Bush at War
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sort customer reviews by: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Show All Reviews on Page
Hide All Reviews on Page
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Bush at War | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Bush at War focuses on the three months following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, during which the U.S. prepared for war in Afghanistan, took steps toward a preemptive strike against Iraq, intensified homeland defense, and began a well-funded CIA covert war against terrorism around the world. The narrative is classic Woodward: using his inside access to the major players, he offers a nearly day-by-day account of the decision-making processes and power battles behind the headlines. Woodward's information is based on tape-recorded interviews of over a hundred sources (some unnamed), including four hours of exclusive interviews with the president, along with notes from cabinet meetings and access to some classified reports.
Woodward's analysis of President Bush's leadership style is especially fascinating. A self-described "gut player" who relies heavily on instinct, Bush comes across as a man of action continually pressing his cabinet for concrete results. The revelation that the president developed and publicly stated the so-called Bush Doctrine--the policy that the U.S. would not only go after terrorists everywhere but also those governments or groups which harbor them--without first consulting Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Colin Powell, or Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is particularly telling. Other principals are examined with equal scrutiny. Though National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice emerges as soft-spoken and even tentative during group meetings, it becomes clear that Bush is dependent on her for candid advice as well as for conveying his thoughts to his cabinet. The relationship between Powell and Rumsfeld (and to a lesser degree Powell and Cheney) is often strained, exposing their differences regarding how to deal with Iraq and whether coalition building or unilateralism is most appropriate. Woodward also describes how CIA director George Tenet prepared a paramilitary team to infiltrate Afghanistan to set the groundwork for invasion, and how this ushered in a new era of cooperation between the defense department and the CIA. A worthwhile and often enlightening read, this is a revealing and informative first draft of the Bush legacy. --Shawn Carkonen |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Reader Reviews 1 - 3 of 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Review Date |
Review Rating(5 High) |
Review Helpful to: |
Customer Review | Reviewer Info |
Permanent Link |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Reader Reviews Below Sorted by Newest First | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 06-22-09 | 3 | (NA) |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
One can say that the difference between a newspaper and a history book is that a newspaper is useless the next day, but a history book stays relevant for years afterwards. Following this logic, I would classify Woodward's "Bush at War" as closer to a newspaper than a history book. Reading it in 2009, the contents of this book are essentially old hat; no great insight, no stunning revelations that has not already been expounded upon in other books or in other news media. Even the context of the book; a recount of the first 100 days after the 9/11 attacks, lacks depth and critical analysis. There is no mention of the "Project for the New American Century" and how many of the decisions within the first 100 days stem from this critical document. There is also little mention of what goes on between Congress and the Bush White House. The passage of the Patriot Act gets minimal coverage; even though it was probably the biggest piece of legislation passed in that first 100 days. So too are the details of the anthrax attacks; a reporter of Woodward's salt should have suspected something when the the two key roadblocks of the Patriot Act in the US Senate, Daschle and Leahy, were the only government recipients of the anthrax letters. So overall, an OK book. I expected better from such a respected author.
(Review Data Last Updated: 2009-08-13 00:46:17 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 03-19-09 | 3 | (NA) |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I wouldn't describe this as the best book I have ever read, however, it did give me a great deal of insight as to what occurred in the White House after 9/11. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the war in Afghanistan.
(Review Data Last Updated: 2009-06-22 14:49:12 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 01-27-09 | 4 | (NA) |
| Reviewer | Permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is a behind the seens picture of how the Bush Administration reacted to the events of 9/11/01. Bush did not initially want to do nation building but in the wake of 9/11/01, they were forced to do so by the conflict in Afghanistan with the Taliban and al Queda. Woodward gives us a picture of an administration that didn't want to analyze things too closely and chose instead to take drastic action and overthrow the Taliban regime. At the end, they consider Iraq as also an ally of the terrorists and start planning for the Iraq War of 2003. This book gives the reader an inside view of the major players in the Bush Administration.
This is a very readable book about the conflict in Afghanistan. I found this highly interesting in how the future conflict in Iraq is pictured. In this book, you see how the Bush Administration guided itself into conflict with the rest of the world by its go it alone strategy. A great read. (Review Data Last Updated: 2009-03-29 14:51:41 EST)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Reader Reviews 1 - 3 of 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
