Seen through Hungtington's simplified view of religious groupings, it looks like recent events prove his point that one group's fear of another is enough to compel it to blindly dismiss its own national interests in favour of those of an irrational foreign state. It looks like Israel and America have dismissed the universal fact that all groups deserve an even chance to interact with on another.

In a very American way, Huntington failed to explain why he simplified the Judeo-Christian world into a single entity that stands against Islam. Like Huntington, America forgets that the Islamic world had no antipathy towards Judaism until the 20th century. Such antipathy evolved as a resistance to the doctrine of Zionism -- itself an argument for racial preferences.

Yet the worst and most prolonged conflicts have taken place between neighbours who were culturally very close. The bloodiest religious wars were fought within Christianity and Islam, not between them.

Blind support of the last living member of the Apartheid Club with ts bold breaches of the Geneva Conventions and its bombing of civilians is bound to backfire on any financial or moral supporter. A blitz on Palestinians or Lebanese in reaction to kidnappings by admittedly belligerent parties indicts this living member as an accomplice. A plea of Shiite vs. Sunni will not defend the accused.

Israel's bombing of Proctor & Gamble's Lebanese baby food factory has already weakened any case. The American government, by proxy, has bombed the interests of its own citizens.

America and its allies are needlessly exposing themselves to risks and perils. All wars have risks and intangible by-products. The real war is about sustainable peace, democracy and fair economic opportunities. It is not about eviction of Lebanese people from their own land.

Any blind support of Israel's absurd war will certainly lead to other clashes and losing the real war. It will damage America and Britain, even if Israel wins the cheap blame games and the battles.