Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace Review

Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
I stumbled across the original H/C version of this book at an antique dealer's shop. I was suprised by the title, I thought that Gore Vidal wrote the only book with that designation.
Upon reading the dust jacket and introduction, I knew the book was for me, as the editor drops the name of Charles A. Beard into the mix. (Beard is one of the few recent historians that Gore Vidal praises.)
The book is considered a 'revisionist' tome, and rightly so. The irony is that the original 'revisionists', (like Beard), sought to clarify the FACTUAL historical record. This book lays the case for foreknowledge of Japan's 'suprise' attack by the Roosevelt administration, and a series of maneuvers to incite Japan to land the first punch at Pearl Harbor.
With the help of the FOIA, Robert Stinnet recently wrote 'Day of Deceit' which vindicates much of what these authors were writing back in 1953. Vidal wrote 'The Golden Age' as a fictionalized account of FDR's maneuvers, and I think he also used the FOIA, and came to nearly identical conclusions.
You can disagree with the authors' product, but you cannot dispute the factual case laid out in detailed, indexed black & white truth.
Cuts through propaganda like a hot knife through butter. Still relevant over 50 years after publication. That's impressive for a foreign policy book.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace



Buy Now

Click here for more information about Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace

Read More...

Gestapo Chief : The 1948 Interrogation of Heinrich Muller Review

Gestapo Chief : The 1948 Interrogation of Heinrich Muller
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
This is one of four books that have appeared since 1995 on the postwar association of former SS-Gruppenfuehrer Heinrich ("Gestapo"-)Mueller with the American Intelligence community. From the outset, it is well worth having by every scholar or educated laymen interested in the last phase of World War II in Europe and its aftermath. The content is, to put it mildly, volatile, or certainly would be in an age less indifferent to such revelations. The public, particularly the academic public, has a right to be skeptical. Recall, after all, what embarrassment was visited upon the British historian, Hugh Trevor-Roper, when seventeen years ago he pronounced the "Hitler Diaries" authentic. Douglas clearly is not impressed with academics. Perhaps rightly so, given the 1983 fiasco. One recalls Hegel's allusion to the "Hofhistoriker," the "court historians," and all of the ramifications of such a designation. Douglas provides photocopies of documents from the US Army and several Intelligence agencies, all of which, were they fakes, might easily have been refuted over four years ago. That has not happened. People are named whose relatives, where the statements made in this volume and those that followed not true, would most certainly have had recourse to litigation. That, apparently, has also not happened. The revelations concerning Mueller should be seen within the wider context of CIA engagement of former Gestapo agents such as Klaus Barbie (a small fish, in comparison to Mueller) as experts in the West's anti-communist efforts, which reached a fever pitch in the late 1940s. It is, of course, a paradox that, while the Army CIC (Counter Intelligence Corps) continued to search for Mueller as a war criminal, the CIA had already recruited him as one of their top agents, moved him to the Washington area (where he entertained in his home the 33rd President of the United States and became a card-carrying member of the Democratic Party), and protected his identity for decades. To be sure, there is much here that will require greater study by scholars. Few will accept the idea that Hitler left the Reichskanzlei with others on April 26th bound for Spain, four days prior to the day on which he is assumed to have committed suicide in the bunker of the Reichskanzlei. The German playwright Rolf Hochhuth and the French writer Pierre Joffroy will be astounded to learn that the SS officer, Kurt Gerstein, according to volume 1 of this series, was the man originally responsible for the mass slaughter of Jews by gassing in Poland, and not quite the "just man" anxious to expose the crimes of others as which he has been described by Joffroy.If there is anything "troubling" about Douglas's volume and those which have followed about "Gestapo"-Mueller in the interim, it is the fact that no compelling counter-evidence has emerged from any quarter in the past four years or more to contest the material contained therein. The silence is, in fact, deafening.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Gestapo Chief : The 1948 Interrogation of Heinrich Muller



Buy Now

Click here for more information about Gestapo Chief : The 1948 Interrogation of Heinrich Muller

Read More...

