Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror by Michael Scheuer Summary and Reviews
|
List Price: Our Price: $6.15 You Save: $4.80 (44%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $3.98 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror
Book Review: A manifesto of reason
Summary: 4 Stars
Having finally read the notorious and controversial "Imperial Hubris", what really struck me was how conventional and self-evident most of Scheuer's main points really are. Many of the reviewers here have outlined them, some of the main ones being- that we are hated for our actions and our policies against Moslems, not for our freedom or "who we are"; that bin-Laden is no mad terrorist, but an intelligent and rational leader of a global, widely supported Islamic insurgency against the United States; that the War On Terrorism has been a monumental failure, as we have not succeeded in eradicating al-Quaida from one country where it existed on 9/11, and have actually increased its support through misguided and foolish post-9/11 policies in Afghanistan and Iraq. I said that these points are conventional and self-evident...that is if you're not a deluded and dishonest neoconservative apparatchik or a brainless, Middle American Bush-worshipping automaton. Scheuer was savaged by these people when his book came out and it's hard to understand why unless you understand the fundamental malignity and treasonous loyalties of his neoconservative adversaries (the easily-led Bushbot masses can be forgiven for their invincible ignorance).
On many issues, the neocons would find agreement with Scheuer. They would agree with his thesis that the al-Quaida threat should be taken more seriously, since they would like to see the American public whipped into a greater frenzy for more offensive military action against Middle Eastern countries. They would agree with his thesis that we are at war with Islam, or at least a major portion of Islam, since they seek to inflame a War of Civilizations that would only facilitate the U.S. invading more of Israel's enemies in the Mid-East, a major neoconservative goal. And they would agree with his position on using greater military force against al-Quaida, since a basic tenet of neoconservatism is the utilization of military force as the solution to all problems, (an ironic characteristic as the neocons have been, to a man, a bunch of draft dodgers and limp wrists). No, their problem wasn't with his basic criticism of our conduct of the War On Terror, since many neoconservatives have been even more scathing of what they consider the Bush Administration's pusillanimity against al-Quaida. What really prompted the neocons' vendetta against Scheuer were 2 arguments he made, which in reality weren't covered in too much detail in "Imperial Hubris", but which occupied center stage during the subsequent media hubbub.
The first argument was that 9/11 didn't happen because al-Quaida hates our freedom, but because of specific American policies in the Middle East, most importantly our blind support for the state of Israel. As the fundamental modern neoconservative raison d'etre is to use American power to maintain and expand Israeli regional hegemony, and criticism of Israel has been a cardinal sin and hanging offense in American public life for 30 years now, "Imperial Hubris" and its author created a formidable nexus of sworn enemies inside and outside the administration. The second dangerous argument was that the Iraq adventure was an insane and unnecessary war that played right into bin Laden's hands and strengthened the worldwide Islamic insurgency. Since the Iraq war was a neoconservative project from A to Z, and represented the real-world application of all their arguments and policy recommendations, this opinion struck at the heart of their entire enterprise. Although the neocons tried their hardest to smear, discredit and destroy Michael Scheuer, his unique professional expertise, his unblemished character and his calm, non-partisan style proved stronger than their lies.
If you're even a halfway sentient being without neoconservative/Israeli prejudices, and have been following the news for the past 4 years, Scheuer's book won't contain that many revelations. However, coming from someone of his stature at the time it did, it was an important blow against the insane foreign policy mess our leaders have led us into. Read it as the major manifesto of an American patriot for logical foreign policy and U.S. national interest. Neocons will be annoyed.
Book Review: Necessary and excellent work
Summary: 4 Stars
1. One thing nearly every reviewer missed here is that Scheuer is essentially advocating near-isolationism as a way to save American lives, erode bin Laden's support in the Muslim world, and uphold true American values by breaking ties and friendships with repressive and anti-American governments.
2. Adherents of Catch-Phrase spouting, Chronic Labelist conservatism have entirely missed the point of the book. "Mikey Scheuer, in this babbling buffoonistic tome that not only gives aid and comfort to our enemies but also to the usual "Blame America Hate Israel" goons gathered around the Soros-Moore-MoveOn.Org kool aid pail, chooses to blame American Middle East policies and our support of Israel for why Osama is mad at us."
