Rating: 
Summary: Ultra Militarism At Its Worst
Review: A detailed blueprint for brutal imperialism. This text sets the stage for perpetual warfare and the constant manufacturing of security threats to achieve that end.
Rating: 
Summary: The neoconservatives demonstrate an unpalatable arrogance
Review: As someone who has met him, I can assure you that Lawrence F. Kaplan knows shockingly little about the Middle East, and he has no business writing (or even co-writing) a book on Iraq. Indeed, practically everything predicted in this silly little book has turned out to be wrong. And it was just published last year.
Rating:
Summary: Outdated a month after it came out.
Review: As someone who has met him, I can assure you that Lawrence F. Kaplan knows shockingly little about the Middle East, and he has no business writing (or even co-writing) a book on Iraq. Indeed, practically everything predicted in this silly little book has turned out to be wrong. And it was just published last year.
Rating:
Summary: Doctrine of Evil
Review: Dig below the surface and this book is Hitlerian doctrine gussied up with Democractic Mythology. A recipe for world disaster. Read only if you worship at the feet of Machiavelli.
Rating: 
Summary: Finally, a book that asks the missing Next Questions
Review: Either the "reader from New York City" below read a quite different book, or s/he is one of those unfortunates who has only one template (racism) for all social and political phenomena. This book takes a realistic look at the options available to advance our national interests (including the interests of all the "brown people" immigrants the reader below cites). It also considers the results of various choices the U.S. has made in the past, or can make now, and describes how those results lead to a need to make MORE choices. Some readers may disagree with its conclusions - that it is in the U.S. interest to intervene in Iraq actively and violently - but the book arrives at those conclusions after honest analysis.
Rating: 
Summary: Starts fast, gets boring pretty quickly, disappointing
Review: Following a boring intro, the first four chapters read almost like a good novel, but then it becomes rather pedantic. It doesn't appear to have been proof read, as mistakes such as having Saddam Hussein invading Iraq (probably meant Iran)and calling French President, Jacques Chirac, Prime Minister don't add to the scholarliness of this effort. The reference notes are only indexed by page and the reader has to search for or conclude, to what they refer.
Rating:
Summary: One Dimensional Pap
Review: I agree with the reviewers who say this work is simplistic dogma at best. In Kristol and Kaplan's world, global economics and world history play relatively little-to-no role whatsoever. Their work seems completely informed by the same sound-bytes we hear from our current Administration. While Sadaam Hussein present(ed) a grave danger to his people and the world, to overlook the role played by oil and global economics is simply ignorant and makes all their work a waste of time for anyone who wants to understand the whole picture. Funny, another reviewer mentioned he thought perhaps the authors don't really believe what they're saying. I thought the same thing. If you pick this one up, read it for what it is: a quaint heirloom depicting voices from a bad era.
Rating:
Summary: straigthening up facts
Review: I have just ordered the book and cannot yet offer a review. I selected "three stars" so I could post this comment.Just to clear things up, Rhea's assertion that the official Pentagon civilian death estimate in Iraq in case of a new war is 500,000 is not true. The Pentagon is not in the business of making public any such estimates. There is a UN estimate for refugees at 500,000 which may be confusing Rhea. You may attach to the UN whatever credibility you wish to. To scale the issue, even Hussein claims 3,000 civilian deaths during Gulf War I and he has every reason to exaggerate the number. Those represent 3,000 tragedies, but that number represents a two order-of-magnitude smaller figure than the 500,000 figure cited by Rhea for any future war. PBS's Frontline has shown that the estimates of the total number of military deaths in Iraq has dramatically decreased over time as people have more carefully considered the data. This was because equipment rather than troops were targeted. If war happens there are two factors that will tend to both increase and decrease the number of civilian deaths. If a war results in door-to-door fighting in Baghdad (let's hope not) this will certainly increase the number of civilian casualties. On the other hand, any new war would use a far greater number of "smart" bombs. That will tend to decrease accidental civilians casualties.
Rating: 
Summary: very informative and fair
Review: I have read a number of books on Iraq and Saddam over the last few months, but this little 130 or so pager is my favorite. It's detailed, intelligent and anything but dry. It draws a great picture about Saddam's unspeakable actions, and how Iraq has served as a foreign policy test of courage for both Clinton and the first Bush, both of who failed it miserably. It gives very close and fair attention to all arguments about Iraq and how to deal with Saddam. My favorite part of the book was the third and final section, which goes beyond Baghdad and explains how the Bush's new foreign policy will deal with the new threats of today, justifying it by drawing on history of the past 100 years.
Buy this book. You'll enjoy it and it won't eat up too much of your time.
Rating:
Summary: A Conservative perspective on invading Iraq....
Review: I read this book for information and to better understand the conservative position, thought, argument, and, for an overall insight on this subject matter.
The authors present their arguments well. They do support the invasion of Iraq to topple Saddam, destroy his internal "undemocratic ways", regime change to make the world safer without Saddam and the like.
Were the authors lack convincing points is in connecting the 9/11 incident to Saddam and/or any real terrorist networks. Also, although the argument is in support of invading the sovereign nation-state of Iraq, they fail to properly address the role of national sovereignty, domestic and international support or opposition, and international law.
I would recommend this book to readers who are interested in how conservatives view "the position" of invading Iraq. One doesn't have to support or oppose Kristol and Kaplan's arguments, only better understand their positions.
|
