Book Description
One womanÂ's story of why she left the culture of Islamic Jihad to support American liberty and tolerance
Why are so many Muslims embracing jihad and cheering for al-Qaeda and Hamas? Why are even the modern, secularized Arab states such as Egypt producing a generation of angry young extremists?
Nonie Darwish knows why. When she was eight, her father died while leading Fedayeen raids into Israel. Her family moved from Gaza back to Cairo, where they were honored as survivors of a “shahid”—a martyr for jihad. She grew up learning the same lessons as millions of Muslim children: to hate Jews, destroy Israel, oppose America, and submit to dictatorship.
But Darwish became increasingly appalled by the anger and hatred in her culture, and in 1978 she emigrated to America. Since 9/11 she has been lecturing and writing on behalf of moderate Arabs and Arab-Americans. Extremists have denounced her as an infidel and threatened her life.
In this fascinating book, she speaks out against the dark side of her native culture—women abused by Islamic traditions; the poor and uneducated mistreated by the elites; bribery and corruption as a way of life. Her former friends and neighbors blamed all the their troubles on Jews and Americans, but Darwish rejects their bigotry and calls for the Arab world to make peace with the West.
The only hope for the future, she writes, is for America to continue waging its War on Terror, seeding the Middle East with the values of democracy, respect for women, and tolerance for all religions.
Customer Reviews:
An Informative Perspective.......2007-09-15
If you're like me, you might know very little about Mideastern culture and life. This book is a highly readable and personal account of one woman's life, experiences and views on Muslim culture. I'm enjoying it; she puts a "human face" on this part of the world and it's issues.
Eye-opening insights into the causes of Islamic extremism........2007-09-11
The author grew up in Egypt under Nasser's dictatorship, but later moved to America. Her father was an Egyptian military officer killed in Gaza by Israel because he organized raids to cause mayhem inside Israel. She reports on the problems in Egypt and Gaza, and on the government and religious propaganda which is polarizing the Islamic world to the point of Jihad. This is an eye-opening read, and it gives insight into how difficult it will be to ever correct this problem.
EXCELLENT BOOK.......2007-09-01
THIS BOOK IS A MUST READ FOR ANYONE WHO WANTS TO TRULY UNDERSTAND HOW THE MIDDLE EAST FEALS ABOUT AMERICA AND WHY. NONIE DARWISH IS A VERY BRAVE WOMAN AND I THANK GOD SHE HAD THE GUTS TO WRITE THE TRUTH.
Now They Call Me Infidel: Why I renounced Jihad for America, Israel and the War on Terror.......2007-08-25
This is an excellen book for those seeking to understand Arab Muslim perspectives. The culture is based on a background, history and value system entirely foreign to our way of thinking. The author relates her life from early childhood, through her school years and early adulthood living first in Gaza then Cairo. She is from the upper middle class, the daughter of a high ranking military officer who is martyred. She describes what it is like to be a woman in the arab muslim world. She raises the issuesleading to a lack of trust both within the society and in relation to other societies. She discusses the inner thinking and the daily propaganda regarding Israel. She also gives important information on the Arab view of Palestines role in the conflict. She distinguishes between the radical Islamic movements and moderate Islam. She notes the purpose and intent of fundalmentalist Islam is the eventual overtaking the world. She discusses how this is being taken to countries throughout the world to bring about this change. We need to understand those with whom we are dealing. This is a book that is easy to read, direct and highly informative.
Demonstrating the Power of Love.......2007-08-15
Now They Call me Infidel: Why I Renounced Jihad for America,
Israel, and the War on Terror, by Nonie Darwish.
Sentinel, Penguin Books, 2006, 258 pp
From our first encounter with Nonie Darwish, through her articles and first web site, we felt that she was someone special. We were attracted by her open and obvious love for America. That web site disappeared, only to reappear as [..] , with this unique opening statement:
To Muslims and Arabs across the globe: Reject hate, embrace love. Bring out the best in Islam by showing your compassion, gratitude and forgiveness. Make the holy land truly holy by giving Israel and the Jewish people the respect they deserve in their tiny little country. This is not a crisis over land. It is a crisis of the soul; a crisis in our faith, judgement and self confidence. Israel should not be regarded as an enemy, but as a blessing to our neighborhood. We need not fear peace, but embrace it.
These are remarkable words to be coming from the daughter of a "shahid" (a martyr for jihad) who was assassinated while serving as a high-ranking Egyptian military officer stationed in Gaza specifically to be of assistance to the Palestinians.
The September 2001 attack on the twin towers in New York was life-changing for many people. From that moment on Nonie Darwish felt compelled to take a stand. It led her to write her life story "Now They Call Me Infidel" which is a pure gift to all of us. She also stepped out into public life with all its demands of speaking engagements, and the disapproval she was bound to experience.
After reading her book with eagerness, I would suggest that it is the perfect book for supplemental reading by all High School students. Let them hear about Islam from someone who has experienced it fully from birth and has turned to Christianity and America for a better life. Let them sense her loyalty and love for her new country. As she describes it--"Many immigrants come to this great nation in search of material gain, which is fine; however, the biggest prize I gained was my religious freedom and learning to love. For me it was nothing short of cataclysmic. I had turned from a culture of hatred to one of love."
In her book she describes her impressions of America. We Americans need to see our country through someone else's eyes, so that we can withstand the propaganda that insinuates that we are the culprit and instigator of all the troubles of the world. It is eye-opening to read through the chapter "A New Beginning in America" and find out why the following words are in italics; and learn just how much our culture differs from the Muslim culture in Egypt. This is specially applicable to the difficult life programmed for women. She considers "friendliness and helpfulness"," courtesy", "diversity and multiculturalism", "self-sufficiency, pride in labor", "generous, honest, and open", "informality", "women's relationships", and "child rearing".
Gradually, to Ms. Darwish's horror, she discovers that her beloved land of refuge, her America which means so much to her, is being attacked from within. She is painfully aware of those old patterns of hatred, as they eminate from mosque after mosque.
She lashes out at terrorists who are invading the Western countries: "America's Islamic enemies and critics--even those who love living in the United States - are nothing more than pirates. That's what Islamic terrorists are - pirates. Instead of building their own society as a model of what Islam should be, they leave it in ruins and look to conquer hard-working successful lands.....They cannot stand to live in a Muslim culture, and they have their eyes set on beautiful and welcoming democracies, not to blend in, but to rob those democracies of their soul and ruin the value system and culture that made them great...." p. 185. You need to get hold of this book and sense the depth of Ms. Darwish's feeling as she begs you to save our precious country from the onslaught she sees coming.
She describes her shock at the Arab world's response to 9/11. They dared to rejoice over the tragedy. When she phoned family members and close friends, whose opinions she had formerly trusted, she could not believe that many thought America deserved to suffer.
The last chapter is "Jihad Comes to America". Nonie dismisses the popular and over-used definition of jihad as merely spiritual pursuit: "there is only one meaning for jihad, and that is: a religious holy war against infidels." p. 201. She remarks that she is shocked by the radicalism she encounters on the American campus. "I am stunned to see them choose to revive the worst of Islamic culture in America rather than be part of America and demonstrate the best of Islamic culture."
On page 159 there is a moving description of Nonie's introduction to Christian worship when she and her husband and family attended a church and "listened to a message of compassion, love, acceptance, tolerance, and prayer for all humanity." There had been some violence in the Middle East and the pastor prayed for everyone--"Muslims, Jews, and Christians. It was very different message from the prayers to `destroy the infidels' that I grew up with....I learned the most important command in scripture was `Love your neighbor as yourself.'" Nonie had found what she was hungering for: "In this church, that day, my soul was revived and nourished with the love of a tolerant and forgiving God." Knowingly she was willing to be called an infidel.
After a remarkable experience of visiting Israel Nonie explains: "I now fully understand why the United States supports Israel and rightfully so. My love of America now extends to Israel." Hence the name of her new web site!
We salute another brave woman, and heartily recommend that you read this extremely important book.
Book Description
First and foremost, this is virtually an exclusive story that few media outlets or the American public know about. Hard to believe when you read the below summary, but lucky for us:
In addition to being the vehicle for the author to become a major media force in the national debate on the war, this remarkable memoir will introduce the public to Captain Robert McGovern's inspirational rise as a boy who was one of nine children who rose to become a New Jersey high school football phenom and then a major NFL star as a linebacker for the Kansas City Chiefs, the Pittsburgh Steelers, and the New England Patriots. Following this success, McGovern chose to leave football and receive his law degree from Fordham University in order to work in the New York City district attorney's office in the late 90s. Subsequently, he was a witness of the WTC attack on New York, which led to his decision to leave public life and join the U.S. Army as a prosecuting attorney for the military, resulting last year in his conviction (and death penalty sentencing) of the Middle Eastern but American–born Army Sergeant Hasan Akbar, who threw live grenades into the commissary tent of his fellow soldiers fighting the war in Kuwait.
Customer Reviews:
a moron for the ages.......2007-09-23
This simpleton of a jerk-off & his ilk are EXACTLY what is wrong with my country. I cannot f+cking wait to leave this country & never return. Enjoy your fascism.
Autobiography and Apologetic.......2007-09-20
Several reviews I have read have come down hard on the author for his stand on the war in Iraq. But this is his autobiography, the story of his life, and his opinion of the war is just one part of it. It is a well-written account of his childhood, his family, his education and his aspirations, and continues into his adulthood to the present time. He lets us know how he was trained by his parents to be unselfish and give back to the community some form of service, and this was undoubtedly the motivation for joining the Army Reserve, and eventually finding himself on active duty in Iraq.
