But it is the form of your argument that particularly intrigues me. Clearly many peoples in the “Near East and Arabia” view the power of Israel as unwholesome and destabilizing and detrimental to the future wellbeing of the region and argue that it would be as well if this unwelcome, destabilizing power were now crushed by an opposing power so that the future “human social organization” of the region could flourish as most people in the region wish and devoutly pray for. It seems to me that the form of their argument is no different from that of what appears to be your argument. But not only that, it seems as though their argument is also correct (valid), if not necessarily (morally) right. If Israel were eliminated today who can deny that the prospects for future peace in the region would be enhanced? So if one cannot fault the form and validity of their argument, on what grounds can one fault it? On the grounds that it violates the truth that Israel, as constituted today, has a right to be? But how, and on what grounds does one demonstrate that Israel has the right to be? For unless one can do this, then only a fanatic could fault the position they argue.

Having no desire for the 'death' of Iran, Persian culture, any Irani, or any Muslim, I don't consider myself a fanatic; others may say what they like, of course. It is an as yet unchangeable fact of human social organisation that the powerful will use power to achieve their purposes and that sometimes only an opposing power can prevent such achievements.

I have no idea how the 'Iranian hoodlums' may see themselves; if they would desist from actively pursuing the destruction of the Israeli state and perhaps also desist from attempts at destabilising the Near East and Arabia and sponsoring terrorism elsewhere in the civilised world, I'd happily leave them to stew in the juices of their rhetorical exercises.

What are 'major crimes' in the Betjeman imagination, I wonder? There is a Father Brown story in which the mighty ones of the earth, represented by very proper Victorian lords, gentlemen and ladies (I don't recall the particulars)-- hypocrites all-- are put to shame (or, at least, silenced) by the sincerely repentant but scandalous lord somebody (and Father B. of course). Don't recall what his sin was. The Something of the Marquess N., I think...

Although, dear Lord, I am a sinner,
I have done no major crime;
Now I'll come to Evening Service
Whensoever I have time.
So, Lord, reserve for me a crown,
And do not let my shares go down.
(John Betjeman)