Dectilion

there is no existing evidence that arabs with nukes = instability. The only issues with it rise from countries such as the US and the UK making unsubstantiated allegations (THe IAEA has said there is no evidence Iran is developing nuclear weapons, having nuclears weapons would severely weaken Irans position, yet it is very much in their interest to have nuclear power. If there was a record of arabs using nuclear weapons to cause trouble, then there would have a point, but they NEVER have.

Most of Israels wars are agressive. while 1946 was technically defensive, by the time the British mandate ran out, the Israelis had already occupied most of the major cities in the Palestinian mandate, the only reason the other arab states hadnt attacked was because they didnt want to cause problems with he British.
There is no real reason to believe the arabs where planning to attack Israel in 1967, sure the Egyptians moved forces into Sinai, but in real terms both the Israeli's and the Egyptians new it wasnt anywhere near enough to attack Israel. And also, Nasser had little to gain and alot to lose form a war with Israel.
1973 cant really be considered defensive for Israel, since the Arabs never attacked pre-67 Israel, and the whole war was an attempt to regain stolen territory, which Israel was illegally holding(and still illegally holds alot of it) despite multiple UN resolutions ordering them to leave.