A good part of his story comes before that. He was competing with his older brothers in athletics, trying to be as good as they had been in high school football, and then in college football. He received an athletic scholarship from Holy Cross, an enormous accomplishment in his eyes, and he was grateful for the opportunity. And then came pro football, four years of it on three different teams. He was pretty good at it, but not outstanding. He simply was not big enough (hefty, bulky) to be a great linebacker. He was thankful for this chance to make the big league, but took the advice of one of his coaches to give it up. From there he decided to study law and with his law degree took a job as an Assistant DA in New York City. Then came 9/11, to which he was an eyewitness. In his role as a US Army Reserve officer he volunteered to help. Immediately following, he applied for active duty, leaving his job as assistant DA, and became a prosecutor for the Judge Advocate General Corps, and then deployed to Afghanistan and later to Iraq. His experiences there were extraordinary because he was involved in the trial of Hasan Akbar, the US Army Sergeant who killed two Army officers and wounded a number of others when he threw hand grenades into the tents of the soldiers.
This is a well-written account of the life of a man who became a soldier in the US Army. Why would anyone find it strange that he has strong opinions in favor of the war in Iraq ? It is his contention that we are there as part of the war on terrorism. The patriotic feeling that he had on 9/11 was something that almost all of us shared at that time. For him it continued; for many of us it disappeared.
Should we still be in Iraq? That is a matter for debate, which has been ongoing for some time now. Captain McGovern feels that we are making a difference, and that is why we are still there.
This book is certainly worth reading, if only to gain some insight from a different perspective.
RICK SHAQ GOLDSTEIN SAYS: "YOU AND I ARE THE "ALL-AMERICAN'S" THAT CAPTAIN McGOVERN IS TALKING ABOUT!".......2007-07-25
The life story of Captain Robert McGovern, is almost "Forrest Gump" like. Rob is one of nine Irish Catholic children, born to Howard and Terry McGovern in New Jersey. Though born in New Jersey, if I were to describe his morals, character, and upbringing, I would describe it in the highest of terms, that most Americans would consider as "mid-western". One of the many, emotionally uplifting themes in this book, is the absolute, enduring, love, and respect, that Rob, constantly proclaims for his parents. He was raised from the beginning, to have high goals, and his older brothers got football scholarships to Holy Cross, as Rob also did later on, but with less fanfare. Just as importantly, he and his siblings were raised to "service" the community. To give something back, and Rob continued this process in college at Holy Cross and while in the National Football League, with outreach programs. When Rob graduated college, no one gave him a chance of making it in the NFL. But he was drafted by the Kansas City Chiefs, as an undersized, underdog, linebacker, and special team's player. He lasted a few years with numerous teams, making the most of his non-star ability. The way he accomplished this, is with dogged, determination and dedication. To quote Rob: "Being the best at what you do has to be more important to you than partying or chasing girls or hanging out with your buddies. It has to be worth sacrificing the comforts and pleasures of an undirected life and replacing them with long hours of sweat and tears. In football, it also helps to be one tough character." At the end of Rob's short NFL career, he attended law school, and upon graduation, became an assistant D.A. in Manhattan. In keeping with his personal goal, of giving service to his community/country, he also joined the Army Reserves.
Then, on the forever-fateful day, of September 11, 2001, Rob was on the way to work in Manhattan, when he saw the smoke, and the planes, at the World Trade Center. He couldn't get to work, so he went home and put on the TV, and heard an announcement, that military men were needed at "ground-zero" to help look for bodies. Even though he was in the reserves, he donned his uniform, and went to "ground-zero", and helped recover the remains of victims for days. Rob, happened to be there, when President Bush arrived, and shook the Commander In Chief's hand, and was so moved, he decided he wanted to go on active duty and help America fight back. Because Rob was 38 years old, they wouldn't let him go on active duty. He persisted in every way possible, and was finally accepted as a Judge Advocate General. (JAG) He proceeded to go to Afghanistan and Iraq and assisted in "Rules Of Engagement" (ROE) enforcement. From there, he went in to criminal prosecution. He wound up on the successful prosecution team, that convicted Sergeant Hasan Akbar, probably the worst, United States Military criminal, in the last 30-40 years. To refresh your memory, Akbar, was the traitor, who the night before, we were going to launch Operation Iraqi Freedom, attacked his comrades, with grenades and small-arms fire. He wounded more than a dozen troops. Two were dead.
There is much more, to the life story, of a man who loves his country, loves his family, loves God, and has dedicated his life to enforcing freedom throughout the world, but let me conclude my review, by having Rob tell you why he named his book "All American". "You might wonder about the use of "All-American" in the title. First of all, let me say off the bat that I'm not talking about myself here. What is an "All-American" anyway? I've met some real "All-Americans- quiet, unassuming, heroic people who inspire students, protect us from crime, and defend our values. They are "All-American" in every sense of the phrase. I chose this title in part to pay tribute to these "All-American", I've been lucky enough to meet and work with through the years. I also chose it to pay special tribute to the men and women of our armed forces, especially those in the 82nd Airborne Division. That famous unit happens to be called the All-American Division."
Extraordinary.......2007-06-08
An extraordinary account of one good man standing tall for the best of American values.
I wanted to like this book, but..........2007-04-29
I am also a Captain in the Army, so I was excited to come across a written account of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan written by one of my peers. I thought this book would be interesting and relevant to my own experiences in Iraq. However, I was very quickly disappointed by the book's one-sidedness and lack of insight.
One of McGovern's main themes is that the positive stories from Iraq and Afghanistan are seldom reported, while violence and strife always make the nightly news. While there is truth to this, McGovern takes the opposite approach to the extreme. He cites children waving at soldiers and Iraqis voting as proof that US policies in Iraq are working and progress is being made, but he completely ignores any and all evidence to the contrary (worsening violence, Iraqi political ineffectiveness, millions of refugees fleeing the country, a steady decline of electricity and other services, children throwing rocks, etc).
By far, the biggest flaw in this book is that McGovern never addresses or acknowledges the negative impact of having an occupying army living and operating for years within a civilian population. In the effort to catch the terrorists, soldiers kick in doors, round up detainees, seize and destroy private property, create collateral damage and civilian deaths, etc. These are the unavoidable side effects of fighting a war. Add to that the unscrupulous actions of the soldiers at Abu Ghraib and Haditha, and you'll find that the longer we stay, the less popular we become, and the more support the insurgency receives from the local population. A recent poll indicated that over half of Iraqis now support attacks against American soldiers. By ignoring half of the issue, McGovern abandons a reasoned, balanced appraisal in favor of blind ideology and wishful thinking.
I haven't mentioned McGovern's career in the NFL or as an attorney, because the autobiographical aspect of this book is actually rather secondary to his promotion of US policy in executing the War on Terror. In this regard, none of his points are new, original, or insightful. Conservative ideology is haphazardly sprinkled throughout the book whether or not it is relevant to the ongoing story. For example, here is a quote from the NFL portion: "Of course, the hate [Vince] Lombardi was talking about was the football kind, not the hate that drives people to fly airplanes into buildings." By the time you reach the end of the book, it starts to sound like a White House press release from 2003. If you are primarily looking for a good inside account of the NFL, life in Iraq/Afghanistan, or the DA's office, this isn't the right book for you. If you're hells bells behind the war in Iraq and want to read something you're sure to agree with, then you might want to pick this up.
Amazon.com
The war on terror has created near unanimity on many points, at least within the American press and political leadership. One essential point of agreement: al Qaeda specifically and radical Islamism in general are stirred by a hatred of modernity. Or as President George W. Bush has articulated repeatedly, they hate freedom. Nonsense, responds the nameless author of this work and 2003's Through Our Enemies' Eyes (the senior U.S. intelligence official's identity became an open secret by publication date). Indeed, he grimly and methodically discards common wisdom throughout this scathing and compelling take on counterterrorism. Imperial Hubris is not a book that will cheer Americans, regardless of their perspectives on the post-9/11 environment. We are, the author notes, losing the war on terror. Hawks will squirm as the author heaps contempt on U.S. missions in Afghanistan (too little, too late) and Iraq ("a sham causing more instability than it prevents"), but opponents of Bush administration policies may blanch at Anonymous' suggestion that what's needed is for the West to "proceed with relentless, brutal, and, yes, blood-soaked offensive military actions until we have annihilated the Islamists who threaten us." Quoting the at-all-cost likes of William Tecumseh Sherman and Curtis Lemay on one hand and contending that unrelenting military measures be accompanied by concessions to the ideology of the militants on the other are unlikely to curry widespread support from either side of the divide. And how will readers conditioned to references to Osama bin Laden as a deranged gangster or simple-minded fanatic with deep pockets digest the respect accorded "the most popular anti-American leader in the world today"? Imperial Hubris clearly wasn't written to win friends, though the author believes it's essential that his words influence people at the top. Whether it will is debatable, but that this blunt, forceful, urgently argued polemic recharges the discussion is a foregone conclusion. --Steven Stolder
Book Description
Though U.S. leaders try to convince the world of their success in fighting al Qaeda, one anonymous member of the U.S. intelligence community would like to inform the public that we are, in fact, losing the war on terror. Further, until U.S. leaders recognize the errant path they have irresponsibly chosen, he says, our enemies will only grow stronger.
According to the author, the greatest danger for Americans confronting the Islamist threat is to believe—at the urging of U.S. leaders—that Muslims attack us for what we are and what we think rather than for what we do. Blustering political rhetoric “informs†the public that the Islamists are offended by the Western world’s democratic freedoms, civil liberties, inter-mingling of genders, and separation of church and state. However, although aspects of the modern world may offend conservative Muslims, no Islamist leader has fomented jihad to destroy participatory democracy, for example, the national association of credit unions, or coed universities.
Instead, a growing segment of the Islamic world strenuously disapproves of specific U.S. policies and their attendant military, political, and economic implications. Capitalizing on growing anti-U.S. animosity, Osama bin Laden’s genius lies not simply in calling for jihad, but in articulating a consistent and convincing case that Islam is under attack by America. Al Qaeda’s public statements condemn America’s protection of corrupt Muslim regimes, unqualified support for Israel, the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and a further litany of real-world grievances. Bin Laden’s supporters thus identify their problem and believe their solution lies in war. Anonymous contends they will go to any length, not to destroy our secular, democratic way of life, but to deter what they view as specific attacks on their lands, their communities, and their religion. Unless U.S. leaders recognize this fact and adjust their policies abroad accordingly, even moderate Muslims will join the bin Laden camp.
