Terrorism & U.s. Foreign Policy

Book Description

The United States government-backed by the overwhelming support of the American public-takes a hard line against international terrorism. The tenets of official U.S. counterterrorist policy are: make no concessions or deals with terrorists; bring them to justice for their crimes; isolate and apply pressure on states that sponsor terrorism; and bolster the counterterrorist capabilities of countries willing to work with the United States. While these tenets are sound principles, their application, specifically overseas, raises difficult questions. Does the "no deal" policy actually deter terrorists acts? Are there cases where agreements might reduce terrorism, while advancing other U.S. interests? Do isolation and pressure really force offending states to alter their support for terrorists? What factors affect the willingness, not just the capability, of foreign governments to help the United States in counterterrorism?

In this critical study, a career CIA officer provides a guide to constructing and executing counterterrorist policy, urging that it be formulated as an integral part of broader U.S. foreign policy. In the first four chapters, Paul R. Pillar identifies the necessary elements of counterterrorist policy, he examines why the United States is a prime terrorist target, and he reveals why the counterterrorist policies that seem strongest are not always the most effective. Chapter 5 examines the widely varying nature of terrorist groups and the policy tools most appropriately applied to them. Chapter 6 focuses on states that sponsor terrorism (including Iran, Libya, North Korea, and Cuba), along with those that enable it to occur (particularly Greece and Pakistan). Pillar examines ways in which the American public's perspective toward terrorism can actually constrain counterterrorist policy, and he concludes that terrorism cannot be "defeated"-only reduced, attenuated, and to some degree, controlled. The final chapter summarizes his recommendations for amending U.S. policy.

Customer Reviews:

Serious Foreign Policy Book.......2006-08-07

Pillar's importance has come to light to "the mainstream" of American thought after his piece titled "War, Policy, and the War in Iraq" came out in Foreign Affairs critizing the current war. Pillar, however, has had a long established career in foreign policy work. The book is not an "easy read" and is quite technical, but it is an essential read if you want to know what our country's top analysts think is the best way to deal with "terrorism". Furthermore, his insight into Bin Laden and his Al-Queda organization is very interesting as this book which was written before 9/11.

Not Our Fault.......2006-07-24

Measured perhaps is the word that best describes this book. Paul Pillar has clearly attempted to present the issues of terrorism in a dispassionate and reasoned manner. For the most part he has succeeded. He also provides the readers of the paperback edition of this book with a new introductory essay that ties the events of the 9/11 terrorist attacks into the main themes of the book. The book provides a useful basis for any discussion on the nature of terrorism and counter terrorism.

It is also a book is filled with interesting observations and comments. For example, anyone who has read Ron Suskind's book, "The One Per Cent Doctrine" undoubtedly remembers Vice President Cheney's comment to George Tenet that, "If there's a one per cent chance that Pakistani scientists are helping al Qaeda to build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have treat it as a certainty in terms of our response." This book which was published well before the Suskind book, provides the reader with the same concept after someone, presumably Tenet, translated it into bureaucratese "...the potential consequences of CBRN weapons getting into the hands of terrorist groups are so severe that the possibility must be countered no matter how low the probability."

Of course this book, like so many written by former government officials is self serving. Pillar probably was forced out as the Deputy Chief of the Counter Terrorism Center (CTC) of the CIA, but the reasons for this are unclear. In any event he spends a good deal of the book justifying the work of CIA and providing what has become the standard Government Official response to critics of the Agency by claiming that: the problems raised by the critics are bogus and show a misunderstanding of how the agency operates and besides which action has already been taken internally to correct them. Nonetheless the book is worth reading and contributes to our understanding of the phenomena of terrorism.

How has terrorism shaped our foreign policy.......2006-03-23

Paul R. Pillar has written in clear wording how terrorism has affected the United States Foreign Policy. Paul R. Pillar He pulls the curtain away from the terrorism mystic. You will learn about the other ways of dealing terrorism other than just the military option. For example

Counterterrorist Instruments:
1. Diplomacy
2. Criminal Law
3. Financial Controls
4. Military Force
5. Intelligence and Covert Action

Mr. Pillar explains how to use the instruments to their fullest extent, even when one instrument might not be the best in the long run, it might just be effective at the moment

Experts in the field of Terrorism have this work on their reference book shelf.

Must read.......2004-01-05

Mr. Pillar makes many very interesting and well-balanced points in writing this book. His suggestions are quite well founded and realistic.

Too often suggested methods to combat terrorism are either inadequate or too extraordinary to be accomplished. Pillar offers very plausible and level-headed suggestions and expectations for the United States' counter-terrorism programs.

The best book I've read on terrorism.......2002-10-16

This is not a book about secret operations or police actions against terrorism. This text is about the phenomenom of terrorism, its different manifestations and the kinds of groups related to this activities. Mr. Pillar explains the methods for answering the terrorist threat and -contrary to what many may think- he relegates military actions to the last place of the list. This book was written before September 11, 2001, but certainly it helps explain why the attacks took place and sets the path to prevent such acts in the future. This book is also important for those interested on the legal aspects of terrorism, because it deals with different instruments adopted to combat this threat. For every person who would like to form his/her own opinion on how to fight terrorism, this text is a must read.

Perilous Power: The Middle East & U.S. Foreign Policy: Dialogues on Terror, Democracy, War, and Justice

Average customer rating:

Insightful At Times; Also Biased and Tedious
Useful ideas for reducing the dangers of yet more wars
US terror
Predictable Conclusion
Conspiracy Literature at its Finest!

Perilous Power: The Middle East & U.S. Foreign Policy: Dialogues on Terror, Democracy, War, and Justice
Noam Chomsky , and Gilbert Achcar
Manufacturer: Paradigm Publishers
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Terrorism | Current Events | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Interventions (City Lights Open Media)
Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy
What We Say Goes: Conversations on U.S. Power in a Changing World
A Power Governments Cannot Suppress
Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance (American Empire Project)

ASIN: 1594513120

Book Description

The volatile Middle East is the site of vast resources, profound passions, frequent crises, and long-standing conflicts, as well as a major source of international tensions and a key site of direct U.S. intervention.

Two of the most astute analysts of this part of the world are Noam Chomsky, the preeminent critic of U.S, foreign policy, and Gilbert Achcar, a leading specialist of the Middle East who lived in that region for many years. In their new book, Chomsky and Achcar bring a keen understanding of the internal dynamics of the Middle East and of the role of the United States, taking up all the key questions of interest to concerned citizens, including such topics as terrorism, fundamentalism, conspiracies, oil, democracy, self determination, anti-Semitism, and anti-Arab racism, as well as the war in Afghanistan, the invasion and occupation of Iraq, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the sources of U.S. foreign policy.

This book provides the best readable introduction for all who wish to understand the complex issues related to the Middle East from a perspective dedicated to peace and justice. It is not an interview book, but rather a carefully planned and orchestrated dialogue with two experts, skillfully edited by Stephen R. Shalom, professor at William Patterson University.

Customer Reviews:

Insightful At Times; Also Biased and Tedious.......2007-06-09

The authors provide both helpful insight and tortured bias towards Israel in this book. "Perilous Power" begins with efforts to define terrorism - the first (12/87) passed the U.N. 153-2 (the U.S. and Israel were upset that it excluded acts by those occupied), and one immediately gets the sense that the U.S. is way out of the mainstream vs. Israel.

Some of their observations include:

Chomsky et al make the interesting point that Treasury officials in '04 testified they had four employees tracing financial transfers possibly attributable to Bin Laden and/or Hussein, and about 6X that monitoring possible Cuban embargo violations - a bit of mis-emphasis, at best. As for the U.S. troops stationed in Saudi Arabia that provoked Bin Laden, they suggest the troops instead could have been stationed in Kuwait.

The dominant trend in the 1960s Arab world was Arab nationalism (eg. Nasser). The U.S. used Islamic fundamentalism throughout Saudi Arabia to counter communism, secular nationalism, etc. This policy continued in Afghanistan, with us backing the Mujahideen and a similar group in Pakistan. (Talk about blowback!) The U.S. also reacted to the '58 overthrow of the Iraq monarchy, fearing it then would use oil for its own purposes, weakening U.S. control over Japanese and European countries. A U.S. withdrawal from Iraq would end our control/influence over mid-East oil.

In the U.S., Republicans have boosted Christian fundamentalists' concern regarding teaching evolution, gay rights, abortion rights - issues that the wealthy care little about and help build support for their causes (low taxes and wages, etc.). Real wages have gone down, beginning with the Carter administration. Political donations from insurance companies and financial institutions block both parties from addressing health and economic issues, instead resulting in a focus on religious issues.

The U.S.' democratic credentials in the Mid-East are quite poor, via our involvement in overthrows in Pakistan, Iran, and Iraq, along with little pressure on Egypt and Saudi Arabia for improvement.

