Rating: 
Summary: Inside an Administration, 9-11, and the war in Iraq.
Review: The book by journalist Bob Woodward; who, along with Carl Bernstein, helped to cover the Watergate era, turns his attention to the current "President" and his motivations for war in Afghanistan and Iraq. The book does a fairly good job of describing the beginnings of the new administration, the reaction of key figures to 9-11, and the events that followed. It also gives a first look at the "mind" (collectively speaking) of the Administration, as what their response would be to Osama Bin Laden, the efforts to find him, the discussions, arguments and debates; within and among the different members, including Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Vice-President Cheney, and Secretary Rumsfeld. As Woodward points out, the latter two, along with Bush himself, were "beyond 'hell-bent'" to get Saddam Hussein out of power; even if it meant using 9-11; Afghanistan; Bin Laden, etc., as pretexts to invading Iraq (as I read it). It paints a more sympathetic image of Bush as a leader, following America's worst tragedy, that I didn't agree with (because of my political persuasion); which is not necessarily "pro-Bush". That aside, the Epilogue and Afterword help to put the book in context with current events. Presumably, his new book will be a little more critical of the Administration; in particular, of Bush. We shall see. I look forward to reading/buying it, at some point. I'd also recommend readers getting their hands on the Gulf War and Iraqi War "Readers"; which I have (both), to get a further understanding of the reason why this nation (i.e., the United States) finds itself in the current situation. The questions posed by the book are more than the "answers" it gives. In a larger context, one might ask: "Did Bush and company do the right thing-in Afghanistan, and ultimately, in Iraq? Time will tell and history will judge. Meanwhile, the book provides some insights into the "thinking" of the men, and woman (Rice) who are running our government and seeking to remain in office. God Bless America.
Rating:
Summary: Very Interesting
Review: This is 4 star writting by the great Woodward. But I think it was so important, as I read this book, not to forget that his conclusions were drawn from impressions he got from the principles; Mr. Woodward wasn't there. He told their story which I found interesting and an effective balance to those of Clark and Dean. All three should be read.
Rating:
Summary: An insightful, unbiased account of the White House
Review: Read this book with an open mind and you will discover that it offers a lot of insight into the workings of the White House after September 11th. I am no Bob Woodward fan, but he does a great job in this book of simply giving us a perspective (as opposed to his typical dirt-exposing) on the Bush presidency.Unfortunately, too many have apparently let their seething hatred for Bush to even pay attention to this book. It's a timely book to read, as well, because it directly contradicts the books of both Paul O'Neil and Richard Clarke. Bush truly was in charge and made decisions for himself, and truly was focused on Al Qaeda prior to 9/11.
Rating:
Summary: Bush at War in Afghanistan
Review: I picked up Bob Woodward's "Bush at War" when I was looking for an objective telling of how Bush got into and approached the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. There are too many partisan accounts that say Bush is all right or all wrong and I was looking for less politics and more information. This book provides that in great and sometimes tedious detail. This book is focused on the period from just before 9-11-01 to prior to the Bush administration's going to war in Iraq, but after the Congress gave the Bush administration the authority to unilaterally do what it felt was required there. The book ends with Bush awaiting UN enforcement of the many Iraq-related resolutions. This is 90% focused on Afghanistan, NOT IRAQ. Richard Clarke's highly critical book on Bush and his alleged lack of attention to terrorism prior to 9/11 came out while I was reading this book Surprisingly enough, Clarke is not mentioned at all in the Bush at War book in spite of his being the head of the Counter-Terrorism office in the White House. The first quarter of "Bush at War" did a nice job of taking me back to the emotional shock of the Trade Tower attacks and the virtually universal feeling in America of patriotism and joining together. The remainder of the story describes in repetitive detail the frequent meetings among the White House principals, (with and without Bush) regarding what kind of response was appropriate, what was achievable and when could it be done. Logistically they found it difficult to reopen old intelligence contacts in Afghanistan and get men and material over there. I was surprised out how difficult the logistics are in