1 comments about The Jonathan Schell Reader: On the United States at War, the Long Crisis of the American Republic, and the Fate of the Earth (Nation Books).

1. When wondering about 'detant' or 'salt' or 'MAD'(mutual assured destruction) you need to consider the facts. This book helps to understand the nuclear arms race and is useful when pondering todays militaries and arms.

1 comments about The Day the Sky Fell: A History of Terrorism (Landmark Books).

1. This is reasonably good summary of terrorism. I only gave it three stars because it attempts to do too much in too little space. Most of the chapters deal with issues too complex for a single chapter. Never-the-less, it is a good starting point for understanding the different faces of terrorism.

1 comments about Temptations of Power: The United States in Global Politics after 9/11.

1. Temptations of Power is the most coherent and least hysterical of the scholarly critiques of U.S. foreign policy under George W. Bush. In a remarkably lucid analysis of the Washington's response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the authors waste no time in relieving the reader of his apprehension that this is yet another leftist assault on American power in the world informed above all by the prudish conviction that the powerful, being powerful, can do no good.
   
   If anything, Jackson and Towle can be counted as reluctant anti-Americans who are fundamentally in sympathy with most, if not all, of the enduring foreign policy principles of the United States. It is with the ideologically-driven violation of many of those principles that they take issue. The central thrust of the book is that the Bush administration has been imprudent, both in securing the immediate imperatives of national security in the age of terrorism and in calculating a rank-order of long-term American interests. On the one hand, the administration has been driven by a powerful set of beliefs, at the center of which is a faith in its ability to widen the global ambit of democracy with force. On the other, it has clearly become, among the Western democracies at least, a heretic on the utility of multilateral institutions and patient diplomacy in the pursuit of national objectives. Whereas patience paid off handsomely in the long twilight struggle of the Cold War, impatience has been calling card of the war on terror.
   
   What's more, the administration's military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq (the "sword" of the Bush policy) do not reflect its preference for taking the offensive over the defensive in the war on terror. Chapter Eight on Homeland Insecurity (the "shield") argues that Americans have not only shouldered the burden of two foreign wars but have also been subjected to new and intrusive laws and federal powers on the home front designed to make them feel less vulnerable while delivering little additional safety. Again, the spirit of Jacskon and Towle's criticism is not that each of the new domestic security provisions is inherently ill-considered but rather that the level of domestic security sought by them collectively is, in practical terms, impossible.
   
   Lastly, the United States has committed errors that combine the potential abuse of power with inept diplomacy and public quarrels over the legitimacy of torture. The most glaring example of this is the decision to incarcerate terrorist suspects in a strange legal limbo at Guantanamo Bay --- a decision that the Bush cabinet obviously thought clever when it was taken but which has been, at the very least, a public relations disaster. Many of us anticipated after that awful morning in Lower Manhattan that the effort against terrorism might well involve U.S. intelligence services in subjecting detainees to questioning "under duress." What we did not expect was that any administration would seek public and congressional approval for the practice. One might not accept the authors' prescriptions for a foreign policy gone badly wrong, but it is hard not to nod in agreement with their list of the Washington's ten most grievous errors in the book's concluding chapter. The politics and diplomacy of Guantanamo tempt an eleventh: shrillness.
   
   Jackson and Towle have written the most convincing indictment of the Great War on Terror this reviewer has yet encountered. It is a sobering assessment of the political impulses behind, as well as the diplomatic consequences flowing from, the Bush administration's policies. But the book is more. The chapter dealing with the challenges to American hegemony arising in China and the Muslim world is especially effective in stressing that the gap of incomprehension between Western and Islamic societies today is vastly wider and deeper than that dividing democratic capitalism from communist totalitarianism during the Cold War. Considered from this perspective, Jackson and Towle have given us a snap-shot of the deterioration of international relations six years into an already troubling century. It is not happy news, but it is a supplementary reason for serious students of global politics to read this book very soon.

5 comments about Blood From Stones: The Secret Financial Network of Terror.

1. This is a fantastic book for everyone interested in Africa, the diamond trade, or the money trail fueling global terrorist activity. The author takes the reader through the many webs of terrorist financing, including key personalities involved in the trade of diamonds and other precious stones. In addition, the author covers several civil wars in Sierra Leone, Liberia, and Congo, which provides a great background to those conflicts. The author traveled extensively throughout Africa and the Middle East to follow the money trail. Farah is an excellent writer who writes in a clear and concise manner. This is an impossible book to put down. Academics and as well as lay people will find this book valuable. In fact, the American people should rush out and buy this book.



