How NY Times is making war with Iran more likely

I'm not sure how to feel about this article.

It does make a valid point but it also seems to be sort of apologist for the Iranians.

"The Times piece tells us that Israel and the U.S. “fear Iran’s growing influence,” that Israel “fears that it could face a threat” from Iranian proxies in Syria, that “many Israelis” sense “danger,” and that Iran’s behavior “worries Israel.”

All true. But there’s no mention of Iranian “fears” or “worries” or perceived “danger.” There’s also no mention of what, from an Iranian perspective, is a glaring asymmetry: Iranians and Iranian proxies in Syria are there with the permission of Syria’s government."

The article fails to mention that the Iranian gov't routinely calls for the destruction of both Israel and the United States.  Do they not expect an aggressive response?

I mean after all, a coalition of muslim states did in fact try to wipe out Israel on several occasions.  Would it not be in Israel's best interest to have an aggressive policy to government's that call for its destruction?

Egypt has changed it's policy towards Israel and now Israel and Egypt are essentially allies and engage in coordinated military action.

I think so long as Iran is run by religious zealots that call for the destruction of Israel they will likely have a justified fear or danger of Israel, but it's essentially a result of their own policies.

How is Iran our problem?