Rating: 
Summary: good review of recent history; a warning siren against war
Review: William Pitt provides a summary overview of US foreign policy in the Middle East over the past century and how it has contributed to the current world crisis. Scott Ritter, in an interview conducted by Pitt, critiques the claims of the Bush II Administration that Iraq is in possession of weapons of mass destruction. He challenges these claims based on information and experience he garnered as UNSCOM UN weapons inspector in Iraq from 1992-98.Although the information presented is not unquestionable, this very short book contributes something meaningful to the discussion in that it provides us with a starting point for logically and reasonably assessing the Administration's continued insistance that a war is the only responsible way to remove Hussein from power in Iraq. Ritter, a member of the Republican party who voted for Bush in the 2000 elections, has absolutely nothing to gain in terms of public opinion by openly criticizing the Administration's claims that Iraq has WMDs. He is obviously doing so because he sees these claims as inaccurate and wrong. Regardless of how one personally views Ritter, Bush, or Hussein for that matter, a full and informed debate needs to be had before US or Iraqi lives are placed in peril by an ill-conceived war (and post-war aftermath). This book contributes to that discussion and raises questions that must be adequately answered. The only drawback to this tiny book is that it was likely written in an effort to get it out to people as soon as possible, given the immanent possibility of war with Iraq, and therefore lacks signficant details, such as footnoting, source citation, and critical interaction with opposing viewpoints. My hope is that Pitt and Ritter would incorporate this text into a larger, more comprehensive text as soon as possible. However, both Ritter and Pitt refer to more comprehensive texts on Iraq and its history that would provide the reader with such sources of additional information. In the meantime, this book is excellent for anyone looking to quickly inform themselves more about Iraq, WMDs that Iraq is alleged to have, and the history of the region and its relationship to the US. It is also excellent to share with others!
Rating: 
Summary: Useful pamphlet could use contrasting testimony
Review: After devouring this best-selling political pamphlet, I am left to wonder exactly what is in this book that "team Bush doesn't want you to know." The history of Iraq is already known: a state created by the British who installed a monarchy and, along with the french, drew its borders with its own interests in mind rather than the tribal lines of the people native to the region. A state run by a mobster-type named Saddam Hussein, who has been demonized to a point where his political machine is, unwisely, forgotten - and where an entire nation of people are identified with a man who is ideologically very different. The bulk of this tiny book, however, is a lengthy interview with Scott Ritter, the former U.N. arms inspector in Iraq. Ritter is a credible witness against current policy: he is a proud Republican who supported Bush in the 2000 election, who swears allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and feels that a compelling case for pursuing a war in Iraq has not been made. Ritter wishes to educate Americans about the process of inspections which were cut off in 1998 because of manipulation and provocations of previous administrations - the look into this is fascinating. Ritter asserts that Iraq was effectively disarmed by 1998, and that they could not have re-armed in such a short time and without detection (though he does not doubt Saddam would like to). There is much to be learned from Ritter's experiences in Iraq and his criticisms of that process. There are, to use the John Adams phrase that crops up frequently in the book, certain "stubborn facts" that shine a harsh light on the current party line on Iraq. However, Ritter later moves into speculations about the future that are frightening but less substantiated. In the interest of looking at "stubborn facts" and the need for the administration to make its case, an analysis and critique of the Bush Administration's case for disarmament and "regime change" to date would have fleshed this book out nicely.
Rating: 
Summary: waste of $
Review: This book is definitely "concise" as long as you remove all positive connotation from the word. It is a sloppily thrown together collage targeted to the 'no war in Iraq' crowd, and does not even feign objectivity. The book contains many valid points, it just struggles to make them or completely fails to do so. I would suggest finding an Arab or Israeli author who makes the case against war and refutes the suggestion of an Iraq-Al Qaeda connection. I would not recommend this book, however if you insist upon buying it I would suggest balancing it with background on Iraq: Building Toward Crisis, by Amatzia Baram; and a pro-war argument The Threatening Storm, by Ken Pollack
Rating: 
Summary: An extremely relevant, current, must-read for all Americans
Review: This book is an eye-opener. Everyone in America should read this short book to understand what is happening in Iraq, the long history of Western intervention in the region, and the dangerous situation into which the Bush administration is hearding this country. This book helped me cut through all the propaganda and rhetoric the current administration --and the local media-- has been feeding us for months. I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to make up his/her own mind in an informed manner, and feels uneasy about the way in which "Dubya" has been haranguing Americans and turning world sympathy into antipathy towards this great country.
Rating:
Summary: Finally - truth bout Iraq and their so called WMD's
Review: Concise... Documented... Composed of honest documentable type facts, yet, an easy read... an interview with a decorated marine (and "republican" yet) who was in THE position of power in Iraq from 91 to 98...
Totally dispels the Bush myth of WMD's in Iraq: A myth borne of his "Skull & Bones" chums and their extensive secret plan for US domination using a Nazi Germany master propagandist's (Goering) own play book for winning elections.
With the neo-conservative proclivity for lies, deceit, and all around deceptitude (please tell me please that they didn't kill Wellstone too), it should come as no surprise that Bush's people absolutely refuse to debate Ritter - in any forum - on issues raised in Mr. Pitt's "War on Iraq".
Cause there's nothing quite like mixing outright of lies with warmongering to help Bush's right wing rich fanatic corporate friends control us common everyday type workin people... Yes, take this one to your church social next Sunday, and watch the sparks fly.
One doesn't need this book though, to prove there are NO WMD's in Iraq, not if one has common sense or even an inkling of how WMD's are actually made. But that's the problem - our population has neither, thanks to a right wing 94% controlled media.
