I don't like this psychology-based analysis, it's too Lord of the Rings and you could always say the same for any nation, for any psychological justification. For example, maybe the Iranians are so twitchy because of 1953 and the overthrow of Mohammad Mossadegh's government by western powers (the US and the UK).

Past experiences surely must colour peoples' and nations' attitudes, but will they go all the way to completely dictate them? I find this an over-reach. There are simpler explanations. Nations want to dominate their immediate geographical neighborhoods so that they can ensure their own citizens' prosperity and security. Israel and Iran are not different in that at all. Israel is in a position to pursue this regional hegemony by overwhelmingly violent means thanks to the unconditional support of the US, while Iran that does not enjoy the same level of support from its own super-power allies, China and Russia, is not capable of dominating with aggression, so it has to try other means: diplomacy, alliances with regional militias, and so on.

I think, that suffices to explain the differences in behaviour between the two nations. Other than that, you'll see the same behaviour from both: they'll attack whomever they consider to be their regional rival, they'll retaliate when attacked, and so on.