AIPAC, the liberal intelligentsia, and Christian evangelicals are the main pro-Israel voting blocs in the U.S. - the latter are the strongest, and ironically, seeking the destruction of Israel for their own purposes. Israel's economic strength is in advanced military production using U.S. technology; the main market it is trying to develop is China, sometimes creating conflict with the U.S. Being pushed out of Saudi Arabia has increased the value of Israel to the U.S.

"Perilous Power's" weakest section criticizes the U.S. attack on Afghanistan - its authors believe more negotiation and development of greater evidence against Bin Laden should have taken place first. Regardless, the authors also assert that Afghanistan's people are not better off now, except in Kabul, with those in the countryside now subjugated by warlords instead of the Taliban; meanwhile, heroin production is up sharply.

The U.S. has created several ironies regarding its position on democracy. For example, Spain's P.M. joined Bush and Blair (despite the electorate's only 2% support), while the U.S. criticized Turkey's lack of cooperation with our Iraq invasion, acting with 95% support.

It was also interesting to learn that the Kurds serve as a U.S. proxy.

Finally, the Israel-Palestine issue. They report that the U.S./Israel position has been that unless Palestinians accept the right of Israel to exist, they can't be accepted as negotiating powers - total nonsense. The authors then use various examples from history, including America's treatment of its native American population, to create a patchwork logic in support of Israel's decades' old abuse of the Palestinian people. Basically, their point boils down to "possession is 9/10ths of the law."

Useful ideas for reducing the dangers of yet more wars.......2007-06-01

This fascinating book records Noam Chomsky and Gilbert Achcar's talks in January 2006. They are astoundingly well-informed and full of good ideas for reducing the dangers of war. They discuss terrorism, fundamentalism (especially in Saudi Arabia), the sources of US Middle Eastern policy (particularly oil), the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq, and the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Achcar points out that the Bush-Blair claim that they must now stay in Iraq because, having invaded, `we have the responsibility', is like the vile rule in some societies that a man who rapes an unmarried woman must marry her. They cite the US military commander in Iraq who admits that the presence of US troops `fuels the insurgency'. They note that most people in Baghdad believe that the USA's chief aim is to `rob Iraq's oil' and they note that most Americans think that the USA should get out of Iraq.

Chomsky and Achcar point out that the EU gives the Israeli state economic privileges and they suggest that the EU should desist until Israel stops building new illegal settlements and the illegal Separation Wall. They agree that an academic boycott of Israel is a bad idea, but worse, it is a divisive diversion from academic unions' main job, to defend their members' wages and conditions.

Chomsky observes that in October 2003, Iran suspended its nuclear enrichment programme in order to reach a general agreement. The EU said that it would provide `firm commitments on security issues', but it reneged when the USA refused to join the talks. In January 2006, Iran offered to suspend its nuclear programme again; the EU rejected this offer too.

Achcar observes, "There's a general trend at the level of the mainstream media to praise those ruling politicians who rule without consulting the polls; that is deemed a great virtue. But behind it is the very elitist idea, also embedded in the very concept of `representative democracy', that, once elected, a representative is free to do whatever he or she wants, even against the unanimous will of his or her constituency." So the Labour government opposes the will of the British people over the attack on Iraq, the EU, the Private Finance Initiative, immigration, breaking up Britain, etc., etc. But are we really surprised that capitalist states do not represent the people?

US terror.......2007-02-12

Chomsky does not say that the US should "accept" terrorist attacks as another reviewer suggests. Rather, Chomsky says the US should stop engaging in terrorism. The US has spent hundreds of billions of dollars developing weapons of mass destruction, and training all sorts of killers through our military camps and bases all over the world, places like the "School of the Americas" which has turned out some of Latin America's worst tyrants. We have proxy wars, special forces, and private mercenaries operating all over the world in the interests of corporatism. As General Smedley Butler said, war is a racket, and he was a "high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers."
Ann Coulter, Victor Davis Hansen, Hugh Hewitt and so many others very obediently avoid the fact of US violence against other people. They only speak in terms of the threats (blowback) our military superpower faces, never the actual harm it causes around the world. That's the "thought-crime" that Chomsky commits in book after book, he dares to suggest that the people of the US look themselves in the mirror.

For some more interviews with Chomsky, I'd recommend the website of Z Magazine.

Predictable Conclusion.......2007-01-16

I'd never read any Chomsky before, but I'd seen one of his movies and heard of his reputation. I was worried he was just going to be a knee-jerk, predictable Vietnam-era peacenik.
He discusses the Middle East, particularly Iraq, in a lot of intelligent detail, and then concludes (surprise!) that the US should withdraw all its forces from Iraq immediately and unconditionally, and that if we did that the Sunnis and Shias would just magically quit fighting against each other.
I felt pretty ripped off, because I thought while he was discussing the situation in so much detail he was actually thinking and digesting information that would drive a conclusion, while in fact the policy he was going to recommend was never in question and had no relationship with the facts on the ground being discussed.
When he was discussing Afghanistan, I had the feeling Chomsky doesn't really seem to feel that the US has any right to defend itself against terrorism, rather, he seems to feel that we should accept it as our just fate because we're such an evil country. As Ann Coulter says, "Terrorist don't hate America as much as liberals do - if they had that much energy, they'd have indoor plumbing by now!".

Conspiracy Literature at its Finest!.......2007-01-14

Every few years I'll pick up a book by Chomsky to get a clue as to what the far left is thinking. Chomsky is predictable. He will always impute the worst of motives to the United States and the best of motives to any State that is anti-American and embraces collectivist ideals. He is unpredictable in how he reaches some of his conclusions and thus you will find surprising and at times enlightening flights of reason -- and fantasy. I will never forgive him for denying the holocaust in Cambodia -- although he would say in his own defense that he was just questioning the evidence of such a holocaust.

This book is the text of a lengthy conversation between Chomsky and Gilbert Achar on the Middle East. They don't always agree, and that makes the book more interesting. Achar is a European -- born in Lebanon -- and thus his statements reflect the leftist European point of view on anti-Semitism, resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli problem, the war in Iraq, and other Middle Eastern topics. An interesting section of the book is the brief epilog which discusses the summer 2006 war of Israel on Lebanon.

The problem with thinkers like Chomsky and Achar is that, just about the time you get to thinking they are making good sense,out of their mouths comes the most outrageous nonsense. For example, Achar more than hints that the U.S. government welcomed the 9/11 terrorist attack. Now, I'm not a Bush fan -- far to the contrary -- but I decline to give credence to an opinion he and other US leaders are so venal as to welcome the death of 3,000 Americans. On his side, Chomsky's characterization of the US invasion of Afghanistan as an "atrocious crime" is misleading. Chomsky makes much of the fact that the US invasion put 5 million Afghans at risk of starvation. Baloney! He omits to mention that the five million were at risk of starvation long before the war because of the Taliban, and that during the war the US and UN kept a massive caravan of grain-carrying trucks rolling into Afghanistan to prevent starvation. Chomsky finally acknowledges there was no starvation -- after spending two pages describing the "atrocious crime" of attacking the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

So, I recommend the book for its originality, its unconventional thinking, and for the howlers you will find amidst its analyses.

Smallchief

Deliver Us from Evil : Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism

Average customer rating:

You will notice
Hannity Wuvz Bush
Misinformation and emotional retardation
Simplistic And Un-Objective
FINALLY!!!

Deliver Us from Evil : Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism
Sean Hannity
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Terrorism | Current Events | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Let Freedom Ring: Winning the War of Liberty over Liberalism
How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must): The World According to Ann Coulter
The O'Reilly Factor: The Good, the Bad, and the Completely Ridiculous in American Life
Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right
Culture Warrior

ASIN: B0002TP1JY

Book Description

As Americans face the ongoing war against terrorists and their state sponsors around the world, Sean Hannity reminds us we must also cope with the continuing scourge of accommodation and cowardice at home. With his trademark blend of passion and hard-hitting commentary, he urges Americans to recognize the dangers of putting our faith in toothless "multilateralism" when the times call for decisive action. He believes that only through strong defense of our freedoms, at home and around the world, can we preserve America's security and liberty in the dangerous twenty-first century.

"Evil exists," Hannity believes. "It is real, and it means to harm us." Tracing a direct line from Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin through Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, he reminds us of the courage and moral clarity of our great leaders. And he reveals how the disgraceful history of appeasement has reached forward from the days of Neville Chamberlain and Jimmy Carter to corrupt the unrepentant leftists of the modern Democratic Party -- from Howard Dean and John Kerry to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Hannity's first blockbuster book, the New York Times bestseller Let Freedom Ring, cemented his place as the freshest and most compelling conservative voice in the country. As host of the phenomenally successful Hannity & Colmes and The Sean Hannity Show, Hannity has won a wildly devoted fan base. Now he brings his plainspoken, take-no-prisoners style to the continuing War on Terror abroad -- and liberalism at home -- in Deliver Us from Evil.