2. I suppose Mr. Farah is the type of journalist who loves to be loved. In reading twice through Blood From Stones, I felt as if Mr. Farah was pistol whipping me into believing his reporting. The reader has to first believe that all of Mr. Farah's sources and methods are right, air tight, and without question telling the truth. Yet at the same time, the reader has to leave Mr. Farah the luxury of betraying his sources and running to the nearest US Embassy any time he, the journalist, was under threat from the nasty warlord turned president Charles Taylor. Ok, Al Qaida members bought some diamonds and Taylor allowed them to do so. Great, bad thing, I agree.
   
   Several times through the first part of the book, Mr. Farah said this or that guy was his dream source. And if only those bunch of idiots back in Washington: CIA, DIA, State, etc, would listen, they would know that Al Qaida was operating in West Africa. While at the same time, Farah the patriotic journalist, turns over his sources to these same bumbling officials so that the sources can be polygraphed, debriefed, and prodded into turning coat and reporting for the good ole US of A.
   
   There is a lot of truth in Mr. Farah's analysis and work, but I wondered why Farah is so patriotic? His reporting in the Washington Post probably led to some of his sources being strung up in some lonely part of Liberia and Sierra Leone; killed for being outted in one of Farah's editorials or articles. In the book, Mr. Farah runs to the US Embassy in Abidjan and clutches to Embassy security officers as he and his family leave Abidjan under a threat from warlord Taylor. I said to myself, ok, you're a journalist who happens to be a US citizen, why not stick it out with your sources, send your family home, and deal with it. Instead Farah runs to his editors at the Post, with eureka, I have it, from my dusty part of West Africa, Al Qaida.
   
   At the end of the book, I just didn't know what to make of Mr. Farah's story: good information, nice second part on how terrorist networks work, and some good insider stuff on Liberia. But, comme meme, enough of Farah saying that these or those guys got it wrong, and I know better than you. Mr. Farah in the end is a journalist, who publishs stories about bad people, and hopefully someone does something about it. Not a patriotic dupe for the guys back in Washington who are dropping the ball.
   
   Well, with Charles Taylor still back in Nigeria and threatenting to eventually come back to join in Liberia's new democracy and avoid war crimes. I only hope Mr. Farah can use the good analysis and work in this book, and there certainly are good parts in this well written book, to bring pressure in Washington for Taylor to be brought to justice. Not out of patriotism, but out of sheer revolt for what this killer has done. You know, the book was about Al Qaida and using diamonds to finance its operations. If that what US senators and congressmembers need as an excuse to get Taylor, then so be it. Farah makes a good argument for blood diamonds, but what the heck do you think the bumblers in Washington could do about it anyways?



3. Want to try and understand why the Patriot Act and actions (all belatedly) by the Homestead Security powers will not work in the face of groups that are non-country specific and not driven by personal financial gain (plus can finance their actions on a shoestring based on the examples of 9/11 in New York; Madrid Metro and most recently London on 7/7)? Then this book while written mainly around pre and post 9/11 actions will be an eyeopener being a rare case of a book on investigative journalism delivering more than a scare story and with a real message to consider and debate afterwards.
   
   It is a book of two parts the first being the author's specific bad experience in Western Africa especially in Sierra Leone and Liberia pre and immediately post 9/11. This focusses on showing how use of high value non-monetary goods (diamonds in this case) allowed the use of non-banking arrangements like hawala and charities, to avoid standard intelligence approaches in blocking funds and in the process generate non-traceable routes.
   
   The second part is even more depressing showing how the use since 9/11 of high volume/low financial value per item scams such as baby formula foods and cigarettes avoid detection under old methods of policing since they are too low to attract high level interest, but can ultimately generate millions.
   
   Alongside this the stories told in passing of Russian and Israeli arms dealers cross border activities and endless in fighting between US government agencies over control not result, and the clear message is that the issues are still not fully understood or more critically the manner to detect and tackle yet been mastered and achieved.



4. Douglas Farah was not the first person to write about the conflict diamond trade but he was the first one to make the US government pay attention. His discovery that Al Qaeda was funneling their dollars for conflict diamonds so that the bush (not the president) wars could continue. This is truly one of the most horrifying operations occurring in the US where what can only be described as evil is profiting on all sides. It is an easy to read book with an important message. For those who want to learn more about the conflict diamond trade and the problems it causes this is a great book to start with.



