AMERICA'S SECRET WAR is a blow by blow account of the Bush regime's "war on terrorism." And while several chapters do offer valuable insights -- particularly the author's discussion of the war in Afghanistan -- overall, the book is a mine field. I cannot recommend it because the author, George Friedman, is either incredibly stupid in believing that a rag tag bunch of 19 jihadists using cell phones outsmarted the most sophisticated security establishment in the world on 9/11 -- or he is just downright devious.

In the intelligence world deception is a finely honed art. The game is played by subtly spicing truth with falsehood -- and there are enough examples in AMERICA'S SECRET WAR for us to suspect that George Friedman is spinning yarns. Allow me to be blunt: He is quite skillful in the art of lying.

Here are some examples:

Friedman mentions the US-Iran discussions that followed 9/11 -- but he fails to acknowledge that in 2003 Iran made a bona fide peace offer to the US that could have resulted in a comprehensive Middle East peace settlement -- IF the US had responded. Iran offered to cooperate in the Gulf, to disarm Hezbollah, to accept stringent IAEA oversight of its nuclear program, and even signed onto the 2002 Arab peace offer, indicating that Tehran was willing to live in peace with Israel -- provided the Palestinians received a measure of justice -- in the form of a state.

As we know, the National Intelligence Estimate in November 2007 provides strong evidence that the 2003 Iranian offer was genuine. The NIE concluded that Iran abandoned work on its BOMB program in 2003, which -- notice -- coincides with the date of the peace offer. The real question, which Friedman never mentions, is why the US rejected the Iranian peace offer out of hand.

Friedman also poo-poohs the 2002 Saudi peace offer, characterizing it as nothing but political posturing. He writes: "The Saudis had consulted nobody about the idea. which meant that this radical proposal didn't even have the backing of [prince] Abdullah's own government." (p. 244)

This is total BS. In fact, the 2002 Arab peace offer had the backing of every member of the Arab League -- and again -- could have become the basis for an Isareli-Palestinian peace settlement -- IF Israel and the US had responded favorably. Both, however, simply ignored it.

The Saudi Prince Abdullah actually went so far as to personally confront Bush about the Palestinian issue during his June 2002 visit to Crawford Texas. At that meeting Bush promised Abdullah that he would take steps to solve the Palestinian question. Of course, as we know, Bush did nothing of the kind -- because his idol Ariel Sharon opposed a peace settlement.

Friedman is also dishonest when he writes about an Iranian BOMB --as if Iran already had nuclear weapons. When in fact they did not -- and do not. There is no excuse for his getting this wrong. As a self-described intelligence expert Friedman should have known this. We must interpret this "error" as a case of calculated deception on his part.


Friedman's confused analysis of why the neo cons invaded Iraq fails to persuade -- and again -- we must conclude that the author is simply fibbing to us. Friedman fails to mention the obvious: that the war was largely about controlling Iraq's oil -- and had nothing to do with fighting terrorism. I would argue: It was also about destroying Iraq as a nation -- leaving Iraq prostrate so that it could never again challenge Israeli hegemony in the region. Now why couldn't an expert like Friedman simply tell the truth and state the obvious? Clearly, he has an agenda.

Friedman gives a really bizarre justification for the US policy of arming BOTH Iran and Iraq during the bloody war which raged between these two nations between 1980-1986. He states that if either Iran or Iraq gained "the upper hand in the region it would try to sieze part or all of Saudi Arabia." (p 253) Which, again, is total nonsense. Why couldn't the author simply state the obvious: The US pursued a wicked policy of bleeding and weakening both nations for its own selfish reasons -- and also to divert attention from Israel's continuing illegal occupation of Palestinian lands. It had nothing to do with protecting Saudi Arabia.

Friedman also repeats the lie that Saddam Hussein kicked out the UNSCOM inspectors in 1998. This lie has been told so frequently that it has taken on a life of its own. But Scott Ritter, the chief UNSCOM weapons inspector, knows what actually happened because he was there. According to Ritter it was Bill Clinton who ordered out the UN inspection team, on the eve of a major US bombing campaign in late 1998, Operation Desert Fox, which was an attempt by the US to assassinate Saddam Hussein. Indeed, this is why the Iraqi leader then refused to allow the inspectors to return. He correctly accused the US of using the UN inspection effort to gather intel about Saddam's whereabouts in an attempt to take him out. Ritter affirms this is what actually happened. Now, why couldn't Friedman get this right?