Download Description

Talk-show giant and New York Times-bestselling author Sean Hannity -- widely recognized as the most popular young conservative voice in the country -- takes on evil in all its forms: from the growing threats of overseas terror, to the ongoing moral degradation of the American way of life, to the upcoming presidential campaign and its implications.

Nearly three years have passed since that tragic day in September. Since then, our wounds have healed, but our senses and memories have dulled.

At first, the nation rallied behind its leader. But by the time the confrontation with Iraq presented itself, our courage and moral certainty seemed to fade in the face of partisan bickering and posturing.

Now the political left and the Democratic Party are trying to use the demanding aftermath of the war to exploit our national cause for their own political advantage.

How could we allow ourselves to forget so soon?
--from Deliver Us from Evil

Sean Hannity's first blockbuster book, the New York Times bestseller Let Freedom Ring, cemented his place as the freshest and most compelling conservative voice in the country. As the host of the phenomenally successful Hannity & Colmes on the Fox News Channel and The Sean Hannity Show on ABC Radio, Hannity has won a wildly devoted fan base. Now he brings his plainspoken, take-no-prisoners style to the continuing War on Terror abroad -- and liberalism at home -- in Deliver Us from Evil.

Customer Reviews:

You will notice.......2007-09-07

You will notice that by trolling through the reviews of this book, all the negative ones written by liberals are nothing more then one or even a few sentences that can only be classified as a rant. There are a few that are a couple of paragraphs in length, but that's the best of the liberal lot.

However, all the reviews by people who agree with Sean just happen to write long reviews that actually delve into the book and analyze the ideas and opinions it presents.

It is obvious that the left wing haters who "rated" this book never even read it. How Sad.

Hannity Wuvz Bush.......2007-08-07

Yep, it's true, and basically, it comes to say that Sean Hannity is yet another conservative scumbag that worships the man and thinks that liberals are terrorists. Plus, the guy's on FOX News, the channel that despite its slogan "Fair and Balanced", leans over to one side and is up to the brim with bias and lies. Hannity is a liar, a hypocrite, basically he's one that basically follows the road of terror that Bush crafted. If you can take one word he utters in this book seriously, you need help.

Misinformation and emotional retardation.......2007-04-04

The author Sinclair Lewis said, "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." I think even Lewis would be surprised by the transparent tactics Hannity uses to pose as a holy patriot, while he serves the super rich who are warring against the US working class, persecuting ecocide, and committing human rights abuses the world over. Hannity knows he doesn't have to honestly discuss issues, as the audience he appeals to is wedded to the military State; thus, they are often quite willing to be deceived about the alleged righteousness of their crusade for corporate profits. War is a force that gives some people meaning, to paraphrase the title of a serious book by Christopher Hedges.War Is a Force that Gives Us Meaning

Fortunately, the American people are being delivered from Hannity's evil. Every day, more people are discovering the radio shows and books of Thom Hartmann, Amy Goodman and Ed Schultz.Screwed: The Undeclared War Against the Middle Class -- And What We Can Do About It (BK Currents) Static: Government Liars, Media Cheerleaders, and the People Who Fight Back Straight Talk from the Heartland: Tough Talk, Common Sense, and Hope from a Former Conservative
Even those who have been "Hannitized" or "Limbaughtomized" are tuning in and considering all sorts of issues and perspectives that the establishment media consistently avoids.
Bringing Hannity even more shame is his endlessly abusive attitude towards anybody who dares to think or act outside "the Fox." He models an authoritarian temper that only the architects and the mental slaves of a strict hierarchy would enjoy. His style brings to mind this quote from Henry Clay, "The arts of power and its minions (like Hannity) are the same in all countries and in all ages. It marks its victim; denounces it; and excites the public odium and the public hatred to conceal its own abuses and encroachments."

Hannity appears to be beyond redemption. His fear keeps him in place. If he ever turned his back on the monied interests he serves, they'd destroy him. As "The Sopranos" and countless other mafia programs tell us - "don't cross the family." But I have faith that people will find and pass along the sort of progressive media resources that will help free ourselves from the satanic media that Hannity represents.

Simplistic And Un-Objective.......2007-03-20

Sean Hannity is one of the louder members of the radical right chorus that continues to promote the "right" way in which Americans should live. We know the roster well, and there is indeed little difference between Hannity's writings and those of Anne Coulter and Bill O'Reilly. "Deliver Us From Evil" has the same characteristics as the above mentioned commentators' works in that it's plain, a quick read and offers numerous arguments in favor of an America that only exists in the mind of Sean Hannity and his devoted fans. The usual bashing of gays, "liberals" and everyone else Hannity perceives as "enemies" are all here, so fans will not be disappointed. For students of history what brings down Hannity's book is his atrocious treatment of recent American history. Hannity glorifies Ronald Reagan to the point of making him a deity, and actually defends Oliver North and Iran-Contra while actually having the cojones to praise the Monroe Doctrine (at one point Hannity says of Reagan, "the Monroe Doctrine meant something to Mr. Reagan"). Essentially Hannity, who has never served a day in combat or ever resided in a war-torn nation, condones the bullying and raiding of other nations for purely idealogical means. Mr. Hannity apparently still believes the Reagan line that Nicaragua, which resides under Mexico and after El Salvador, is a mere two day drive away from Texas. But then again, Hannity has appeared on Fox News insisting that Iraq had WMDs. In other sections of the book Hannity goes on tirades based on slim facts on everything from God to immigrants (Hannity uses his Irish ancestry as an excuse to go after current immigrants crossing into the United States). And all of it is framed by a very dry, monotone writing style. "Deliver Us From Evil" offers nothing of real value to those who seek real, detailed reading on current events, the book doesn't even serve as a useful tool for social analysis. Hannity tries to instruct us on very dire, important issues with little experience, expertise or insight. Men like Newt Gingrich of course use the man to open their "tours" and speeches because he has garnered an impressive radio audience composed of really the only type of people who could take this kind of book seriously. The saddest aspect of "Deliver Us From Evil" is that Hannity, like his comrades, does not appear to have the imagination or spirit to actually move forward into the future, instead he remains locked to a nostalgic 80's past that never existed. For Hannity the Reagan era was the Golden Age, for many it was the beginning of the true corporate sacking of America, and for Latin America it was a bloody era filled with state-sponsored terrorism. His solutions, like Pat Buchanan's and O'Reilly's, are not to face the challenges of the future, but to remain locked to a past, a past corrupted by their legalistic, radical idealism. The most dangerous aspect of this kind of propaganda is that it only serves the divide the nation instead of unifying it into a true, working culture that will advance. "Deliver Us From Evil" is empty in skill, and empty in ideas.

FINALLY!!!.......2007-01-23

Finally someone, in this case Sean Hannity, is able to cut through the liberal domination of the published world and drop some truth grenades on the battlefield of America. You say Liberalism I say Terrorism. In fact I can't tell the difference. It's the liberals who have declared jihad on the wombs of America's women. It is Liberals who strapped their [...] bombs to their bleeding hearts and blew up the church of marriage. And it is liberals who flew the plane into the second tower. I've heard one of the pilots was a 3rd cousin of Al Gore. Sean Hannity delivers us from evil...now if he could only get my pizza here on time.

America Unbound: The Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy

Average customer rating:

Helpful
A Comprehensive Review of Bush Starting With the First Election
A decent overview
A reasoned, balanced critique of Bush's foreign policy
Engaging and thought provoking presentation

America Unbound: The Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy
Ivo H. Daalder , and James M. Lindsay
Manufacturer: Brookings Institution Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Non-US Legal Systems | Perspectives on Law | Law | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

U.S. | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Terrorism | Current Events | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Nonfiction | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

Rise to Globalism
A Creative Tension: The Foreign Policy Roles of the President and Congress (Woodrow Wilson Center Press)
Surprise, Security, and the American Experience (The Joanna Jackson Goldman Memorial Lectures on American Civilization and Government)
Taming American Power: The Global Response to U.S. Primacy
Clinton's Foreign Policy in Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti, and North Korea (Essays in Public Policy)

ASIN: 0815716885

Book Description

George W. Bush has launched a revolution in American foreign policy. He has redefined how America engages the world, shedding the constraints that friends, allies, and international institutions impose on its freedom of action. He has insisted that an America unbound is a more secure America.

How did a man once mocked for knowing little about the world come to be a foreign policy revolutionary? In America Unbound, Ivo H. Daalder and James M. Lindsay dismiss claims that neoconservatives have captured the heart and mind of the president. They show that George W. Bush has been no one's puppet. He has been a strong and decisive leader with a coherent worldview that was evident even during the 2000 presidential campaign.

