Rating: 
Summary: the 'right' are wrong
Review: Bob Woodward's claims in his book are being refuted by the White House. He didn't become one of our nation's pre-eminent journalists for nothing. He has hours of taped conversation and full transcripts to back up his claims, (including taped conversations with Powell himself). He said he will keep them private, but I'm sure, if push comes to shove, he will make them public to silence his right wing critics. He did not set out to bash bush, but was obviously very disturbed by much of what he saw and heard first hand in the administration."To announce that there must be no criticism of the President. or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is treasonable to the American public." (Theodore Roosevelt "editorial", Kansas City Star, May 7,1918) A republican president no less.
Rating: 
Summary: Duplicity Revealed - Again!!!!
Review: Well, the Bush Administration, if nothing else, is certainly controversial. The third book in as many months has just been released and although it's based on 3 1/2 hours of interviews with Bush himself, along with 3 hours with Rumsfield and interviews with seventy-five other administration members, most of whom remain anonymous, it fails to expiate the Bush Administration. "Plan of Attack" is, as it's title infers, a book that outlines the basis for planning and carrying out the attack and occupation of Iraq, which started a mere 72 days after Sept. 11th and was funded by money earmarked for Afganistan. If the book is to be believed, and I'm a believer, the war on Iraq is a misadventure of the highest magnitude. According to the book, The war strategy started out as a two pronged initiative, diplomacy with the threat of war, a war which came about due to inertia. Woodward claims that Vice President Dick Cheny was the driving force behind the march to war, a "powerful, steamrolling force" who pulled the Presidents strings toward a war mentality. The fact that Bush was a foreign policy novitiate allowed the hard liners such as Cheny, along with other allies who had the "Fever" such as Deputies "Scooter" Libby, Wolfowitz and Feith to mold the President to their way of thinking. Other than Secretary of State Colin Powell, who eventually caved in, the other members of the Cabinet seemed to go along for the ride. Cheney, now alegedly, barely on speaking terms with Powell, is quoted as saying "(Powell) always had major reservations about what we were trying to do". WHAT WERE YOU TRYING TO DO DICK? Woodward says that Powell counseled the President against war, stating "you're going to own the place" and invoking the "Pottery Barn rule" on Iraq, "you break it you own it" but in the end, when Powell saw the President's mind was made up, he acquiesed. This was unfortunate because the support of Powell gave the President's position an aire of legitimacy, which the President himself was dubious about. "Nice try" Bush said when CIA Deputy Director John McLaughlin finish his presentation for their case and what would later be the administration's case for Iraqi WMD. Bush went on "I don't think this quite - it's not something that Joe Public would understand or would gain a lot of confidence from". Bush then turned to CIA Director, George Tenet and asked "I've been told all this intelligence about having WMD, and this is the best we've got?" Tenet assured Bush that weapons of mass destruction were indeed in Iraq and even said "It's a slam dunk". Nevertheless GWB took us to the precipice of war and jumped. Is he dismayed that we did not find WMD? Bush claims not, you see, he now has a new mandate. "I believe we have a duty to free people"
Rating:
Summary: The real reason...
Review: "I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. ... corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864 (Letter to Col. William F. Elkins)
Rating: 
Summary: questionable
Review: When contradictory statements are made about the veracity of the contents of a book like this, the tendency is to give the author credence. Well, Woodward may be telling the truth regarding Powell's being out of the loop. But, anyone who automatically gives Woodward the benefit of the doubt, please, please, please read the book SILENT COUP: THE REMOVAL OF A PRESIDENT. It has much documented evidence that Woodward has told and written some monumental lies in the past. And maybe he's changed since then, but I, for one, am not going to count on that.
Rating:
Summary: Sixteen Vests and Blue Fingers
Review: I Dipper sleepy. Book me tired. Flying monkeys give me itchies. Fly monkey fly.