fighting a war all the way around the world. Woodward does not clear up the question of whether Bush was on point regarding terrorism prior to 9/11 but makes it clear that it was taken very seriously after, to the point where the subject honed Bush's vision of what he wants to accomplish with his Presidency. Some key points from the book. *Iraq is discussed in the White House early on after 9/11 but is not the main topic, Al-Quada is and the Taliban's support of them. The Taliban is not even the prime initial target for retaliation; in fact they are offered an out by turning over Bin Laden and the rest of the leadership. *This book does not make it clear that an Iraq invasion was on the Bush agenda upon inauguration. However, Rumsfeld suggests possibly attacking Iraq or somewhere in the Far East to demonstrate the far reach of the US military and to scare the terrorists, especially when it becomes clear that the military had no initial plan or assets to exploit in Afghanistan. No one else went for that idea. *Bush comes off as decisive, inclusive and even open-minded during the discussion phases. He is heavily involved in the "you are for us, or you are against us" position on terrorism that came out early after 9/11. He is involved in tactical discussions and keeps the team focused and confident. *Cheney and Rumsfeld are the uber-hawks, pushing the ultimately prevailing position that the possibility of a devastating second terrorist attack against the US, either domestically or internationally, required the adoption of the declared preemption policy. They are the prime proponents behind the decision to eventually invade Iraq. * Powell was not as much a part of the real inner circle as Cheney and Rumsfeld were (and are still). Powell is more independent and less trusted. This is more similar to an in-depth newspaper piece than a novel in terms of readability. Woodward could have described the discussions leading to policy formulation and then used hindsight to report where they were right or wrong. I would have liked more conclusions rather than just fact reporting. Another difficulty was keeping track of the passage of time. A timeline running along the top of the pages would have been helpful in this type of account. As it was I frequently had to flip around to reconfirm where I was in the calendar of events. Bottom line, "Bush at War" is a well researched book with good sources clearly evident, that is not pushing a political agenda. He needs to do another one focused on Bush in Iraq.
Rating: 
Summary: Even puff-pieces can serve history
Review: Thank goodness for this book, as it eloquently corroborates Richard Clarke's assertions that prior to 9/11, al-qaeda was not on Bush's radar, let alone his priority list. Despite fervent daily briefings from CIA director Tenet, and a strong warning from the outgoing Clinton administration, Bush himself admits in this book that he ignored the danger signs. Woodward must be a far-sighted genius, cleverly lulling an unsuspecting Bush into admitting it. Okay, actually neither Woodward or Bush had any idea at the time the quotes in this book would come back to haunt the administration, but there you have it. I understand that future printings of this book will have a title modification: "Bush (was a failure) At War." Proof that even puff-pieces like this have their purpose to history.
Rating: 
Summary: Total B.S.
Review: I found this book to be so biased and one sided, its not even funny! How can people support this ididot for re-election? Who in their right, common sense mind would want to re-elect this hardliner hawk? Bush and his cronies are guilty of illegally invading Iraq and causing the deaths of many american soliders as well as many innoncent iraq people. Why doesn't bush and his zombies go and fight on the front lines? Instead of sending young soldiers to fight his dirty war!
Rating:
Summary: Packed with Knowledge!
Review: This detailed account sometimes reads with the inside perspective of a Tom Clancy thriller. Famed Watergate reporter Bob Woodward's "fly on the wall" story relies on detailed accounts from excellent sources who were in the room when key decisions were made. This exposition lives up to his reputation, and even promotes it to another level - if there is one. He takes us inside the White House bunker, Camp David and the halls of political power. Sometimes you'll think you're reading yesterday's headlines, but the story is more interesting when Woodward tells it. His narrative line is strong and you never feel that he is pandering to an action-film audience. This volume's most important contribution is its colorful portrayal of the key decision makers and its insight into how things really worked in Washington at the nation's most critical moment. We highly recommends this book to anyone yearning for a deeper insight about the World Trade Center attacks and their continuing aftermath.