Daalder and Lindsay caution that the Bush revolution comes with significant risks. Raw power alone is not enough to preserve and extend America's security and prosperity in the modern world. The United States often needs the help of others to meet the challenges it faces overseas. But Bush's revolutionary impulse has stirred great resentment abroad. At some point, Daalder and Lindsay warn, Bush could find that America's friends and allies refuse to follow his lead. America will then stand alone—a great power unable to achieve its most important goals.

Customer Reviews:

Helpful.......2006-12-23

Just read this helpful little book. Daalder and Lindsay describe President Bush's post-9/11 foreign policy revolution. It's easy to read and is a fine introduction into the world of neoconservatism (though he doesn't really use the term "neocon" to describe Bush's worldview). The authors point out that the Administration is a bit more heterogenus than most recognize: some of the folks around the President really believed in the power of democracy, some believed that America must remain strong and assertive to protect its national interests. As has been told many times, Bush had his attention elsewhere prior to 9/11: a little foreign policy, but mostly domestic issues - and certainly almost no focus on terrorism. That changed, of course. We can all dispute the long-term impact of the supposed Bush revolution in foreign policy, but if things don't turn around soon in Iraq - and now Afghanistan - we may see another quick revolution back to a more realism-based look at the world. As Daalder and Lindsay pointed out, thankfully there are relatively few people who want to do away with an internationalist perspective. Retreating to within our borders and the believe that oceans can protect us has been thoroughly rebuked by reality. But that does not mean that the power of military preemption (or prevention) should be our stated right as a powerful nation.

Daalder and Lindsay are most powerful in their analyses of the major speeches and documents to come from President Bush and his administration.

Helpful book, but others are better: Rise of the Vulcans by James Mann is far more useful for understanding the different viewpoints of the Administration. That and he offers compelling of the major players in the Bush administration (although there is little discussion about Bush himself).

A Comprehensive Review of Bush Starting With the First Election.......2005-11-30

The present book is a compelling read and covers many but not all of the major issues on terrorism and Iraq.

I feel like I have been on an overdose of these books just having read House of Bush, House of Saud by Craig Unger - the biggest tell all blockbuster (my opinion), The Choice by Zbigniew Brzezinski (an excellent analysis), Disarming Iraq by Hans Blix, Noam Chomsky's Hegemony of Survival (truly a book that makes one think), Thirty Days (about Tony Blair) by Peter Stothard, and Price of Loyalty by Paul O'Neill (excellent book), Why America Slept by Gerald Posner, the very popular best seller Against All Enemies by Richard Clarke, and the Rise of the Vulcans by Mann and Mann. I put together a "listmania" list of the 25 best books - the best books - mainly non political taken together, no strong bias conservative or liberal - a spectrum of opinion when you take them all together.

Many of the books are "gotcha" books that link Bush with some wrong doings or alternately books like Brzezinski that lay out solutions. This book is a bit different. It is more of a chronological history, and the book has been highly acclaimed by the Economist, NY Times etc. After reading I can see why.

I started to read the present book and was unable to put it down until I had read it virtually cover to cover. It is a surprisingly good book and neutral in tone and a compelling read - for myself it was a page turner. It brings together the story of Iraq and WMD's in chronological order (all briefly). It starts with the Bush campaign and what he says in his run for the presidency regarding foreign policy, his philosophy, the team that he put together, plus the authors put in some historical perspective starting with Washington, then Wilson, Truman, etc. It then works its way through pre and post 9-11, Afghanistan and Iraq until late 2003.

Surprisingly I found that this book is in almost complete agreement with some of the more recent "tell all" books (Blix, O'Neill, Clarke), and I would strongly recommend reading this book. The overlying theme or conclusion is that the intelligence was flawed and incomplete. Like the Hans Blix book there were no WMD's in Iraq. The Iraq war was pushed by Wolfowitz and others prior to 9-11, and can best be described as a distraction or even an incitement of Muslims towards anti-Amercian feelings. The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan lacked realistic follow up plans for the post military invasion. So those conflicts still remain unresolved. Also, the more serious threats of Iran and North Korea remain almost unsolvable due to the potential negative consequences of a military solution for those cases including the threat of North Korea dropping nuclear weapons on South Korea.

An excellent book and I highly recommend.

A decent overview.......2004-11-29

The book is an adequate overview of President Bush's foreign policy through the first three years of his office. But it does not do justice to the more intelectually challenging questions of the administration's foreign policy such as why exactly did America go to war in Iraq and what kind of role are the neo-conservatives playing in the administration.

A reasoned, balanced critique of Bush's foreign policy.......2004-09-19

Unlike the rather vitrioic and harsh rhetoric of the Bush-hating left, this book presents a fair yet reasoned critique of the Bush foreign policy. It rebuts the common assertion that Bush is an idiot or that he is being a tool by a neo-conservative cabal.

As the authors demonstrate in this book, the major problem with American foreign policy under this administration is the rigid adherance to notions that are demonstratively false. The Bush Administration seems to believe that offending allies carries no risk and that multilateral institutions such as the United Nations, are worthless in the international sphere.
This view is dangerous and in my view, demonstrative of the stunning arrogance of the Bush Administration.

Engaging and thought provoking presentation.......2004-04-15

While obviously opposed to the Bush approach to foreign policy in general and to Iraq in particular, Ivo Daalder and James Lindsay have nonetheless succeeded in producing a remarkably fair book attempting to explain the reasons behind the President's about face from recent U.S. foreign policy. The attacks on 9/11 and other terrorist activities over the past decade had gradually convinced the President that the internationalist view espoused by Bill Clinton and his own father was simply no longer the answer. Bush has chosen instead to embark on a new unilateralist course favored by most of his senior advisors that the authors argue may be somewhat productive in the short run but likely to be a disaster over the long haul. Extremely well written, thoughtful and meticulously documented, this book should be an essential read for any citizen seeking to get up to speed on foreign policy issues before the 2004 Presidential election.

New Glory : Expanding America's Global Supremacy

Average customer rating:

A must read!
Prophetic
DECENT AND INTERESTING SECURITY ASSESSMENT
A powerful vision of American power in the 21st Century
Must Read for Every American

New Glory : Expanding America's Global Supremacy
Ralph Peters
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | History | Bargain Books | Stores | Books

United States | History | Bargain Books | Stores | Books

Terrorism | Current Events | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Never Quit the Fight
Imperial Grunts: On the Ground with the American Military, from Mongolia to the Philippines to Iraq and Beyond
Beyond Terror: Strategy in a Changing World
Beyond Baghdad: Postmodern War and Peace
Wars of Blood and Faith: The Conflicts That Will Shape the 21st Century

ASIN: B000EUKR7C

Book Description

America is at a strategic crossroads. As the worldÂ's lone superpower, we face savage hostility, at home and abroad, from critics furious over our power and successÂ—and their own failure. Should we retreat from the struggle for human freedom to please religious extremists, decayed European powers, and an irresponsible global media?

Absolutely not, according to Ralph Peters, a strategist with an unrivaled record of predicting future threats. AmericaÂ's heroic past should make us proud, but we should embrace the possibility of an even greater future. New glory will augment the old in the years aheadÂ—if our leaders make the right decisions today.

In this sweeping, eye-opening book, Peters delivers an insiderÂ's critique of our intelligence system and our overstretched military before describing an innovative strategy befitting the greatest (and most virtuous) power in history. BACKCOVER: Â“Peters has produced a dynamic, intellectually challenging, must-read bookÂ…It needs to be in the hands of all policy-makersÂ—and all those who vote for them.Â”
Â—The New York Post

Â“Peters is an astute and historically informed observer of the worldÂ's cultures and politics, so the vision he offers in New Glory manages to be not just inspiring but also highly realistic.Â”
Â—The National Review

Â“For all its thunder and lightning, New Glory is a work of optimism, written by an author steeped in historyÂ—and theology and geopolitics and even fine art. Academics will dismiss this book. Then Again, Peters has little use for academics, and says so.Â”
Â—The St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Customer Reviews:

A must read!.......2007-01-10

This book is amazing! Awesome (and I hate the overuse of that word)!
A coherent, cogent, realistic look at the status of the US in the world and a proposed strategy that would work.

Prophetic.......2006-06-10

I find the breathe of his knowledge and his ability to weave current Middle Eastern events into the context of history to be astonishing. One of the best books I've ever read.

DECENT AND INTERESTING SECURITY ASSESSMENT.......2006-04-15

Ralph Peters must have thought he was back at the Command and Staff School at Fort Leavenworth when he came up the idea to write this book. New Glory: Expanding America's Global Supremacy is an excellent example of the type of paper that most majors at Leavenworth are required to write to demonstrate the ability to conduct a strategic assessment, develop strategies and policies to address the strategic reality, and identify the type and scope of military resources required to implement those strategies and policies.

