We are in the midst of a Dwight Eisenhower revival. Today pundits often look to Eisenhower as a model of how a president can govern across party lines and protect American interests globally without resorting too quickly to the use of force. Yet this mix of nostalgia and frustration with the current polarized state of American politics may mislead us. Eisenhower's presidency has much to teach us today about how a president might avert crises and showdowns at home or abroad. But he governed under conditions so strikingly different from those a chief executive faces in the early 21st century that we need to question how much of his style could work in our own era. The chapters in this volume address the lessons we can draw from the Eisenhower experience for presidential leadership today. Although most of the authors find much to admire in the Eisenhower record, they express varying opinions on how applicable his approach would be for our own time. On one side, they appreciate his limited faith in the power of his words to move public opinion and his reluctance to turn to the use of force to solve international problems. On the other side, it was plain that Ike's exercise of "hidden-hand" leadership (in Fred Greenstein's evocative term) would not be possible in the modern media environment that makes Washington a giant fishbowl and instant revelation an acceptable norm. Both Eisenhower admirers and skeptics (and many of the authors are both) will find much in these essays to reinforce their preconceptions-and much that is unsettling. Eisenhower emerges as an effective but flawed leader. He was in many ways the right man for his time, but limited because he was also a man of his time.

We are in the midst of a Dwight Eisenhower revival. Today pundits often look to Eisenhower as a model of how a president can govern across party lines and protect American interests globally without resorting too quickly to the use of force. Yet this mix of nostalgia and frustration with the current polarized state of American politics may mislead us. Eisenhower's presidency has much to teach us today about how a president might avert crises and showdowns at home or abroad. But he governed under conditions so strikingly different from those a chief executive faces in the early 21st century that we need to question how much of his style could work in our own era. The chapters in this volume address the lessons we might draw from the Eisenhower experience for presidential leadership today. Although most of the authors find much to admire in the Eisenhower record, they express varying opinions on how applicable his approach would be for our own time. On one side, they appreciate his limited faith in the power of his words to move public opinion and his reluctance to turn to the use of force to solve international problems. On the other side, it was plain that Ike's exercise of "hidden-hand" leadership (in Fred Greenstein's evocative term) would not be possible in the modern media environment that makes Washington a giant fishbowl and instant revelation an acceptable norm. Both Eisenhower admirers and skeptics (and many of the authors are both) will find much in these essays to reinforce their preconceptions - and much that is unsettling. Eisenhower emerges as an effective but flawed leader. He was in many ways the right man for his time, but limited because he was also a man of his time.

Acclaimed historian of U.S.-Middle East foreign relations Douglas Little examines how American presidents, policy makers, and diplomats dealt with the rise of Islamic extremism in the modern era. Focusing on White House decision-making from George H. W. Bush to Barack Obama, Little traces the transformation of the Cold War-era "Red Threat" into the "Green Threat" of radical Islam. Analyzing key episodes from the 1991 Persian Gulf War and Bill Clinton's mishandling of the Oslo peace process through the 9/11 attacks, George W. Bush's decision to invade Iraq, and the showdown with ISIS, Little shows how the threat posed by Islamic "others" shaped the Middle Eastern policies of both Democratic and Republican presidents. This second edition includes a new afterword that carries the story through the Trump administration and into the Biden presidency, focusing particularly on Afghanistan, a major trouble spot in the Muslim world that will command global attention for many years to come.

In certain parts of Mexico, the sewer system lacks some of the convenient features you might be accustomed to here at home. For example, dropping even a single sheet of toilet tissue into the bowl will cause the entire system to back up. This becomes a problem for those of us who are creatures of habit. Somehow, the idea of dropping tissue into the trash can doesn't stick well when performing the task of, well ... using toilet tissue. So what happens when habit takes over and you accidentally drop a square into the bowl? Mexican Bowl Fishing, of course ... Like his monthly MPN Column, William Douglas Little's book "Mexican Bowl Fishing" hones in on the most humorous, (and usually most embarrassing), tales of life, often noting the life-lessons that he's learned along the way. Most importantly, the ability to laugh at one's own inadequecies. In this book, William recounts 26 individual stories including unrevised versions of his popular columns, "Bury the Cat Slowly," "A Lesson in Cheap," "Used Parts Salesman" and his introductory column, "Practice What We Preach" as well as 22 brand new, hilarious tales. Each story offers a humorous telling of the unfortunate circumstances that seem to plague his life, all delivered with his real-world, conversational writing style that has attracted thousands of readers to his magazine column. Unfortunately, Mr. Little's misfortunes are all too recognizable by many of us With great lessons to help anyone in their job and their everyday life, Mexican Bowl Fishing is an entertaining look at the importance of laughing off embarrassment and focusing on the most important goal in life ... having fun. This book is required reading for anyone who has eversuffered from bad luck, misfortune, accidental injury or the minor complications of everyday life

With the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, America's relationship with the Middle East exploded to the forefront of our national consciousness. Looking back more than a half-century, Douglas Little offers valuable, historical context for anyone seeking a better understanding of this complicated relationship. He explores the encounters between the United States and the Middle East since 1945, focusing particularly on the complex, sometimes inconsistent attitudes and interests that have shaped U.S. relations in the region.

Little begins by exposing the persistence of "orientalist" stereotypes in American popular culture and then examines U.S. policy toward the Middle East from many angles. Chapters focus on America's increasing dependence on petroleum; U.S.-Israeli relations; the threat of communism; the rise of revolutionary nationalist movements in Egypt, Iran, Iraq, and Libya; the futility of U.S. military and covert intervention; and the unsuccessful attempt to broker a "peace-for-land" settlement between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The overarching theme of the book is that a combination of American omnipotence and profound cultural misunderstanding ensured that the United States would encounter trouble in the Middle East after 1945 and that those forces continue to bedevil the relationship between these vastly different cultures to the present day.

In this important new book, Douglas Little explores the political and cultural turmoil that led U.S. policy makers to shift their attention from containing the ""Red Threat"" of international communism to combatting the ""Green Threat"" of radical Islam after 1989. Little analyzes America's confrontation with Islamic extremism through the traditional ideological framework of ""us versus them"" that has historically pitted the United States against Native Americans, Mexicans, Asian immigrants, Nazis, and the Soviets. The collapse of the Soviet Union seemed to signal that the doctrine of containment had served U.S. interests in the Middle East well, preserving Western access to Persian Gulf oil while protecting Israel and preventing communist subversion. Yet, although many Americans hoped that the end of the Cold War would enable the United States to redefine its diplomatic relationships in the Middle East and elsewhere, Little demonstrates that from Operation Desert Storm in 1991 to Obama's battle against ISIS today, U.S. foreign policy has been governed by ""us versus them"" thinking, with Islamophobia supplanting the threats of yesteryear.