D-Day: A Day That Changed America: They Fought to Free Europe from Hitler's Tyranny Review

D-Day: A Day That Changed America: They Fought to Free Europe from Hitler's Tyranny
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
If the first twenty minutes of Steven Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan" gives young students a graphic understanding of what it was like to storm the beaches at Normandy on June 6, 1944, then "D-Day: A Day That Changed America" will put the invasion of Hitler's Fortress Europe in perspective. After all, the sub-title of Shelley Tanaka's book is "They Fought to Free Europe from Hitler's Tyranny." Consequently, this illustrated volume, with paintings by David Craig, both explains why this was the turning point of World War II in Europe and how the small parts of the invasion that readers might have seen in "Saving Private Ryan" or "Band of Brothers" fit into the big picture on D-Day (if you want the cinematic equivalent of what this book is trying to do then check out "The Longest Day," even though it is in black & white).
Tanaka tells the story of D-Day from the perspective of four eyewitnesses who survived the invasion: paratrooper Don Jakeway, fighter pilot Quentin Aanenson, seaman Bob Giguere, and combat medic Jack Fox. The order that we meet these four American soldiers allows the invasion to proceed chronologically. Young readers should appreciate the personal perspective of the story, which allows Tanaka to talk about what was happening with the entire invasion while also providing the intimate memories of her four soldiers, who were all in their eighties when they shared their stories. She makes it clear that not only was America changed by D-Day, but so where these four men. In addition to Craig's detailed paintings the text is complemented by historic photographs, pictorial maps, diagrams, and D-Day artifacts. There are also informative sidebars and features on topics like what the "D" in "D-Day" stands for and how the Allies fooled the enemy before and during the invasion. The result is a solid enough juvenile history of D-Day to provide young readers with a basic understanding of the invasion to build upon when they move on to more advanced works.
When I looked at the cover of this juvenile history of the Normandy Invasion I immediately agreed with the idea of this series and this particular example as "A Day That Changed America." After all, today is the third anniversary of 9/11 and the attack on the World Trade Center buildings and the Pentagon. There was a good indication of how much that particular day changed America in a new poll that reports over 70% of Americans believe the war against terrorism will never end. However, as much as those two days clearly fit the bill I have to say that the other volumes in the series are not as on point. After all, "Gettysburg" was a three-day battle, although Pickett's Charge on the third day is certainly considered the high-water mark of the Confederacy, "The Alamo" was a thirteen day siege and it was the Battle of San Jancinto that won Texas independence while having nothing to do with the United States until the republic was annexed, and the San Francisco "Earthquake!" did not really change much outside of the Bay Area in California. My point is that recognizing days in American history that truly changed the nation is a worthy effort and attention must be paid to what does and does not fit the bill.

Click Here to see more reviews about: D-Day: A Day That Changed America: They Fought to Free Europe from Hitler's Tyranny



Buy Now

Click here for more information about D-Day: A Day That Changed America: They Fought to Free Europe from Hitler's Tyranny

Read More...

Uss Arizona: Warship, Tomb, Monument Review

Uss Arizona: Warship, Tomb, Monument
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
I would recommend this book to anybody that's into WWII. It's very informative and has some great pictures.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Uss Arizona: Warship, Tomb, Monument

The story of the USS Arizona encompasses far more than the milli-second BOOM! that split her hull and snuffed out the lives of 1177 men aboard her. The huge battleship led a fascinating life before her demise, and--as a poignant symbol of the attack that thrust the United States into World War II--has impacted millions of lives since. She lays where she sank, in the silt of Pearl Harbor, spanned now by a graceful white memorial that pays tribute to her dead. MacKinnon Simpson's newest book, USS Arizona - Warship Tomb  Monument, pays tribute to the ship, her crews, and her symbolism through the years. Packed with many rarely-before seen images, the book includes such unlikely characters as Elvis Presley, whose benefit concert helped trigger the fund-raising for the Memorial, and Henry Williams, a three-year-old boy who placed the first bolt in her keel in 1915 and read a newspaper by the light of her raging fires as a lieutenant at Pearl Harbor in 1941. USS Arizona - Warship Tomb Monument tells a story that needed to be told, of why the Arizona is still so important to people from around the world who trek to visit her each year.

Buy NowGet 24% OFF

Click here for more information about Uss Arizona: Warship, Tomb, Monument

Read More...