What makes this book better than the 1000 or so papers on the exact same subject generated at the various war colleges or military schools is both Ralph Peters flowery and distinct writing style and the radical positions that he advocates both for his assessment of the nature of reality and his recommended strategies. Indeed, while no one ever "flunks out" at a military graduate program, any student as radical as Mr. Peters would have a tough road arguing his positions against the "standard" school assessment.

Yet, Mr. Peters gets more right than wrong in this analysis of the world security situation. If anything, his radical assessment of Europe is, in this reviewer's opinion, a bit conservative. Europe is headed for a demographic crises combined with a complete inability to assimilate its immigrant population from the Middle East. For far too long, being European has been defined as a state of being rather than a collection of actions and beliefs. Peters idea that AIDS might have a modernizing effect on Africa similar to what the Black Death had on Europe is interesting and seems plausible.

Some of Mr Peters positions are a bit less defensible. His assault on Think Tanks and former politicians is based on his experience and observations, but Mr Peters misses the point. In our society, the way to deal with factions and interest groups has always been to develop competing factions and interest groups to slug out the war of ideas in the public arena. If RAND has developed an unhealthy symbiotic relationship with the DOD (as Mr. Peters argues), then one need look no further than the Marine Corps relationship with the Potomac Institute's Center for Emerging Threats and Opportunities (CETO) to see a more effective effort at developing new ideas from a Think Tank. It seems a safe bet that either as personalities and relationships change, some think tanks will become more or less effective over time and the dollars will chase the institutions that have the best ideas.

Mr Peters attacks on "...chubby, ex politicians that only know about war from books..." is a bit misplaced. War is ever changing with the only constant being human nature, therefore even the most experienced warrior will, from time to time, face new scenarios and new requirements that will require academic study and thought. However, he is spot on that civilian leadership needs to be more open to debate, dialogue, and discovery from the uniformed members - especially those that have special combat or intellectual qualifications.

Overall, this is an excellent book and I highly recommend it.

A powerful vision of American power in the 21st Century.......2006-03-14

During the 1990s there was much talk of "the end of history" which really meant the end of armed conflict. Ralph Peters, a retired Army officer and articulate writer, debunks that notion in this incisive book. As Peters explains, "clashing is what civilizations *do*..." Peters explains that other civilizations, at present the Islamo-fascist being the best example, are humiliated and antagonized by the very existence, pervasiveness, humanity, and success of modern American-Western civilization. Elements of other civilizations (as opposed to their often powerless citizens) are often implacably antagonistic towards the West, primarily its leader, America. This will mean that the 21st Century will have no shortage of conflict, some of it armed conflict. The alternative is simply defeat.

Peters is no Republican apparachnik. He thoroughly condemns elements within the Bush Pentagon for pushing expensive and unused weapons systems such as the F22 Raptor while our soldiers in Iraq are waiting for next-generation body armor and armored vehicles. Peters' real message, as I interpreted it at least, is that armed conflict will be a defining characteristic of the 21st Century, and armed conflict means casualties and sacrifice. The notion of bloodless "technological" war, pushed mainly by reporters and others who never served in the military and know little about war or armies, comes in for ridicule.

This is a persuasive, well-written, even beautifully written piece that will not fail to engage the reader. Some of my own sacred cows came in for a thrashing by Peters, and he left me thinking and in some cases, yes, doubting. I predict that this will be the reaction of most readers and all thoughtful ones. It is no exaggeration to say that all Americans and indeed all citizens of Western nations would benefit by reading Peters' book. Whether the reader agrees with everything Peters has to say or not, Peters has a well-thought-out point of view based on a vast study of empirical data (facts). Peters may very well change minds with this one. A book that can do that is worth reading. Highly recommended.

Must Read for Every American.......2006-03-09

Tom Peter's book is a Must Read for every American, and it is especially useful for analyzing the war on terror and the future world we are moving into. Unlike other reviewers I think Mr. Peters is critical of the USA, and the way the war has been handled thus far. He makes no bones about saying Mr. Rumsfield doesn't know what he is doing and that the President (Bush) has made errors in the invasion of Iraq.

Mr. Peter's has the ability, and it is unique, to summarize a thousand years of history into one pithy paragraph. His historical observations are accurate, and his summaries of how the west and the east have evolved to their present positions are worth the price of the book all by themselves. I am not saying all his observations are absolutely correct; however, they are direct, easy to understand and the vast majority of them are accurate.

Mr. Peters believes the USA is missing huge opportunities to expand democracy in India, Africa, and South America. He sees trends there that will favor more open and modern societies that America should take advantage of; however, he believes we are failing to do this and that we will pay a large price for focusing on Europe and old European ideas of nationhood rather than focusing on the new emerging ideas of democracy and more open and modern societies that are developing around the world. He has nothing but disdain for our diplomacy, and, if he is correct in his factual statements about how our diplomats are acting, his conclusions are correct and we are in trouble.

The most important reason to buy the book and READ it is to stimulate thinking about the world and how America can play a positive roll beyond the wars in the Middle East and the old thinking of Europe. America can be a positive force in the world whether or not we "win" the war in Iraq. This books tell us how to do that in very clear and concise terms.

Fighting Back: The War on Terrorism from Inside the Bush White House

Average customer rating:

'Somebody's going to pay'
Thank You George W. Bush
Sold With Pom Poms
Disappointed with our leaders.
GO BUSH!!!!!

Fighting Back: The War on Terrorism from Inside the Bush White House
Bill Sammon
Manufacturer: Regnery Publishing, Inc.
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

U.S. | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Terrorism | Current Events | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Strategery: How George W. Bush Is Defeating Terrorists, Outwitting Democrats, and Confounding the Mainstream Media
Misunderestimated : The President Battles Terrorism, Media Bias, and the Bush Haters
At Any Cost: How Al Gore Tried to Steal the Election
Rebel in Chief: Inside the Bold and Controversial Presidency of George W. Bush
The Evangelical President: George Bush's Struggle to Spread a Moral Democracy Throughout the World

ASIN: 0895261499

Book Description

Best-selling author and award-winning White House correspondent Bill Sammon uses his unparalleled White House access -- including revealing one-on-one interviews with President George W. Bush, conducted on Air Force One and elsewhere -- to show how the pr

Customer Reviews:

'Somebody's going to pay'.......2004-11-27

This book, which preceded _Misunderestimated_, is the one in which Bill Sammon began chronicling the presidency of George W. Bush. (_At Any Cost_ -- an excellent book as well -- was an account of Al Gore's attempts to steal the 2000 election, not of Bush's presidency itself.)

I read _Misunderestimated_ first, but this one is every bit as good. It begins with 9/11 and follows the Bush Administration's responses, up to and including the removal of the Taliban from Afghanistan. (The war to depose Saddam Hussein is covered in the next volume.)

Sammon makes no secret of his own support for Bush (and his lack of respect for Bush's immediate predecessor in office). But this isn't a liability, journalistically or otherwise. It isn't that he's not _capable_ of criticizing the Bush Administration (and he does chide the White House for its occasional misstep); it's that he really has come to the conclusion that the Administration is doing a good job and the President has proved equal to his historical tasks. (And as for Clinton, well, let's just say that the ability to see the warts on _that_ presidency isn't exactly a sign of bias.)

Sammon's account is crisp, clear, and briskly paced -- and, since he's been in such close touch with the President, it's the next best thing to being inside Bush's head. It is, in short, a captivating and informative read.

It also incorporates several of Bush's speeches in their entirety -- including his inspiring remarks in the National Cathedral and his stirring 9/20/01 address on Capitol Hill before a joint session of Congress.

Together with _Misunderestimated_, it's a fine account of America's post-9/11 transition from peacetime to wartime. Bush-haters won't like it, but that's their problem.

Thank You George W. Bush.......2004-07-05

As an American, I cannot thank you enough for your heroic handling of the events of 9/11, your steady attack on terrorists, for keeping this country safe, for taking out Sadam Hussein and for defeating Al Gore and his democrat croonies and for making this a better country.

Although we may not be where want to be, we are sure as heck a lot better off now than we would have been if Gore was in office. And four years from now, we will be in a lot better shape with you as our Commander-In-Chief than we would be if John Kerry became President (God Forbid!))

Thank you President Bush for your unselfish service and dedication.