Download the Complete Bibliography for this book.
Customer Reviews:
Hit me baby one more time..........2007-10-10
...Or 8 more times and hit me harder, who knows. But that is in essence what we seem to be saying (among other things) to our enemies as we sit on our hands trying to fight a politically correct and "safe" war.
Mr. Scheuer has raised many points of view gleaned by 17 years of analysis in the very subjects we are fighting, or playing tit for tat with. He gets past the arguments of simpletons that say they attack us because we are free, or hate our pop-culture, clothing, etc. He breaks down the 6 main reasons why bin Laden and company attack us repeatedly. Additionally he breaks down bin Laden himself, even comparing him to - brace yourself - our very own Abe Lincoln. The comparison is in reference to how he is viewed in the Islamic culture, and how he is fighting for the cause and what's right in the Islamic religion. He lays out a very detailed profile of bin Laden, going against the grain in terms of labeling him just a terrorist, a megalomaniac, mass-killer, etc. Basically he gets deep, and honest and some of it is disconcerting to read but none-the-less informative.
Additionally, he breaks down where we (Clinton and Bush) went wrong fighting this war. Why did it take a month to get into Afghanistan after 9/11? Why didn't we use assets we had from assisting in Afghan-Soviet war? Why does it seem we are sitting on our hands? Do these people even want to be "free" and democratized? What about the propping up of puppets in government that don't have the support of their countrymen?
The book also talks of Islam in general and why and how our country and its policies are on a crash course with the insurgents fighting against us. One such example is man-made law vs. God's law. Mr. Scheuer also suggests certain policy changes that we need to make, lest we let our children continue fighting this war. I hate to use a cliché, but he calls for the "gloves to come off", really come off and you may not agree with some of his ideas (bringing back land mines to mine areas of mountain passes we cannot protect or block or basically bombing the country/is into submission, so much so that they lose all hope or at least support from the people of the country, stopping our support of Israel - which is one of the 6 reasons they attack us, and more) but other options need to be on the table because so far we aren't really winning.
The fact that bin Laden himself references this book as the reason we are losing this war, should be seen as a kick in the nuts because he knows that we do not have the stomach to do what is necessary to win. And he may be right.
Recommended by Osama bin Laden.......2007-09-08
Most infamously recommended as "further reading" by Osama bin Laden in his message of 9/7/07, this work by the former head of the CIA's bin Laden unit is a must-read for those wishing to fully educate themselves on the issues in the War vs. Terrorism.
Scheurer's book is a well-reasoned treatise focusing on the strengths of bin Laden's "humiliate/bleed America to death" strategy in the current Iraq campaign. Differentiating himself from the Steve Emerson's and Daniel Pipes of the world, Scheuer paints a politically incorrect picture of the Al Qaeda movement as a very sane response to Western policy rather than simply the rantings and ravings of a group of abhorrent fanatics.
Neither far left or far right, Scheurer is a refreshing centrist who opines that the Islamists rightfully have a bone to pick with the imperial hubris of the US. While we may not want to agree that we're losing the War on Terror, Schuerer makes a very solid case and offers myriad tangible solutions.
Warning: it's not always a comfortable read for those with a great deal of hope for the long-term survival of this country. Scheuer's view is that, collectively as a country, we are "whistling past the graveyard" and that merely the first shot has been fired in this long and bloody war.
"If you want to understand what's going on and if you would like to get to know some of the reasons for your losing the war against us, then read the book of Michael Scheuer." - Osama bin Laden, 9/7/07
Author Fails to Drill in on the President.......2007-08-05
Mr. Scheuer was persuasive with his argument that Americans need to be re-awakened from a wasteful diversion into Iraq and the downgrading of bin Laden as a threat. Mr. Scheuer certainly awakened me to the bin Laden menace and hopefully it will be the catalyst to reawaken an American sleeping giant (again). He puts forth the proposition that U.S. forces have fought incorrectly in Afghanistan by not pursuing an all out war against bin Laden, like the WWII battle against Hitler and Emperor Hiroshima. Civilians standing in the way were not spared in the bombing of the civilian populations in Dresden, Germany and the atomic bombing of two cities in Japan. The WWII U.S. fight was massive with total destruction to both German and Japanese forces. In contrast Mr. Scheuer says our strategy to "fight and win quickly; do not kill many of the enemy, destroy much of his property, or kill many of his civilians; and above all, lose the barest minimum of U.S. soldiers," has been a primary reason for our defeats in wars since WWII.
Mr Scheuer makes a lot out of the fact that the U.S. lost the initiative by delaying for several months attacking bin Laden and his al Qaeda forces. Here he absolutely misses the most important reasons behind the U.S. defeat in Afghanistan and failure to capture bin Laden and his al Qaeda forces. I almost think, as a conservative, he was trying not to offend the radical right; or perhaps he just did not know. Here is what he left out, information that would have made his arguments stand out and given his book more attention.
(1) Troops Moved to Iraq. Two months after 9/11, late November 2001, The Whitehouse distracted top military commanders from the hunt for Bin Laden with rushed plans for a new war in Iraq. About half of the intelligence and Special Forces assets in Afghanistan were diverted to support the war in Iraq. This shifted focus at a critical moment, when US forces thought they had corned Osama in the White Mountains (Spin Ghar). With too few troops, bin Laden was able to escape.
(2) Reinforcements Never Sent. Despite CIA leaders' direct appeals in Dec 2001 to the Whitehouse (by phone) for 1,200 marines, sitting idly in Kandahar, to be deployed to the White Mountains (Spin Ghar), they were never ordered into battle.
(3) Cease-fire Allows Most Al Qaeda Fighters to Escape. A cease-fire was declared on Dec. 12 2001 with Al Qaeda forces in hopes that some would surrender in the White Mountains (Spin Ghar). This allowed a large contengent of al Qaeda forces to slip through the valleys and over the White Mountains into Pakistan.
(4) Whitehouse - Musharraf May Have Cut Deal to Let Bin Laden Go. Pakistani president, General Pervez Musharraf said that he was sending in Pakistani Special Forces to cut off Bin Laden's escape into Pakistan in Dec 2001 during the battle of Tora Bora in the Spin Ghar mountain range. Those forces never came. His lack of action gives credibility to a 25-Aug-03 report in the UK London based paper, the Guardian, suggesting the Whitehouse and Musharraf had stuck a deal not to seize Bin Laden after the Afghan war for fear of inciting trouble in Pakistan. The Guardian asserts that after Bin Laden's escape the Pakistanis set up three elaborate security rings which stretched 120 miles in diameter around Bin Laden in order to protect him from capture.
(5) Army Misdirects Attack on bin Laden's Retreat. Al United States Central Command in Florida directed the CIA forces to Tora Bora, not Zhawar Kili, in the pursuit of Bin Laden and his Al Qaeda forces in Dec 2001. Bin Laden most likely used Zhawar Kili as his escape route which was 70 miles south of Tora Bora. Tora Bora consisted mostly of natural caves that were not interconnected. By comparison Zhawar was a nine-square-mile complex including tunnels, built with U.S. assistance during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in 1986. And then in Aug 1998, in retaliation for bombing of U.S. embassies in eastern Africa, it was bombed with cruise missiles as directed by the U.S. Central Command in Florida. Despite having bombed Zhawar Kili, and in a possible attempt to cover up Whitehouse orders to allow Bin Laden's escape, Central Command claimed ignorance about Zhawar. A spokesman for General Tommy R. Franks, the Commander in Chief, United States Central Command, stated, "Had we known in November 2001 of ...the place... we'd have paid more attention to it, I suspect."
(6) Bin Laden Capture Low Priority for Whitehouse. The President has always focused on Iraq (even before becoming President) and has stubbornly refused to consider Osama a serious threat. Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes appeared on Fox September 14, 2006 to discuss his recent meeting with President Bush in the Oval Office. The key takeaway for Barnes was that "bin Laden doesn't fit with the administration's strategy for combating terrorism." Barnes said that Bush told him capturing bin Laden is "not a top priority use of American resources." Mr. Scheuer does say that our involvement in Iraq took the eye off the real enemy, but he never actually drills in on the President. In my opinion, a strategic mistake that takes a lot away from the book.
One Of The Best.......2007-05-13
Michael Scheuer's work is without a doubt the seminal work on how the Muslim world views bin Linden and he points out that we need to pay attention to that. He also notes that the Bush Administration failed to check the CIA "checkables" on Afghanistan and that we will pay for that error. Were I still teaching history at the secondary level, this work would be required reading for all my students. A non-fiction work that reads like a thriller, the academic community needs to make it a part of their curriculum. I intend to acquire additional works by this very polite former CIA analysist.
My Attempt to Understand Jihad.......2007-05-09
Good read. A bit dated now in 2007, but still relevant. Also read "Future Jihad" by Waleed Faras if you want to learn about where these animals are coming from and "Perfect Soldiers", also sheds light on the breeding and conditioning of subhumans who would strap bombs on their children and send them to oblivion or attach innocent civilians in the name of a "prophet" who robbed the cradle, committed puligamy, and robbed and murdered his way to fame.
Islam, the "Religion of Peace"....or is that "Follow Allah and be Blown to Pieces"?
If you aren't serious now about the problem, either you will be after reading these books or there's no hope for you.