5. I read through most of this book in the bookstore and found it quite disturbing. I'm not qualified to rate the accuracy of the authors claims, however, it wouldn't surprise me if they turn out to be 100% true. Sierra Leone and Liberia have suffered horrific civil wars. I have read other accounts of children being forced to join the army and turned into killing machines. I've also see photos of African children who've had their arms hacked off at the elbows by rebels.
   
   Since almost nothing is made in America anymore I sometimes wonder how much exploitation goes into various sundry items. There's really not much that one person can do about the world's injustices, however, since a diamond is a major purchase it warrants a little investigation. My understanding is that synthetic diamonds are virtually the same quality and cost a fraction of natural ones.
   
   Apparently there is also a lot of blood and destruction involved in gold mining as well, especially in Brazil right now.

1 comments about Iraq and Vietnam: To what extent is the U.S. experience comparable?.

1. Surely the most delicious irony of the long-running mess in Iraq is that one of its principal architects was also one of the first to call it a `quagmire'--generally accepted code for declaring that it is a debacle on the scale of the Vietnam war. In 1994, Dick Cheney argued that the G.H.W. Bush administration (in which he served as defence secretary) was correct not to pursue Saddam Hussein to Baghdad.`[I]it's a quagmire, if you do that', Cheney said, and in quick strokes laid out many of the problems that actually did follow upon the 2003 invasion.
   
   This 3,000-word survey and analysis was prepared for the War in the Modern World program at King's College London. You will therefore have to put up with the spelling and punctuation oddities of British English. Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

No comments about Jihad and International Security.

2 comments about Blood and Fire: La Violencia in Antioquia, Colombia, 1946-1953.

1. Mary Roldán has authored a masterpiece. She destroys many simplistic viewpoints often used in Washington to justify U.S. aid. The author uses a powerful prism to examine the violence in Colombia. She concludes that paramilitary death squads are one of the greatest threats to democracy in Colombia. Roldán's research is impressive. She deserves loud applause.



2. Mary Roldan tackles a complex issue in Blood and Fire. In 1946, Colombia entered a period of violent conflict known simply as La Violencia. The traces of that early eruption can still be seen today, as much of Colombia is still uncontrolled by the government, and subject to rule by guerrilla revolutionaries and reactionary paramilitaries. Today, the problem is ignored by the U.S. government and mainstream media, who choose to assume that all violence there is drug-related, instead of examining facts. To understand the continuing violence in the Colombian countryside, one must understand the origins of that violence.
   
   There's no easy answer for those seeking the reasons that Colombia could have endured such strife for so long, and Roldan doesn't offer one. She narrows her analysis to examine a single department (province) in Colombia, and offers many overlapping suggestions for why the formerly peaceful partisan politics could have turned so bloody there. Roldan is clearly an intelligent scholar who devoted a great deal of energy to her research, and as a Colombian, is passionate about this topic. Roldan's refusal to offer a concrete answer marks her, in some ways, as an honest researcher, but in providing so many different possibilities, the narrative of the book is often confused. It is clear that Roldan did an immense amount of very thorough research, but she is unable to draw a very clear picture of the events of La Violencia. This is, in part, due to the complexity of the problem, but there are structural issues in the writing as well; it is a difficult book to read.
   
   La Violencia is a difficult issue, for historians or modern political scientists, and as such, it often gets ignored. Roldan's book is a seminal analysis, and definitely offers a great deal of information to some one learning about Colombian history for the first time. But be prepared for a difficult read. In many ways, the ongoing struggle in Colombia is like the conflict in the Middle East; learning the history may provide you with a new understanding of the events, but motives are much harder to discern.

5 comments about Bullshit Artist: The 9/11 Leadership Myth.

1. 
   This is an above board attack on an incompetent presidency, not just on George Bush per se. It confirms what we (Republicans) have always suspected about him and his presidency but didn't want to know, or admit to ourselves. GWB and Dick Chaney can no more defend America than they can fight their way out of a paper bag. It shows how little we Americans expect of our leaders.
   
   Maybe John Kerry did cheat with his medals, and had shifting values, but at least he served in the military. It makes one wonder about these "Frat boy" Presidents. They just don't seem to be made out of the same material as their fathers. GHW Bush was a true statesman and a credit to his race and to this country. But the "GWB and Dick Chaney show" can only have one ending: It will grind to a screeching halt, crash and burn, taking American prestige down a full notch with it.
   
