Rating: 
Summary: Read it and draw your own conclusions
Review: I picked up this book during a trip to New Zealand in May. Even though it is based on an interview with Scott Ritter that was conducted about a year ago, it's timely and relevant. Not only does the book outline in incredible detail why Iraq could not have had weapons of mass destruction, but it also outlines the problems that the coalition would face (or should I say "is facing"?) in the aftermath. The book is brief and direct, allowing the reader to draw his/her own conclusions. As the subtitle of the book suggests, this is "what Team Bush doesn't want you to know." Read it with an open mind, and don't be misled by the review of "mistermisses" which misses the point. You don't have to agree with Ritter's assessment, but you owe it to yourself to read what he says.
Rating: 
Summary: Not much book for the money
Review: I thought the reviews of this book are more interesting than the book itself. The reviewers either love it or hate it, depending on their political leanings. It is a short explanation of things leading up to our second war in Iraq (I read it after the "Operation Iraqi Freedom" invasion in Iraq) and some of Ritter's speculations seem to be on the mark, others are way off.
Rating: 
Summary: I wonder how ritter sleeps at night.........................
Review: contributing to the raw misdeeds he solicits people to do. Like, for instance, undermining international security, prolonging Iraqi children & adults' suffering, imposing religion intolerance and mass murder, and allowing snaky unprincipled countries like France and Russia to continue their long-abusing relationship with dictatorial regimes, all for a quick buck. Especially true for France, who built most of Hussein's weapons factories and Russia, who are greasing their palms, waiting for the 8 billion dollar debt that Iraq was supposed to pay them. Thanks to Bush, Blair, Rumsfeld, the military, Spain, Japan, S Korea, Portugal, and the innumerable coalition of 45 countries, disestablishing derogatory slander from the jealous left that this war was "unilateral", the real countries who finance terrorism and persist on imposing dictators to stay in power, like France & Russia, won't profit from people's pain anymore.I'll wrap this up, shortly & succinctly, by advising everyone who wants to be remembered as rational to smirk at Scanlon's typically radical, fanatical castigation of the majority of most reasonable countries' opinions. Scanlon just disclosed himself as someone who doesn't want to solve problems, but, instead, simply mindlessly persists on his untamably liberal "doctrines" of wishful thinking and being unrealistic, clinging to his Wellstone-like fantasy world of "everybody being inherently good".
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding: brief and succinct
Review: A great book discarding fluff for straight fact. If you get all your news from FOX cable news you'll just disregard this out of hand, probably with a lot of finger-pointing and castigation, but facts are hard to argue with. (Which why so many on the right tend to stoop soooo frequently to character assassination instead of actually addressing the issues and refuting facts point for point.) As for the rest of us it's remarkably acurate, especially in view of the notorious PNAC documents now coming to light. Do a web search. PNAC. You'll be as stunned as I was at how many in this administration completely and publicly laid the whole sordid plan for this war out in a blow by blow description of what you are now living with in the news... and they did it FIVE YEARS AGO! In THEIR own words AND signed by those now coincidentally in office!
Rating:
Summary: The best summary on how the "war" was unjustified
Review: A couple of items to start: Ritter is a card-carrying Republican who voted for Dubya in 2000. The book is short. So if you suffer from a thick-book syndrome, it's page-for-page value is low. As to the book's content--something many of its "critics" wouldn't understand as they obviously haven't read it--I'm giving copies to several people as it's the best summary I've seen of how there was no justification for the latest Bush/Blair boondoggle. Remember why those two soon-to-be-unemployed said we're going to war against another country not in a position to defend itself? Because of Weapons of Mass Destruction--WMD--(stored in mass quantities, incidentally by US and UK). Well, one of the networks went through a fertilizer factory during the invasion. They're correspondent commented that it took the military a few days to find the chemical "weapons" what the UN didn't find in months. (For that idiotic statement--IN A FERTILIZER FACTORY--I'd have fired him on the spot!)
