[dk/coro]

I won't split hairs over this one. SJH was addressing the issue in much broader terms than Bernard Lewis, Dan Pipes, Gaddis, Johnson, etc, who narrowed the debate -- especially after 9/11 into the clearly defined challenge Islam poses to "Christendom" (Western Democracy).

All of the above pragmatists certainly, as a group" clearly argued the tribal aspects of man's cultural affinity vis-a-vis the Fukuyama globalists, who falsely, in my opinion, placed their bets on man's inherent sociability and desire for global harmony.

Tommyrot, of course. I am surprised that Bush would let Fukuyama and his cohorts in the front door of the Executive Mansion -- much less, listen to their utopian blather. Pie in the sky One Worlders, to a man.

Clinton, Albricht, Holbrooke, Talbot, Soros, Gergen all fall into that camp. Dangerous policy; very dangerous to the very survival of the Republic, IMO. And, please note that not one of the above ever donned a uniform in service to their country.

Have a great summer. /dkp

[attiladhun2]

I got a great deal out of Huntington's book, but a far better book to understand the current situation is not his, but Leon Uris' The Haj. He accurately depicts Islam for what it is--a blood cult based on personal honor, power, and nepotism. He also accurately depicts the Arab as a person who can hold onto two contradictory views at the same time and who can be persuaded to participate in the most harebrained scheme as long as it has prospects of glory and plunder. I think this makes any clash with these people especially dangerous.