Amazon.com
Having won an unprecedented series of victories and acquired huge new territories in 1942, Germany and Japan seemed poised to dominate most of the world. A year later both empires were reeling back in the face of Allied assaults. The rapid turnaround, King's College history professor Richard Overy writes, came about largely as a result of technological innovation and structural responsiveness. The Allies were able to convert their economies to a war footing with few institutional fetters, while the Axis powers imposed layers of bureaucracy that often competed internally. In fact, Overy writes, at one point during the war, the Luftwaffe had more than 425 different aircraft models in production, the result of different state agencies' and manufacturers' vying to push their models into the order of battle. The defeated Axis powers' conversion to their foes' economic model enabled them, according to Overy, to become technological leaders in the postwar years. His study is full of detail, and it makes for very good reading.
Book Description
Richard Overy's bold book begins by throwing out the stock answers to this great question: Germany doomed itself to defeat by fighting a two-front war; the Allies won by "sheer weight of material strength." In fact, by 1942 Germany controlled almost the entire resources of continental Europe and was poised to move into the Middle East. The Soviet Union had lost the heart of its industry, and the United States was not yet armed. The Allied victory in 1945 was not inevitable. Overy shows us exactly how the Allies regained military superiority and why they were able to do it. He recounts the decisive campaigns: the war at sea, the crucial battles on the eastern front, the air war, and the vast amphibious assault on Europe. He then explores the deeper factors affecting military success and failure: industrial strength, fighting ability, the quality of leadership, and the moral dimensions of the war.
Customer Reviews:
Just the facts ma'am, just the facts........2007-08-23
"Just the facts ma'am, just the facts." could be Mr. Overy's motto. Many in the general public assume the Allies winning WWII was all but a given. In reality the Allied were utterly unprepared for war in the late 1930's. Where the Axis had been planning and building for years. This highly detailed account describes the advantages and disadvantages of the Axis and Allies, both in men and material, at the start and then throughout the war. He has an unorthodox view regarding the true effects of the massive aerial bombings that cost so many lives on both sides. He backs up his view with an almost overwhelming amount of detailed data.
Gem of a Book.......2007-07-09
Richard writes very full. His analysis of key themes why the Allies won is excellent.The prose flows well and it is a joy to read this book.The endnotes are excellent. Do note that Richard has updated his 1995 book via a second edition published in 2006.
Also recommended: Fateful Choices by Ian Kershaw (2007)
Highly Recommended.......2007-06-07
Richard Overy, a British historian who specializes on World War II and has written on air power and the German economy, set out to explain: why the allies won. The result is this book of just over 400 pages. Everything about this book from the writing, research, photos, and even the maps is of the first order.
The war did not end because the axis powers lost; it ended because the allies won. A key ingredient on the side of the allies be it in Canberra, Ottawa, Washington, London, or even Moscow was the sense that the allies were fight for a positive good. That sense of mission sustained people and armies through the difficult times that they faced when the tide of war was running against them. It was a sense of mission that the Axis powers never had to the same degree. Germany and Japan went to war out of a sense of mission, but kept fighting long after its people had lost hope due to coercion.
Overy disagrees with those that think that economic power alone determined the victors. Britain, France, and Belgium had more resources than the Germans in 1939. In 1941, Hitler controlled most of Europe and had more than the allies. Overy believes: "The line between material resources and victory on the battle field is anything but a straight line." It is also important to remember that the difference between victory and defeat was often quite small. The United States defeated Japan at Midway because of only 10 bombs hitting their targets. A key element in the success of D-Day was the fact that the allies kept the Germans guessing about where they would land.
The two critical areas factors that defeated Germany was the victory of the Soviet Army. The eastern front was the decisive theater of the war. Another critical element was British and American airpower, which gave the allies victory over the German and Japanese navies, and then the allies broke the back of German and Japanese industry.
Finally, leadership and the adaptive ability of the allied militaries were other key elements in the outcome of the war. The leaders of allied nations bonded with their people as the war progressed and were able to motivate them. In this case, it was better to be loved than feared. The allies suffered a number of early defeats, but they learned from these experiences and got better. In Germany, Italy, and Japan the situation was the exact opposite.
Highly recommended.
Very readable and interesting.......2007-03-08
The author's hypothesis is that the allies' victory was not a foregone conclusion. He analyzes which factors were important, and what caused things to go the allies' way.
The analysis is top rate, and the book is interesting to read through. Lots of tidbits I was unaware of.
Broad-Based Look at Allied Victory .......2007-02-18
Historian Richard Overy does a superb job examining why the Allies won World War II. Overy concentrates partly on battlefield strategies but more heavily on economic output, scientific achievement and administrative leadership. Some don't realize that the war's outcome was far from certain after the U.S. entered in December, 1941. At that point Nazi Germany (plus Italy) ruled most of Europe, North Africa, and large parts of Russia, U-boats were sinking ships along the Atlantic coast in view of U.S. beach-goers, and Japan either ruled or was about to grab much of China, East Asia, the Phillipines, and the Pacific. But the author shows how the Allies had reversed the tide by 1943 due to economic and scientific achievement, strong leadership, intelligent strategy, and a strong sense of moral righteousness. In short, the Allies proved highly capable at turning their people and economies into fighting potential. Overy shows that by mid-1943 the badly-battered Russians were now chewing up the Wehrmacht, while the combined navies of the U.S., Britain and Canada (with much air support) had largely won the Battle of the Atlantic. Also by 1943 the U.S. economy was starting to produce enough goods to supply several nations in a two-front war. These advantages turned the tide, but it still took two more years against a tough, determined foe.
This rare book examines the war from the multiple economic, political, scientific, administrative, and military fronts. I felt the author under-rated the Axis, which came fairly close to victory (and inflicted more casualties) with fewer people and less industrial potential. Still, this is a clear and sober look at why the Allies succeeded in a huge and horrific conflict.
Book Description
Built around 8 case studies, WHY NATIONS GO TO WAR covers the crucial events that led to the outbreak of the twentieth century's major military conflicts, with particular focus on the pivotal role leaders play in pushing a nation over the threshold into war.
Customer Reviews:
Good read.......2007-02-25
I don't normally read non fiction but this book is excellent- giving a different view of history and war.
Great idea and great book.......2006-12-14
This was one of the best textbooks I have read in college. It covers most of the major wars post world war 2 and gives the history leading up to them. You can see a clear dichotomy where the major power in the world leading up to the conflict causes the conflict through foolish colonization policies. Mostly British for the first half and then the United States. It is a good summary overall and is a must have for any student in International Relations or military history. It is a well written and quick read. 5 stars.
Fascinating and Insightful.......2006-03-02
"Why Nations Go to War" is a very fascinating book to read as it provides some unique perspectives on the reasons that the author views as the cause of nations to go into conflict. The author uses a clear and simple style of writing that make it easy to read and understand his arguments, propositions and conclusions, even if one does not agree with them.
Basically, Stoessinger argues that the national leaders play the decisive role in bringing nations into conflict. It is the characteristics and ego of the leader that, at the critical moment, makes the difference between nations crossing the Rubicon and ultimately committing to go to war. Other factors such as territorial disputes, economic considerations or clash of religions or civilisations may be contributory but not the main cause for nations to go to war. The author supports his views with some well presented, insightful and compelling case studies.
Stoessinger critically examines the characters, personalities and egos of some of the modern leaders that took their nations to war and shows how poor judgements and wrong perceptions led to disasters and untold suffering for their countries.
This is a well researched book that emphasises the importance of moral courage on the part of leaders to prevent war and not allow their fragile egos to cause unnecessary suffering to other human beings. Although this is easier said than done, this message from the author is compelling.
I recommend the book to anyone with an interest in history, international relations and war.
Very interesting perspective.......2005-10-09
I was originally required to read this book for a class, but found it interesting anyway :).
In any case, I have always been interested in history, and almost majored in it in college, and so found this book particularly interesting. His concept is so simple, and yet so often overlooked. As I understand it, his basic point is that people often think of wars as being caused by factors such as religious differences, economics, etc. Stoessinger argues that these types of factors are necessary but not sufficient. You also need additional factors, particularly misperceptions.
I think that he makes a pretty decent case for this, his examples are appropriately chosen, and he makes some very interesting observations. I think many of his ideas have very great explaining power and should be a consideration in any discussion of war.
Definitly a recommended read, particularly if you're interested in history or political science.
A Product of a Non-Existent Discipline.......2005-09-13
The title of a book is a promise to the reader, in this case to answer the question. Stoessinger makes little effort to make good on his promise.
When we ask "why" we are asking a question of causation, not a question of what proximate events surrounded and immediately preceeded another event. Nor are we asking for speculative assertions about the centrality of the psychological culture of a country which are easily disproven by any broader knowledge of human behavior and history.
For example, Stroessinger is "convinced that Hitler's charismatic grip on Germany can best be explained by the authoritarian structure of the family." How then do we explain the numerous similar charismatic grips held by leaders in other countries, with different family structures, throughout history? For example, Stalin, Mao, Peron, Napoleon, numerous rulers in Africa and elsewhere in the third world?
When we ask a question of causation we are not looking for answers that simply push the question back a level, or back in time, and leave it to languish there. When we ask a general question of causation such as "why nations go to war" we are seeking general answers, answers that reveal regularities and provide insight into why they exist.
So an examination of the proximate details, yet again, of WWI or WWII or any other specific war is not germain to the question at hand. To pretend to answer by describing some detail or asserting some psychological state is to beg the question...why then did that detail or psychological state exist?
Stroessinger seeks to emphasize the role of the individual leader and find the ""moment of truth" when leaders crossed the threshold into war." Unfortunately this is a very poorly concieved approach. First, because nations are not buttons to be pushed that respond automatically. Bush could decide tomorrow to attack Britain, but I doubt that anyone would respond. The people of the country have to also largely be willing to go to war with whatever country is in question.
The second problem is that he appears to be ignorant of the psychology of commitment, that one small decision can commit us psychologically to many more larger ones in the same direction. This is how corruption and corporate scandal often develops as well. People dont start out corrupt, they start out willing to look the other way and not say anything. People also dont start out willing to go massacre a whole enemy town, there is a process. That process has it's own momentum that pushes it along, each step making the next more likely, so the critical issue is when the process starts and how, not some randomly judged "threshold."