   In a time of one of the worse crisis in our nation's history, there sit Bush and Chaney with their hair on fire and their heads stuck in the sand hiding out, waiting for the "all clear signal," but then immediately running to the front of the line to the first photo op to take "unearned credit" for what the Firemen and Policemen of New York City and Rudy Guillani did. In a miltary chain of command, doing such as that would have been considered disgraceful and dishonorable -- not to mention immoral. And for the leaders of a Banana Republic to have done so would have been laughable, but expected. For the leaders of the last standing superpower to do so is well beyond being just down-right embarrassing. It is also unconscionable.
   
   I am not a Bush basher or hater. He strikes me as a nice, not so very bright man. Someone nice to have a beer with. Therefore it was extra important for me that this book's assertions be backed up with unimpeachable references. In fact, that is one of the reasons I bought it. A friend assured me that it was well-documented and he was not wrong. The documentation is thorough and unerring.
   
   Nothing this adminstration has done since 911 has in the least vindicated the Bush administration's megaphone gradnstanding in NYC. So, I was a little dissappointed that the book did not spectulate on what having an incompettent Presidency in these troubled times could mean for the Republic. I suppose with Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Lebanon blowing up all over the globe, the incompetence of this adminstration speaks for iteslf. I gave the book 4 stars.



2. What makes this book stand out from others of this genre is how the author provides an objective perspective on the events of 9/11. I found that after reading this book I really do not care if Ron Schalow is a Democrat, Republican or Communist. For the first time an author has taken the politically charged emotions out of 9/11 by presenting a black and white case against George Bush to determine if he truly fulfilled his duties as president on September 11, 2001. Nothing more, nothing less. You won't get your conspiracy theory fix with this book, just a whole lot of thoroughly researched material and most importantly a much needed dose of commonsense.



3. This easy-to-read book has dozens, if not hundreds, of quotes from Bush himself and people from his administration, through which the reader can plainly see how Bush & Co. dropped the ball when it came to defending America from attack on 9/11. How these same people contradicted themselves and each other after the fact, and tried to make the Presidency's performance on 9/11 look much better than it actually was, becomes painfully obvious.
   
   Schalow outlines the events of 9/11/01, minute by minute, and compares them to the inaction and incompetence of Bush and his cronies. Part of the point of the book is to show what an incompetent President we have, and what a difference having had someone in The White House who knew what he was doing would have made on that day. Instead we had a deer frozen in the headlights who, after having heard of the airplanes crashing into the WTC, continued to sit there and read with Florida schoolchildren, then promptly fled to the middle of the continent on Air Force One. Then, to add to the absurdity, starts acting macho and pissed off, long after it's obviously too late. To Bush, the response to the attacks began on 9/14, three days after the fact, and the President would rather you started remembering about how great he did starting then.
   
   If you want to increase your knowledge of the truth regarding 9/11, I highly recommend this book. The sarcastic, witty style in which it is written makes a tough subject easier to handle.



4. A chronology of President Bush's actions on 9/11, while available separately -- if not sporadically -- across many outlets, has never before been assembled in such a complete and compelling way.
   
   The author's use of actual quotes from administration officials, juxtaposed alongside of his own sardonic anecdotes, presents the material in such a unique way that you feel as if you are having a conversation about the events with the author himself. The book's format makes it easily accessible and the text is something that could be used as a chronological reference for the events of that day in September.
   
   A must read for fans of both humor and fact.



5. TOTAL TRASH.....MILLIONS OF WORDS HAVE BEEN WASTED ATTACKING THE PRESIDENT FOR HIS ACTIVITIES BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER 9/11. NOT ONE OF YOU HAS BEEN ABLE TO CHANGE ONE THING. PERIOD. GORE LOST TO HIM IN 2000, KERRY LOST TO HIM IN 2004, YOU CAN'T IMPEACH HIM, AND YOU CAN'T STOP THE WAR. YOU'VE ALL WASTED EVERYONE'S TIME WITH THIS GARBAGE FOR YEARS. WHY DON'T YOU GUYS DO SOMETHING POSITIVE WITH YOUR TIME? WRITE A BOOK ABOUT THE BRAVE MEN AND WOMEN IN OUR ARMED FORCES THAT ARE SPILLING THIER GUTS EVERYDAY TO GIVE YOU THE TIME WRITE THIS JUNK

No comments about Whose Wars?: Teaching About the Iraq War And the War on Terrorism.

