Rating: 
Summary: Strategic Context for Understanding 11 Sep Attack on America
Review:
Of all the books I have read or reviewed in the past two years, this is the only one that comes close to addressing the bitter truth about the fundamental disconnect between our perception of ourselves as "the beacon of truth", and the rest of the world's perception of us as "interventionist, exploitative, unilateralist, hegemonic, and hypocritical." Those that would seek to understand just how long our Dark Ages will last would do well to start with this book while also buying a copy of the map of "World Conflict and Human Rights Map 2000" available from the PIOOM Project at Leiden University. Beyond that, selected portions of the Shultz et al book on "Security Studies for the 21st Century", where detailed comments are made about both knowledge gaps among our policymakers and non-traditional threats, are recommended.
There is no question but that the Attack on America of 11 September 2001 has awakened and even frightened the American public. It has elicited conventional assurances from other nation states. What most Americans do not understand, what this book makes brilliantly clear, is that two thirds of the rest of the world is glad it happened. I quote from page 52: "...at least two-thirds of the world's people--Chinese, Russians, Indians, Arabs, Muslims, and Africans--see the United States as the single greatest threat to their societies. They do not regard America as a military threat but as a menace to their integrity, autonomy, prosperity and freedom of action."
Whether one agrees with their depiction of two-thirds or not (or whether they see the Attack as a well-deserved bloody nose or an atrocity beyond the pale), the fact is that the authors paint--together with the PIOOM map--a compelling picture of billions--not millions but billions--of impoverished dispossessed people suffering from failed states, crime, slavery, starvation, water shortages--and an abundance of media as well as propaganda showing the US fat and happy and living the consumer society dream on the backs of these billions.
Of all the policy people I have followed over the years, Robert McNamara and Bill Colby are the two that have in my view matured and broadened the most after leaving the halls of power. The deep insights that I find throughout this book-a partnership expert between McNamara with the global reality and power game insights, James Blight with the scholarly underpinnings-are extraordinarily applicable to the challenges that we face in the aftermath of the 11 September 2001 Attack on America. In particular, their dissection of the United Nations-what works and what does not-and their recommendations for future initiatives that are multilateralist and focused on the prevention and amelioration of the root conditions that are spawning our terrorist challenges, are vital reading for policymakers, diplomats, warriors, and financial magnates.
I am very concerned by any effort to militarize our response to the terrorist challenge-this is a long war that requires a fundamental restructuring of national intelligence and counterintelligence; a $100 billion a year effort to address the root causes of instability worldwide and a redirection of US foreign and defense policy away from unilateralism (for instance, we must now support the International Tribunal and an international island prison for those convicted of war crimes as well as acts of terror). Our military is still needed, but it too must be restructured to provide for four major capabilities all equally capable: CINCWAR, CINCSOLIC, CINCPEACE, and CINCHOME. I can only hope that this book, which I recommend highly, is read and understood before we start to throw money at the problem in counterproductive ways.
Rating:
Summary: That Their Pain Will Not Be In Vain
Review: I am not a student of history or war, but a therapist to people who have participated in the horror of it. As enlisted men, officers and even former enemies they got past it, but never got over it. The soldiers and officers I have seen have been unable to effectively keep the "code of silence" that plays up the glory and plays down the gory details of war to others and more costly to themselves. What started as a leak into their dreams and daytime activities slowly but inexorably metastasized throughout their lives leaving any chance for peace of mind in its wake.
Many of them were initially seduced and then addicted to the excitement of war not realizing until too late how the thrill of an adrenaline rush is only exceeded by the devastation from an adrenaline crash.
The psychological devastation that war causes is not knowing how to proceed after you've become aware that as invincible as you thought you were was as vulnerable as you turned out to be; as bulletproof as you thought your were was as fragile as you turned out to be; and as certain as you thought your were was as wrong as you turned out to be. How do you move forward with these realizations playing like an unending tape loop in your head? Add to this the bewilderment about what the war was about anyway.
A few years ago one of these patients summed up war this way: "The seducing, using, and in the end discarding of young men to wage a battle between the egos of older men who in the name of God desperately try to hold onto power they never deserved to have in the first place."
McNamara's book is not just pungent and poignant, it is a poultice of validation that what these people must live with in their imaginations in not imaginary. And maybe, just maybe that the pain they still endure will not be in vain.
