was successful. Yet it remains unlikely that Islamist religious extremists who embrace suicide bombing are deterrable. They may look at the use of such weapons as a means to reach some form of religious imperative against others, critical to achieve what they consider the legitimate objective of creating an Islamist caliphate or facilitating the return of the Hidden Imam (more on this later) while securing their own benefits in another world. It is precisely the ascendance of such a school of thought that should lead us to oppose the Islamists, even as we seek to partner with those non- Islamist forces in Arab societies who are uniquely positioned to discredit them in a way that we are not.
Yes David, but why do they hate us? Do you really think you can stop everyone with a dirty bomb? Wouldn’t it be better to address their actual grievances? What about Israel/Palestine? Do Palestinians have a grievance?
