John Bolton thinks the Israelis might attack Iran (HT2LRC) after the election but before the inauguration. Now some people--such as the head of the IAEA--think this would turn the Middle East into a "fireball." But Bolton dismisses this wuss talk as scaremongering (not to be confused with Condoleezza Rice's talk of a "mushroom cloud" etc. regarding Saddam).
In fact, Bolton thinks that if Israel bombs Iranian nuclear facilities, the Arab world will be "pleased." Now you might think that is an erroneous prediction, but we will never know one way or the other. Bolton covers himself:
"It [the reaction] will be positive privately. I think there'll be public denunciations but no action," he said.
It occurs to me that in Bolton's worldview, if a country doesn't launch a retaliatory attack, that is equivalent to endorsement. If people aren't willing to back up their views with weapons, then those views really aren't all that important, are they?