Rating:
Summary: Great Reporting
Review: Bob Woodward, as usual, has delivered us excellent reporting. This insiders account of the Bush Administration is very informative and revealing. A pretty good book.
Rating:
Summary: Don't hate the player, hate the material
Review: Woodward's writing seems the same as ever here; crisp, informative and objectively dry (read boring:-). My Woodward fave is "Veil," with its epic sweep and characters. This book is much more limited in scope and time frame. The subject matter in Bush at War is not that interesting; A new crew carries out a plan largely written during Clinton's tenure. And the players seem pretty dull... at least compared to, say, Kissinger or Casey. So Woodward is working with some stiff gray clay. Two main points stick with me from this book: 1. Bush really DID consistently make decisions - not Cheney or others. 2. Tenet's sweeping request for greatly enhanced CIA power was ALL okayed by Bush with a quick "okay." Woodward covers this decision for potentially pre-Watergate Agency power in about a page. The subtext of Bush's decision runs through the moves in Afghanistan; but I'd have enjoyed Woodward spending a few pages putting Bush's "nod" in a broader context. With some broader context, and more colorful (to me) players.... I'd add a fifth star.
Rating:
Summary: "That's alright. . .after all we're America."
Review: I took two things away from this book that can by summed up in two words: policy and personality. Bob Woodward used his amazing knack for access to secure interviews and transcripts of meetings---from the first 100 days after 9/11---which deliver a fly on the wall perspective to Bush policy and the personalities that drive that policy. "Fly on the wall" unfortunately also means that there's not much of a middleman between what's presented and the reader. By way of providing analysis and context, Woodward intentionally shies away from these authorly duties for the sake of impartiality. Although Bush at War doesn't have much of an author's voice, the principle's words speak louder, and inform deeper, than any author could. The personalities are what will stay with the reader, not so much the intricacies of the Campaign in Afghanistan. The basic dynamic of Bush's inner circle seems to be the unilaterally aggressive, military-minded elements including Cheney and Rumsfeld knocking heads with the more finessed, worldview sensibilities of Powell and Rice, with the President being in the middle but leaning toward the Cheney/Rumsfeld doctrine. One way to characterize this friction is as one of dominance vs. diplomacy. One of the more revealing quotes in the book is from President Bush. He surmised that in the course of the war on Terror our tactics would alienate us from the world community, but for him "that's alright. . .after all, we're America." If anyone harbors doubt that this administration has unilateral tendencies, this and other quotes dispel that doubt. Tempering this attitude in the administration, Powell and Rice believe that it is in the country's interest to bring the rest of the world along with our policies. They bristle at the dismissiveness of some and believe that hubris only weakens this country in the long term. While they see diplomacy as having preponderance over power politics, they do not see the latter as obsolete. Rather, it has a limited use in today's world order but is rarely the only option left us. A quote I like from Powell alludes to this perspective: "sometimes tough talk is necessary, but behind the scenes, it should not be substituted for policy." While Powell/Rice may be a counter weight to unilateral militarism, Rumsfeld/Cheney are two of its sources. Bush at War clearly shows their ideas manifested in this administration. The most revealing insight of this book shows just how, and more important, when the Iraq policy materialized. In fact, with transcripts of meetings and interviews with Rumsfeld himself, we see that on Sept 12---reflexively and without any evidence---Rumsfled urged the President to invade Iraq. This revelation could lead some to conclude that the desire to overthrow Saddam's regime in Iraq existed long before 9/11. And in fact, that conclusion is quite accurate, but you wouldn't know that for sure from this book since, as I said above, Woodward does not expound much of what is said in his book. Overall, an interested reader will find some nuggets of revelation in this book, but only after slogging through some dry text.
| 
