There are other ways of looking at this. From UK's Guardian:
What about the American presidential election? The president's annual address to Aipac is always an occasion to handicap how the president is doing with Jewish voters. That goes doubly in an election year.
The Jewish-American electorate of course is as heterogenous as any voting bloc – there's no one clear way for the president to speak to these voters on this issue. Inside Israel, a recent poll found that 34 percent oppose a strike on Iran no matter what. Forty-two percent would back a strike only if it had at least the support of the United States. Also of note in this context: President Obama already enjoys stronger support among Jewish voters than among the electorate at large (pace Rick Santorum, who in a December speech to the Jewish Republican Coalition said that "Jews all across this country are now understanding that the values of the Republican Party are in concert with theirs"). The Link
PH, you've already changed your tune. You started with "israels least friendly" to "oh just that one instance" and when pointed out, you try to wiggle out by posting israeli news articles. Here's an assessment from Tom Friedman:In reply to:
Yes, that would be Iran ... the OTHER Middle Eastern powder keg. I think Iraq will be too busy with other issues for quite a while to worry about building nukes.