International Relations is terminally conflicted. On the one hand they seek regularities of human behavior, and on the other hand they seek to ignore the fact that all the people involved are humans, that there is just one species involved here.
Somehow they have convinced themselves of the obviously false proposition that explaining universal paterns by asserting that it is the "state system" which makes the paterns happen means that they can avoid being "deterministic." They seem to feel that explaining universal regularities of human behavior by noting that humans share a lot of genes in common with each other would be "deterministic." They also want to examine a behavior patern at the state level but ignore all the piles of evidence that the same behavior patern occurs at the band and tribal levels as well. As if ignorance will allow insight.
When it comes to the issues that Stroessinger promises in his title to address he is in fact hilariously ignorant. In the few paragraphs he devotes to the asserted topic of his book, why humans go to war, he makes a complete fool of himself. He has been so dismissive of human nature, the effects of evolution on making humans behavioraly predisposed for war, that he is beyond entirely ignorant. I quote from the sixth edition...
"Whereas aggression may be inherent, war is learned behavior and as such can be unlearned and ultimately selected out entirely.Humans have overcome other habits that previously had seemed unconquerable. For example, during the Ice Age, when people lived in caves, incest was perfectly acceptable, whereas today incest is almost universally taboo." (pg 210)
This is just comical! For one thing, plenty humans did not live in caves during the ice age. There just are not that many caves in Africa, Asia, and Australia. For another, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that incest was perfectly acceptable then, or that it had seemed an unconquerable habit. Seeing that, in evolutionary terms, incest is maladaptive, and that all primates(see Human Universals), even most mammals in general, avoid incest, this assertion is highly unlikely to be true.
Of course, there are examples such as the ancient Egyptians where the ruling Pharoahs kept their bloodline 'pure' by only marrying close relatives, like sisters. Even here though this was not the practice of the larger society, and it took place well after the ice ages.
There is just no factual basis for asserting that war is entirely a learned behavior. All human societies have war, except for a small handful of tribes that share one common trait; they are geographicaly isolated and have no neighbors. Overwhelming evidence shows that humans have made war on each other for at least the last 30,000 years (see Constant Battles), and we know now that even chimps have primitive warfare.
Denial of this only leads to a hopeless effort to show regularities while fighting to maintain complete ignorance of why such regularities exist. When the title of your book promises to in fact explain just that, why the regularities exist, it is quite a problem that you are in some strange state of denial. All you can do then is beg the question, force us to ask further questions. Why were the Germans the way they were psychologically? Why was Hitler insane? Why did this or that condition arise in the first place? Why was the government organized like that? We can keep going back and back with this method of answering why until we end up explaining WWI by looking at the Germanic wars with Rome, and perhaps back before that even.
Descriptions of proximate circumstances and purely uninformed speculative generalizations about the psychological cultures of millions of people do not constitute an answer to the causative question why.
What should be the starting point for a book by this title is showing that while the precise proximate details leading to war are infinite in variety, the psychological processes are not. There has yet to be a circumstance where mutual admiration and trust led to war. Feeling that your two nations have much in common also has proven a poor road to combat. Ditto for describing the other people as honest and good and hard working. On the other hand, opposites of the above have consistently led to war no matter what individual was the leader or what the specific circumstances were.
Stroessinger has failed to address the topic of the assignment he gave himself, so I must give him an F.
Book Description
Why have there been no terrorist attacks in the United States since 9/11? It is ridiculously easy for a single person with a bomb-filled backpack, or a single explosives-laden automobile, to launch an attack. So why hasn't it happened? The answer is surely not the Department of Homeland Security, which cannot stop terrorists from entering the country, legally or otherwise. It is surely not the Iraq war, which has stoked the hatred of Muslim extremists around the world and wasted many thousands of lives. Terrorist attacks have been regular events for many years -- usually killing handfuls of people, occasionally more than that.
Is it possible that there is a simple explanation for the peaceful American homefront? Is it possible that there are no al-Qaeda terrorists here? Is it possible that the war on terror has been a radical overreaction to a rare event? Consider: 80,000 Arab and Muslim immigrants have been subjected to fingerprinting and registration, and more than 5,000 foreign nationals have been imprisoned -- yet there has not been a single conviction for a terrorist crime in America. A handful of plots -- some deadly, some intercepted -- have plagued Europe and elsewhere, and even so, the death toll has been modest.
We have gone to war in two countries and killed tens of thousands of people. We have launched a massive domestic wiretapping program and created vast databases of information once considered private. Politicians and pundits have berated us about national security and patriotic duty, while encroaching our freedoms and sending thousands of young men off to die.
It is time to consider the hypothesis that dare not speak its name: we have wildly overreacted. Terrorism has been used by murderous groups for many decades, yet even including 9/11, the odds of an American being killed by international terrorism are microscopic. In general, international terrorism doesn't do much damage when considered in almost any reasonable context.
The capacity of al-Qaeda or of any similar group to do damage in the United States pales in comparison to the capacity other dedicated enemies, particularly international Communism, have possessed in the past. Lashing out at the terrorist threat is frequently an exercise in self-flagellation because it is usually more expensive than the terrorist attack itself and because it gives the terrorists exactly what they are looking for. Much, probably most, of the money and effort expended on counterterrorism since 2001 (and before, for that matter) has been wasted.
The terrorism industry and its allies in the White House and Congress have preyed on our fears and caused enormous damage. It is time to rethink the entire enterprise and spend much smaller amounts on only those things that do matter: intelligence, law enforcement, and disruption of radical groups overseas. Above all, it is time to stop playing into the terrorists' hands, by fear-mongering and helping spread terror itself.
Customer Reviews:
Wacko 9/11 conspiracy theorists.......2007-08-17
You can easily understand what this author and his book are all about by observing his actions. Recently, he appeared at a panel on "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid by Jimmy Carter". For those of you who don't know, Carter basically advances the view that the problems in the middle east are all caused by the uncomfortable fact that jews exist in the region and that the way to solve these problems is to get rid of them. Since the only way this is going to happen is through genocide, that is what he supports. He also makes it quite clear that ANY behavior by the muslims in that region, no matter how heinously evil, is justified. This horror fest was cosponsored by a local group that promotes the view that 9/11 was not an act by muslim terrorists but rather a nefarious plot by our own government.
These are the types of people Mueller groups himself with.....dangerous lunatics who support national socialist style fascism. This says everything you need to know about his book. It also says everything you need to know about people who read books like this and find merit in them. You might as well shave your head and tattoo a swastika on it (or maybe a crescent). Because that is what YOU are all about.
Subtitle: Terrorism -- Not a big deal.......2007-04-08
Mueller's thesis, in brief, is that terrorist movements cannot succeed and have never succeeded in their political goals. The violence they employ is not widespread enough to overthrow governments or forcibly change societies to their liking. Thus, for Mueller, to react militarily to terrorism instead of treating it like organized criminal violence simply exacerbates the problem.
Some issues Mueller does not seem to consider or is outright incorrect about:
First, although it is true that terrorists have never won (i.e., overthrown a government, upset a society), Mueller seems completely unaware of the work done by Walter Laqueur and others that note the world is in a "new age" of terrorism. While terrorists can't win by employing truck bombs and pizza-parlor massacres, theoretically they now have the power to win by using weapons of mass destruction, the technology related to which is "open." Most terror academic and governmental experts -- neither of which Mueller is -- have esssentially concluded that it is just a matter of time before the world experiences this. What then? A few arrests and trials?
A second problem is the illogical claim that *the response to terrorism causes it*. Mueller again seems completely unaware of the mountainous work done by scholars such as Bernard Lewis that demonstrate the millenia-and-a-half effort by the Islamic world to extend its control throughout Asia, Africa, and Europe using both conventional and non-conventional war such as terrorism. For that matter, Mueller seems completely unaware of early 20th century terror movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood, movements that existed prior to the Iraq war, the Israel-Palestinian issue, the very creation of Israel itself, the US being a world power, and indeed, prior to the birth of anyone reading this. Mueller wants arrests but no military response -- it's as if he doesn't realize there's a war going on.
A third problem is his general dismissal of terrorism as much of a risk to innocent civilians. Mueller believes other risks, such as automobiles and cigarette smoking, cause far more death and injury than does terrorism. The obvious rebuttal: we *choose* these other risks. Perhaps not the consequences (no smoker really wants lung cancer), but we certainly choose the undertake the risky behavior. But who chooses to be a target of terrorism? All of the other risks Mueller discusses are preventable by making the choice not to engage in them -- lung cancer, for example, would end if people stopped smoking and DUI-related deaths would end if we didn't drink and drive. But terrorism-related deaths won't end until the terrorists are killed and their political motivations are defeated. But Mueller evidently hasn't noticed the difference between the chosen risk of smoking and the unchosen risk of being a terror victim.
A fourth problem is that Mueller seems unaware of domestic terror cells in America. In fact, he claims that there aren't any. Readers can find discussions of domestic terror cells on web sites such as Jihad Watch, that of Middle-East scholar Daniel Pipes, and elsewhere that offer lengthy discussion of domestic terror cases.
The core problem with Mueller's book is that he simply wasn't qualified to write it. He makes error of both scholarship and fact that no undergraduate students of terrorism would make. He might as well have written a book on 19th century French literature or on plate tectonics -- his discussion and his conclusions would have been equally thoughtful.
Required Reading for Chicken Licken.......2007-03-25
This is an interesting, valuable and important book, and I'm fairly sure almost no-one has or, for that matter will, read it. I will do what I can to change that.
John Mueller is from a venerable but sadly rare tradition of Academic commentators: the skeptics. It's that perspective he lends to our "troubled times" and over this course of this tidily executed, thoroughly sourced and entertaining book, Mueller systematically demolishes much of the public hype which holds us up in airport terminals, eats up our tax dollars and does its level best to prevent us sleeping soundly in our beds.
