Hanson is annoyed with Matt Steinglass’ recent post on Israel and Iran:

Moreover, Iran’s bomb is not comparable in general to nuclear Pakistan, which, although dangerous enough, is deterred by a far larger, far more powerful nuclear and democratic rival, India, next door.

This is obviously very different from a possible nuclear-armed Iran, which would be deterred by a far more powerful nuclear and democratic rival, Israel. It is telling that that Hanson never once mentions Israel’s nuclear arsenal at any point, as if this had no bearing on the question of the so-called existential threat that Iran poses. Israel may not be “master of its fate,” as Steinglass says, but with an estimated 200 nuclear weapons it is much more powerful than Iran.

Most of Steinglass’ post concerns itself with the problems that the continued occupation and settlement-building in occupied territory create for Israel, but one would hardly know that given Hanson’s complete failure to address anything the original post said about these things. The best Hanson can manage here is to engage in a lot of hand-waving to try to change the subject along the lines of saying, “Well, what about northern Cyprus?” What about it it? Turkey’s invasion and the expulsion of the Greek population from that part of the island were outrageous, but the situation on Cyprus today is not like that in the West Bank. Does Hanson really think Polish control of formerly German-inhabited territory is comparable to the current occupation of the West Bank? That would be news to the residents of Gdansk.