Osama *is* mad at us for support of Israel. Osama *is* mad at us for our Middle Eastern policies. You have *not* read any of Osama bin Laden's "letters" and communications to America which Clearly state this. The belief that we are simply facing a group of live-grenade kamikaze chargers, or perhaps dynamite-belt wearing cockeyed loons might sound funnier and be easier to swallow for intellectual simpletons like Sean Hannity, but lacks a real efficacy in terms of understanding the enemy and his agenda.
3. Michael Scheuer is not "blaming Israel" or "blaming America". He is simply saying that we have a choice: Support Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jordan, Russia, etc. and fight an endless, bloody, potentially devastating nuclear war, or serve our own interests in alternative energy sources and self-protection.
4. This book offers a perspective and information you will *not* hear anywhere else. Fox News adherents, whose collective knowledge of the Middle East could fit into a tabaccy container, have not been served by their organizations in terms of real information about "what" the war on Terror is, "who" supports it, and "why" the fight began. There is nothing wrong with knowing this. There is no major fault in reading books and learning things you may not agree with.
Michael Scheuer is, in fact, quite "conservative" in his beliefes on the application of military force, which he doesn't bat an eyelash over. "Mad Dog Jack" and all the other front-porch shotgun defenders who recommended that he get in some "combat time" in the "war on Terror" are hilarious distractions from those of us who actually enjoy expanding our knowledge and viewpoints.
That said, I would recommend at least one reading of this book to anyone interested on the "war on terror" and its present implications.
Book Review: Excellent book, from the other side
Summary: 5 Stars
I really liked this book, even though I am a progressive Democrat and the author is a intelligence conservative.
Without going too far into the books details like other reviews, here's why you should read this.
1. Unlike a lot of anti-Bush, anti-terror war books, this one is actually written well.
2. He uses his unique work experience and perspective to his advantage, giving reasons against the war on terror (or at least the current approach) that are different than the usual anti-war rhetoric.
3. I certainly disagree with a lot of how he would "solve" the problem (ANWR is not the answer, in my opinion), but at least he comes up with some cohesive ideas.
In conclusion, read this book, not because you are going to agree with everything, because it is thought-provoking.
Book Review: Just Had One Problem
Summary: 4 Stars
I won't go into the main themes of this book because most reviewers have done that and done it well but there was one thing that bothered me about reading this book. For the most part, the book paints an honest picture of the United States' ill-fated attempts at putting an end to terrorism and stabilizing the Middle East and Scheuer seems well-informed (even after leaving the CIA). However, he seemed off the mark when describing the Northern Alliance and the huge "mistake" the United States made when they failed to ally with them. I don't have any exact quotes to cite because I lent the book to a friend but Scheuer describes Ahmed Shah Massoud, one of the military leaders of the Northern Alliance, as a great political figure, one who could unite different kinds of people in one common effort. Days before September 11, 2001 Massoud was killed by Taliban assassins posing as journalists. It is believed that bin Laden ordered the assassination and he did so because he recognized the great "diplomatic" talents Massoud possessed and the probable union of the US and Northern Alliance after September 11th. The truth is that the Northern Alliance as a whole are a corrupt and violent organization. They are, essentially, a collection of small factions who were actually warring with each other prior to the appearance of the Taliban. They united because of a mutual hate and contempt they all felt for the Taliban but even after the overthrow of the Taliban they still cannot resolve any of their differences. And the warring continues. They kill without reason and allow their soldiers to rape women and young girls as a reward for their hard work. The United States is better off not having them as an ally.Book Review: much better than expected
Summary: 5 Stars
I had seen this book numerous times at the book store and it always struck me as one of those books that was complaining about something, but not really offering anything helpful. I'm not a fan of Bush by any means, but some of the books that have been written since he's been in office are just horrible. This book always appeared as if it might be one of those books. I couldn't have been more wrong.
Scheuer offers one of the most coherent, pragmatic and logical takes on the "war on terror," and how the U.S. is conducting it. He seriously examines many important issues and deals with each of them on their own merits. Particularly helpful was his attempts to debunk the line "they hate us because of our freedom." Scheuer points out that this is not the case and explains why. This is the first book I've read that seriously examines bin Laden's own statements to try and determine what it is the man is saying.
This book really surprised me. I don't agree with all of his points, but I feel I have a much better grasp on bin Laden and Afghanistan after reading this book. Not only does the book offer serious analysis and would be helpful to policymakers, it's also very well-written and easy to read. I would think someone with very little background could pick this book up and understand it.