Days of Infamy: Macarthur, Roosevelt, Churchill-The Shocking Truth Revealed : How Their Secret Deals and Strategic Blunders Caused Disasters at Pear Review

Days of Infamy: Macarthur, Roosevelt, Churchill-The Shocking Truth Revealed : How Their Secret Deals and Strategic Blunders Caused Disasters at Pear
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
There are few events that prompt as much spontaneous discussions regarding the possibility of conspiracy and guilty prior knowledge as those involving the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. Indeed, there are a whole catalogue of titles dealing with the possibilities, the associated issues, and with the substance of arguments surrounding all of the varied possibilities, which seem to have endless permutations and countless variations. So too here in British author John Costello's excellent exposition, the fascinating world of this "what did the President know, and when did he know it" whodunit is deftly explored by a virtual master of the genre. Also the author of such notable titles as "The Pacific War" and "And I was There", Costello addresses himself to a welter of issues and conditions that paint an indelible picture of what he conceives to be the actual circumstances surrounding the Japanese attack.
Indeed, the author not only asks a number of interesting rhetorical questions regarding the surprise attack at Pearl Harbor itself, but also delves into the shocking related attack on the American forces in the Philippines later the same day. Why, he asks, given his being warned so far in advance, did General Douglas MacArthur allow the Japanese forces to destroy the greatest single concentration of American air power in the Pacific region some nine hours after the attack on Pearl Harbor? And, in answering the question by way of detailing the complex series of miscommunications and fumbles surrounding MacArthur's mishandling of the circumstances, the author also raises the issue of MacArthur's unlikely escape from the blame game following in the aftermath of the attacks. Seems that those in power in Washington were so intimidated by MacArthur's positive image and reputation among the press that they dare not attack him openly by court marshalling or reprimanding him. In essence, his political connections saved him. Instead, after ordering MacArthur off the island, ostensibly to take command of all the Pacific forces regrouping in Australia, Roosevelt rewarded the general with the Congressional Medal Of Honor.
Also discussed here is the half million dollar payoff that the Philippine Government gave to MacArthur as he departed the islands, as is the desire of the Philippine government to try to maintain their neutrality, an exercise in futility that may have played fatefully into the hands of the Japanese, and which the author suggests may have influenced MacArthur in his decision not to attack or save the pacific-based American planes under his command. Yet the book spends much more energy and time covering the ways in which the diplomatic and military miscalculations on the part of both Roosevelt and Churchill played almost perfectly into the hands of the Japanese. Yet it was, according to Costello, more the loss of the Pacific air power rather than the losses at Pearl Harbor that so severely limited and hampered American efforts to stem the rising tide of Japanese hegemony over the Far East in 1942.
The author writes with considerable skill in arguing that it was the combined blunders, bungling, and malfeasance on the part of Roosevelt, Churchill and MacArthur that left the western world in such mortal danger at the end of 1941. For one thing, Roosevelt had committed the United States to a secret agreement with the British to aid in the defense of the British empire's Far Eastern reaches, a pact that was likely both illegal and unconstitutional. For another, the decision to move the bulk of MacArthur's army forces 5,000 miles west of Hawaii to the Philippines left Hawaii weak and overexposed to a potential Japanese attack. Finally, the combined neglect of countless encrypted messages concerning the details of the attack as well as MacArthur's failure to mount a preemptive air attack despite being directly ordered to do so doomed the American hopes for any quick resolution to the conflict once it had started. In sum, it was the colossal lack of good leadership that led us into the disaster of December 7, 1941, and in spite of the fact that all three men are held in high regard and remembered warmly, they were largely responsible for the American failure to prevent the disaster at Pearl Harbor in a day of infamy. This is an interesting book and a worthwhile read. Enjoy!

Click Here to see more reviews about: Days of Infamy: Macarthur, Roosevelt, Churchill-The Shocking Truth Revealed : How Their Secret Deals and Strategic Blunders Caused Disasters at Pear



Buy Now

Click here for more information about Days of Infamy: Macarthur, Roosevelt, Churchill-The Shocking Truth Revealed : How Their Secret Deals and Strategic Blunders Caused Disasters at Pear

Read More...