So, "War on Iraq" brings value that can't be measured (especially the next time some chicken hawk loonytoon carrying AR 15 starts screaming "We need to bomb them suckers to smithereens!").
Rating: 
Summary: Limited in scope.
Review: I bought this book after going to the book store and saying to myself "go find something that disagrees with your point of view and learn from it." I cheated and bought this tiny little book. (In my defense, I bought a second book under the same auspices.) Now that I've tipped my hand, you may be tempted to disregard anything I say because I am biased toward using force in Iraq. Hear me out and condemn me after, if you still chose to do so. Most of this book is an interview of Scott Ritter by the author William Pitt. That's good since *I*, personally find Mr. Pitt's words uninspiring. *I* find his views blindly against force. He repeats the party line ignoring the incompleteness of his words: "get inspectors back in Iraq." Hello, that's what everyone wants. Mr. Pitt seems to ignore the fact that Iraq is refusing entry. Mr. Ritter, thankfully, proffers a key point that those who categorically oppose force generally don't include. This is what I learned from this book. This is it. Just one thing. Get ready: "The weapons inspectors who were denied entry by Iraq were political puppets of a U.S. lead agenda designed to provoke Iraq." Mind you, I can't say whether or not this is true, but, it is something new that I learned. If true, and since no one ever seems to talk about it I can't be sure, this would completely reverse my opinion on the use of force in Iraq. Iraq must be disarmed, unilaterally if necessary. However, the superpower should conduct itself by the "high" standards if it wants to be viewed as having taken the "high road" when it imposes its will on a third world country.
Rating:
Summary: William Rivers Pitt writes like no other
Review: I found this book intriguing and informative. From a reader who is not well informed on the subject matter, this book allowed me to understand more about nuclear weapons and Iraq's use of them.
READ IT TODAY
Rating:
Summary: Not a book
Review: I would call this a vanity publication, at best. While a leftist should be proud of a well made book against the Bushies, and I a leftist, this is not a well made book against the Bushies. It isn't worth the money, despite being low-priced. It has nothing of merit that one can't find on the internet in some listserv.
Rating:
Summary: Gross fiction
Review: If this was a novel, it might be a little more forgiveable.
As it stands, this 'piece of work' (if any real work went into this joke of a book), is nothing but some un-informed leftist spouting-off anti-republican, liberalist nonsense. This author has no investigative ability at all, is somehow ignorant to the facts, or is just a common liar. The only so-called facts come from Ritter, who obviously has no clue what is happening in Iraq. I don't care if he was a UN inspector, they weren't allowed to see anything anyway. So of course he'll say Iraq is no threat.
So here is the tip of the ice berg, as it were. For one thing, prior to Desert Storm/Desert Shield, we knew almost exactly how much Chemical/Biological weaponry Iraq had. We know how much was destroyed during, and after the conflict. And we know how much was turned over to UN inspectors.
The numbers don't add up. Sadam still has an enormous stockpile of UN banned weaponry.
In the past few years the Iraqis have built Missle platforms that can only be used for types of ballistic missles banned by UN sanctions. (those with ranges greater then 150 km. ie Al Husayn and Al Abbas types, with ranges from 600-900km). There is also evidence that Iraq is experimenting and building Missles with far greater ranges (well over 1000km)
This author puts far to much attention (to the point of being obscene)on Usama Binladen. What does he have to do with taking care of business in Iraq? Nothing.
If we don't take care of Sadam now, we will have another 9/11.
Then the shouting will begin again, "How did this happen!".
Sadam is nothing more than a terrorist with a title. We are already at war with terrorism, how is a military power with a known Chem/Bio weapons an exception?
Don't agree with Me? See what the CIA has to say, or check out the UK's threat dossier
Rating:
Summary: Derails the drive to war
Review: In this extremely useful book, Scott Ritter, the former UN weapons inspector, and William Rivers Pitt, an expert on the Middle East, refute Bush and Blair's key allegation, that Iraq is a threat to us. This helps to derail the drive to war. Ritter worked for seven years in the UN's Special Commission, Unscom, charged with destroying all Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) capabilities. He states, "We can say unequivocally that the industrial infrastructure needed by Iraq to produce nuclear weapons had been eliminated." "We eliminated the nuclear program, and for Iraq to have reconstituted it would require undertaking activities eminently detectable by intelligence services."
Similarly, Iraq has no chemical weapons capability. In 1996, Unscom destroyed Iraq's chemical weapons facilities. The weapons it did produce, VX gas and the nerve agents Sarin and Tabun, have only a 5-year life, so any stocks would now be harmless goo. Iraq has not been able to recreate these facilities. "The manufacture of chemical weapons emits vented gases that would have been detected by now if they existed. We've been watching, via satellite and other means, and have seen none of this. If Iraq was producing weapons today, we'd have definitive proof, plain and simple."
And Iraq has no biological weapons capability. In 1995, Unscom destroyed the factories and equipment producing biological weapons, which last only three years. Subsequently, "we never found any evidence of ongoing research and development or retention." Nor does Iraq have the means to deliver the WMD that it doesn't have. "Iraq doesn't have the capabilities to do long-range ballistic missiles." Ritter sums up, "Iraq has been fundamentally disarmed." He also shows that there is no link, rather mutual enmity, between Iraq and Al Qa'ida, that forced regime change would not lead to democracy, that invading Iraq would be far harder than evicting its forces from Kuwait, and that Bush's contempt for the UN could destroy it. Most worryingly, he points out that the Pentagon plans to use nuclear weapons if the US attack on Iraq starts to fail.
| 
