Against All Enemies: Inside America's War On Terror (Thorndike Press Large Print Americana Series)

Rating:
Summary: Disappointing memoir of a White House bureaucrat
Review: This book caused such a stir in the fall of 2004 that I assumed it must be packed with engaging insights into the war on terror. Instead it seemed to be the daily meetings, musings and conversations of a disaffected Washington bureaucrat. There is very little new you will learn from this book. I actually think the author (or perhaps his editors) primed the book exclusively for release during the 2004 election, and as a result post-election it reads a bit like a deflated balloon.

The last chapter - the one in which he claims he will reveal how the war on terror could be won - was the chapter I had hoped would save the book for me. But instead of providing brilliant insight and direction, the author goes on what seemed to be a very personal tirade against the Bush administration without ever offering any actual advice (oh, watch out for Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran). By the end, I could begin to understand why his role within the White House was demoted in 2000.

Perhaps the most revealing comment was his soft assertion that somehow if only he had been invited to brief the cabinet in January instead of August of 2001, 9/11 might somehow had been averted.

Anyway, I recommend you pass on this one. Very, very disappointing.


Rating:
Summary: This man was ignored, by the Bush White House, to our peril
Review: This thoughtful, cogent, analysis of how the United States; culminating in the attacks on 11 September (September 11 or 9/11) 2001 might have been, if not prevented, at least, better handled by the Bush (II) Administration. Although Mr. Clarke cites instances, from Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush, where ineffective responses to e.g., the Cole, Khobar, and Beruit, led to the emergence of groups, like Al-Qaeda; and the unfortunate incidents which "tied up" the Clinton Administration's efforts to "get Osama/Usama Bin Laden" fell short, he describes how the arrogance and ignorance of this Administration (Bush II) help to prevent the capture and killing of Bin Laden and his deputies (a point that has been consistently, and rightly, made a campaign issue of in 2004, by John Kerry) and although nothing might have been done to completely prevent 9/11, the officials of the incoming administration, e.g., Condoleezza (Condi) Rice, might have helped in approaching the problem to "head off" (as much as possible) the potential for attack. Also, Mr. Clarke's analysis that the idea to invade Iraq (led by Richard B. [Dick] Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and others, became a higher priority than dealing with Osama/Usama Bin Laden [another Kerry point]). It's unfortunate that more people haven't read this book, as well as the 9/11 report, and related books prior to this coming election. If they had, the people who will help reelect (possibly) the same Administration who's action, or inaction, in dealing with Al-Qaeda, and subsequent and mistaken invasion of Iraq, have put this nation on, contrary to Mr. Bush (the younger) and company, a "less safe" world "footing". It is unfortunate they will make the 2nd biggest mistake in recent history (the first being 2000) and it will be unfortunate that this book in hindsight (always 20-20?), like Mr. Clarke, will have gone (largely) ignored, much to the U.S.'s continuing (and then) peril. God Bless [and Help] America.

Rating:
Summary: Where Was Mr. Clarke?
Review: When Bill Clinton chose to make those pin-prick cruise missile strikes on empty terror camps in Afghanistan and on an alledged pharmaceutical factory in the Sudan. And where was Mr. Clarke when Bill Clinton chose to send in B-52s to incinerate 2000 non-terrorist pro-American Serbs instead of sending them (or special forces) off to the mountains of Afghanistan?

Clinton, preoccupied with saving his a** after the impeachment hearings chose to make an Impeachment war over Kosovo, but Richard Clarke (and I don't question his patriotism, or what he did try to do - only where his fingerpointing should have been made) fell into lockstep with Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Sandy Berger, and the rest who are much more responsible for ignoring the threat of Al Qaeda than the Bush Administration (remember, Clinton had 8 years to deal with Osama - and Richard Clarke, if anyone should know that well)

Richard Clarke occupied the same Oval Office that Oliver North once worked out of. There the similarity ends. Yes, President Reagan, God Bless Him, should be rightly blamed for not dealing with terrorists after the bombing of the Marine barracks. But he does deserve credit, as does Colonel North, for the bombing of Libya, and the swift retaliation on the hijackers of the "Achille Lauro". North was the architect of the latter action, and what did Richard Clarke do that was comparable.

Mr. Clarke did try time and time again to alert Clinton about Al Qaeda and the Taliban. But Billy was too busy with the bims. He wouldn't even meet with James Woolsey, his CIA director (see Gerald Posner's book), something Mr. Clarke doesn't mention here.
yes, President Bush can be faulted, but he had only eight months to deal with Al Qaeda and was in the process of cobbling together a plan despite the incompetency of the FBI and of Mr. Tenet, the holdover at CIA whom he should have jettisoned right away. Bill Clinton gave us that FBI, Mr. Tenet, and an emasculated Intelligence.

Furthermore, Mr. Clarke can also be faulted for being cocksure of himself. Tommy Franks points that out in his book, and Clarke did some unfortunate self-promotion on 60 Minutes a good two years before 9/11 about how we were unprepared but hey he was doing a wonderful job. I do believe Mr. Clarke meant well, and maybe working with a Colonel North (whom Clarke's friends in the Kerry camp despised) they would have been a team that Osama would have been reckoned with. It was his misfortune to serve the Carterites and Slick.

And he was NO Ollie North who did get things done. If North was still running that office instead of Clarke, we would have been BOMBING TERRORISTS in Afghanistan, not innocent civilians in Belgrade.