What is Friedman's agenda? We get a clue from the author's discussion about the Madrid bombings in March 2004, which he attributes to al Qaeda. Yet, today, we know al Qaeda had nothing whatever to do with that attack, which ocurred shortly before major elections in Spain. The bombing was almost certainly staged by operatives of the ultraconservative Spanish government then in power -- as a way of terrorizing the Spanish people into re-electing that same government. They blamed it on Basque separatists. Fortunately, the false flag attack failed. The Spanish people saw through it -- and voted out Bush's allies -- in the process, electing a new populist government that immediately fulfilled its promise to withdraw Spanish troops from Iraq -- consistent with the strongly anti war sentiment in Spain. Here, again, by misfiring, the author shows his true colors.

Friedman is the founder and chairman of STRATFOR -- which claims to be an independent intelligence agency. However, I suspect he has links to the Israeli Mossad and maybe even to the CIA. The reader should beware: Read the book with a discerning eye -- because the author weaves many falsehoods between the lines. He is a liar.

I highly recommend reading this book as one source in a broader study of US foreign policy since 2001. The author of this book, George Friedman, provides an interesting geopolitical explanation of the reason the US invaded Iraq under President George W. Bush as part of the broader war on terrorism. Even if one does not agree with Friedman's analysis, this book provides excellent insights into US foreign policy interests both in the Middle East and globally concerning the war on terrorism (including Afghanistan) that goes beyond events reported in the mainstream press. The book was published in 2004, so Friedman's analysis does not deal with events since that time. However, the book is still valuable for a different viewpoint into US foreign policy since 9-11-2001.

NOTE: the title of the book might give the impression that this is a conspiracy theory type book. Not so! Friedman provides background material and analysis from a geopolitical viewpoint. Since the geopolitical aspects of international events are rarely discussed adequately in the press, this book analyzes the reasons for US foreign policies that are rarely, if ever, reported in the press. Hence, the title "America's Secret War" concerning the war on terrorism. Friedman also provides insights into the security interests of other nations involved in this conflict, such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and others.

One drawback is that the author does not provide documentation for certain facts cited in the book. This is because the book focuses on his analysis of these facts. Still, providing references for these facts would make this book even better.

Dr. Friedman explains the birth of Al-Qaeda, the failures of U.S. intelligence, and the goals and objectives of both the Bush Administration and Al-Qaeda in this fascinating and well written book. You're not going get this analysis in the major media.

In short, Dr. Friedman says that the 9.11 attack was nothing really personal -- it was just a way for O.B.L. to unite the Arab world. The other main point: the invasion of Iraq was purely a strategic move to demonstrate the prowess of American forces to Saudi Arabia who was caught in the middle of Al-Qaeda on its turf and cooperating with its ally the U.S.

In the end he concludes that the U.S. is generally winning the war but only time will tell who the real winner will be (and there will not be clear winners).

George Friedman gives us a rare look behind the scenes of America's fight with radical Islam. It was fascinating to get a look at how the U.S. viewed acts of terror and terrorists in general before and after 9/11. Friedman goes into detail that you simply cannot get from watching the news or reading papers. For example, Friedman lays out many reasons for invading Iraq other than WMD's. These include: a need for an impressive military victory to send a message throughout the Arab world, a point of leverage to deal with Saudi Arabia, and the fact the Saadam was a brutal dictator. Friedman discusses the strengths and weaknesses of various U.S. intelligence and law enforcement services in great detail. He also explains why Al Qeada has been as successful as they have and what seperates them from other terrorist groups. The book takes the reader through the military operations and campaigns of the first three years in the global fight against terrorism. For a more specific look at Al Qaeda and the rise of radical Islam see Lawrence Wright's "The Looming Tower."

A few months ago, at the suggestion of a friend who is active in the American intelligence community, I subscribed to the Friedman's Stratfor email newsletter. In it I have found some of the best analysis out there. It consistently gives clear, concise, and factual explanations of world events--something that is very rarely found in the mainstream media today.