He makes, and repeats, a point which many otherwise perfectly sensible and well-informed commentators can't fathom: The biggest source of terror in our lives is not terrorists in Afghan caves, but our own politicians and media pundits constantly blathering about them. The terrorists themselves cause sporadic but, in fact, very limited mayhem.
The thousands of hungry mouths who comprise the "terrorism industry" on the other hand - the politicians, civil servants, defence contractors, security analysts and media commentators - each of whom is primarily interested in justifying his own existence or convincing us to open our wallets - each has a vested interest in persuading us we should be soiling rather than sleeping in our beds. Their statements, therefore, we should take with a pinch of salt.
But even though we all know we ought to, we don't. We acquiesce: we put up with speculative, unsourced, unattributed, and frequently credulous nonsense - we tolerate queues and being unneccesarily fondled at airports, hikes in tax rates and restrictions on our civil liberties. John Mueller's book sets out to provide us a reality check and ask, pointedly, why we are so easily prepared to do that.
By way of preface Mueller lists a series of items which ought to be - but aren't - conventional wisdom. They're all very big points, among them:
* Terrorism just doesn't do much damage considered in any reasonable context (nine times as many Americans are struck by lightning in the average year as are killed by terrorists)
* Even where Terrorism has horrendous results, it tends to be one-off events (despite six years of anxiety, there has not been another terrorist attack in the U.S. *at all*, let alone one on the scale of 9/11)
* Catastrophic events are by their nature are hard to repeat (never again will a plane full of unsuspecting passengers sit and allow unarmed men to fly them to their deaths without intervening, since the assumption "we'll be used as hostages so we're safe for now" no longer holds)
* Terrorist actions tend to be counterproductive on almost every level any way: far from throwing New York into chaos, panic and Hobbesian brutality, the direct and immediate result of 9/11 was the sudden blossoming of compassion, cooperation and cohesion in the city on a completely unprecedented scale - a place not usually known for its neighborliness or Samaritan spirit
* The cost (both human and economic terms) of the "War on Terror" has been far greater than the cost of Terrorist actions themselves (even taking into account the financial losses sustained in the capital markets)
* The "War on Terror", being as it is a war on an idea, is utterly unwinnable. There is no practical way of eradicating the possibility of individuals, for whatever reason, engaging in entirely destructive acts of violence. Like road fatalities (of which there are tens of thousands each year in the US) the risk of terrorist attacks are a fact of life in built up areas which we should take reasonable, dispassionate, measures to minimise bearing in mind the opportunity costs of doing so.
Mueller doesn't take an (overtly) political position - his arguments are not based on views about foreign policy nor the moral rights and wrongs of the situation, but an statistical analysis of the costs and risks of the terrorist threat, and acknowledgment of the personal agendas which inevitably inform those who shout loudest. "If it bleeds it leads" - people don't buy newspapers to read good news, so in a competitive market it is no surprise if newspapers tend to dwell on worst case scenarios. Yes, terrorism is dreadful, Mueller says, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep it in perspective.
In short, this book is a long overdue and much needed dose of common sense.
Olly Buxton
911 type attacks kill as many as toilet drownings.......2007-03-07
I listened to Michael Medved [right wing radio talk show host with whom I usually agree] interview John Mueller about this book.
Medved stronly disagreed when John said that terrorists are not a big deal.
I had to agree with Mueller.
It is the difference between perceived risk and calculated risk.
Mueller is calculating the risk.
Mueller is the man.
The emperor has no significant terrorist risk and is over reacting.
I Won't Read It -- But, Read "Beyond Fear" by Bruce Schneier.......2007-02-27
I'm honestly NOT fearmongering, bottom line I do NOT live in fear, and I work in Defense. Bottom line, really now, BOTTOM LINE, how many "one-time" events are we willing to tolerate? How many? So are you willing to risk the one-time event that annihilates 10,000, 1,000,000, 10,000,000, 100,000,000 or more Americans, or other freedom loving nations ... what is your limit?
As for me, I understand the risk and the comparisons to the fact I'm much more likely to be killed by me hitting a deer on my drive home than ever being annihilated by a terrorist shooting me in the head with a 9MM, nuclear weapon or biological attack, etc.
For me, I want to spend as much money as it takes to live in peace, less national bankruptcy, to save 1 American (or any fellow human being) from some terrorist scheme to kill 1, 10,000, 100,000 ...
You?
These books are thought-provoking and MUST be written to keep us all level-headed, but we can't give up on tracking down terrorist, improving security to stop terrorist attacks, and keep our politicians in-check.
Book Description
Not since the Roman Empire has any nation had as much economic, cultural, and military power as the United States does today. Yet, as has become all too evident through the terrorist attacks of September 11th and the impending threat of the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran, that power is not enough to solve global problems--like terrorism, environmental degradation, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction--without involving other nations. Here Joseph S. Nye, Jr. focuses on the rise of these and other new challenges and explains clearly why America must adopt a more cooperative engagement with the rest of the world.
Customer Reviews:
The paradox is a problem; Nye has some answers.......2007-02-10
Although 40 people have reviewed Nye's book thus far, no one has directly quoted Nye's clearest expression on what the PARADOX of American power is. What is the paradox about America's power? The thesis is at the end of the 1st chapter. "The paradox of America power at the end of this millennium is that it is too great to be challenged by any other state, yet not great enough to solve problems such as global terrorism and nuclear proliferation. America needs the help and respect of other nations" (pg. 40; Nye borrows this, adeptly, from Sebastian Mallaby).
In order to earn the "help and respect of other nations" America needs, what Nye calls, "soft power." "Soft power rests on the ability to set the political agenda in a way that shapes the preferences of others" (pg. 9). Soft power is needed now more than ever, because hard power (e.g. military force) is becoming less relevant in this technological revolution the world is undergoing. "Today the foundations of power have been moving away from the emphasis on military force and conquest" (pg. 5).
Soft power and the information age are the two topics Nye deals with primarily and skillfully. There are 2 nice quotations which summarize these topics well:
On Soft Power -
"The countries that are likely to gain soft power in an information age are (1) those whose dominant culture and ideas are closer to prevailing global norms (which now emphasize liberalism, pluralism, and autonomy), (2) those with the most access to multiple channels of communication and thus more influence over how issues are framed, and (3) those whose credibility is enhanced by their domestic and international performance" (pg. 69).
On the Information Age -
"...power in a global information age is distributed like a three-dimensional chess game. The top military board is unipolar, with the United States far outstripping all other states, but the middle economic board is multipolar, with the United States, Europe, and Japan accounting for two-thirds of world product, and the bottom board of transnational relations that cross borders outside the control of governments has a widely dispersed structure of power" (pg. 140).
Simple Read with some Good Points.......2006-11-10
The book is written in easy to read tone, and has some good starting points for anyone wanting to read up on the concept of 'soft power'. Not merely a book about American's soft power, but the "West's"
Soft Power is Only Influence.......2006-08-03
Joseph Nye is brilliant, but completely off with his theory that there is any such thing as "soft power" beyond mere influence. He makes a case that so-called soft power, which comes from cultural exports and good will, are comparable to hard power (as expressed in terms of the capacity for military or economic coercion) in terms of accomplishing a nation's (specifically, America's) objectives on the world stage. What he's done, though, is merely to elevate influence based on popularity to the level of actionable power, which is totally wrong. Look at the entire history of bilateral relations between any two friendly nations, and you will see that over and over again, accomodation was made when it was in the interest of both states, or when one had the hard power to coerce the other to go along. No nation ever acts in the interest of another just because they like that other country's pop music and blue jeans!
sage advice from a great theorist.......2006-06-21
Nye has produced a brilliant and concise plea for American humility in The Paradox of American Power. The central thesis of the book is that the ideas and concepts of power are changing and that ultimately, the U.S. is going to have to adjust to these changes if it wishes to remain "the" country in the world.
The first chapter covers familiar territory for Nye witha a discussion of power, particularly what Nye calls soft power or the power of ideas and culture. In this chapter, Nye convincingly states that there is more to power than just a strong military and that the U.S. has to cultivate its soft power as well. Nye also discusses potential competitors here, such as China and Europe and how these countries could challenge the U.S.
Chapters two and three discuss the emergence of an information revolution and globalization, respectively, and how both of these phenomena can and will change the global environment. Nye is making the case for how the U.S. can stay on top, and while some might fault him for that, this book is not a call for U.S. dominance to the detriment of others; it is a call for a more responsible and responsive U.S. that will benefit the vast majority of other countries.
Chapter four deals with domestic issues such as the economy and education and how these issues could potentially undermine American power. Chapter five concludes the book with the theme of redefining the national interest. This final chapter is particularly helpful because it provides real ideas for what the U.S. should be doing in the world and how doing it will benefit us in the long run. That is perhaps the most impressive idea he articulates in this book...that we should do all we can now to create a world that will be more congenial to our basic values in preparation for a time when we might not have the level of power and influence we have now.
Even though Nye barely mentions it, the ultimate validation of this book is to look at what's happening in Iraq. It is clearly a problem the U.S. can't handle on its own and one that has been made worse because the types of recommendations that Nye makes have been ignored. The book is eerily prophetic when viewed through this particular lens. You could easily think that Nye was writing this book in 2005 or 2006 as a response to Iraq, rather than 2001-02. Nye's basic premise holds true here and that is that the U.S. will be better off if we can get other countries to want to help us.
What stands out about this book the most to me is that it can be largely interpreted as a response to the Bush administration, but Nye hardly mentions Bush or specific Bush policies at all. Rather than producing just another boring and predictable polemic against Bush (who certainly deserves strong criticism), Nye has produced a wonderfully precise critique of post 9/11 American policy that blends pragmatism and realism in a way that reminds me of Noah Feldman (another great author I would highly recommend).
