Rather, I think Bush and Rice have run into a wall constructed of (1) western liberal pieties (esp., multiculturalism and the belief that reason trumps violence), (2) western anti-militarism (which flows from the admixture of decadent cowardice — which inhibits a resort to violence — and the liberal pieties just cited — which justify nonviolence as moral superiority), and (3) the lack of success (real or imagined) in defeating the insurgency in Iraq.

Together, these three factors have steadily undermined the philosophical and emotional foundations of the original Bush Doctrine, so much so that now Bush will not take forceful military action to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons — the raison d’tre of the original Bush Doctrine. The preparations for such military action could not be kept secret. If Bush were planning to strike Iran, we’d know about, and they would know about it because Bush would issue an ultimatum before launching the attack. Just like with Saddam in 1991 and 2003.

So, no, I think what we’re seeing is what we’re getting. Any meaningful “war on terror” is over at this point in time. Perhaps our next president will reinvigorate our efforts, without first waiting for another devastating attack on the country.

“Historians will look back at this weekend’s cease-fire agreement in Lebanon as a pivotal moment in the war on terror. It is pivotal in the same sense that the Munich agreement between Adolf Hitler and Neville Chamberlain was pivotal in an earlier ba…