Rating: 
Summary: Straight from the "Horse"
Review: As ever, Bob Woodward has put together an incredibly cohesive book, stuffed to the gills with facts and words directly from Bush and "all the president's men." The reporter in Bob Woodward really comes out here because he lays out the facts as he was told them by the President himself and the facts are very eye-opening. In my opinion, he is restrained in putting forth his own conclusions or opinions. I found it to be just fantastic and interesting, and the facts can be interpreted to suit both sides of the aisle. Read it!
Rating:
Summary: A book more revealing than perhaps intended
Review: This is a book perhaps even more revealing than the US Administration intended, since it does anything but inspire confidence in the electorate on how Iraq is being handled. It is all well researched and equally scary.... Just in fact as Winston Churchill found back in 1921 when he similarly had to create a stable Iraqi government from scratch after years of bloodshed. We must learn from history. Christopher Catherwood, author of CHURCHILL'S FOLLY: HOW WINSTON CHURCHILL CREATED MODERN IRAQ (Carroll and Graf, 2004)
Rating: 
Summary: Correcting the myths
Review: A previous review states the oft-repeated lie that Joe Wilson "disproved" that Saddam tried to buy uranium: "For example, when former ambassador and Africa expert Joseph C. Wilson is sent to investigate the rumor that Saddam had tried to buy weapons-grade nuclear fuel from an African nation, he comes back from the war-torn continent with the unambiguous conclusion that the rumor was unfounded." Now, in fact, we know that Joe Wilson was partisan liar, and Bush was telling the truth all along: Multiple intelligence agencies and sources have been reviewed, the evidence confirmed (eg the Butler report) and determined that it was well-founded: Saddam was indeed tryng to buy uranium from Niger. Lesson? Dont buy Joe Wilson's book. And dont believe the phony mantra of him and others on the left, bashing Bush as a liar. More and more facts show that in fact Bush acted in good faith. Indeed "Plan of Attack" clearly backs up that thesis. This was about assessing and defeating a threat to United States. Nothing about oil, kowtowing to saudis, or some neocon rule the world plot (sorry mikey moore you're full of it). Just Bush and his team trying to protect national security in a post 9/11 world, with many uncertainties and assumptions that necessarily entails. So the real lying partisan liars are in the anybody but Bush brigade yelling 'Bush lied'. They are wrong. Woodward's work? It's a good book. Dunno if its a "slam dunk" though. :-) Take some of the 'private conversations' with grain of salt.
Rating:
Summary: Woodward has hit another home run
Review: What a great follow up to Woodward's "Bush at War".
Woodward continues to be effective at keeping his bias in check. He presents the information in a responsible manner, showing great intellectual honesty. Don't expect this book to parrot the typical partisan perspectives - what you will experience is the current administration and world leaders as humans with their convictions and failings.
I knew I wanted to read this book after reading the last Woodward book, but when I saw Woodward being interviewed about "Plan of Attack" by Larry King - and watched him prevent various callers from twisting his words to suit their political purposes, I knew that I had to read this book immediately! The book held quite a few surprises, getting some intimate revelations from the likes of Ellie Wiesel and Saudi Prince Bandar and others of world reknown. The mechanics of going to war were also unexpected, much of it revolving around General Tommy Franks and his dealings with the Pentagon and the combat institutions. If you enjoyed "Bush at War", then this book is required reading!
Rating: 
Summary: interesting draft
Review: Woodward here is getting a bit long in the tooth and in dire need of a stronger editor to parse away all the chaff and give a bit of focus. Instead we have to wade through a bureaucratic quagmire of point by point reconstructions of early meetings (and their minutes) and video conferencings, actual document headings and blah blah before the narrative finally picks up steam two hundred or so pages in. A younger Woodward did much better with similar material in The Commanders, on Gulf War 1.
Rating:
Summary: A Magnificent Piece of Journalism
Review: From the secure meetings among Bush's cabinet members, to the stealthy operations of the CIA's network of "ROCKSTARS," Plan of Attack presents the whole story of the build-up to the Iraq war in stunning detail. Wonderfully balanced, Woodward was careful to present the actions, rationale, reservations, and compromises of those involved behind the scenes without spinning or coloring the events with his own political leanings. He leaves his readers with a sense of understanding of the history behind the Iraq conflict, as well as the freedom to draw their own conclusions about its merit. This is an informative and entertaining book that I'd recommend to anyone regardless of their personal political leanings.