5 comments about The Collapse.

1. This was almost painful to read because of the spelling and grammar errors. I made it all the way through (that would be "threw" in this book) the story but it was a struggle at times. There is a story in there somewhere; too bad the book was not edited before it was published.



2. This novel has a very good story line. Character development is good and the plot moves along quite rapidly. The author does a good job on spending a little time for you to get a feel for the character and what they'd be like and what they're reaction would be to certain things, but without going into too much detail.
   
   Is also doesn't try and avoid the sometimes touchy subject of racial conflict that would undoubtedly happen if things in the US got this bad and it's seems pretty true to life, but at the same time it avoids being like the Turner Diaries or Hunter where the whole book is about race. In a any major crisis people are going to look to their own and they'll usually see outsiders that aren't the same race as they are as a potential threat, that's just the way it works in the real world. I liked the book Patriots, but I didn't see it's entire cast of bad guys (which were all bikers or N.W.O. soldiers) as being very true to life. How many bikers did you see ripping things up during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and during the L.A. Riots? I didn't see any either. Anyway it's realistic and the situation that the characters get into seem true to life if something like this happened.
   
   The story starts out with tension building between the US on one side and China and North Korea on another. Tension breaks out into all out war when North Korean Terrorists are sent to create chaos with nerve gas and sabotage. The whole country goes nuts and busts at the seams and it's up to every man and woman for themselves to survive as best they can. There's a whole cast of characters including people that are prepared for disasters and civil disorder (Survivalists), people that aren't prepared at all (Sheeple), North Korean Terrorists, Black Steet Gang Members, Outlaw Bikers, the Military and National Guard, FEMA Administrators misusing their power and former Cops and SWAT Team Members all looking out for themselves and choosing sides as their circumstances and position in life dictate.
   
   In fact this book would be THE best SHTF novel out there except one thing: the spelling.
   
   The author is really good at using imagery to describe events and character development, but the spelling is absolutely horrible or perhaps the person who transcribed it really sucks at his or her job. The proofreader didn't earn their money on this one either, if there even was one. It really detracts from a top notch story line and I didn't realize that it would bother me that much, but it did just because it was an issue every other page and it happens over and over again.
   
   At some point maybe there will be a "Revised Edition" as it really is a good story, but it needs to be fixed. Hopefully the author will see these reviews and will realize that he has a real gem of a story, but that THE SPELLING IS SOMETHING THAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. The story line is good enough that I'd actually buy another copy if he did something about the spelling.
   
   If you like Dystopia, Survival and SHTF novels like Patriots, Lucifers Hammer, Molon Labe, Turner Diaries, Hunter, Unintended Consequences, Black Arrow, Enemies Foriegn and Domestic and Domestic Enemies: The Reconquista then you'll like this one as well and it's worth suffering through the spelling for just for the story line.



3. What a terrible waste of time & money. Extremely primitive writing. How any publisher could let this go out is beyond me. In terms of movies it have to be below a "B" movie. Do they give grades of F? The dialog, the predictable seqeunce of events, the fact that none of the "good guys" get much more than a scratch, The UN factor, the length of the book which is so boring, well it just stinks. I can't properly describe how painful the dialog is to go through.
   
   On the only upside there are some good list of equipment that would constitute survival kits for home or auto.



4. I really enjoyed this story. I found it to be well thought out and the characters well developed. It is action packed and yet not over the top. I found the premise quite realistic and engaging. I only rate it a 4 star because of the terrible editing. The grammar and spelling was quite annoying, and at times it distracted from what otherwise was a great story. None the less, I can safely recommend this first novel by Jeff Stansfield with the caveat for the poor editing. I believe this is one of those self published internet books which accounts for the lack of professional editing. I believe that this work will get Stansfield noticed by a publisher, and with some professional assistance I look forward to a Stansfield sequel.



5. What made this book gripping was the ever-present "What would I do..." question for the reader; as the different scenarios unfold. In truth, almost nobody can be as fully prepared as the end of society would require. You may have ammo, but no food, or food but no gas. Medical care is a tough one!
   I also felt the timeline was about right- near total breakdown of society in only a few days. A very thought provoking book...
   
   I found very few misspelled words! Instead it looks like a spelling checker was used and every single time a correctly spelled synonym was inserted. It didn't detract much from this fascinating and sobering book.