Surely the most "lethal threat" would come from a biological weapon, the anthrax case in the States and even more so the Aum Shinrikyo case proves that such a singular or cocktail of such agents can be easily hidden and deployed to devestataing effect.

That Saddam,Churchill and the Japs used such weapons does not mean that only leaders are able and willing to use them,there are others in less exalted posistions who,given the opportunity,would be more than willing and able to do so.

An Ebola virus on an unsuspecting population would wreak havoc and terror far above that of todays situation.

"Egypt had negotiated an agreement aimed at reducing the number of missiles being fired from Gaza"

So that's alright then, the number of attacks from Gaza was to be reduced.

I suppose the fact that Israel had been under attack from rockets fired from Gaza for months on end is acceptable but when Israel bites back everyone starts jumping up and down

"It seems unlikely that any 'small' player would instigate a nuclear exchange when their own lands would be the first to be razed to the ground by the 'big boys'."

I;m afraid this discounts teh "jihad".

As I;ve said before, any Muslim nuking Israel know they will spend eternity in Heaven being waited on by nubile virgins, and in 1,000 years their name will be revered throughout Islam.

They;ve been fighting over this land for perhaps 3,500 years.

Another thousand or so is not going to make any difference.

morddwyd "jihad"

I'm afraid we disagree on this! Jihad has often been seen as lone perpetrators strapping a bomb on themselves and causing mayhem - on the instruction of a 'handler'.

But if you are talking about "any Muslim nuking Israel" then it would require the 'handler' to be a government or sophisticated group capable of producing the means and delivery method.

These 'handlers', would not be likely to want to meet their own 'virgins' (just yet anyway) and would hardly wish a nuclear holocaust to fall upon themselves - not quite the same as a suicide bomber causing only 'local' difficulty that does not put them in the direct, retaliatory, firing line. Whereas a nuclear war would affect everyone, regardless.

Please show me any reliable story that coonfirms the Israeli government are deliberately killing children so they win votes in their upcoming election.