The Paradox of American Power, while not necessarily an easy read, should still be read by anyone that cares about the direction American foreign policy is going. I feel better about our government knowing that someone like Nye was on the inside. Hopefully he'll find his way into an influential position in the McCain administration in 2009.
Nye wants us to handcuff ourselves and sing Coombayah with the rest of the world........2005-11-05
There were many times when I had to mentally and physically shake my head as Nye supports his thesis that America's dominance in this globalized system actually necessitates its interdependence with the rest of the world (read; France and Germany).
The underlying idealism of Nye points to a world where if only the United States of America would submit, just a little, to other states and respect (read; follow) their opinions then BY GOLLY our Air will be cleaner and North Korea and Iran will give up their nuke programs. Also, Europe will magically create a more robust military transport capability and actively participate in counterterrorism and ethno-religious conflicts abroad which, will be on the decline.
My biggest gripe was Nye believing that self constraint will somehow lead to greater leadership opportunities above when these tools of self constraint are tools used by weaker countries to limit US power. That's why, 'they' want to make US weaker. Nye, in one sentence by my count, concedes this point but still argues that in the long term it'll be for the good. However, Nye does not recognize the ulterior motives by countries such as Germany and a nostalgic France (Europe is given way too much credit and attention in his book as well). Given the self interests of other states and the entrenched problems associated with failing states, failed states, and the Middle East it is a stretch to believe that countries will unite with the United States (who will still be the 100 ton gorilla in the room) and make the world a better place.
I don't buy it. So...don't buy it.
Product Description
All books are written for or against some point of view, and the books of the Bible are no different. Bible book authors were often motivated to write because they wanted to challenge or correct those who had written before them. As Helms explains, The Bible is a war-zone, and its authors are the combatants. Paul said of Peter, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong (Gal. 2:11). Helms notes that Jeremiah condemned the entire religious establishment of his time the very same people that other Bible authors held in highest esteem: prophets and priests are frauds, every one of them (Jer. 8:10). Luke felt the need to write another gospel even though many writers have undertaken to draw up an account of the events (Luke 1:1). Luke obviously felt that Mark s gospel was filled with errors and edited it freely. Not even Mark s account of the words of the dying Christ was left unaltered.
Customer Reviews:
Packed with facts.......2007-06-08
Although it isn't the most entertaining read, this book delivers interesting analyses as promised. It's a great starter for the reader who would like to investigate the lack of consistency in the Christian Bible. An excellent compliment to classics like FC Conybear's "Myth, Magic and Morals".
A deep dive into biblical history..........2007-05-12
Randel Helms is a well regarded Biblical scholar. In this work he details the subtle inconsistencies and glaring contradictions of the modern incarnations of the Christian Bible. This work is best read by someone with a more than passing familiarity with the Bible (including its alternate forms). While scholarly, the information is presented in a more or less chronological order and is fairly easy to read.
Helms spends a good bit of time with the New Testament, presenting some detail of the battle between the Jacobites (followers of James) and Paulists (followers of Paul). At no time does the work challeneg the legitimacy of faith, rather it reminds us that the bible was crafted by people and thus subject to their own interjections and plagarisms. The correlations between Egyptian myth, Old and New Testament is truly striking. I especially appreciate the inclusion of references in the original Greek.
If you are interested in the history of Judaism and Christianity and its beliefs, then pick up this work. I would also recommend a basic primer on Biblical history.
So much to digest.......2007-05-07
It isn't a very long book, but there is so much in it I was amazed. Its the single best book I've read on the subject of the Bible. I think that believers need to read this book and think about the documents that make up the basis for their faith and where those documents came from. This book showed me the human side of the texts that make up the bible, and why so much of the bible is well, confusing. The authors style is very quick I'd say, you dive right in without any apologies like in Dennetts "Breaking the Spell". I liked that, it got to the meat of the matter and challenges the reader to keep up with the point the author was trying to make. Atheists and Believers should check this one out.
Superb Bible Scholarship.......2007-04-05
Randel Helms may be the world's most underrated biblical scholar. This is probably due to a few factors: First, the smoothness and accessibility of his writing; second, the brevity of his books relative to other scholarship; and, third, his primary approach of addressing the bible as literature, and examining it in terms of style, allusion, metaphor, and historical perspective.
His new book, The Bible Against Itself, is the third in a trilogy of such examinations, the previous books being the excellent Gospel Fictions (1988), and Who Wrote The Gospels (1997). All short books, they each contain as much detail and scholarly citation as books four times their length.
The Bible Against Itself delves into many of the outstanding contradictions in the bible, and helps explain them by showing how various books in the bible were written in opposition to other books, to dispute them and hopefully supplant them. Helms chronicles a history of literature that came into being as a result of the constant struggle within a people's culture to identify themselves and their god - a struggle that lasted from the exile to Babylon through the first couple centuries of Christianity. This struggle was comprised of multiple opposing factions, each passionately dedicated to their points of view and as passionately opposed to the views of the others. The literature that espoused these views form a history of the development of Jewish and Christian laws and philosophy that is less concerned with historical truth than it is with persuading the culture to see things according to the writer's point of view. And this persuasion is generally accomplished through threats of damnation, insults, and other vitriol.
Read this book. Read about the prophets calling the other prophets blasphemers, the Paulist Christians labeling the Jacobite Christians dogs and sinners, and vice versa, and the apocalyptic authors erring again and again, but continuing to predict anyway (using as their sources the errors of previous apocalyptic theories).
You'll love it. It's a great book.
Seems crazy.......2007-03-10
It may seem unbelievable, but this book's last page is the first, and the first page is the last.
How can people be so careless?
Amazon.com
Consider a war in which 25,000 soldiers are killed or wounded in a single battle, as they were at Gettysburg, or 16,000 in a single day, as at Antietam. The degree of suffering and hardship during the American Civil War has been well documented and analyzed in books and films from Margaret Mitchell's fictional Gone with the Wind to Bell Irvin Wiley's classic studies of Civil War soldiers, The Life of Johnny Reb and The Life of Billy Yank. All these sources agree on the brutality of the combat, but what motivated soldiers to continue fighting under such bitter conditions is the cause of some controversy. Until recently, the common stance has been that soldiers enlisted out of economic need and stayed out of loyalty to their comrades. The respected Civil War historian James M. McPherson weighs in with a different point of view in For Cause and Comrades.
Professor McPherson posits that the common rank-and-file soldiers did indeed hold political and ideological beliefs that prodded them to enlist and to fight. His research is based on letters and diaries from 1,076 Union and Confederate soldiers. These reveal many motivations, but always they lead back to duty, honor, and a cause worth dying for. For Cause and Comrades is a fascinating exploration of the 19th-century mind--a mind, it seems, that differs profoundly from our own.
Book Description
General John A. Wickham, commander of the famous 101st Airborne Division in the 1970s and subsequently Army Chief of Staff, once visited Antietam battlefield. Gazing at Bloody Lane where, in 1862, several Union assaults were brutally repulsed before they finally broke through, he marveled, "You couldn't get American soldiers today to make an attack like that." Why did those men risk certain death, over and over again, through countless bloody battles and four long, awful years ? Why did the conventional wisdom -- that soldiers become increasingly cynical and disillusioned as war progresses -- not hold true in the Civil War? It is to this question--why did they fight--that James McPherson, America's preeminent Civil War historian, now turns his attention. He shows that, contrary to what many scholars believe, the soldiers of the Civil War remained powerfully convinced of the ideals for which they fought throughout the conflict. Motivated by duty and honor, and often by religious faith, these men wrote frequently of their firm belief in the cause for which they fought: the principles of liberty, freedom, justice, and patriotism. Soldiers on both sides harkened back to the Founding Fathers, and the ideals of the American Revolution. They fought to defend their country, either the Union--"the best Government ever made"--or the Confederate states, where their very homes and families were under siege. And they fought to defend their honor and manhood. "I should not lik to go home with the name of a couhard," one Massachusetts private wrote, and another private from Ohio said, "My wife would sooner hear of my death than my disgrace." Even after three years of bloody battles, more than half of the Union soldiers reenlisted voluntarily. "While duty calls me here and my country demands my services I should be willing to make the sacrifice," one man wrote to his protesting parents. And another soldier said simply, "I still love my country." McPherson draws on more than 25,000 letters and nearly 250 private diaries from men on both sides. Civil War soldiers were among the most literate soldiers in history, and most of them wrote home frequently, as it was the only way for them to keep in touch with homes that many of them had left for the first time in their lives. Significantly, their letters were also uncensored by military authorities, and are uniquely frank in their criticism and detailed in their reports of marches and battles, relations between officers and men, political debates, and morale. For Cause and Comrades lets these soldiers tell their own stories in their own words to create an account that is both deeply moving and far truer than most books on war. Battle Cry of Freedom, McPherson's Pulitzer Prize-winning account of the Civil War, was a national bestseller that Hugh Brogan, in The New York Times, called "history writing of the highest order." For Cause and Comrades deserves similar accolades, as McPherson's masterful prose and the soldiers' own words combine to create both an important book on an often-overlooked aspect of our bloody Civil War, and a powerfully moving account of the men who fought it.
Customer Reviews:
More Excellent Work by Professor McPherson.......2007-06-02
I don't know if anyone will ever read this review for a 10-year old book, but I'm reading it right now and I really wanted to share about it.
I truly appreciate the scholarship of McPherson on the Civil War and all the research he has done on the subject. For this book alone, he read hundreds of soldiers letters and diaries to understand what motivated them to put their lives on the line. A great many of them understood the issues of the day, volunteered for the war, and did not need a whole lot of incentive to enlist. A 1982 movie, "The Blue & the Gray," contains a scene where Union soldiers in 1861 are inspired to enlist with the help of a beautiful young lady singing a patriotic song. In actuality, most of these soldiers would not have needed such encouragement.