This book met the same high standard. The discussion covers the 9/11 attacks and the American response. Friedman attempts to cut through the fluff and public statements and looks at the hard geopolitical realities of the events, and he does an excellent job of doing so.

I was constantly impressed by the innovative explanations he develops. For example, he argues that a major reason for the Iraq war was to put greater pressure on Saudi Arabia to reign in Islamists. Another compelling idea is that the very purpose of the 9/11 attacks was to provoke an American overreaction, which would in turn help Islamists gain ground within the Muslim world.

[...]

Friedman's prose is succinct and readable, with the occasional entertaining anecdote to keep things interesting. This makes for a fast and enjoyable read.

My only criticism (and it is a significant one) is that Friedman does not cite any sources. There were many facts that I would like to have looked up, but I had no idea where he got his information.

Still, this was a tremendously good book. I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in America's contemporary foreign policy.

It was the best explaination of the history and events in the Iraq war

In "America's Secret War" author Dr. George Friedman lays out his thinking on the background of the Islamo-fascist terror war on the West, events that led up to the Iraq conflict, and events that have occurred there through the print date of 2004.

Dr. Friedman is certainly qualified to do so as the founder and Chairman of Strategic Forecasting (Stratfor), often described as the "Other CIA" with an excellent track record in geopolitical event forecasting.

The reader will enjoy Friedman's clear-thinking approach by a skilled intelligence analyst devoid of passion, which he correctly states is praised to much. It leads to loud noises and incoherence.

He treats all the powerful players on the world stage with respect, no matter how (apparently) inept or diabolical the reader may think they are. One must understand that these skilled and powerful players have a clear vision of how they think the world should look. He also correctly states that fools and psychotics do not accumulate and hold such power.

From there, Friedman leads the reader through the events of the on-going conflict, and his perception of the mistakes (along with many victories) that have occurred on all sides. He closes out the book with his ideas of the concepts needed for victory over this murderous enemy. The Main Stream Media of course, is basically both lazy and clueless, and the reader will learn of many events that were either unknown to the MSM or, if known, not reported.

As the thinking reader would expect, there are no references to sources, just as one would not expect sources to be listed in a classified report from a government intelligence operation.

As a subscriber to Stratfor, this writer found Friedman's book just an extension of the expected clear-thinking analysis that appears in his newsletter. Those with interest in geopolitical events, will find this book well worth the read, and I fully recommend it.

I was skepitcal about this book. I've read a lot on the war on terror, but no book has even come close to this. The last third of the book focuses, rightly, on Iraq. The author makes complex ideas easy to follow, like a good physics teacher. You will have an essential understanding not only of what's going on now, but the answers to the questions you've accumilated in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, the invasion itself, and the occupation since. From France to Fallujah. Not just a military history or study of tactics, though it includes both. But of the Psy ops, the diplomacy, the good the bad and the ugly. Never dry or dull. You will be pulled as if by a magnet to the end of the book. And most if not all the questions you had will be answered. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

Approaching this book requires an open mind, because George Friedman writes from a point of view completely independent of the Left or the Right. When reading "America's Secret War," you should neither expect the jingoistic rhetoric of a Sean Hannity or the conspiracy-mongering of the radical left. Indeed, the book should be titled, "America's 'Strategic' War," since the strategic aspects of the GWOT are uppermost in Friedman's mind.

If you can identify Friedman's "agnostic" view of the war (which appears in the Introduction), you will have a much greater enjoyment of this book. This view can be paraphrased in the following way:

-- America's leaders are not "fools"
-- While we may disagree with our enemy's morals, our enemy is rational
-- The world is a chess board, and we are all players in it

In other words, both sides of the War are engaged in a grand strategy, which is not always apparent, and is difficult to encapsulate in a few words. And, what's more, the dynamic of this grand strategy are as implicit and hidden, as the moves made by the players are indirect and opaque.

Considering this point of view, Friedman's book often requires a leap of faith that he knows the true reasons for the Iraq War, namely that it is more a War about Riyadh than it is of Baghdad. As a result, the reader is often left to accept that IT IS ALL ABOUT SAUDI ARABIA.

