Rating: 
Summary: Fact-filled Account of the Planning of the War in Iraq
Review: This is the second book by Bob Woodward that I have read, the first being Bush at War. Those who were fans of that book will find this one interesting as well. It provides more insight into the inner-workings of the George W. Bush administration and the politics provide planning the first preemptive war in American military history.
I think the most important thing to note about this book is that Woodward provides a roadmap or diagram of the processes behind planning the war. He outlines the varying steps and decisions that had to be made along the way to go from the initial planning stages to the actual implementation and the first days and months of the War in Iraq. This book is NOT, however, an analysis of those decisions and the actors involved in the planning process. Those readers looking for a critique of the Bush administration should look elsewhere. This book is designed to provide the reader with the necessary information in order to reach their OWN opinion with no interference from the author.
That being said, this book offers incredible insight into Bush's cabinet, especially Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and, to a lesser degree, NSA Condi Rice and President George W. Bush. While Woodward was allowed to interview President Bush on two separate occasions for several hours each time, Bush is not the "strongest" character of the book. Instead, his cabinet members are flushed out considerably and their personal policy preferences become relatively apparent. Increasingly apparent is how the administration pushed aside the views and preferences of Secretary of State Colin Powell in favor of the apparent fervor of going after Iraq displayed by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney.
At almost 450 pages, the book does get tiresome, especially because it is, simply put, a timeline of events throughout the months leading up to the start of the war. Towards the end of the book I was ready to be done with it so I could move on to something else. This may be do to my poor attention span rather than the book itself. Never the less, this book offers an insight into the decision-making process of the administration. Since Woodward does not interject his own opinion throughout the book, it allows the reader to form their own opinion. This should also lend some credibly to the book and should be accepted by both the left and the right as an accurate account and description of the current administration.
Rating: 
Summary: Woodward has hit another home run
Review: What a great follow up to Woodward's "Bush at War".
Woodward continues to be effective at keeping his bias in check. He presents the information in a responsible manner, showing great intellectual honesty. Don't expect this book to parrot the typical partisan perspectives - what you will experience is the current administration and world leaders as humans with their convictions and failings.
I knew I wanted to read this book after reading the last Woodward book, but when I saw Woodward being interviewed about "Plan of Attack" by Larry King - and watched him prevent various callers from twisting his words to suit their political purposes, I knew that I had to read this book immediately!The book held quite a few surprises, getting some intimate revelations from the likes of Ellie Wiesel and Saudi Prince Bandar and others of world reknown. The mechanics of going to war were also unexpected, much of it revolving around General Tommy Franks and his dealings with the Pentagon and the combat institutions. If you enjoyed "Bush at War", then this book is required reading!
Rating:
Summary: Read It!
Review: While it was clearly not written as an anti-Bush polemic, this book is nonetheless disturbing. It gives the reader an inside track of an administration that was obviously obsessed with starting a war with Iraq. It is clear that the intelligence supporting WMD and the Iraqi/Al Qaeda link was vaporous, and that the claims of the Administration were grossly embellished. Woodward leaves no doubt in my mind that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al were all aware of the fact that the intelligence was insufficient to support either their claims of WMD in Iraq or an Iraqi link to international terrorism. What is unanswered is why they were so doggedly determined to place tens of thousands of Americans in harm's way while diverting attention and resources from real and necessary counterterrorism efforts. Was it because they believed that an invasion of Iraq would be a political quick win -- to impart a sense of security (albeit a false one) to millions of frightened post 9/11 Americans by demonstrating "resolve" and attacking (in a manner sanctioned by the Al Saud family, of course) an Arab nation? Was it because of concerns over the long term viability of the Al Saud family and the perceived need to install a puppet government in Iraq to secure a source of oil in the inevitable event that the Al Sauds are overthrown by Saudi Arabia's Islamist majority? Or was it to vindicate Dubya's daddy? Can one really believe that the war with Iraq will somehow bring stability to the Middle East? I would like to think that Woodward's book will stimulate readers to question the real motives of the second Bush Administration, although I am less than optimistic that this will happen. Hopefully we will all learn the answers sooner than later, however. Whatever the reasons, after having read Plan of Attack, it is more obvious to me now than ever before that the Bush Administration lied to and played upon the fears of Congress and the American people to legitimize its own political agenda. And while some may excuse Bush's actions as demonstrating resolve and others (including Dubya himself) may call it divine influence, to my way of thinking, it is insanity.
Rating:
Summary: methods and rewards
Review: Woodward will probably go down in history as one of the journalists with the most access to the most people in Washington. Part of the reward of reading his books is having a 400+ page glimpse into how the "transparent" world of the federal government actually works.
"Plan of Attack" will give pause to both sides of the debate on the Iraq War. Not only does it show the importance of gambling on intelligence and betting on diplomats' and other executives' stances in the matter of war, but it also shows how strong Bush case was at different points along the road to toppling Saddam. In many ways this book unearths what should have been on the table months prior to going to war. And part of the journalist in me wonders why he didn't break confidentiality to get some of the news to the people who needed it most -- the average citizens most affected by the war (Granted this would have made Woodward liable under Cohen v. Cowles).
His on-background methods, both a hallmark and, some would say, watered down writing of history is as rewarding as it is frustrating in his reconstruction the he-said, she-said politics in the run up to the war. But for anyone who enjoys Woodward's strong writing and compelling story telling, "Plan of Attack" is a "slam-dunk" read.
Rating:
Summary: A private war
Review: Woodward's new book, based on interviews with 75 White House insiders--including the President--is a chilling example of what happens when the Chief Executive of the most powerful country in the world decides he's going to war--or, as Condoleezze Rice puts it, engages in "coercive diplomacy." According to Woodward, Bush decided as early as November 2001 to wage war against Iraq, and diverted several hundred millions of dollars from the Congressional Afghanistan campaign appropriation to develop war plans. None of the inner circle except Rice was informed of the President's plans. He told Woodward that he didn't feel the need to discuss the plans because he knew his people were on board. Desperate for a way to sell the war to the American public, Bush pressed George Tenet for assurances that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. Tenet gave the thumbs-up (himself, no doubt, feeling pressure to provide the answer Bush wanted), and the war was just a matter of time. Whenever counterevidence to Tenet's insistence that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction showed up--as with Hans Blix's UN reports--senior advisors to the President accused the authors of the reports of deliberate deception. One of the surprising themes in Woodward's book is just how intent George Bush was on waging war with Iraq. The story on the street, of course, is that Bush was manipulated into war by his senior advisors. But if Woodward is correct, Bush played this one himself. He was undoubtedly influenced by people like Cheny and Rumsfeld, but he made the decision himself. He wanted a war, and he got it. This book deserves to be read alongside other recent ones: John Dean's _Worse than Watergate, for example, or Ron Suskind's _Price of Loyalty_. Thought the imperial presidency died with Richard Nixon's resignation? Think again.
|