Anyway, a book like this is highly important. It has become very popular to say things like "the war was not fought over slavery" or "the Civil war had nothing to do with slavery." This book goes straight to the sources and finds out why the men who were there did what they did.
Clearly, for some of them, North and South, slavery was THE issue. In fact, I have long believed slavery was just an institution, but the real issue for many Confederates was the preservation of white supremacy. Many soldier's letters cited declare that they saw it as an abomination- even laughable to some- that anyone would want to free "inferior savages" they thought could not be educated or assimilated into American society. In fact, on page 109, a private of the 25th Wisconsin Infantry wrote home that some captured Confederates told them they were fighting because "You Yanks want us to marry our daughters to the n----rs." But this book does show that while slavery was a huge issue, certainly the source of political and territorial strife for so many years leading up to the war, it was not the only issue. The book shares the letters of immigrant Union soldiers who fought to secure democracy, something denied to them in their oppressive native countries. And many Confederate soldiers clearly say they are fighting in defense of their homes and families and because their states have been "invaded."
I tend to think some people who want to minimize or dismiss altogether the impact of slavery- or really, the place that black people would have in America, North AND South- unfortunately miss the understanding of the Civil War and American History. Personally, the older I get, the less I'm concerned about why the war started and why it was fought than I am with what happened when it ended. All I know is, the Union was saved and slavery was dead. Unless all people in "the land of the free" have access to liberty, that "land" is a hypocrisy.
Audio version is engrossing and thorough.......2007-04-02
I listened to the unabridged Books on Tape version which consists of 8 cassette tapes in a case. I found it very interesting. The tapes seemed to go by quickly.
My only suggestion would be to shorten some of the lengthy introductory material (dedication and credits) so as to get into the actual book more quickly. Also, a portion of the last cassette is devoted to a preview of another book, so the set could fit onto 7 tapes if edited just a bit.
McPherson quotes extensively from letters and diaries written during the war, so most of the accounts are first-hand. He groups them into categories and draws conclusions from their similar opinions, although he sprinkles in disclaimers because the sample is not totally balanced as it is only from literate English-speaking soldiers whose letters were saved by their descendants. Men who could not write (including most of the large number of ex-slaves who served in the Union army) did not leave a record of their experiences. Also, families of men who died in battle were often more likely to save their letters than those who survived the war.
As a female who has never served in the military, I have often wondered why so many men left their homes and families to fight in the Civil War, especially puzzling since their enemies had recently been their countrymen and were often even their relatives. McPherson has done a good job of using the soldiers' own words to explain why they risked their lives again and again. He also points out how the war changed men's viewpoints on slavery. Union soldiers who did not care much about it were exposed to it's hardships as they marched through the South and became anti-slavery, while some Confederates expressed doubts about it as the futility of their struggle became apparent. By 1865 some Southern soldiers said they would rather see the slaves freed then to lose the war. But of course it was too late.
The narrator does an excellent job of reading the book. Recommended.
A very differnt civil war novel.......2006-12-14
James McPherson does it again with a great analysis of why men fought in the civil war and what made them continue fighting after that first battle. Whether it was brotherhood, pride, or religion each side brought with it various and compelling reasons for going to war. The war was a travesty that brought devastation to both sides but if you want to see inside the soldiers minds this is the only book that does it. There are few out there like it and I McPhereson is among the best. This is an essential book for any civil war library.
a good reason.......2006-06-26
Very well researched and easy to read. McPherson tries to be fair to both sides of the war, giving the good and the bad, but it is rather obvious that he favors the North.
Well written account.......2006-04-24
McPherson has weaved together a very well written study of what motivated soldiers, both North and South, to fight in the Civil War. McPherson does an excellent job of breaking up the chapters to keep the text flowing. He also describes what would motivate men to continue to fight after seeing the horrors of battle, why men joined up, why married men continued to serve despite pleas from family members to go AWOL or take a medical leave, etc. All the while, McPherson uses dozens of quotes from diaries and letters to back up his claims. McPherson should be applauded for letting the soldiers tell most of this story rather than the author conjecture why he thought they fought. He also seems to have let the story come to him rather than set out with an agenda. A must have for any Civil War or military history student.
Book Description
Will the U.S. go to war with China over Taiwan or oil? Yes--bestselling authors Jed Babbin and Ed Temperlake say Chinese aggression is virtually inevitable and in their new book, Showdown, they address the threat of mainland China and Bush's promise to defend Taiwan--at any cost. Showdown offers indispensable strategies and tactics for the U.S. to respond to the Chinese military threat in this ongoing battle for democracy and freedom.
Customer Reviews:
Keeping our wits about us ... learning from history.......2007-09-04
As a Christian and a theologian, I take quite seriously the teachings of Christ regarding the well-being of others. I look and actively work toward a better world, or so I hope. My area of interest is intercultural, or comparative theology, and so I spend my days advocating dialogue and mutual understanding. But such idealistic leanings must not deter us from looking critically at the world around us, and the web of human relationships with its economic, political, and military implications. Such a critical analysis is exactly what Jed Babbin and Edward Timperlake do in this text with regard to the expansive growth and power of mainland China. If the Beijing regime will violently massacre more than two thousand of its own people in Tiananmen Square, one wonders what risks it will take militarily on the international scene. Babbin and Timperlake suggest several plausible scenarios for a Sino-American war, including battlespace in Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, Japan, and that place where experts have long expected it: Tiawan. This text is reasonable, fascinating, and easy to read; it does not ring irresponsible alarms. Instead, it thought-provokingly acknowledges the increasing power of the Chinese, in military, in stealth, in economics, and in computerized mischief. This is a valuable read for anyone who believes that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. In our self-satisfied bliss as Americans who enjoy the gifts of freedom and prosperity, we must always be mindful of the defense of these gifts. And to adopt yet another adage, we must keep close not only to our friends, but to our enemies as well. As Babbin and Timperlake suggest, this can be done with containment, engagement, and deterrence ... and hopefully without bloodshed.
The China Question........2007-07-16
Jed Babbin--an editor of the ultra conservative rag The National Review--has done it again. Conservatives of his ilk always need something to hate--it makes them feel strong and manly. This is the same idiot who stated: "I am willing to kill as many people as necessary to take out Hezbollah."(As stated on CNN's Paula Zahn Now July 28, 2006.)
Now that's sound policy! It ranks up there with condoning military torture.
This is a badly written book with few footnotes to back up criminal-minded opinions. China doesn't want to go to war with us--they want to make bucket loads of money. And who do you think holds our trillion dollars of debt? China. Who is our largest trading partner? China. People like Babbin like to rile the ignorant masses when he should be critically examining why and how China will be the next superpower and how we can work with them rather than preemptively cast doubt upon their intentions.
This proves that limits on free speech should be directed towards those who shout "Fire!" in a crowded buliding when there is no fire.
Why War With China May be Inevitable.......2007-06-08
This book takes an interesting look at the war imperative with China from a military perspective. In my own volume, I focus on the economics underpinnings of that conflict. Put simply, the battle for oil and other natural resources as well as access to markets will intensify as China continues its growth as an emerging superpower. See The Coming China Wars: Where They Will Be Fought and How They Can Be Won
Great If You like Tom Clancy, but comparing this book with Clancy is an insult to him.......2007-05-19
How this book passes for non-fiction or even a serious piece of lit on China is beyond me. I should have read more reviews and read some content from the book itself before ordering. Instead I glanced at the TOC and some reviews from this website. My career and education both pertain to China's rapid growth and I am always on the look out for books on the topic. This book insulted my own intelligence. The author never misses a chance to inject his own political views which become evident right away. I don't have a problem with views in a book but this was absolutely drenching with cheap shots. Eluding to Hillary Clinton as a witch leader (pg75 see end note) evoked more laughter than any serious thought. I am by far not a fan of the Senator from NY however there is no place for that in this book. If you would like a fictional account of war scenarios with China then great, get this book, but do not set your expectations too high for even that goal. The authors should stick to writing fiction. As a former JAG and former fighter pilot, the two authors are hardly in a position to provide anything approaching expertice on the issue. All of the war scenarios play out as follow: China incites hostile events in location A, US responds with either a "MOAB" or an "EMP" bomb, end of story. I don't want to discourage anyone from buying the book (I did notice it's price on here did drop several times over the last few weeks so it's a bargain) however, just do not take this book seriously or take it as seriously as the authors did. This book is junk.
Showdown: Why China Wants War with the United States .......2007-01-28
This is a book which tells me the real danger of Communist China.
Books:
- Operation Barbarossa in Photographs: The War in Russia As Photographed by the Soldiers (Schiffer Military History)
- Oral & Intravenous Bisphosphonate-Induced Osteonecrosis of the Jaws: History, Etiology, Prevention, and Treatment
- Palm Springs Modern: Houses in the California Desert
- Pearl Harbor: A Novel of December 8th
- Restoring Your Digestive Health: How the Guts and Glory Program Can Transfom Your Life
- Resurrecting Empire: Western Footprints and America's Perilous Path in the Middle East
- Room 40 : British Naval Intelligence 1914-18
- Salmon Without Rivers: A History Of The Pacific Salmon Crisis
- Shadow Divers: The True Adventure of Two Americans Who Risked Everything to Solve One of the Last Mysteries of World War II
- Sharpe's Enemy (Richard Sharpe's Adventure Series #15)
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- History: Fiction or Science
- Unearthed Arcana
- Patterns of Growth and Development in the Genus Homo
- Protein Crystallography in Drug Discovery
- Structural Steel Designer's Handbook
- Understanding Wood: A Craftsman's Guide to Wood Technology
- The Secundus Papyrus
- Palladio and Palladianism
- Pamphlet Architecture 25
- Changjiang san jiao zhou ji lin jin di qu bao zi zhi wu zhi
General
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Because They Hate: A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America
Infidel
The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion
America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It
Why I Left Jihad: The Root of Terrorism and the Return of Radical Islam