Suspend your disbelief while reading "Secret War," and you may be able to appreciate a completely different point of view on the Iraq War.

Approaching this book requires an open mind, because George Friedman writes from a point of view completely independent of the Left or the Right. When reading "America's Secret War," you should neither expect the jingoistic rhetoric of a Sean Hannity or the conspiracy-mongering of the radical left. Indeed, the book should be titled, "America's 'Strategic' War," since the strategic aspects of the GWOT are uppermost in Friedman's mind.

If you can identify Friedman's "agnostic" view of the war (which appears in the Introduction), you will have a much greater enjoyment of this book. This view can be paraphrased in the following way:

-- America's leaders are not "fools"
-- While we may disagree with our enemy's morals, our enemy is rational
-- The world is a chess board, and we are all players in it

In other words, both sides of the War are engaged in a grand strategy, which is not always apparent, and is difficult to encapsulate in a few words. And, what's more, the dynamic of this grand strategy are as implicit and hidden, as the moves made by the players are indirect and opaque.

Considering this point of view, Friedman's book often requires a leap of faith that he knows the true reasons for the Iraq War, namely that it is more a War about Riyadh than it is of Baghdad. As a result, the reader is often left to accept that IT IS ALL ABOUT SAUDI ARABIA.

Suspend your disbelief while reading "Secret War," and you may be able to appreciate a completely different point of view on the Iraq War.

"America's Secret War" is not for the politically inclined. It is for people who simply want to know what happened, and what is going on now. It covers events up to mid-2004 Iraq.

The book is a product of Dr. Friedman's private intelligence company, Stratfor. You should first understand Dr. Friedman's methodology, because the book contains no bibliograpy or references. From his website:

"Anomalies/pattern recognition - The team is focused on a constant pursuit of anomalies that contribute to the evolution of net assessment reports, a virtual model of the world and the interaction of all its parts. Our analysts begin each day by sweeping open sources - including printed and electronic news media, commercial databases, trade publications and human sources - seeking information that either reinforces or contradicts the net assessment or that brings forth new areas of inquiry.

Information architecture - Stratfor's detailed understanding of where information resides enables the company to gather sensitive information. Stratfor believes that most of the world's information is readily available through open sources and that which is secret can be inferred. The company, however, is not completely dependent upon digitized and printed information. Analysts also make use of unclassified reports that are not widely available and "proprietary and secret" information - classified and sensitive information that can be obtained legally."

As a Stratfor reader, I am satisfied that the information is valuable. I leave your own conclusions to you. That said...

...the reader of "America's Secret War" will come away with a few basic understandings:

-That al Qaeda is truly unique and very sophisticated, and not just another terrorist group like Hamas or Hezbollah or Abu Sayyaf. It's crucial to understand that al Qaeda has a specific history and specific goals. No matter our image of terrorism, underneath it is a visible, political agenda available to all willing to look. The diplomacy leading to the war in Afghanistan is quite a read, and was something of a miracle. Dr. Friedman also discusses the immense legal challenge of pursuing al Qaeda, as the 9/11 attack didn't fit any clear definition of acts of war or criminal acts on the books at the time. How we would pursue it would determine who would do the pursuing. This is why president Bush's frequent juxtaposition of "war on terror" and "bring them to justice" is more than a rhetorical problem.

-That the errors within our intelligence community were structural. Dr. Friedman spends a great deal of time exposing the shallowness of the claim that "our government knew about 9/11". There's a big difference between possessing data and having knowledge. We had not corrected the intelligence problem we discovered after Pearl Harbor, which the creation of the CIA was meant to solve. The fallacies of 100% source-based intelligence are discussed.

-That geopolitics regarding the Middle East are anything but simple. We still hold the idea that the Arab world can be explained with blanket statements, and that is dangerous. Al Qaeda was not liked by many of our enemies, who in turn don't like each other. The tangled, internal politics of Saudi Arabia is untangled for the reader.

-That the Iraq War was strategic, not about WMDs as was claimed, and not about oil, as is charged. Here is where the Stratfor reader will be at home, but the new reader will be greatly informed. You'll be given the immense, diplomatic and strategic reasons for our decision to go to Iraq. Whether or not you agree with it is left to you. Again, this is just an account of what happened, not what should or should not have happened.

There is no need to surround the events of the last few years with politics and conspiracy theories, as has become the popular standard. His book is not meant to draw you to any side other than the side of record, and thus dismisses the rhetoric we've all grown used to hearing. The political reality is introduced only where it has an actual effect on events; but its substance is the stuff of popular consumption and is properly dismissed as immaterial and misleading. Behind everything, even terrorism, are rational, political motives, and Dr. Friedman does a good job of presenting them.

"America's Secret War" is not for the politically inclined. It is for people who simply want to know what happened, and what is going on now. It covers events up to mid-2004 Iraq.

The book is a product of Dr. Friedman's private intelligence company, Stratfor. You should first understand Dr. Friedman's methodology, because the book contains no bibliograpy or references. From his website:

"Anomalies/pattern recognition - The team is focused on a constant pursuit of anomalies that contribute to the evolution of net assessment reports, a virtual model of the world and the interaction of all its parts. Our analysts begin each day by sweeping open sources - including printed and electronic news media, commercial databases, trade publications and human sources - seeking information that either reinforces or contradicts the net assessment or that brings forth new areas of inquiry.

Information architecture - Stratfor's detailed understanding of where information resides enables the company to gather sensitive information. Stratfor believes that most of the world's information is readily available through open sources and that which is secret can be inferred. The company, however, is not completely dependent upon digitized and printed information. Analysts also make use of unclassified reports that are not widely available and "proprietary and secret" information - classified and sensitive information that can be obtained legally."

As a Stratfor reader, I am satisfied that the information is valuable. I leave your own conclusions to you. That said...

...the reader of "America's Secret War" will come away with a few basic understandings:

-That al Qaeda is truly unique and very sophisticated, and not just another terrorist group like Hamas or Hezbollah or Abu Sayyaf. It's crucial to understand that al Qaeda has a specific history and specific goals. No matter our image of terrorism, underneath it is a visible, political agenda available to all willing to look. The diplomacy leading to the war in Afghanistan is quite a read, and was something of a miracle. Dr. Friedman also discusses the immense legal challenge of pursuing al Qaeda, as the 9/11 attack didn't fit any clear definition of acts of war or criminal acts on the books at the time. How we would pursue it would determine who would do the pursuing. This is why president Bush's frequent juxtaposition of "war on terror" and "bring them to justice" is more than a rhetorical problem.

-That the errors within our intelligence community were structural. Dr. Friedman spends a great deal of time exposing the shallowness of the claim that "our government knew about 9/11". There's a big difference between possessing data and having knowledge. We had not corrected the intelligence problem we discovered after Pearl Harbor, which the creation of the CIA was meant to solve. The fallacies of 100% source-based intelligence are discussed.

-That geopolitics regarding the Middle East are anything but simple. We still hold the idea that the Arab world can be explained with blanket statements, and that is dangerous. Al Qaeda was not liked by many of our enemies, who in turn don't like each other. The tangled, internal politics of Saudi Arabia is untangled for the reader.

-That the Iraq War was strategic, not about WMDs as was claimed, and not about oil, as is charged. Here is where the Stratfor reader will be at home, but the new reader will be greatly informed. You'll be given the immense, diplomatic and strategic reasons for our decision to go to Iraq. Whether or not you agree with it is left to you. Again, this is just an account of what happened, not what should or should not have happened.

There is no need to surround the events of the last few years with politics and conspiracy theories, as has become the popular standard. His book is not meant to draw you to any side other than the side of record, and thus dismisses the rhetoric we've all grown used to hearing. The political reality is introduced only where it has an actual effect on events; but its substance is the stuff of popular consumption and is properly dismissed as immaterial and misleading. Behind everything, even terrorism, are rational, political motives, and Dr. Friedman does a good job of presenting them.

"America's Secret War" is not for the politically inclined. It is for people who simply want to know what happened, and what is going on now. It covers events up to mid-2004 Iraq.

The book is a result of Dr. Friedman's private intelligence company, Stratfor. You should first understand how Dr. Friedman's methodology, because the book contains no bibliograpy or references. From his website:

"Anomalies/pattern recognition - The team is focused on a constant pursuit of anomalies that contribute to the evolution of net assessment reports, a virtual model of the world and the interaction of all its parts. Our analysts begin each day by sweeping open sources - including printed and electronic news media, commercial databases, trade publications and human sources - seeking information that either reinforces or contradicts the net assessment or that brings forth new areas of inquiry.

Information architecture - Stratfor's detailed understanding of where information resides enables the company to gather sensitive information. Stratfor believes that most of the world's information is readily available through open sources and that which is secret can be inferred. The company, however, is not completely dependent upon digitized and printed information. Analysts also make use of unclassified reports that are not widely available and "proprietary and secret" information - classified and sensitive information that can be obtained legally."

As a Stratfor reader, I am satisfied that the information is valuable. I leave your own conclusions to you. That said...

...the reader of "America's Secret War" will come away with a few basic understandings:

-That al Qaeda is truly unique and very sophisticated, and not just another terrorist group like Hamas or Hezbollah or Abu Sayyaf. It's crucial to understand that al Qaeda has a specific history and specific goals. No matter our image of terrorism, underneath it is a visible, political agenda available to all willing to look. The diplomacy leading to the war in Afghanistan is quite a read, and was something of a miracle.

-That the errors within our intelligence community were structural. Dr. Friedman spends a great deal of time exposing the shallowness of the claim that "our government knew about 9/11". There's a big difference between possessing data and having knowledge. We had not corrected the intelligence problem we discovered after Pearl Harbor, which the creation of the CIA was meant to solve. The fallacies of 100% source-based intelligence are discussed.

-That geopolitics regarding the Middle East are anything but simple. We still hold the idea that the Arab world can be explained with blanket statements, and that is dangerous. Al Qaeda was not liked by many of our enemies, who in turn don't like each other. The tangled, internal politics of Saudi Arabia is untangled for the reader.

-That the Iraq War was strategic, not about WMDs as was claimed, and not about oil, as is charged. Here is where the Stratfor reader will be at home, but the new reader will be greatly informed. You'll be given the immense, diplomatic and strategic reasons for our decision to go to Iraq. Whether or not you agree with it is left to you. Again, this is just an account of what happened, not what should or should not have happened.

There is no need to surround the events of the last few years with politics and conspiracy theories, as has become the popular standard. His book is not meant to draw you to any side other than the side of record, and thus dismisses the rhetoric we've all grown used to hearing. The political reality is introduced only where it has an actual affect on events; but its substance is the stuff of popular consumption and is otherwise immaterial and misleading. Behind everything, even terrorism, are rational, political motives, and Dr. Friedman does a good job of presenting them.

America's Secret War is a very well-written account of the ongoing war on terror. It's one of the more highly readable books on the topic. Friedman wraps Al Qaeda, the Cold War, 9/11, the wars on terror and Iraq in one neat little package. Friedman claims to have taken a "cold and clinical" approach to his subjects and in many cases this is true. However, at times it appears that Friedman gives the US and its enemies too much credit in having a totally coherent strategy in these wars. His analysis ties perhaps coincidental events together to continue his story.

The major flaw with America's Secret War is that it's hard to tell the difference between fact and Stratfor's analysis. This problem could be overcome by revealing sources, or at least providing a few footnotes and bibliography. However, Stratfor is in the business of providing corporate intelligence...like in any government's intelligence services, sources and methods are trade secrets. Friedman makes some bold assertions (such that the decapitation strike on Saddam was not based on any intelligence) that should be backed up by fact or stated that this is just his assessment.

Despite these flaws, this was a good read. Friedman's style is clear and concise. America's Secret War provides an interesting explanation of why we're at war with Iraq...much more believable than the WMD explanation given to the American people. If Friedman's correct, then this story needs to get out there. If he's wrong, well...his shadow CIA isn't much better than the real one.

I have read this book more than halfway now and have seen MANY inaccuracies in it. People who think this book is informative are so uninformed. There is so much proof of what did and didn't happen on 9-11 there should be no question now and this book does not have the facts.

