If you want to be a blind fool, then that's a choice you are purposefully making, if you think your country can do no wrong.
What of Israel's threats to Iran? What's of Saudi Arabia's? What of USA's threats? It's not a one way street.
Iran's military is set up as DEFENSE. It is not technologically, or sizably a threat to Israel. Pretending that Iran is going to launch a nuke at Israel is sheer silliness, as this would assure Iran's destruction, as well.
There is a false perception about Iran's aggressiveness, perpetuated by Israel, USA, etc.
The Defensive Dimension of Iran's Military Doctrine: How Would They Fight?THE THREAT PERCEPTIONIran is perceived by some analysts and states, such as Saudi Arabia and Israel, as a serious threat to the region. However, it must be kept in mind that Iranian politicians and military decision makers are concerned about both external aggression and separatist movements (from, for example, Azeris, Kurds and Balochis), which can be easily fueled by outsiders.7As far as defense is concerned, Iran's geographical location is disadvantageous; it is bordered by unstable Afghanistan and Pakistan, with borders of 935 and 972 kilometres, respectively. Iranian insecurity is intensified by a sense of alienation, being mainly (about 50 percent) Persians, who have a hostile attitude towards Arabs (and vice versa). Religious factors also play a role. The region is dominated by Sunni Muslims, while Iranians are mainly Shia, perceived by the Sunnis as religious renegades. What is more, Iran has an understandable sense of being surrounded by U.S. allies — Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Many neighboring states, mainly Saudi Arabia but also some other GCC member states, spend much more on defense than Iran, which cannot compete with them financially.MAIN DEFENSE ASSUMPTIONSAfter the end of the Iraq-Iran War in 1988, which signaled the failure of the concept of exporting the Islamic Revolution, Iran abandoned its offensive ambitions and adopted a doctrine of deterrence, emphasizing its adherence to defense, though it did not abandon its self-perception as a power and a natural leader in the region. It declared that defense would be uncompromising, determined and oriented toward the destruction of every enemy (in practice, mainly U.S. forces)." If you invade Iran […] we will chase, punish and target and destroy you beyond the country's borderlines," warned Brigadier General Yahya Rahim-Safavi, former commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) (1997-2007) and the supreme leader's military adviser. The IRGC itself added that Iran's military system has become a "reliable and effective deterrent" able to face "arrogant powers" with a "serious and devastating response." The supreme leader's opinion is, unsurprisingly, the same: "We neither welcome, nor begin war, but in case of war, the U.S. will leave disgraced." Obviously, this seems to be a politically driven exaggeration, but Iran could make invasion unprofitable, even if it were not able to defeat an aggressor in an open fight. The scale of armed resistance against American troops or any other occupier might be compared to the Iraqis' resistance after 2003, but on a larger scale. To accomplish this goal, Iran spends approximately 2 percent of its GDP on defense.https://www.mepc.org/journal/defensive- ... they-fightThe lie about Iran wanting to wipe Israel off the map, is just that.
Then, specialists such as Juan Cole of the University of Michigan and Arash Norouzi of the Mossadegh Project pointed out that the original statement in Persian did not say that Israel should be wiped from the map, but instead that it would collapse.
Cole said this week that in the 1980s Khomeini gave a speech in which he said in Persian “Een rezhim-i eshghalgar-i Quds bayad az sahneh-i ruzgar mahv shaved.” This means, “This occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the arena of time.” But then anonymous wire service translators rendered Khomeini as saying that Israel “must be wiped off the face of the map,” which Cole and Nourouzi say is inaccurate.
Ahmadinejad slightly misquoted Khomeini, substituting “safheh-i ruzgar,” or “page of time" for "sahneh-i ruzgar" or “arena of time.” But in any case, the old translation was dug up and used again by the Iranian news agency, Cole says. In fact, that’s how it was presented for years on Ahmadinejad’s English-language Web site, as the Times noted in a somewhat defensive article on the translation debate.https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fa ... 44446a1b43So just how much of a threat IS Iran, really?
“Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson