Hmm, you guys seem to be missing some of my post here.
Please correct me if I'm wrong (and by correct, I don't mean tell me I'm wrong, please write out what is correct).
Within Chinese arts, there is an assumption that all paths lead to the same place, ie internal arts can produce efficient and practical fighters and external arts can produce students with incredible internal strength/chi. The distinguishing factor is rather what order these things are taught and how they are taught rather than what the end results are.
I can't think of any martial art that wouldn't be better if done by someone with neijin/internal strength. The question then becomes, which direction are you going in your teaching? I frankly think Aikido would be a lot better if it was an internal art, but the syllabus simply doesn't seem to be there. I don't have access to what DR's actual syllabus is, so I can't comment on that. If anyone would like to send me the Takumakai maunal, that'd be great though...
Mike, would you care to clear up the two usages that I'm confusing? I attempted to limit my discussion to the teaching paradigm rather than any kind of end result or the qualities that are eventually developed at the end of ones training.