I don't have much to add to the long 5-star reviews of this book on Amazon. One middle-star reviewer warned it was boring; on the contrary, I found it very gripping and a really a page-turner. Friedman "peels the onion" and reveals numerous pwerful dynamics lying behind many events of the 90s and the last five years. The audiobook version is excellently read with superb inflections and a 'you are there' cadence. You really feel as if the original author were the professional reader.

this book is perfect for anyone who wants an in-depth explanation for what is really going on and at stake in this war on terrorism. author seems to be un-biased and talks about positives and negatives of decisions and WHY! i love this book, interesting, intriguing, and extremely informative regarding the geo-political situation that america was in , but did not realize until 9/11. one should not be able to vote or debate until he or she reads this book!

I just finished a book I'd like to recommend to anyone interested in understanding the history and strategy behind the "War on Terror." George Friedman's "America's Secret War" is one of the most comprehensive and insightful analyses of warfare I have read. [Friedman is the founder and chairman of Stratfor, a leading private intelligence company - and I've found it well-worth subscribing to their e-mail reporting.] The beauty of the book is that it recounts the history of the bin Laden terror movement and the West's responses in synopsis form (354 pp), while laying out the strategic logic driving each side every step of the way. Although it's impossible to say that every interpretation of the strategic logic on each side is absolutely correct, the explanations all make sense in light of history as I understand it. Friedman pulls no punches when it comes to his critique of President Bush and his national defense team's handling of the war, for example:

"In the case of the Iraq campaign, the problem is compounded by the fact that the administration never made a clear public case explaining the connection between the campaign and the broader war. As Stratfor has argued, there was a clear concept driving the war, focusing primarily on Saudi Arabia. The administration's unwillingýness to articulate that connection publicly-its insistence that the war was about weapons of mass destruction or democracy-made it appear as if Iraq were a war in its own right, unconnected to the broader war. Thus, success or failure in Iraq became the definition of U.S. success in the broader war. The inability to articulate strategy led to the administration's inability to place Iraq in a broader context. In turn, it was impossible to explain the significance of the battles or justify the losses. The war became incoherent."

However, when you look at the complex problem of defeating Islamo-fascists as Friedman details it, you can't help but appreciate Bush's successes so far, given the uncertain and less-than-desirable menu of options on Bush's plate. For example, I believe that calling off the assault on Fallujah in April 2004 was a military counterinsurgency mistake of the first order; however, Friedman makes a persuasive case that curtailing the attack was just part of an effective military-diplomatic strategy to counter the Shiite leader Ayatollah al-Sistani's power play to subordinate U.S. policy to his design. Friedman is quite good at explaining the relationships and interaction of the multiple, diverse factions involved in this war.

The only factual error I found in the whole book was minor. Friedman misidentifies the USAF OSI as the Air Force's intelligence arm rather than it's Counterintelligence and Criminal Investigation service (p65).

Friedman writes in an understandable style that is very readable for the layman, although a general familiarity with world events since the 1979 Iranian Shiite Revolution is useful because the author does not spend much space rehashing the details of past history. This book was published in November 2004, so there is a year plus gap between the place where Friedman ends his analysis and the present. But I still find it very timely to put today's events in perspective and would strongly recommend it to all concerned Americans. It would greatly raise the level of discussion concerning U.S. policy for protecting ourselves and our civilization from the Islamo-fascists, if Americans were aware of the realities of our fight to the death with the Islamo-fascists, instead of just "sound-bite/bumper sticker-'Bush Lied'-wisdom."

Mr. Friedman does a magnificent job of illustrating to the reader a global perspective on the current war. If you could pick only one book to bring you up to speed on the what is really going on, this must be it. "America's Secret War" opens the readers eyes to what happens beyond 'media coverage' helping the reader to develope a global perspective which can be used to interpret future current events. In this book you will learn the origin of the current war. You will also discover the true goals of Al Quieda in their attacks of Sept. 11 and why they have failed. If you are truely interested in learning what is really going on and not a mindless follower of our media system, consider this book required reading.

This book is the best overview of the current situation regarding the US war on terror and the war in Iraq (the two are part of the same.) At some 350 pages or so it can't be hugely in depth, but it packs in a lot of punch, epxlaining all the major and important trends. The writing is concise, straight to the point and lucid. For me it wasn't boring at all, although at times the seriousness of our situation was more than sobering.