Since then, they've found, you guessed it, nothing. Dubya and Blair are rationalizing their behavior worldwide. Many of us see right through it...hear that George and Tony? Right through it. Ritter was responsible for the WMD inspections before the two mentioned above decided to invade Iraq based on her possession of such weapons. The book starts logically with a brief history of the situation in Iraq. That's been covered here by some of the erudite critics and it was helpful to put things in perspective. The bulk of the text is an examination of the inspection process, how Iraq couldn't have the WMD George and Tony claim they had. Sorry, folks, but they don't have them and they couldn't have them (a conclusion based on the difficulty and detectability of obtaining the materials necessary for their manufacture.) And it's thorough and experience-based enough to be convincing. To those who call the book "socialist," "leftist," and such labels, refer again above. No, Ritter wasn't waving a red flag from his dreadlocks. There is a little speculation, on what would happen if a war took place (as some have pointed out, the book was written before the invasion took place). But that speculation wasn't offensive. It wasn't, for example, ideologically driven nonsense. There is a useful analysis for those who argue the bin Laden/Saddam connection. (Incidentally, a few months before the invasion, 3 percent of the US population thought there was a connection between Saddam and 9/11. By the time of the invasion, that percentage had passed 50. The wonders of modern propaganda...) Not only is there no such connection, but there never will be. Bin Laden sees Saddam as a hopeless secularist, about as likely a connection as, say Falwell and Ralph Nader. Overall, the book is a useful summary. So read it, get it to others, particularly those who're interested in looking at facts.
Rating:
Summary: The truth that needed to be told!
Review: According to Pitt and Ritter, there is no incriminating evidence that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. Instead, this argument was used by the US government to justify the war against Iraq. Moreover, there is no evidence of an alleged link between Hussein and Bin Laden, it is also an invention used to justify the war. This war was about one thing only: the control of Iraqi oil. Those who fail to recognize this obvious fact are extremely naive and gullible. Does anyone really believe that the US government truly cares for Iraqi people? Labeling the war "Operation Iraqi Freedom" is pathetic, ridiculous and extremely insidious. Since when does the US government care about the oppressed and the victimized?
Rating:
Summary: Guess Who Told the Truth
Review: Pitt interviews Ritter over the phone. Why did he not just go and see him in person? Surely that would have put more meat on the book. It is long enough to answer the most pressing questions, but too short to really whet your appetite. An interview is like a survey. You know the outcome before you even start. Did Pitt publish the whole interview, or just the parts that he liked? Did he just ask leading questions? Did he not want to bring up details about Saddam's use of poison gas because the answer could have been embarrassing? Here we have two men who know exactly what they want to say. So you only have to form the question correctly. The book was published Sept. 25, 2002 - long before the war started. By now the war is over and the book becomes redundant. But it must be said that Ritter told the truth. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, nor did it work on a nuclear device. People should be honest enough to give Ritter credit for this truth.
Rating:
Summary: Short on facts...long on opinion
Review: The author has obvious contempt for GW Bush and has a hard time hiding it in this "non partisan" collection of rantings and ravings that have been proven wrong by recent events in Iraq. For serious knowledge and analysis of this subject, look elsewhere. 2 stars.
Rating:
Summary: a very well thought book !
Review: It explains alot,mostly how bush realy doesnt want us to know what is realy going on,although very one sided, it is still great for research.
Rating:
Summary: Bunk!
Review: As can be evidenced even by the short description of this "book", this entire tome is packed with disinformation and rhetoric! "Pitt and Ritter also explain the lack of any plausible link between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, and highlight the absurdity of forcing democracy on a nation that has been divided for centuries." As Fox News has clearly shown in the last week, Iraq had an ACTIVE Al Qaeda training camp outside Bagdad. Interviews with local has also shown just how happy they are that we are there (knocking down all of Saddam's narcissistic statues and painting), and how eager they intend to embrace the freedoms we bear. "The book closes with a stark forecast for American troops if a ground war ensues and urges the White House to seek a diplomatic solution." Once again, proven WRONG. Anyone who has watched the war for the last three weeks cannot refute how quick and short our path to victory has been. It's all over except for Janine Garafalo "crawling on broken glass to the White House" to apologize for her insane statements before the war.
| 