American Assassination: The Strange Death of Senator Paul Wellstone Review

American Assassination: The Strange Death of Senator Paul Wellstone
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
The authors of this important book argue that Senator Paul Wellstone's death, 10 days before the 2002 elections, was an assassination, most likely ordered by the Bush administration.
Directly confronting the widespread tendency to reject all "conspiracy theories," the authors point out that "the idea that every theory that implies the existence of conspiracy ought to be rejected out of hand" is no more rational than the idea that every such theory should be accepted. Rather, "each case has to be evaluated on the basis of the evidence that is relevant and available in that case." On that basis, they argue, if we look at ALL the relevant evidence and employ the scientific method of inference to the best explanation, we must conclude that the theory that Wellstone was assassinated is far more probable than the official theory, according to which his airplane crash was an accident.
The evidence includes several facts suggesting that the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) colluded with the FBI in a cover-up:
1. FBI agents from Minneapolis arrived at the crash site within 2 hours after the crash, even though the trip from Minnesota to Duluth to the crash site would have taken at least 3 hours--so they must have departed before the plane crashed.
2. When asked for the times at which private flights had arrived in Duluth that morning, the FAA said the records had been destroyed.
3. Considerable disinformation about weather conditions was quickly given to the press.
4. Although regulations called for the investigation to be carried out by the NTSB, not the FBI (because the crash site was not designated a crime scene), the FBI agents were there for 8 hours before the NTSB team arrived.
5. The FBI, even though there illegally, prevented the local "first responders" from taking photographs.
6. Although it was the NTSB's responsibility to determine the cause of the crash and although the FBI's prior presence was illegal, the NTSB leader publicly accepted the FBI's declaration, made before the NTSB's investigation, that there was no evidence of terrorism.
7. When the NTSB team finally carried out its own investigation, it was unable to find either the cockpit recorder, which it assumed the plane had had, or the black box.
8. The NTSB held no public hearings, claiming that it was not a sufficiently "high-profile" case.
9. The NTSB's final report concealed the fact of the FBI's participation.
10. The NTSB investigation was headed by Acting Director Carol Carmody, a Bush appointee who had earlier ruled that there was no foul play in the small airplane crash in 2000 that took the life of Governor Mel Carnahan of Missouri, the Democratic candidate for the Senate who was killed 3 weeks before his expected victory (over John Ashcroft).
The evidence also includes some facts strongly suggesting the falsity of the NTSB's official conclusion, which was that the plane crashed because the pilot failed to maintain proper speed, causing the plane to stall.
1. The plane would have stalled only if it slowed to below 70 knots, yet it was equipped with a device that emitted a loud warning at 85 knots.
2. The plane was being flown by two experienced and fully certified pilots, a fact--obfuscated in the NTSB report-that makes this kind of pilot error very unlikely.
3. The NTSB's theory fails to explain why, about two minutes before the crash, all communication was abruptly terminated and the plane began going off course.
The evidence also includes facts suggesting that the plane was instead brought down by an EMP (electromagnetic pulse) weapon:
1. The plane's fuselage burned, although it was separated from the wings, which contained the fuel.
2. The plane's electrical system, which would be affected by an EMP, was in the fuselage, and the fire from the fuselage gave off blue smoke, which is indicative of an electrical fire.
3. An EMP could explain why the plane simultaneously went off course and lost its radio about two minutes before the crash.
4. At the same time, cell phones and garage doors in the area behaved in a way consistent with the occurrence of an EMP.
5. An NTSB spokesman professed ignorance about the existence of EMP weapons that could have brought down the plane, although the existence of such weapons had been known for several years.
An important part of the authors' case is the fact that the Bush administration would have had several motives:
1. Wellstone's defeat would return control of the Senate to the Republicans.
2. Wellstone's death 10 days before the election meant that $700,000 in the Republican campaign chest could be transferred, the very next day, to the (successful) effort to defeat Max Cleland in the Senate race in Georgia.
3. Wellstone was the biggest obstacle in the Senate to several Republican policies, such as those involving Iraq, Colombia, the SEC, tax cuts, and Homeland Security, and he was the strongest voice in Congress calling for a full investigation into 9/11.
4. Two days before his death, Wellstone reported that Cheney had told him: "If you vote against the war in Iraq, the Bush administration will do whatever is necessary to get you."
5. Wellstone had developed a 7-point lead in the polls over Norm Coleman, the Bush administration's hand-picked candidate.
Finally, with regard to the question whether the Bush administration would commit such a heinous act, the authors argue that an administration that "compounded lie upon lie to . . . send hundreds of thousands of young American men and women into harm's way [in Iraq] is not an administration that would hesitate to kill a single senator."
The authors conclude that the evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that Wellstone was assassinated. They have, in my view, made a convincing case.
David Ray Griffin, author of "The New Pearl Harbor" and "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions & Distortions"




