About the atrocities in Bombay, I will say only this — something you have heard many, many times: There is no negotiating with or appeasing these people; they must be faced down, until they don’t bother us anymore. They are the same, really, wherever they strike: Bali, London, Madrid, New York . . . They are Islamists, or Islamofascists, and the civilized world must round on them, until they die or quit. This is a war of civilization against barbarism. All the rest is a matter of details.

Now, the view I have just expressed is often criticized as “Manichean.” But life is sometimes like that, for better or worse: Manichean.

‐Earlier this year, I was standing in front of the Taj Hotel (although I didn’t stay there). Does it make me feel the atrocities more acutely? No — human sympathy has no need of travel or direct experience. But one might imagine the scene more vividly, I regret to say.

‐Some Indians are pointedly identifying the terrorists as “Pakistani.” And they are, in some sense. But in a more important sense: They are Islamists, or Islamofascists. It doesn’t matter where they’re from — whether Pakistan or India or the Philippines or Egypt or Amsterdam or Marin County. They are Islamist terrorists, and they must be faced down until they bother us no more.

Or did I say that already?

‐I imagine that many people — including some who were very, very hard on the former president of Pakistan — wish that Musharraf were still in power. During his entire time, I thought of a phrase made popular by the title of a movie: “as good as it gets.” And let us remember that Pakistani authorities have killed more al-Qaeda than most of us have ever dreamed of killing.

Some of them are killed themselves, for their acts — see, for example, David Pryce-Jones on the heroic Gen. Faisal Alvi, here.

‐This is one of the most arresting opening paragraphs of a news report I have ever read: “The 2-year-old orphan found drenched in the blood of his parents at the besieged Jewish center in Mumbai left India on Monday on an Israeli Air Force jet, accompanied by the Indian woman who rescued him.” (For the full report, go here.) There is a lot about Israel in that sentence, too.

‐For the last six or seven years, the Democratic party, the establishment media, and some weak Republican sisters have cherished a myth: America is a pariah in the world; relations with our allies are in tatters; those relations need to be “restored.” So we read that Hillary Clinton has vowed to “reach out to the world again.” Obama says that Clinton’s appointment is a “sign to friend and foe of the seriousness of my commitment to renew American diplomacy and restore our alliances.” Of his wife, Bill Clinton says, “She is the right person for the job of helping to restore America’s image abroad, end the war in Iraq, advance peace, and increase our security.”

America’s image abroad has always been a mixed proposition. You may wish to see a Paul Hollander-edited book, Understanding Anti-Americanism: Its Origins and Impact at Home and Abroad.

And how exactly are our alliances in tatters? Do the Bush critics mean the Western Europeans? Relations with those governments, as with others, wax and wane, but they’re pretty good at the moment, don’t you think? And don’t Brown, Sarkozy, Merkel, and Berlusconi think so? How about the Eastern Europeans? Do they count? In addition, we have permanent interests, not permanent allies, right? Or are we no longer Palmerstonians?

Canada, Israel, Australia — are those alliances in tatters? And will Obama improve relations with Colombia? Furthermore, George W. has been pretty nice with the Red Chinese, just like the world wants, true? He has not even pushed “Pooty Poot,” as he is said to call the boss of Russia, very hard.

I could go on: Condi Rice has had a few sharp things to say about, for example, the jailing of Egyptian bloggers. But the administration overall has been fairly warm to Mubarak, right? In fact, some Bush critics have said that W. has not done enough to rock the boat with those of our allies who are less than democratic.

We see, once more, that, in many eyes, Bush can’t win: Damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t.

When Democrats, their media allies, and the others talk about “the world,” they really mean the U.N. bureaucracy, I think: They mean the likes of Kofi Annan and Lord Malloch-Brown. Or Davos. And self-assertive, unapologetic Americans are very unlikely to win the favor of that crowd, ever.

You may have noted that Bill Clinton said “end the war in Iraq” — and the president-elect just said, “I will be giving Secretary Gates and our military a new mission as soon as I take office, responsibly ending the war in Iraq through a successful transition to Iraqi control.” Why do these people talk about “ending” the war in Iraq — rather than winning or losing it?

President Bush has wanted to win it — and, if we do so, his determination to win will be a big reason for that outcome.

‐Mark my words: The Obama administration and its amen corner in the media (as an old friend of ours might have put it) will depend a lot on denigrating the Bush administration. And there will be no one to defend that administration: because scarcely anyone has done it for years, and the president has appeared strangely reluctant to do it himself.

‐Speaking of politics, I attended a service at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine, on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, on Sunday morning (and on into the afternoon . . .). I did so because a composer friend of mine was having a piece of his premiered. This cathedral is the seat of the Episcopal faith in New York. And the old crack went, “The Episcopal Church is the Republican party at prayer.” Something like the opposite applies to this particular church. The service had the flavor of a Democratic convention, with better music.

The sermon drew heavily on Studs Terkel, the late Left journalist and activist. There were also the obligatory references to “Dr. King” — for my essay on the honorific “Dr.,” go here — and Desmond Tutu. And everybody spoke about “diversity”: “diversity,” “diversity,” “diversity.” “Diversity” was almost a magic word, like “abracadabra,” or a mantra. It seemed to be invested with a talismanic quality. Has there been a word more drained of any meaning in recent years than “diversity”?

We can say this: If you feel like congratulating yourself, simply say “diversity.”

Senator Schumer spoke. He was very enthusiastically received. But when Senator Clinton spoke, she was received with an enthusiasm that was almost North Korean in its intensity (although the North Koreans, those poor, enslaved souls, can’t really mean it). The congregation stood and cheered as though Jesus himself had reappeared (and, frankly, I’m not sure Jesus could have topped her — how does he stand on “choice”?).

I will stop now, except to say this: For years, I have heard alarms about “the Religious Right,” and the politicization of evangelical churches. Maybe the alarm-sounders should look elsewhere as well, and maybe people should tend to the beams in their own eyes, as the great HRC (or someone) once said . . .

‐In this here symposium, I have some suggestions about Christmas gifts, and several other people do, too. In this here impromptu, I wanted to mention three Christmas tracks — not whole albums, but tracks, ones I have cherished, and with which I have kicked off my Christmas-music season. (I refrain from listening to Christmas music until after Thanksgiving. Some years, I am sick of it by December 8 or so, but that is surely my fault, not the music’s.)

1. Leontyne Price singing “O Holy Night” on this album. She was in her mid-30s when she made this track, and absolutely perfect.

2. Heidi Grant Murphy, soprano, Kevin Murphy, piano — “Shepherd’s Pipe Carol” (Rutter), on this album.

3. Chanticleer, “Jerusalem in the Morning,” which ends a medley, on this album.

Don’t say I never did anything for you — or never gave you anything for Christmas!

P.S. I don’t mean to imply that there’s anything wrong with these albums as a whole — not at all! I am just singling out tracks . . .

‐Since we’re talkin’ Christmas, and suggestions and all, could I plug my own lil’ book — seeing as I haven’t done so in this column since, oh, April, I think? I hope that makes me a good boy (I say to Santa)! For details on Here, There & Everywhere: Collected Writings of Jay Nordlinger, go here.

‐For many years, a lot of readers have been asking for an RSS — an RSS for Impromptus. I’m not sure what “RSS” stands for. And I’m not quite sure how it works. But I’m told that, if you use this link, you’ll get Impromptus, RSS. I’m also told that an RSS is especially useful for a column that appears irregularly, or unpredictably.

Anyway, good luck, and thank you! And I’ll see you for another column real soon, RSS’d or not . . .