This thread is a really good one (IMHO).

Could one compare JFK's attempt to approach Nasser to Jimmy Carter enlisting Anwar Sadat to create at least a partial (and long-lasting) peace movement in the Israeli-Arab eternal feuding?

Another comparison would be the role of Queen Elizabeth portrayed in "The Crown" where she (naively and impulsively) tried to win back the support of (I think) President Nkrumah of Ghana who had strayed from the British orbit (toward the USSR).

If JFK were to have been trying to cozy up to Nasser, I personally don't think that his actions would have been prudent, even regarding potential nuclear war.

It's a little like the situation of Iran and nukes, or NOKO and nukes. I believe Jimmy Carter when he says that the Iranians (and the NOKO's) are not suicidal so they won't use nukes even if they have them.

This is the first I have heard about Golda Meir loading planes with atomic weapons during a war. Same proposition. Basically a suicidal concept. Especially (as mentioned above) since it was fighting over a desert. A DESERT!!!! Too many nut jobs in the Middle East. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, but it's all too true (IMO) and probably will never change, at least not until the sun burns out (and goes dark) and no sooner.

We probably don't have to worry about use of atomic weapons because (if it happens) almost everybody or maybe everybody will quickly be killed, blinded or both. And I don't think rocking the boat in the Middle East by JFK (if it actually happened) would have been prudent. In fact, it would have been chalked up to JFK's (and RFK's) legendary impulsiveness and shallow (though sincere) judgment.

James Lateer