Consider the following claims, each of which in Washington circles has attained quasi-canonical status.--Andrew Bacevich
* The presence of U.S. forces in the Islamic world contributes to regional stability and enhances American influence.
* The Persian Gulf constitutes a vital U.S. national security interest.
* Egypt and Saudi Arabia are valued and valuable American allies.
* The interests of the United States and Israel align.
* Terrorism poses an existential threat that the United States must defeat.
For decades now, the first four of these assertions have formed the foundation of U.S. policy in the Middle East. The events of 9/11 added the fifth, without in any way prompting a reconsideration of the first four. On each of these matters, no senior U.S. official (or anyone aspiring to a position of influence) will dare say otherwise, at least not on the record.
Yet subjected to even casual scrutiny, none of the five will stand up.
When I was growing up, Harvard, Yale, and Princeton all had an affirmative action program, though they didn't call it that. In the interests of diversity (and you could make a case for it), they modified their admissions standards beyond mere academic ability, to make sure that about 95% of their students were goyem, or I believe we're now supposed to call them Gentile-Americans. Now it's non-Asians.