Rating:
Summary: Impressive, Comprehensive, Detailed and Balanced (Good Read)
Review: Background. I have found this topic of Terrorism and Iraq to be quite fascinating, so I have read over 25 of the current best sellers. I just recently received this present book from amazon.com and had it back ordered for 6 weeks. I made up a "Listmania" list of what I thought were the best books. I just read House of Bush, House of Saud by Craig Unger (an excellent book) - a tell all blockbuster, The Choice by Zbigniew Brzezinski (an excellent analysis), Disarming Iraq, by Hans Blix, Noam Chomsky's Hegemony of Survival (truly a book that makes one think), Thirty Days (about Tony Blair) by Peter Stothard, and Price of Loyalty, Paul O'Neill (excellent book), Why America Slept by Gerald Posner, Against All Enemies by Richard Clarke, and the Rise of the Vulcans by Mann and Mann. I put together athe "listmania" list of the 25 best books - the best books - mainly non political taken together, no strong bias conservative or liberal - a spectrum of opinion when you take them all together. I have tried to prioritize them as interesting to read and to get a balanced view. How Is This Book New and Different? The present book is one in a series by the author about the administration but deals mainly with the discussions and decisions on the invasion of Iraq by Bush and his advisors and the military. For the most part it covers the time period from shortly after Bush is elected until the invasion of Iraq, but mostly it is weighted on the time from just after 9-11-2001 until the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. It is a solid effort being over 400 pages long with many notes and a nice "epilogue" to update the situation post invasion. I was impressed with the scope and breadth of the details. He includes talking points and priority lists from secret administration meetings that involved the actual planning for the Iraq invasion. Woodward appears to be good friends with a number of insiders including Rumsfeld. First of all most of the other book's such as the Blix book or Clarke's or O'Neill's gives their perspective. The present book written by Woodword - an outstanding journalist - is much more comprehensive and systematic. He interviews 75 people including the president and has many comments and quotes from a variety of people, so the book paints and more complete and comprehensive picture. In that way it is very impressive. Some of the other books just gave part of the picture. In the current book - and I know from reading the others - you get a more balanced perspective. He also manages to convey the siege mentality of the post 9-11 thinking in the Whitehouse and the acceptance by the administration post 9-11 of the seriousness of all the security threats including nuclear weapons. There are obvious conflicts of personalities and philosophies in the book between for example the views of Rumsfeld and Powell, and perhaps Bush and Cheney were already pre-disposed to invading Iraq. I do not want to give away all the plot, and it is too long to do so. My recommendation is that you should buy and read the book since a short review cannot begin to do the book justice. Outstanding book - 5 stars. You will enjoy the book. Jack in Toronto
Rating:
Summary: Enh, Wrong
Review: Ya know, it'd be a whole lot easier to listen to the left, IF they provided any facts to back themselves up. Limbaugh and Hannity actually encourage thinking for yourself, they provide accurate facts and therefore I decided to base my beliefs on them. You don't like it, go to Russia. Haven't read, had to give 3
Just didn't like the trash talk, so I decided to jump in on it. note: actually I'm 16
Rating:
Summary: Bush ensures my generation has a Vietnam of our own
Review: Like many other individuals with a working brain, I was predisposed to hate George W. Bush. My Texas residency (and previous years of state required Texas Goverment/History courses) meant that I had seen the worst of Bush up close...or so I thought. Even when I previously said Bush was plotting to destroy the world with his oil industry buddies (who non-coincidentally are also daddy's friends), part of me believed this was a joke. Surely, the American people (the Congress included) would prevent such extremisim from acutually occuring in any context? 9/11 was tragic, but the surealism quickly surounding the event aftermath makes Joe McCarthy's anti-communist crusade look like a fine tuned amusement park ride for the kiddos. Exploiting the national sentiment, Bush began to colonize Iraq (replete with Colonial Governor Bremmer) and honestly cannot figure out why the people of Iraq are not excited about trading in one ruthless dictator for another. Once again living up to his reputation as America's (if not one of the world's) best investigative journalists, Woodward explains why the president remains eager to talk about weapons of mass destruction despite the mountains of fabricated evidence now uncovered. Bush is so welded to the idea of conquering Iraq at all costs that he is even ignoring a growing intra-party dissent which is usually unheard of except in times of extreme turmoil (LBJ and Vietnam, Nixon and Watergate) which would otherwise spell defeat for both the sitting president and their party. Bush's actions folks, are an impeachable and convictable offense. This is also the reason why Bush is so eager to renew the Patriot Act despite (again) Congress's rapid unease with supposedly anti-terrorist legislation. Congress and the American people fear (and rightly so) that the broad powers of this act give Bush free mandate to lash out at whatever he wants in whatever manner he wants, letting somebody else worry about the consequences of their mess. The president comes off sounding incompetent because he actually is. Notice that the reccent Bush campaign material is focused entirely on economic cuts instead of the character/morals issue which was allegedly so important four years ago. Finally, it is telling that many Republicans and conservatives are praising this book for revealing the president's country-endangering flaws during the much-hyped 'war on terror'.
Rating:
Summary: Bush's Cover ups: Then and now
Review: Don't you see that Bush recommends the book so he will appear more innocent?
The book is potentially destructive to his campaign, especially in these prime months. If he rebuffed the allegations, people would want to know exactly what happened urging more people will read the book and amplifying its affect. Readers would either believe what the book says, or would compel further investigations to dig further into the white houses other unexposed secrets. Bush would obviously not choose this because it would dwindle his chances for a second term.
Yes, the book is detrimental, but Bush tries to make the damage minimal. He can't try to attempt to deny the claims, because later, it would be proven that he had done something wrong. By approving the book, he asserts that he has nothing to hide. It's the best action he could make, because less people would think there's something worth reading. He acts as though his undisclosed actions were appropriate, negating much of the criticism and damage, hoping the book won't having a lasting tinge in voters minds on Election Day.
Rating: 
Summary: Bob is selling out America
Review: Wow, Bob must have used the old tape recorders in the Oval Office to actually know what was being said. Oh, wait, he's basing his book on what was said AS TOLD BY Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc, etc. Come on folks, if this is actually on the RNC's website as recommended reading, then something isn't square. If the truth always resides somewhere in between, then you have to raise your eyebrows if the White House and the RNC are recommending it. Common sense tells you Bob can't be finding the truth independently because his information comes from all the horses mouths. I believe Bob has been completely manipulated by the White House to spin the truth about, oh, little things like WMD's, or the lack thereof. Tenet is the sacrificial lamb and will take-one-for-the-team. Bush describes to Woodward how Tenet says the issue is a "slam dunk". Since when did we allow cross-examination by the witness himself?? This book is laughable and is an outrage to common sense thinking. Bob should take a huge step back and think about his lack of independent information gathering and objectivity.
| 
