I knew you'd like Fukuyama's new book, but you ought to read the whole thing. He never approved of going into Iraq. He never represented the view of the administration. He's had an ongoing debate with Krauthammer which has gone on for years about this. He was influenced by Gilles Kepel and Olivier Roy, whom he praises in his book, and they are of the opinion that 1) the Jihadists are small in number, and 2) they have no support from the rest of society. He's calling his new position, Realistic Wilsonianism. You can tell a lot about a person's theory about the current war by his terminology. Fukuyama likes the term "Jihadist." These are the people to worry about, and of course there aren't too many of them. The author I am presently reading, Khaled Abou El Fadl, The Great Theft, Wrestling Islam form the Extremists, uses the term Islamic Puritans, and there are a whole bunch of those. Lawrence -----Original Message----- From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andreas Ramos Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 11:11 PM To: Lit-Ideas Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Fukuyama and the End of... well... Fukuyama's article is pretty bad news. If the hardcore believers of theory that got us into Iraq no longer believe in the theory, then we have a war without a cause. This is a remarkable situation: the war is still going, but the ones who are prosecuting the war no longer believe in that war. The war has been lost not on the battlefield, but in the halls of the White House. I don't think I've ever heard of a similar situation: a country with overwhelming military superiority giving up in the middle of a battle. The war in Iraq is over. It has been lost. yrs, andreas www.andreas.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html