Despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, many continue to believe that Obama is “anti-Israel.”
Thomas Friedman, Pulitzer-prize winning author and columnist, spends big chunks of the year abroad, developing a keen sense of the inter-connectedness of nations. He frequently focuses on the Middle East.
He is not an unwavering Obama fan. In fact, he has been calling for the formation of a new third party movement because of his dissatisfaction with both Republicans and Democrats.
Nonetheless, his recent column gets right to the point with stunning clarity. It begins:
“The only question I have when it comes to President Obama and Israel is whether he is the most pro-Israel president in history or just one of the most.”
Friedman goes on to explain how Obama brilliantly re-framed the issue of Iran getting a nuke from being an Israeli problem to being a problem for America, the entire Middle East and indeed, the whole world.
Friedman closes the column with another powerful paragraph:
“If it comes to war, let it be because the ayatollahs were ready to sacrifice their whole economy to get a nuke and, therefore, America — the only country that can truly take down Iran’s nuclear program — had to act to protect the global system, not just Israel. I respect that this is a deadly serious issue for Israel — which has the right to act on its own — but President Obama has built a solid strategic and political case for letting America take the lead.”
As I’ve said previously, disagreeing with the President’s policies is fine; labeling him as anti-Israel is absurd.