Sold With Pom Poms.......2004-06-23

There must be a rule with any author that has a book published by Regnery Publishing and that is that on every third page the book needs to take a negative dig at either President Clinton or Democrats in general. For those of you wondering, this book fulfills the quota with an impressive start on page two. Even though this book is an unabashedly pro Bush book on the 9/11 attacks and the American response, there are more mentions of President Clinton then Osama Bin Laden. The author finds ways to blame just about everything bad in the world on Clinton and then for good measure knocks around his wife at least once per chapter. I knew this book was going to be, in a small part anyway, a bit of a puff piece for Bush. The author wears his love for the President on his sleeve on all his public appearances on the FOX network and he is employed by the rather conservative Washington Times. This was one of the reasons I was drawn to the book. Who doesn't like to read a positive, pro American, rock-um sock-um type book? I thought I would get a nice and interesting look at 9/11 from an author that was probably given more access to the Bush Team because he was going to write such a glowing review. I figured this would be a nice bookend to the Woodward book.

The book does deliver what I was looking for, a very positive and detailed account of the Bush administration from 9/11 through mid 2002. The author does a nice job of giving the reader a great deal of facts that the average author might pass by. This is why I bought the book and on this point I was pleased. My concerns with the book were the rather childish way the author lets his massive dislike for President Clinton invade this book. It was almost as if the author could not stop himself with the rude comments. They added nothing to the main story. If this side show was not enough the author spent about 20% of the book attacking the media and its coverage of the Bush administration. So much so I got to think that maybe the title of the book was somehow related to the Bush Administrations fight with the "Liberal" press instead of Americas fight with terrorists. All of this anti Clinton and press bashing did nothing for the story and took away more from the book then it added.

I guess what really disappointed me was the authors very obvious and not very well done attempts at defending the Bush administration from some of the negative charges or comments made by the press or his opponents. The author covered topics that had nothing or very slightly anything to do with the main focus of the book. Many of the comments were nothing more then bait and switch campaign tactics or well worn GOP standard attack lines usually used at the end of a losing negative campaign. All these comments did for me was to call into question how much of the book as based in solid fact and how much was blind support for the President. What makes the comments sad is that the book did not need them. The President, by almost all accounts, was and still is thought of as performing very well during this time. He does not need this ham handed shading of the facts and cheap shots that this author employs. It actually takes away more then it adds.

Overall I enjoyed the parts of the book that detailed the facts. These sections of the book put the President in a very positive light and were well written. It was just that the negative comment campaign against President Clinton and the press brought the book down to some playground name calling event. Throw in the attack dog dirty campaign style support pieces and the book falls into the middle of the rating scale. If you are an arch conservative you will probably fall in love with the book and the author. If you are more of a moderate and are looking for a book that just covers the facts and skips the rhetoric then I would suggest the Woodward book Bush at War.

Disappointed with our leaders........2004-05-28

I am a sad American - Disappointed with our leaders.
While I was writing my review off-line to take advantage of the spell checking, I watched this book go from number 6 to number 57. I actually read the book. Now I wish I'd spent the money on a good steak with onions, mushrooms and a really big scotch. It's hogwash, an illusion, like most politicians.

I'm an old fart, retired Texas businessman, conservative, grandfather, and once proud to be a Republican. I even voted for George Bush Jr., thinking that Gore was a better statesman, but George Jr. was closer to understanding the plight of the middle working class. It wasn't the biggest mistake I've ever made, but it troubles me the most. I'm sure a lot of good Americans are reassessing their support for our Misunderstandeded President.

Hey class clown, yes; most fun to get drunk with, yes; class bully, yes; but qualified to be President of the Greatest Country in the History of the World? I don't think so. What the hell were we thinking? He doesn't represent us, the middle class, he represents the CEOs, the affluent, the Top 2%, and the lobbyists from big corporations. Time to admit we were wrong.

I have a lot of time on my hands to think, think about the Korean War I served in, WWI that three of my 7 uncles served in, and the Vietnam War that my son was disabled in. I, like the vast majority of Americans, believed our government and trusted politicians back then. But, hey we were stupid, we thought being a lawyer was an honorable profession.

Even though I was a conservative, I contributed to charity, I did volunteer work, I never judged a man or woman who was down on their luck or those who had made bad life decisions. I always thought; "There but for the Grace of GOD, go I." I lived by the Golden Rule. I even supported `Affirmative Action' thinking that Jesus would have also. Given my fellow man that had been so horribly oppressed, a hand up. What happened to Christian charity? You can call the President many things, but you CANNOT call him `compassionate' with a straight face.

This book is written by a life long conservative who is an average journalist and big business supporter. It is turned out by a public relations gin mill and not worthy of your money. One of my four children is a rabid conservative. Somewhere I went wrong. I failed to teach him that family, love, compassion, honor, and being your brother's keeper were the reasons we put here by God. I can no longer be silent. This is not a worthy read, nor is it the truth.

GO BUSH!!!!!.......2003-12-19

Do not get me wrong, I am a strong Democrat who does not support most of President Bush's politics nor his war on Iraq. However I do like him as a person because he is a very down to earth, loving human being and this book proves it. It's sad to see the libreals bashing this book because it has alot to tell and alot to offer about President Bush and what kind of a man he is. I do not look at him as a bad man at all. That does not mean he gets my vote in 04 but I would ask people to read this book with an open mind and think about This President Uniting this country to the best of his ability on 9/11. Al Gore never could have done that let me tell you. So to all readers I hope you read it and enjoy it and perhaps look at President Bush in a diffrent way.

Winning Modern Wars: Iraq, Terrorism, and the American Empire

Average customer rating:

Meh.
We need Clark!
Fair and Balanced?
General Clark's high-low mix
Interesting, but still a no win situation

Winning Modern Wars: Iraq, Terrorism, and the American Empire
Wesley K. Clark
Manufacturer: PublicAffairs
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Middle East | History | Subjects | Books

Iran | Middle East | History | Subjects | Books

Iraq | Middle East | History | Subjects | Books

General | Military | History | Subjects | Books

Military Science | History | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

U.S. | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Terrorism | Current Events | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Waging Modern War: Bosnia, Kosovo, and the Future of Combat
Wesley K. Clark: A Biography
A Time to Lead: For Duty, Honor and Country
An End to Evil: How to Win the War on Terror
The Bubble of American Supremacy

ASIN: 1586482181

Amazon.com

Retired General Wesley Clark's follow up to his insightful, detailed memoir of NATO's victorious Kosovo campaign begins as a concise analysis of the 2003 military invasion/occupation of Iraq and wends its way to a troubling yet ultimately hopeful examination of America at an unprecedented domestic, economic, and geopolitical crossroads. Clark's keen intellect (he was a Rhodes Scholar and graduated first in his class at West Point) and refreshing gift for intelligent plain-speaking often call attention to salient observations too often overlooked in the daily jumble of selective news and political spin. Our conflicts with Iraq have not been two distinct wars, but an unceasing, 13-year-long military campaign; the ambitious Pax Americana envisioned by Bush administration neocons is not only unsustainable, but a redundant anachronism, America having long ago created a "virtual empire" by dint of its interlocking international business relationships, cultural lure, and (ideally) moral leadership. His critics may label it the political manifesto of an ambitious presidential contender (a charge he quickly addresses in his introduction with a pre-emptive strike that is, given the subject matter, a bit ironic), but Clark's vision of an engaged, enterprising America leading the world instead of dominating it is rooted in an objective understanding of history, our nation's own longstanding philosophical ideals, and no small amount of refreshing horse sense (are we fighting terrorism by creating terrorists? And how safe is a country that starves its very security apparatus with unsound economic policies?). Ever loyal to the armed forces he served with distinction for 33 years, Clark also never passes up an opportunity to praise our nation's best and bravest, the men and women who are the cutting edge of America's sword, be it yielded with restrained wisdom or reckless abandon. --Jerry McCulley

Book Description

General Wesley K. Clark's Waging Modern War: Bosnia, Kosovo, and the Future of Combat, a Washington Post bestseller, examined his experience directing the NATO-led war in Kosovo. As Clark saw it, the Kosovo war--limited in scope, measured in effect, extraordinarily complex in execution, waged with an uneven coalition, with instantaneous media coverage, and with a duration measured in days and not years, would serve as a model for contemporary war. He has been proven right.

In Winning Modern Wars, General Wesley Clark writes about how the issues and principles discussed in his earlier book were evident in Afghanistan, Iraq, and wherever the war on terrorism has taken us or may take us next, providing a frank and revealing analysis of the gains, risks, and shortfalls of America's current approach and offering informed alternatives to that approach.

What Clark, currently a much-watched and much-admired military analyst on CNN and one of the most decorated and influential officers of his generation, has to say on our national plans and tactics--and the lessons of empire--is invaluable, reminded us that as we celebrate our successes, we must also tend to their consequences.