Rating: 
Summary: Spooky in a Nice Sort of Way
Review: I do not know who wrote the prolog to this book, but it has got to be the most painful 20 minutes of my life. It was really bad, getting through it was like dragging a full size refrigerator loaded with lead blocks through a swap while wearing a chicken suit and snowshoes. The good new is that the rest of the book was nothing like the prolog. The book gave an interesting and I felt bit simplistic and idealist view of how American and the rest of the world (UN) should conduct foreign policy. The liberal in me was happy with the suggestions, but the realest in me just can not get around thinking that no matter how noble the ideas there would be someone out there that would take advantage of us.
McNamara fills the book with interesting stories about his time as Defense Secretary and I found these items the most enjoyable of the book. He covered a good deal of information on his view of the Cuban Missile crises and why we got into Vietnam in the first place. If there is value in the book then this is where it was. Overall the book was well written, except the prolog, and easy to read. The authors expressed their views well and with conviction. It was just that I kept thinking that this is never going to work in the real world. I would agree with another reviewer here that if you are looking to just get the highlights of the book chapter five is the place to start and finish.
Rating:
Summary: Spooky in a Nice Sort of Way
Review: I do not know who wrote the prolog to this book, but it has got to be the most painful 20 minutes of my life. It was really bad, getting through it was like dragging a full size refrigerator loaded with lead blocks through a swap while wearing a chicken suit and snowshoes. The good new is that the rest of the book was nothing like the prolog. The book gave an interesting and I felt bit simplistic and idealist view of how American and the rest of the world (UN) should conduct foreign policy. The liberal in me was happy with the suggestions, but the realest in me just can not get around thinking that no matter how noble the ideas there would be someone out there that would take advantage of us. McNamara fills the book with interesting stories about his time as Defense Secretary and I found these items the most enjoyable of the book. He covered a good deal of information on his view of the Cuban Missile crises and why we got into Vietnam in the first place. If there is value in the book then this is where it was. Overall the book was well written, except the prolog, and easy to read. The authors expressed their views well and with conviction. It was just that I kept thinking that this is never going to work in the real world. I would agree with another reviewer here that if you are looking to just get the highlights of the book chapter five is the place to start and finish.
Rating:
Summary: Do the authors follow their own advice?
Review: I thought this book was amazing until I got to the material added after 9 / 11. For all of the authors' talk about empathizing with the enemy, their discussion of misunderstandings between Americans and the Muslim world, particularly the fundamentalists responsible for terrorist attacks, smack of the essentializing moves that created such a dangerous situation in the first place. There are two pages that seem a variation on the "He said" "She said" dialogue.
However, the IDEAS here are wonderful. This book needs to be read by anyone concerned with our present and future.
Rating: 
Summary: Too idealistic for a practical peace
Review: I was expecting more. McNamara uses his personal experiences especially during the Kennedy and Vietnam era as an argument for a lot of his arguments. While these serve to give a first hand view of the problems they add little to the arguments presented. The problem lies not as much with the overly idealistic and optimistic desires of the authors but with the lack of any constructive method to reach those ideals. The fact that you want peace and think that if everybody else would commit to wanting peace too then that would solve the problem does not make for a serious discussion of how to bring peace about. In the beginning of the book McNamara says the ideas presented are to spark discussion and debate to bring about a change for a more peaceful world. I don't know if this book adds much to the discussion other than an idealistic desire. I give the book a C- on the StuPage Book Reviews.
Rating:
Summary: Heed Proverbs 20: 29!
Review: In this short book, former Defense Secretary, Robert S. McNamara, and Brown University Professor James G. Blight provide a blueprint for future American foreign policy designed to avoid the carnage of the 20th century that left an estimated 160 million people dead. Using the metaphor of America being haunted by the ghost of President Woodrow Wilson, whose warnings were ignored after World War I (WWI), they, like Wilson, warn that the failure to insure harmonious international relations will cause a war of apocalyptic proportions. They propose a five-step program that includes: Only multinational interventions by the U.S. Full reconciliation with Russia and China Restructuring the U.N. Defining, deterring and punishing war crimes The total elimination of nuclear weapons worldwide What can a long dead president from a bygone era, the architect of America's failed policy in Vietnam, and/or a professor from academia contribute to real-world decision makers today? The Holy Bible says in the book of Proverbs, Chapter 20, Verse 29, "The glory of young men is their strength; of old men, their experience." The strong, young men of Wilson's day did not listen to him. As he predicted, a second world war, more deadly and destructive than the first, was the result. Wilson's warnings are more poignant today than after WWI. In 1919, the world had the capability of destroying continents. We now have the capability to destroy all life on this planet. McNamara and Blight, offer a plan to reduce the chance of genocide and nuclear holocaust. Given the explosive nature of international conflicts today, the proposals of these wise, old, men deserve serious consideration if mankind is to survive.