Click Here to see more reviews about: American Assassination: The Strange Death of Senator Paul Wellstone

Senator Paul Wellstone was, "the first 1960s radical elected to the U.S. Senate." In Senate Race 2002, the White House made defeating Wellstone priority #1. Karl Rove hand-picked arch Republican Norm Coleman to run against him. Despite massive funding, Coleman was trailing the popular Wellstone two weeks before election day. Then, tragedy struck. On the morning of October 25th, 2002, Wellstone was killed after a mysterious communication cut-out and crash of his small aircraft. He died alongside his wife Sheila, their daughter Marcia, three staff members, and two pilots, while trying to land at Minnesota's Eveleth airfield. CNN's Wolf Blitzer insisted to his reporter at the scene that foul weather was the lethal factor in the crash, despite the statements to the contrary from the CNN correspondent. To this day, the public tends to blame the weather.Ph.D. Professors James Fetzer and Don "Four Arrows" Jacobs present the harrowing truth. The plane wasexceptionally airworthy. The weather didn't bring down Senator Wellstone. Nor were the two pilots incompetent, as the report of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) would eventually claim. The facts point elsewhere.The FBIarrived at the remote rural crash scene less than two hours after the crash. Could they have knownabout it in advance? The FBI forbade the ambulance and fire teams to take photos. Even the AP photographer on hand was intimidated, delayed and then highly monitored. For some reason, a member of the U.S. Capitol Police Dignitary Protection Division was also present.Why did the FBI state that they were treating the site as a "crime scene" although there were "no indications of any criminal activity"? How could the FBI so very swiftly conclude and state publicly, before NTSB arrived, that there was "no evidence of terrorism" involved?Why did the NTSB search for a "blackbox" for a day and a half andthen conclude that there hadn't been one, after all?AMERICAN ASSASSINATION confirms the worst fears of a nation. Senator Paul Wellstone was murdered.Both authors are decorated university professors. A Native American, Four Arrows (a.k.a. Dr. Don Jacobs) teaches educational leadership and is a staunch critic of US foreign policy. Dr. Jim Fetzer is a published expert on U.S. political assassinations and the logic of science.Although no one can prove exactly what happened in the events leading to Wellstone's death, these two Ph.D.s point out the official story's inconsistencies and deliberate omissions. With a methodical argument, they present evidence of an official cover-up, a compelling motive for Wellstone's assassination and advance a more likely explanation for how Senator Wellstone's plane was taken down.Their findingsinclude new evidence and alternative hypotheses that were never considered by the NTSB:• There was never any distress call from the pilots. Communication was somehow cut off shortly before the crash.• NTSB's Carol Carmody handled the Wellstone case. A former CIA official, Carmody is a damage-control expert who handled the NTSB's investigation of the suspicious aircraft crash of Democratic Senatorial candidate Mel Carnahan, exactly two years earlier.• NTSB is legally mandated to take jurisdiction over a crash scene, yet it allowed the FBI to control the scene--and then neglected to cite the FBI's involvement in presence in the NTSB's final report. • Some witnesses heard the engines cutting out, a phenomenon not consistent with a stall. • Others reported odd cell-phone and garage-door phenomena that were taking place about the same time the plane lost both communications and control.• The NTSB's own simulations, which replicated properties like those of King Air A-100s under similar conditions, were unable to bring the plane down—even when conducted under abnormally slow speeds! • One of the members who actually signed the report, Richard Healing, admitted that they really had no idea what had caused the plane to crash. Since becoming active in this issue, local residents have contacted Professor Fetzer and related strange electronic interference in the area at the time of the crash. One experienced an odd cell-phone phenomenon with a form of static he had never heard before. Its auditory pattern appears to be similar to that of "electro-magnetic pulse" (EMP) weapons recently developed by the Pentagon to jam the computer-assisted controls of enemy aircraft. Reports of garage doors that mysteriously opened in the immediate vicinity are surfacing. And radar images from the time of the plane crashes of Senator Carnahan and of Senator Wellstone are suggestive of EMP imprints. These weapons not only jam a plane's electronics but also disable its radio communications. In the wake of the crash, 69% of Minnesoteans blamed a "GOP Conspiracy" for Wellstone's death. This bookmakes the case that, in this case, at least, the people had it right. In appendices to AMERICAN ASSASSINATION, Paul Wellstone's courageous stands against the rich and powerful continue to inspire us. It presents highlights from Wellstone's platform andincludes his important speech, "On Iraq." His opposition to the Bush administration helps the reader to understand why the Senator was a likely target for assassination. When the reader meets Wellstone in his own words, his vision is kept alive and lives on in each of us.