Customer Reviews:

Meh........2007-08-30

95% of this book is an overview of the war in Iraq and on terrorism up to the publication date. It's a competent telling, but adds absolutely nothing to what we already know. Given Clark's political aspirations, role as a TV commentator and part in winning a "modern war" you would expect much more criticism and insight. When Clark does get around to what should be done differently, his policies are meaningless. The United Nations should be used for legitimacy? I've never heard that before. Our allies should be treated as partners and not children? That's just crazy. Republicans are liars that will use a social agenda to advance an economic policy that benefits the wealthy? Heretic! Education, health care and retirement security are important for all Americans? You sir are a visionary.

It's my honest hope this book was ghostwritten by an unpaid intern. The absolute blandness, lack of fact checking, and broad statements without citing any sources should not be allowed by anyone - especially not someone who runs for President.

We need Clark!.......2005-11-22

When someone like Wesley Clark enters the public arena, it brings a smile to my face. He is an absolutely brilliant man who graduated first in his class at West Point and eventually went on to become the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. It doesn't get much more impressive than that if you are looking for a presidential candidate with foreign policy credentials. Unfortunately, Clark's campaign for presidnet in 2004 was poorly managed, and was eventually unsuccessful. In this book, Clark takes us through a lot of the history behind the Iraq war that I belive is crucial to understand. He is one of the most honest and straighforward men in Washington and I hope that he runs for president again in 2008. Clark clearly demonstrates in "Winnning Modern Wars" that he is not just another son of a rich guy who graduated with C's throughout high school, went to Yale (???how???), lost the election, and became president. Clark is special. He is intelligent and we need him! Read Winning Modern Wars and see for yourself!

Fair and Balanced?.......2005-07-13

This author attempts to provide an unbiased account and analysis of the current war in Iraq. He attempts to do this by explaining the military-political events before during and after the immediate official declaration of war on Iraq.
General Clark, retired, paints a very clear picture. Regrettably, he has taken a few liberties with his story. For instance; on the inside cover General Clark is given the credit for defining modern war, this is definitely a stretch. He has certainly helped to define the evolution and development of doctrine but by no means was this a singular person event, he was one of many key and visionary officers that helped shape and prepare the modern army and its integrated fighting techniques. I can personally think of a few officers and DA Civilians that should receive the lion's share of the honor such as LTC Antulio Echevarria and Dr. Stephen Biddle of the Strategic Studies Institute.
A couple of other literary offenses include the fact that his notes do not substantiate his entire thesis/story. He expects the reader to accept at face value his word on the events as they happened and as they are interpreted by him because of his stature and implied authority as a retired General Officer. Secondly, his description of events on page 155 and 156 are not entirely true. The subsequent integration of police, first responders and other key service providers POST 9-11 will not and does not occur overnight. How many people (other than the Police and Fire dept) were really interested in a unified communications and response methodology and system across EMT, Police, Hospitals and Fire Depts.? There wasn't a Congressman or Senator on the roles that would have voted to spend that kind of money pre 9-11, and most assuredly, America was not interested in such things on Sept 10th. Additionally, Bio hazard training for first responders was never a really serious issue for anyone except the military and first responders before 9-11; do we really expect that these kind if massive, semi militaristic changes would have been acceptable pre 9-11? You definitely know the answer to this question.
In conclusion there are many other stretches of facts. Like not finding WMD. We did find WMD, like anthrax and sarin, but not in the quantities and packaging we had expected. The media was too busy hyping/spinning the failure and America never heard about what we found. All in all it is not quite as balanced as one would believe. This book is a well presented mix of fact with disinformation and plausible credibility, which is what, makes this book dangerous.
As an ex active duty military operations planner and a defense contractor during this period I do not lay claim to know everything; but this author has mixed fact with opinion and stature to present claims that are pure myth.

Professor Terry Tucker, US Army, SGM, Ret, Richland TX

General Clark's high-low mix.......2005-05-31

General Wesley Clark's opinion on current military matters and geostrategic situation is always important due to his vast professional experience and the extremely successful campaign he waged against Jugoslavia in 1999, as top commander of NATO forces. In this book he devotes 101 pages to the planning and the operational execution of the "Iraqi Freedom" (which is the best part of the book) supporting a thesis which I also had some weeks before the start of the operation, that US Army went into battle with inadequate forces, taking dangerous and unnecessary risks and creating many problems in the postwar Iraq. The next 60 pages are an analysis why the US engagement in Iraq was a flawed strategy which threatens to bog down and attrite the magnificent US Army and leave Al Qaeda free to regroup and mount its next deadly attack. Unfortunately the book was published shortly before the US 2004 elections, when Clark was a candidate for the Democrats and thus the last chapter which is labeled "Beyond Empire: A new America" covers 40 rather boring pages presenting a litany of the well known arguments about US moral superiority, the need for cooperation with the traditional European allies and a demonstration of financial knowledge which is a prerequisite for a presidential nominee. It would be far better if Clark had devoted these pages to his opinions about the US military transformation, recommending the best strategies regarding the problems with Iran and North Korea. If you want a short byt sound operational analysis of the war in Iraq, you'd better choose Thomas Donnelly's "Operatio Iraqi Freedom: A Strategic Assessment" despite its few shortcomings.

Interesting, but still a no win situation.......2004-09-20

General Wesley K. Clark has enough experience to attempt to grapple with reality, but the title WINNING MODERN WARS seems to lack any insight into the nature of the problems that currently face the world. America has never been good at understanding balance while it achieved excessively in modern warfare. Even Nam, already, seemed like a waste to those who had an opportunity to observe the endless military build-up in yearly intervals that never gained much ground, particularly if the cemeteries for 243,000 South Vietnamese soldiers who died in Nam but tend to be neglected by the existing government, are counted as part of American plans for the future in the 20th century. In the 1960's, economic growth due to the Kennedy tax cuts was supposed to supply the eternal boost to keep everything booming, but economics often fails to add up for anyone who is concerned about catastrophes of greater magnitude than a cyclical slump. Putting "The American Empire" in the subtitle was a brave move for anyone who wants readers to face what is happening to the world, but what this book notices about economics is limited to the best that can be said about modern trends:

`At the beginning of the twenty-first century the United States is the world's leading economy, accounting for about 20 percent of global output and, during the period 1995-2002, for about 40 percent of the world's economic growth.' (p. 178).

Me again: in the world as a whole, the leading industry is tourism. The DVD called `Life and Debt' on the situation in Jamaica shows how increasingly difficult it is for small countries to obtain any money for local activities, including health and education, after a combination of the World Bank and the IMF controls a country's flow of international currencies to allow payment of loans from the global financial institutions. American economic controls in Iraq gave every indication, before and after sanctions were dropped, of maintaining as much control as possible, instead of allowing France, Russia, and Iran to maintain established activities. Clark describes this "benefit to ordinary Americans" as a result produced by a financial situation in which "the United States must consume more than it produces--while much of the rest of the world must produce more than it consumes." (p. 178). News from Iraq indicates that we have been particularly interested in Iraq producing oil, an item that the United States needs, but that the insurgency in Iraq has been unusually successful in preventing the United States from "sharing the benefits with others." (p. 178).

Clark calls the means of our success `the American values of free-market economics and popular democracy. Enabled by modern communication and transportation, this network facilitated access to markets and investment opportunities abroad, assisted the flow of talent and intellectual property, and fostered the spread of market forces and democratic processes around the world. The major beneficiary of this was the United States itself. This "globalization" was the New American Empire.' (p. 180). The U.S. mistakes which offended common values might be blamed mainly on the C.I.A. activities that used to be covered by plausible denial. "Worried about potential Soviet encroachments into the Middle East, the United States deposed an Iranian leader and replaced him with an unpopular shah. Siding against a Soviet-oriented India, the United States distanced itself from the world's largest democracy. Fearing a Marxist takeover of Chile, the United States backed Chilean military action to throw out the democratically elected Marxist leader, Salvador Allende. In Central America the United States fought for almost a decade . . ." (p. 183) blamed more in this book on "CIA and special forces personnel" (p. 183) than on Oliver North, a patsy who does not even appear in the index. Obviously the CIA had a policy then, but the world remains unconvinced that its policy regarding regime change is any different now.

Freeing the United States from the cold war mentality allows it to engage in more idealistic fights, such as a war on drug lords, called "the U.S. military peace operations in the Balkans, Latin America, Africa, and Asia" (p. 183) which are pictured as being nobler than our cold war heritage.

A year ago, things that could fall apart had started to show the danger: "By September 2003, U.S. forces were in Iraq--deeply committed, without as yet . . . " (p. 184). "Individually, some governments, especially democratic governments who must listen to the opinions of voters, would simply find it difficult to comply with American wishes. Turkey, for example, refused . . ." (p. 185). Part of the danger is economic. "In the narrowest sense, if foreigners should lose confidence in U.S. leadership and reject the implicit understandings and economic alignments that have led them--especially the central banks of China, Taiwan, and Japan--to accumulate dollar holdings, they could quickly diversify out of dollar assets, triggering a sharp decline in the dollar's values and significantly impacting our economy." (pp. 185-186). The idea of a "tipping point" (p. 186) understates the danger when the rest of the world has an incentive to design an alternative to a system which is dragging down whatever opportunity other countries might have to produce benefits for themselves.