Rating:
Summary: Sobering thoughts on peace
Review: McNamara and Blight have crafted a clear and persuasive argument for avoiding the carnage of 20th century wars that took some 160 million lives, left many more injured, and caused hundreds of billions of dollars of destruction. They ask: How can we avoid a similar fate in the 21st century? An analysis of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson vision for the 20th century in the aftermath of the First World War serves as a starting point. The authors endorse Wilson's realization of the unimaginable disaster that awaits humanity if we do not create the climate and institutions for peace. They also admire his moral approach, his notion of peace without defeat, and his multilateral approach envisioned in the League of Nations. However, there is also Wilson's ghost - his promotion of fragmenting national self-determination, his sometimes patronizing moralism, and his failure to persuade the Senate and the American people to abandon a unilateral approach to foreign affairs. McNamara and Blight adopt two imperatives. The moral imperative for U.S. foreign policy is to avoid in the 21st century the carnage caused by conflict in the 20th century. The multilateral imperative is to refrain from using our economic, political, or military power unilaterally, other than in defense of the United States itself. The authors suggest three steps as essential to securing peace in the 21st century. First, we must prevent great power conflict. This can only come if we truly seek to understand and appreciate the perspectives of other nations, especially Russia and China - what the authors call empathy. Second, we must reduce communal killing by intervening in "dangerous, troubled, failed, murderous states." This would involve a standing United Nations pacification military force of at least 10,000 trained troops on stand-by for immediate mobilization. It would also involve planning and cooperation with other nations that understand the roots of the conflict or have interests in the region. It would involve taking sides in conflicts on the side of human rights and the realization that it might take years, even decades, to stabilize a war-torn area rather than go for a quick fix. Finally, the policy would involve realization of the limits of military force in resolving some conflicts, that is, a realization that sometimes, external force only makes matters worse. Third, the policy should be to avoid nuclear catastrophe by "moving steadily and safely to a nuclear-weapons-free world. The authors are realistic. In a world with no nuclear weapons there would always be the danger of cheating or breakout from nuclear restraints. However, the dangers of the present situation with thousands of nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert far surpass the dangers in a weapons-free world. The authors argue, that no matter how long it takes, our policy objective must be total elimination of nuclear weapons. The book is somewhat repetitious. If you want the gist of the argument, go to the ten-page chapter 5 "Reducing Human Carnage, An Agenda for the 21st Century." On the other hand, McNamara's extended comments on the decision making involved in the Cuban missile crisis and the Vietnam War greatly enhance the value of this volume. A sobering and challenging book that we would all do well to ponder.
Rating:
Summary: Enlightening international solutions.
Review: Mr. McNamara and Mr. Blight present the 21st century's three
major international problems to be solved if we are to have an
earth to live on. It is amazing how close we live with the possible daily nuclear destruction of our planet. This book shows the arrogance
America possesses in its international operations and what we must do to combat it. I am not so sure what is being proposed by these two is in the realm
of reality. They have provided the road map for peace, but I know
of no nation or people that are politically ready to follow it. I'm sure
the ignorance of the world's people will lead to a nuclear holocost
and the dawn of a new race of homosapiens. This is an excellent
read and recommended for those of you interested in international
operations.
Rating:
Summary: Studying the means of avoiding war and sustaining peace
Review: The collaborative effort of Robert S. McNamara (educator, businessman, and Secretary of Defense to Presidents Jack Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson), and James G. Blight (Professor of International Relations, Watson Institute for International Studies, Brown University), Wilson's Ghost: Reducing The Risk Of Conflict, Killing, And Catastrophe In The 21st Century is a clear, hard look at the twentieth century as being the bloodiest era in the whole of human history, with over 160 million people worldwide as victims of wars and other armed conflicts. Studying the means of avoiding war and sustaining peace, and presenting a plan to realize Woodrow Wilson's dream of a peaceful planet, McNamara and Blight cogently set forth a radical means to reducing the bloodshed and progressing toward a more enlightened future. Wilson's Ghost is very highly recommended reading and a welcome addition to personal reading lists and academic Peace Studies reference collections.
| 