Buy NowGet 16% OFF

Click here for more information about American Assassination: The Strange Death of Senator Paul Wellstone

Read More...

Surprise, Security, and the American Experience Review

Surprise, Security, and the American Experience
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
The surprise attack of September 11 brought about, in the eyes of many learned observers, a radical shift in American national security policy. Since World War II and up until the collapse of the Soviet Union there was a policy of containment and deterrence. During the 1990s, in the wake of the collapse, there was a feeling that democracy and capitalism would eventually triumph everywhere; the Clinton administration reasoned that the US "only needed to engage and the rest of the world would enlarge the process."
In response the 9/11 attack the Bush administration formulated a new strategy, outlined in the national security speech at West Point on June 1, 2002. This speech called for a new strategy which looked like a departure from American tradition. The key elements of this new strategy were preemption, unilateralism, and hegemony. In the beginning, it was little noticed; however, in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, people began to examine this strategy more closely.
Yale professor John Lewis Gaddis, in this short and well-written little book, argues that this was not a new policy, in fact it had deep roots in American history that go back to the earliest days of the republic. Gaddis demonstrates that after the British attack on Washington DC during the War of 1812, the then secretary of state, John Quincy Adams asserted the same three principles. Preemption was the rationale for Andrew Jackson's invasion of Florida, the "failed state" of its day being a haven for marauding Seminoles, runaway slaves and profiteering pirates. With the diminishing authority of the Spanish in Latin America, the US sought to restrict the influence of other European powers in the Western Hemisphere. The Monroe Doctrine was a unilateralist declaration even though the US did not have the means to enforce it without the backing of the British navy. And in the end, the policy of John Quincy Adams was to be the predominant power in the Western Hemisphere, or at least on the North American continent - a hegemon in all but name.
Preemption, unilateralism, and hegemony was indeed a US strategy up until World War II. The US was seeking merely to assure its security by keeping the European powers out of the hemisphere. Most Americans believed it was a mistake to seek an oversees empire as the brief foray into the Phillipines proved in the early part of the 20th century.
After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt was forced the build alliances with the Soviet Union and other great powers in order to defeat Germany and Japan. It was thus necessary to forgo preemption and unilateralism in deference to the alliance. During and after World War II, the US took the lead in building multilateralism institutions - a multilateral system that not only ensured American hegemony, but made it desirable at the same time. Forgoing preemption gave the US the moral high ground, which it maintained until the invasion of Iraq.
The Bush administration's invasion of Iraq had all the elements of a grand strategy: preemption, unilateralsim - when multilateralism failed - and American hegemony. There was also an innovation to this strategy: there would be an active promotion of democracy in the Middle East. This idea swayed many liberals to the cause, including members of the media and the academic community.
The problems with this strategy became apparent after the invasion. They are too numerous to go into and obvious to anyone following the news. The mistakes made during the occupation leaves the Bush Doctine with only a few remaining supporters. The failure to enlist the great powers, not to mention many of the smaller powers, destroyed our status as a benign hegemon and jepardizes our moral high ground.
Gaddis does an excellent job of explaining the grand strategy and showing that it has precedents in history, better than Bush or anyone in his administration. However, he does not show that this strategy is justified, morally or legally, and he does not seem to fully appreciate that many of our friends and allies find this strategy frightening and repugnant. They do not call us arrogant for nothing.
Nevertheless, the jury is still out. Immediately after the invasion, it looked as though one regime after another would fall in the region, along the lines of the dominoes of Eastern Europe. At the present writing, with the Iraqi elections approaching, a decent outcome seems remote and a civil war possible. Yet, there are stirrings of hope and change elsewhere in the Middle East, such as in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The upheaval in Iraq is also creating debate that did not exist before in Egypt and the Gulf States. The pendulum may again swing the other way and the grand strategy may be working inspite of itself.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Surprise, Security, and the American Experience



Buy NowGet 4% OFF

Click here for more information about Surprise, Security, and the American Experience

Read More...