You might notice that there is nothing in the index for money, dollars, or the budget, except "Bush administration, tax cuts of, 8, 156, 188-89." (p. 208). It can't mean page 8, and certainly not Note 8. There are only two chapters that have notes 8 and 9. How clear is page 189 ? :

"As states and cities across the country faced local problems of balancing receipts and expenditures, it was becoming increasingly clear that federal tax cuts either equaled reduced services and increased unemployment, or offsetting increases in state and local taxes."

Ultimately inequality is much easier to understand than the number of ways in which that might make sense, and that goes double for me and the tax cuts.

Contemporary Cases In U.S. Foreign Policy: From Terrorism To Trade

Average customer rating:

Contemporary Cases In U.S. Foreign Policy: From Terrorism To Trade

Manufacturer: CQ Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Nonfiction | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

U.S. Foreign Policy: The Paradox of World Power, 2nd Edition
The Politics of United States Foreign Policy
American Foreign Policy Since World War II
American Foreign Policy: Theoretical Essays (5th Edition)
Seven Sins of American Foreign Policy

ASIN: 1568028970

Book Description

Crafting foreign policy today is a pluralistic process. As witnessed by the waning and waxing of the American president's predominance, consensus regarding the central aims of U.S. foreign policy is in flux. More actors are involved, partisan loyalties are stronger, and decisions made elsewhere impact the U.S. in new and significant ways. Members of Congress, interest groups, NGOs, the media, and bureaucratic actors all compete to influence the way U.S. foreign policy is made and implemented.

Contemporary Cases in U.S. Foreign Policy captures this complexity by drawing in students to 15 real-world cases. Whether grappling with the policy-making dynamic of fighting the war in Iraq, dealing with North Korea's nuclear weapons program, raising and lowering steel tariffs, or determining the rights of detainees in the War on Terrorism, students must question motives, consider alternatives, predict out-comes, and communicate choices.

To help students get a sense of why the issues are important, and why particular policy choices were made the authors follow a consistent format across chapter, providing critical thinking questions, a chronology, and an annotated list of key actors for each case.

The War on Terror in Comparative Perspective: US Security and Foreign Policy after 9/11

Average customer rating:

The War on Terror in Comparative Perspective: US Security and Foreign Policy after 9/11

Manufacturer: Palgrave Macmillan
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Terrorism | Current Events | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
ASIN: 0230007295
Release Date: 2007-01-23

Book Description

This book offers a thoughtful analysis of the international and domestic political impact of the global war on terrorism through the prism of US security relations in the wake of September 11, 2001. While focused on regional and country-specific responses and consequences, the book redresses the balance between change and continuity in the international system brought about by the war on terror. The unusual meshing of wide-ranging views and perspectives represents the shared wisdom of an epistemic community emerging at the intersection of international relations, comparative politics and foreign policy analysis.

Average customer rating:

WHY DO THEY HATE US?
the best book on America and the Middle East in coming year
"Fighting the Demand Side of Terrorism"

The Stakes: America and the Middle East
Shibley Telhami
Manufacturer: Westview Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Middle East | History | Subjects | Books

War & Peace | Current Events | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Terrorism | Current Events | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Criminology | Crime & Criminals | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Understanding the Contemporary Middle East (Understanding (Boulder, Colo.).)
Losing America: Confronting a Reckless and Arrogant Presidency
Taming American Power: The Global Response to U.S. Primacy
Resurrecting Empire: Western Footprints and America's Perilous Path in the Middle East

ASIN: 0813340780
Release Date: 2002-12-03

Book Description

Could the United States defeat Al-Qaeda but still lose the broader war on terrorism? In The Stakes: America and the Middle East, Shibley Telhami, one of America's most in-demand commentators on the Middle East, provides a concise and penetrating analysis that explains Arab and Muslim attitudes toward the United States and shows why there is much reason for concern. In an insightful, passionate, yet balanced analysis, Telhami provides new perspectives on the collapse of Palestinian-Israeli negotiations and the attending escalation of violence. He shows why the Arab-Israeli conflict remains central to the war on terrorism and to international stability, and considers American policy toward Iraq and the Persian Gulf. He demonstrates the need for political change in the region's oil states and he suggests how best to achieve it. The Stakes provides a well-reasoned, calm analysis that will be essential reading for anyone who wonders where America should go from here, amid the dangers and opportunities in the ever-volatile Middle East.

Customer Reviews:

WHY DO THEY HATE US?.......2003-07-22

I think we all know what Shibley Telhami is addressing in the title of this book. It's not just terrorism that we have to worry about. Countries such as Saudi Arabia have about 2/3 of the worlds oil reserves which, no matter what we say, we are partially dependent on. What is at stake is a whole generation of young Arabs and Muslims who can grow up hating America or having a positive view of it.

I think one of the questions a lot of Americans asked after 9/11 was how could a group hate us enough to kill thousands of innocent people, and by extension of that, why does the Middle East hate us so much? That is one of the questions Telhami tries to answer in The Stakes. After doing surveys in Muslim countries, and also, in some European countries, like France, Telhami came up with a surprising answer. He found that they hold resentment towards our foreign policy, not our belief system. Much like Bush said our war wasn't with the Iraqi "people" but with its regime, most of them have a problem with the policies of our presidents or our congress. They have a more favorable view of our belief system. Well, that's not counting the religious fundamentalists.

Telhami thinks that a huge part of the friction between us and middle eastern states is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Whoa, that's a big surprise, isn't it? Even as I write this, meetings have resumed in Israel between the two parties. Hopefully, there will be a peace in our time. Because the Arabs, or at least some, view themselves as one people. They see the victimization of the Palestinians as an oppression of all Arabs. The author believes that until this is settled, and as long as we blindly back Israel, there will never be a complete ease in relations with Middle East nations. In fact, according to surveys he conducted, America could improve its image among Arabs and Muslims almost 100% if it could broker a lasting and just peace between the two parties. God, what a relief that would be.

Telhami is not gentle about our dependence on Middle Eastern oil. Even though in the short term we can look to other nations for oil, most of the reserves that will be used in the future are located in the Middle East. In the future, as oil becomes more scarce, that area of the world will become even more important than it is now. So we had better do something about our image now.

One of the other things that Telhami writes about is whether or not we should even care about public opinion in the Middle East. The answer is yes. The only reason we get by now is because in most middle eastern countries there is a military strongman to oppress his people when they try to speak their mind. In Pakistan, Egypt, and other countries, most opposition is put down mercilessly. The fact is that if most Middle Eastern countries became democracies overnight, they would be violently opposed to the US. If we truly want rule by the people in these nations, we need to improve our image.

This is a good book. It's informative and comes to some sound conclusions. Yes, the US has great power, but it needs to work on its public relations in the middle east. Even a terror organization such as Hamas has a good image among the Palestinians in the occupied territories and other countries around the world. Why? Because they contribute to social services such as schools, and help to the destitute. Why can't the US do things like that in the Middle East? Instead of invading countries, why not help build schools, help the poor, anything to give positive reinforcement to the belief that America is a good country. It IS a good and generous country. It's just that sometimes our leadership isn't the best. We're going to need a good leader in the future to steer the right course in our relationship with the Middle East. Its our security and peace that is at stake.

the best book on America and the Middle East in coming year.......2003-03-25

This book is balanced and gives insight to the region's social, political and economic conditions.
It shows that the central issue in the region is the Israeli-Arab conflict. It explains why People in the region dislike America's FOREIGN POLICY... And that they will be more than happy to have America exports its VALUES there...
Great book!

"Fighting the Demand Side of Terrorism".......2003-03-18

I have read more than 300 books on the Middle East. Along with Jimmy Carter's "The Blood of Abraham," which introduced me to the region nearly two decades ago, and Benny Morris's "The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem," which exploded the myth of Israel's righteousness in forging its statehood, this is one of the three that really opened my eyes.

I know of no other American who writes with such comprehension--and expresses himself so clearly--about the Middle East. The public opinion surveys Telhami has commissioned in diverse Arab countries reveal at least two important facts: 1) Arabs in general misunderstand Americans as badly as Americans in general misunderstand Arabs, and 2) the plight of the Palestinians is an issue so personal to so many people throughout the Middle East that if the United States wishes to keep peace there it should make helping create a Palestinian state its most important objective for the region.

Telhami's thesis that the United States must fight the "war on terrorism" on two fronts--the supply side and the demand side--and that we currently are fighting it well only on the supply side must be understood if this nation is ever to regain the respect, admiration, and trust around the world that it has lost in the past few years.

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books