As I predicted, in his role as representative of the Jewish people, Jeffrey Goldberg got a one-on-one interview with Barack Obama again, laying on hands to make sure that he wants to attack Iran.
In 45 minutes, Goldberg appears to have asked 23 questions, not one of them dealing with the 4-1/2 million Palestinians living without rights under occupation. Palestinians don't merit a reference except when Obama disparages the Goldstone report and the flotilla.
But I guess that's the point of the Great Game of the Iranian threat-- take Palestine off the table.
Also, typically, Goldberg asks two questions about Obama's relationship with Netanyahu. "Are you friends?" I.e., Goldberg's ultimate test, do you like Israel?
Below, Goldberg seeks reassurance that Obama will resort to military means if he has to and that Iran is a threat not just to Israel but the world. Thus Goldberg seeks to solidify the idea that it is in the American people's interest to attack Iran.
President Obama: It would still be a profound national-security interest of the United States to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.
GOLDBERG: Why, then, is this issue so often seen as binary, always defined as Israel versus Iran?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: I think it has to do with a legitimate concern on the part of Israel that they are a small country in a tough neighborhood, and as a consequence, even though the U.S. and Israel very much share assessments of how quickly Iran could obtain breakout capacity, and even though there is constant consultation and intelligence coordination around that question, Israel feels more vulnerable. And I think the prime minister and the defense minister, [Ehud Barak,] feel a profound, historic obligation not to put Israel in a position where it cannot act decisively and unilaterally to protect the state of Israel. I understand those concerns, and as a consequence, I think it's not surprising that the way it gets framed, at least in this country, where the vast majority of people are profoundly sympathetic to Israel's plight and potential vulnerabilities -- that articles and stories get framed in terms of Israel's potential vulnerability.
But I want to make clear that when we travel around the world and make presentations about this issue, that's not how we frame it. We frame it as: this is something in the national-security interests of the United States and in the interests of the world community.