It is not logically possible to tolerate intolerance, one can only surrender to it, whether slowly or quickly; because that is the only result intolerance will ultimately accept--and truces are not tolerance.

We in the West wish to "tolerate" many who will only agree to anything that seems to them at least a small step towards our ultimate surrender.

We too, may wish to procrastinate, believing that the Islamic Reformation underway will do our work for us, but we shouldn't label this inactivity on our part as tolerance, either. It's strategic delay.

I agree with Dr. Dalrymple that privatization of Islam would spell its doom. Further, if there is any "root cause" for Islamic terrorism, it is the realization by Muslims of all stripes that modernity and its handmaiden, globalization, inevitably will lead to the dissolution of Islam in all but name.

Western thinkers on this issue cannot accept this line of thought. Even so astute and vociferous a commentator as Daniel Pipes has repeatedly insisted, for example, that there are such entities as "moderate Muslims," the supposedly silent majority of Muslims, who hold the key to the reconciliation of Islam with modernity. But anyone familiar with the Middle East knows that this is pie in the sky and a fundamental misreading of what it means to be a Muslim.

Dr. Dalrymple states "Untold numbers of Muslims desire little more than a quiet life." No doubt, this is true. But I believe this statement is only half the equation: the other half would read: ". . . so long as they can live within the boundaries of Islam." These "untold numbers" would take to the martyr’s road in a flash if living within the fold of Islam was no longer a choice for them.

Difficult and unpalatable as it may be for Western thinkers to accept, they would do well to heed Dr. Dalrymple’s "all or nothing" characterization of this conflict. The implications of this scenario are unpleasant, to put it mildly. But it is vital to realize that Muslims across the board accept this reality without any problem at all. They are convinced--and what’s more, they believe it correct--that at the end of the day, the muezzin’s call will be heard 5 times a day world-wide, marking the end and triumph of the Final Jihad.

From Mr. Dalrymple's review, Mr Karsh's analysis of Islam echoes the words of Winston Churchill on Islam from The River War (1899), his account of the Sudanese campaign. Winston Churchill was a man whose prescient warnings about Hitler were ignored by the world. The world appears to be doing the same today.

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property--either as a child, a wife, or a concubine--must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

"Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die. But the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytising faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science."