(A nice rebuttal of his "Christian militarism" thesis can be read here:)

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/paul-w1.html

Rosenzweig's a complicated figure, and it's an eccentric chink in Spengler's churlish armor that he remains so devoted to him. From Wikipedia:

"Rosenzweig, while critical of Jewish scholar Martin Buber's early work, became close friends with him upon their actually meeting. This friendship lasted despite their differences of political opinion: Buber was a Zionist, while Rosenzweig was a strong defender of the German-Jewish heritage and felt that a return to Israel would embroil the Jews into a worldly history they should eschew (this position was given a tragic tone by the death of Rosenzweig's wife in a concentration camp long after he himself had perished of disease)."

…

"Rosenzweig's final attempt (he was dying from ALS) to communicate his thought, via the laborious typewriter-alphabet method, consisted in the partial sentence: "And now it comes, the point of all points, which the Lord has truly revealed to me in my sleep, the point of all points for which there—". The writing was interrupted by his doctor, with whom he had a short discussion using the same method. When the doctor left, Rosenzweig did not wish to continue with the writing, and he died in the night, the sentence left unfinished."

"In February 2006, I argued that a few sorties by American aircraft could put the Iranian problem to rest, but that the window for a clean military operation would not last long.
The longer Washington dallies, the more resources Tehran can put in place, including:

Upgrading Hezbollah's offensive-weapon capabilities in Lebanon.

Integrating Hamas into its sphere of influence and military operations.

Putting in place terrorist capability against the West.

Preparing its Shi'ite auxiliaries in Iraq for insurrection."

…

"In early 2006, I predicted "war with Iran on the worst terms", and that is what the West is likely to get. I warned at the time, "if Washington waits another year to deliver an ultimatum to Iran, the results will be civil war to the death in Iraq, the direct engagement of Israel in a regional war through Hezbollah and Hamas, and extensive terrorist action throughout the West, with extensive loss of American life. There are no good outcomes, only less terrible ones. The West will attack Iran, but only when such an attack will do the least good and the most harm."

…

"Deals with the devil simply do not work, even in the ethically challenged world of foreign policy. The devil will act according to his nature, whatever bargain one attempts to make with him."

…

"Western civilians well may pay a heavy price for the excision of Iran's nuclear program in the form of terror attacks. The price may be steep, but it's worth it."

The West has no choice but to attack Iran, because Iran believes that it has no choice but to develop nuclear weapons. Make no mistake: this attack will destabilize the entire region, past the capacity of the king's horses and king's men to reassemble it. The agenda will shift from how best to promote stability, to how best to turn instability to advantage."
——

Spengler's recommendations form a blueprint for Hell. He confuses the cause of the West's sickness, centralized government militarism in concert with imperialist corporatism, with the cure. We don't need to smash Islam with an iron fist, we need to reembrace the things that, historically, have made the West preeminent: Aristotelianism, Judeo-Christian ethical advances, and the inviolable dignity of the individual in relation to the State.

More war will only lead to more war, and the further destruction of authentic Western values.

Spengler, though he denies it, is, like his namesake, a pessimist: he can see no future for the West that does not entailing mass murder.

Like Neuhaus, Spengler's great intelligence is no protection against profound error.

In the 20th Century, Communism was this ideology; in the 21st, it is Neoconservatism. Naive Christian Zionists are the useful idiots of today, just as naive, eager, idealistic collectivists were the useful idiots of yesterday.

Maybe there is a Darwinian element to this; those individuals foolish enough to be hoodwinked by Organized Jewish Chicanery (OJC) end up as canon fodder, just as whole societies foolish enough to be hoodwinked by OJC end up with the kinds of problems that now afflict America, including terrorist attacks because of support for Israel, open borders/cheap labor to enrich OJC, massive deregulation of OJC controlled industries, and a generally politically correct governing class that refuses to address the OJC elephant in the living room.

What OJC amounts to is a Jewish oligarchy bent on extracting as much nourishment and as many resource as it can from any given society or country before the cadaver finally collapses, as did the Soviet Union. OJC will then move on to fresh meat elsewhere.

Canada, Australia, Oceania…be afraid…be very afraid.

Just wanna know how much I will be paying for gas. And, wanna know if there will be US military draft.

Anybody got a clue?

FROM WIKIPEDIA:

Regarding regime change in Iraq, in 2002 Ledeen criticized the views of former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft, writing:[20]

He fears that if we attack Iraq "I think we could have an explosion in the Middle East. It could turn the whole region into a cauldron and destroy the War on Terror."
One can only hope that we turn the region into a cauldron, and faster, please.

The Christian Zionists are probably more like the Russian and Ukrainian Orthodox peasant, who put so much effort into making pilgrimages to the Holy Land in the late 19th century. One can easily imagine that Jabotinsky wanted to harness such naive religious fervor to serve his movement.

When he finally visited the USA to recruit Jews to his form of Zionism, he also found Christians with just the right combination of zeal and gullability in white racist premillennial dispensationist Confederate irredentists of the American South. Jabotinsky consciously canvassed their leaders in order to inject Zionism into their eschatology.

The Christian Zionists are probably more like the Russian and Ukrainian Orthodox peasant, who put so much effort into making pilgrimages to the Holy Land in the late 19th century. One can easily imagine that Jabotinsky wanted to harness such naive religious fervor to serve his movement.

When he finally visited the USA to recruit Jews to his form of Zionism, he also found Christians with just the right combination of zeal and gullability in white racist premillennial dispensationist Confederate irredentists of the American South. Jabotinsky consciously canvassed their leaders in order to inject Zionism into their eschatology.

February 07, 2005, 8:50 a.m.
Faster, Please
Iran needs change. We need to help — now.

"…to the Iranian people, I say tonight: As you stand for your own liberty, America stands with you." — President Bush, in the State of the Union Address

http://www.nationalreview.com/ledeen/ledeen200502070850.asp