Rating:
Summary: "Known unknowns" & "Unknown unknowns" on the way to Baghdad
Review: "The worst thing that could happen would be to allow a nation like Iraq, run by Saddam Hussein, to develope weapons of mass destruction AND THEN team up with terrorist organizations so they can blackmail the world" (emphasis added). Such are President Bush's words & his evolving reasoning post September 11th; which led him to ask this of Donald Rumsfeld on 11-21-2001: "What kind of a war plan do we have for Iraq?" This book by Mr Woodward is the story of what happened next. Rumsfeld had improvised the plans for Afghanistan, but now he was getting the opportunity to get ahead of the curve. He directed General Tommy Franks to review what was on the shelf vis-a-vis Iraq. 5 weeks later Franks was briefing Bush on his preliminary views. This he was asked to do in Crawford so that Bush could gauge the character of the man who Bush would have to rely upon; that is, if he were to chose to pursue this matter militarily. From there Franks kept tweaking and revamping the plan to shorten the time required to build up forces; mostly by determining what needed to be done, when, and whose help would be needed to facilitate such requirements. Franks contributed the "notion of spikes"---how to postition materials and forces into place in a manner as much under the radar, so to speak, as possible. By March of 2002 Franks was himself becoming convinced that his planning didn't just fall within the realm of possibilities by this point anymore, but was rather likely to be eventually acted upon. That's the primal point that is apparent in this book by Mr. Woodward---that the "momentum of war" was pushing this along after 9/11. So that by the time President Bush challenged the UN (September 12, 2002) to address Iraq or become irrelevent, the die was already set. The intervention of Prime Ministers Blair, Howard (Australia), and Aznar (Spain), as well as Secretary Powell, were seemingly responsible for giving the United Nations this one last chance to particiate in enforcing the dozen-plus UN resolutions that Saddam was breeching. The Bush administration thus found itself in a convenient position. Saddam, whose position was becoming progressivelhy less precarious up until September 11th, immediately was thrown back on the ropes, so to speak, as a result of that day's developments. Say---if your predilection is such---that 9/11 gave Bush the excuse to go after Saddam, but it could just as easily be said that Septmber 11th did shock Bush into the belief that al-Qaeda was not simply going to be defeated by denying them sanctuary in Afghanistan; that the Arafat---who spat on the peace plan presented him by Ehud Barak & Clinton---wasn't going to shoulder his pistol as long as he was championed by Saddam; and that one couldn't gamble that in the future al-Qaeda and Saddam wouldn't formalize the alliance that existed philosophically between them concerning their hatred of Western Civilization and/or America. So, was the Iraq was a pre-emptive one? Absolutely. But that doesn't negate the fact that Iraq was in breech of countless UN Security Council Chapter 7 Resolutions (which are subject to enforcement---unlike General Assembly resolutions against Israel, for instance, which have no enforcement mechanism; and are, in actuality, thus purely political). So we have two books in one, in effect, thanks to Mr. Woodward: an exposition of the planning toward war with Iraq, as well as the overlay of the endgame of Saddam's decade long cat & mouse game vis-a-vis the United Nations. It certainly makes for fascinating reading. Cheers!
Rating:
Summary: Woodward's Best Yet
Review: I've been a fan of Bob Woodward ever since I read "All the President' Men". This book, "Plan of Attack", far exceeded my expectations. Bob Woodward shows in detail the inner-workings of our government, especially the NSC. This book details the struggle between Bush administration officials on key issues, some that became policy. "Plan of Attack" digs deep into the division between Sec. Powell and Sec. Rumsfeld on the basics of the Iraq war planning. Everyone remembers seeing updates on news channels on the war planning. This book details aspects of the planning that the American public never even drempt of. Probably to the advantage of the American people. Bob Woodward takes the term "investigative reporting" to a new level. This book, really opened my eyes. Bob Woodward truely did a magnificent job with this one.
Rating:
Summary: methods and rewards
Review: Woodward will probably go down in history as one of the journalists with the most access to the most people in Washington. Part of the reward of reading his books is having a 400+ page glimpse into how the "transparent" world of the federal government actually works.
"Plan of Attack" will give pause to both sides of the debate on the Iraq War. Not only does it show the importance of gambling on intelligence and betting on diplomats' and other executives' stances in the matter of war, but it also shows how strong Bush case was at different points along the road to toppling Saddam. In many ways this book unearths what should have been on the table months prior to going to war. And part of the journalist in me wonders why he didn't break confidentiality to get some of the news to the people who needed it most -- the average citizens most affected by the war (Granted this would have made Woodward liable under Cohen v. Cowles).
His on-background methods, both a hallmark and, some would say, watered down writing of history is as rewarding as it is frustrating in his reconstruction the he-said, she-said politics in the run up to the war. But for anyone who enjoys Woodward's strong writing and compelling story telling, "Plan of Attack" is a "slam-dunk" read.
Rating:
Summary: Timely reminder
Review: This book develops a sound hypothesis and presents balanced, compelling information to support it. It reminds us how MUCH good journalism can uncover and, at the same time, how LITTLE journalists and the general citizenry know about the true workings of the intelligence community. Woodward's narrative is as telling for the facts presented as it is for the facts omitted. Such omissions are not necessarily a reflection of author bias (indeed, this work is one of those rare books that seems to be truly committed to objectivity); no, these omissions are inherent with any discussion of intelligence and military planning. There is some material that is simply not available now; some that will never be. Woodward's work is remarkable for how much he actually uncovered. Readers may agree or disagree with his findings, while respecting his objective, vigorous research. Current history at its most provocative.
|
