I've read several books by Pipes. It's my impression that most of what he says is rather tame and cautious. And that most of what he says is not very controversial. He often has something illuminating in his essays, but much of this is relatively apolitical.At least in this book, I was able to figure out which political party he favored!Now, it is true that Pipes has often said that militant Islamic attacks on Americans were a form of war as opposed to individual criminal acts. He's said that our government ought to take seriously the ideology that has been motivating such attacks, and that we ought to make policy changes in order to win this war and destroy the effectiveness of any enemy forces. Well, our administration has regarded the 9/11 attacks as war. It has tried to destroy the enemy forces. As near as I can tell, what Pipes has advocated here has been fair and reasonable.Pipes feels that the battle is not against Islam but against militant Islamists, a group that can be marginalized and defeated with the help of moderate Muslims. Again, this does not sound all that radical an idea.Pipes is indeed bothered by Islamic militants who manage to pass themselves off as moderates. If they get away with it, Pipes' recommendations will be misimplemented and doomed.I liked the essays and found them informative. Maybe you will as well. But if you were looking for something wild and maybe, um, raging and fuming, you won't find it here.