It is widely recognized by Middle East experts and anyone who has stopped to think about it that war on Iraq will destabilize the entire region and focus the Muslim world's hatred of Israeli policy into a white hot flame against that country as a whole. As the conflict escalates, states will get involved - either by taking some form of direct action or by providing financial aid, logistical support and materiel for any group ready to carry out punitive action against Israel. The modus operandi of the Sharon government in dealing with such attacks has always been to counter them with brutal and overwhelming force; Ariel Sharon has on more than one occasion suggested Israel would not hesitate to strike Iraq with nuclear weapons if attacked with any sort of "weapons of mass destruction" (I too am beginning to despise that tired term, but please bear with me).
If that were to happen, Muslim states would not rest until they were able to secure nuclear weapons with which to punish Israel. There is plenty of nuclear material (not to mention actual weapons) available across the old Soviet republics, and the only thing keeping it out of the hands of radical elements is the sanity and/or humanity of those who presently control it. This will erode with a war on Iraq that many feel is being instigated by Israel, and is likely to disappear altogether once Israel gets involved. It is therefore virtually certain that at some point some Muslim state will retaliate against Israel with nuclear weapons, and as at least one prominent Israeli dissenter has pointed out, Israel cannot survive more than one or two nuclear hits - even "small" ones by modern standards.
The so-called Christian Right in the US has been historically anti-semitic, and the movement only began to use the term "Judeo-Christian" in its public relations a scant ten or twelve years ago. By seeming to embrace the Jewish community by including it under its tent, the fundamentalist Christian movement accomplished two things: 1) It broadened its appeal among those who saw the movement as a bunch of bigots, and 2) it swelled its ranks - and political power - by attracting the support of ordinary jews as well as powerful right-wing and/or reactionary Jewish groups. It was this alliance, I believe, that greatly helped "elevate" the movement from its previous position as part of the "lunatic fringe" into the mainstream of modern American politics, and it was this elevation that has allowed some of its most malignant proponents access to the corridors of real power.
This apparent "maturing" of the fundamentalist Christian movement in the US hasn't changed its objectives, however, as the rantings of its leaders and almost two years of the Bush administration's scorched-earth implementation of its agenda clearly demonstrates. It stretches the imagination to think that the Conservative Christian Right's historical hatred of the Jews ended ten years ago when it launched its "Judeo-Christian" public relations gambit (which, it should be noted, hasn't mitigated the rather openly expressed and virulent anti-semitic sentiment among the movement's more candid factions).
This raises the question of whether it is a goal of the Bush administration to insure Israel's destruction, perhaps not as a primary objective, but as an acceptable or even desirable bonus of war with Iraq. Surely the Bush team's policy analysts must have sketched this scenario. By encouraging the policies of the Sharon government, discouraging a just resolution of the Palestinian issue, and essentially declaring war on the entire Muslim world, Bush sets up a grand contest in which the US will ultimately prevail given its military and technological might. Israel, however, cannot survive such a contest despite its impressive arsenal. While America can absorb a limited nuclear attack (as unlikely as that might be), Israel cannot. The US will survive, but Israel ceases to exist if even two nuclear warheads reach their targets.
Is this in the Bush cabinet's war plan? Will the US consider this an unfortunate example of "collateral damage"? Do they just not give a damn? Or would they consider it a serendipitous bonus, a poetic payback for Christ's crucifixion? This, after all, has been the central tenet of anti-semitism in the world for almost two thousand years, and continues to be a centerpiece of extreme fundamentalist Christian ideology.
While seeming to "support" Israel and encouraging its campaign of military oppression, is the US not just setting the stage for Israel's destruction? And if that were to occur, wouldn't that provide the pretext for destroying the entire muslim world? Haven't these in fact been parallel goals since the rise of "Christianity"? Has the leopard changed its spots?