An old lawyers' saying is that if your client is innocent argue the facts, but if he is guilty then argue the law. In this discussion substitute history for the law and decided for yourself who uses more historic examples.
In this case two Jews argue about Israel's future and the details of a possible Palestinian conflict resolution. What more needs to be said? This discussion is an hour and a half long.
Dershowitz saves the Iran card for the last minute. (Which he apparently did not do, according to a questioner, in a previous event.) The Q&A -- final fifteen minutes -- may be more interesting for the casual viewer.