The book attempts to explain, in as unbiased a manner as possible, the strategic reasoning behind both America's and the terrorist's actions, how the war had its origins in the end of the Cold War, and how the two sides' strategies are playing out. It's an excellent primer for anyone who wants to know such things as:

- What is Al-Qaeda, how did it start, and what does it want? (Basically a reinstating of the Abbasid Caliphate. The Afghanistan victory against the Soviets convinced radical Islam that it had the power to do this.)

- What is Al-Qaeda's strategy for obtaining what it wants? (Don't expect any quarter or any scruples, their capabilities are limited so they make up for it with extremism, trying to provoke America into a much larger war with Islam in general. It's hard to deny someone a war when they want to kill you and try extremely hard to do so.)

- What is America's strategy for dealing with Al-Qaeda? (Al-Qaeda is designed to be extremely survivable. Defeating it won't be easy or quick and will require a large amount of sacrifice and patience. Its survivability limits its effectiveness though, ensuring a long campaign.)

- What role does the Iraq campaig play in the struggle? (It's become the equivalent of the Solomons campaign in the Pacific in WWII, or the battle of Stalingrad. It's losing its original strategic significance with both US and Al-Qaeda objectives being left unfulfilled, but it is becoming the campaign where the victor -although not the victory- is determined.)

- What role do the Saudis play? (They have to fight Al-Qaeda since that's where Al-Qaeda's funding comes from. This would mean a civil war in the country. The Government, which is very detached from the highly Wahabi population, is trying to avoid this at all costs dragging the problem along even more. Stagnation and failure in Iraq means the Saudis won't stand up to Al-Qaeda because they will feel Al-Qaeda is more powerful / has stronger will to fight than America.)

- What role does Iran play? (They hate us and want us destroyed. They hate Al-Qaeda too and want them destroyed. They are developing nuclear weapons. Worst case scenario? Play Al-Qaeda and America off each other, supporting both, one with weapons and the other with intelligence, and then step into the power vacuum.)

The book is history and analysis rolled into one, starting with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and going to the present day. As such the parts explaining the more distant past are better than the parts explaining the present, since hindsight is 20/20 and there is some significant uncertainty as to the current situation. This is certainly understandable and excusable, if not outright unavoidable. It's also a very realpolitik explanation, which at times can be a bit depressing since there's not much to be said about the human spirit in the realpolitik view. However, one should hope for the best but plan for the worst, and realpolitik certainly forces you to do the latter.

Americans should read this book so that they can understand just how difficult an enemy Al-Qaeda is, how limited America's choices really are, how effective our actions have been or have not been, and what the geo-politics of the mideast are. Once you have this necessary knowledge you'll be far more able to critically analyze the news and America's actions for fighting Al-Qaeda.

Definitely recommended.

I learned a lot from this book, I wouldn't read it for leizure unless you liked being bored to death

The cover describes Stratfor (the intelligence company Friedman founded) as a "Shadow CIA". By this book's description of the CIA, this implies it has a lot of details right but misses many important broad trends. The book tends to have weaknesses of this nature, being better as a history of Al Qaeda's conflict with the U.S. than as a guide to the future, but it's probably a good deal more reliable than CIA analysis.
It describes a few important trends that I wasn't aware of. The best theory the book proposes that I hadn't heard before is the claim that the U.S. government is much more worried about Al Qaeda getting a nuclear bomb than the public realizes (for instance, the Axis of Evil is the set of nations that are unable or unwilling to prove they won't help Al Qaeda get the bomb).
The explanation of the U.S. motives for invading Iraq as primarily to pressure the Saudi government is unconvincing.
The book's biases are sufficiently subtle that I have some difficulty detecting them. It often paints Bush in as favorable a light as possible, but is also filled with some harsh criticisms of his mistakes, for example:
"It is an extraordinary fact that in the U.S.-jihadist war, the only senior commander or responsible civilian to have been effectively relieved was Eric Shinseki, Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army, who was retired unceremoniously (although not ahead of schedule) after he accurately stated that more than 200,000 troops would be needed in Iraq"
But it's hard to place a lot of confidence in theories that are backed mainly by eloquent stories. It's unfortunate that the book is unable or unwilling to document the evidence needed to confirm them.