Rating: 
Summary: More in Line With Woodward's Hallmark Books
Review: This was a good book. Not a hallmark like his early books, but a better book than some of the author's more recent efforts. Unfortunately, Woodward has been turning from a report-the-facts-and-let-the-chips-fall-where-they-may into more of a political agenda, offering or delaying information if it suits his agenda (he more or less hints at this in this book as well).Overall, there is a lot of good information about leading up to this Iraq war. The Epilogue also contains some pertinent and current information that should not be skipped. One disturbing paragraph was at the start of chapter two (and already being cited in the press). This claims that Bush knew about the 9/11 attack before hand. It appears that the substantiation will come later, but it never does. The author even admits that the "evidence" was questionable, not direct and probably would have made no difference. Why, then, the paragraph that is sure to be inflammatory? Again, a political agenda rearing its ugly head. Some say that this book is damning for Bush. Upon reading it, I clearly think that it is not. In fact, it shows a concerned President who gathers information and leads with his decisions (and NOT a puppet of Cheney, as some would say). The book does show the wavering of Powell, that anyone could see between-the-lines in the news. However, Powell as well as Hillary Clinton and others still have the conclusion that it was the "right" thing to do, with or without evidence of WMD. The book also shows how certain and adamant Tenet was about WMD. It also shows the duplicity of Kerry and hints at why he might not be trustworthy, as all of his military superiors have also said. There are a host of other enlightening tidbits, so it is worth reading and is fairly easy reading at that. The best thing that I liked about the book was the hint that Woodward is heading back in the direction of more objective reporting.
Rating:
Summary: A poignant record of a historical blunder
Review: As has been pointed out already, this is a unique opportunity to read about a chapter in history which is still in the making, and frankly it's rather disturbing. We see a picture of a President who is firmly and honestly convinced of the goodness of his action, but whose conviction could easily have come from never having considered another point of view. We see a secretary of state who could have been Presidential material, but whose career is pretty much finished. And we see a number of pro-war idealists, none of whom had ever seen combat, decide that toppling Saddam was more important than dedicating enough forces to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan in a definite way. I would recommend this book to anyone; its size and density of information is more than made up by its timeliness and insight.
Rating:
Summary: Thanks, France
Review: Overall, I don't think the book makes Bush look bad. Interesting tidbits include Powell negotiating with the U.N. for some sort of peaceful solution to the Hussein problem, and French President Chirac and Foreign Minister de Villepin keeping force off of the table as a negotiating tool, thereby giving Hussein no incentive to change or step down. France and Germany could have avoided this war by standing by the U.S. and demanding change in Iraq. But, of course for France and Germany, it was all about oil. As for war -- the Mission is definitely NOT Accomplished, unlike Bush in the jumpsuit on the deck of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln seemed to imply. Why the rush to war in Iraq? Good question. The book provides some answers. In hindsight, should we have done it? The jury is still out. If Gore had been president, would 9-11 have happened, or would he have prevented it? I doubt it. If Gore had been President, would the Taliban still be in power in Afghanistan and Hussein still running Iraq? Most definitely yes.
Rating: 
Summary: Huh?
Review: Huh? This was the collective response from almost all our allies, foes and half the US public when war was planned for Iraq. For good reason. - Iraq had nothing to do with 9\11. And if your argument is that Saddam would supply terrorists with WMD - look to Pakistan, North Korea, Iran. This book shows in vivid detail the WMD evidence was shaky at best. Not enough to stake our foreign policy on, not enough to stake the lives of our military. Our efforts would have been much better spent in other areas. - Al Queda is a loose group of individuals all over the globe. We can only track them down with the cooperation of other nations. There is no army to fight. Only by treating other countries with their due respect as equals will we gain their trust and help in tracking down Islamic extremists. The contempt shown to the UN and our allies by Cheney\Bush in this account is disturbing. - The Israeli-Palestinian conflict - it is the catalyst for the rage of Islamic extremists. The Bush administration has completely ignored it. An honest and ethical approach to solving it is CRUCIAL to America gaining the trust of Arab countries. This war cannot be fought with bombs, but with ideas. The Islamic world thinks we are at war with them - this was Bin Ladens goal by crashing planes into the world trade center. To start a cultural\religious war. Bush had a problem with the 'vision' thing and played right into it. - And for terrorism, Iran, Syria.. there are a number of nations that lead the list. Iraq is a footnote. The poll that has 50%+ of Americans believing Saddam was behind 9\11 - it shows the ignorance of Americans and the media. It's embarrassing. Crack a newspaper once every month and get a clue. Read this book through your own political lense, of course. Why the Bush administration did not focus on ripping the CIA and FBI a new one for failing the US public - using the outpouring of sympathy and respect from the world after 9\11 which they squandered - and putting the billions of dollars and energy into securing us at home... not abroad. We need a new face on American policy to give us a fresh start.
Rating:
Summary: I'm not dead but its history
Review: "Plan of Attack" I read the entire book and found that it was extremely informative. Evolution to war and the process involved is well written. The information in this book is plentiful. For me it did raise more questions. However, it also provided a lot of answers that I had about why the Bush administration made the decision to go to war. I don't take everything written as gospel. Because some of the material mentioned in the book doesn't really jive how I personally precieve the world. So what? Who am I. I'm just happy there is a Bob Woodward who can communicate so well. If you are like me and trying to understand the insanity of chosing war over peace than read "Plan of Attack"
Rating:
Summary: Plan of Attack depicts President Bush as a strong leader.
Review: Despite all the hoopla from the media, who obviously have not read Bob Woodward's Plan of Attack, this book depicts President Bush as a strong, thoughtful and decisive leader. And despite Woodward himself giving TV interviews that gave the viewer the impression that the book was critical of Bush, it was not. Or not much. This book put a nail in the heart of Democrats and the media that "Bush Lied about WMD's". Woodward tells in his book about a meeting between Bush, CIA Director George Tenet, his deputy John McLaughlin, NSA Condi Rice and White House Chief of Staff, Andy Card where the CIA showed Bush and his Advisers the evidence of WMD's in Iraq. The President challenged the evidence and George Tenet said the case was a "slam dunk case". Bush then ask Tenet, "just how confident are you, George?" Tenet says again "it's a slam dunk". I know that's a blow to the Bush haters and the anti-war appeasers, but life is a b**ch! Great read, but better on Audio CD.
Rating:
Summary: Read It!
Review: While it was clearly not written as an anti-Bush polemic, this book is nonetheless disturbing. It gives the reader an inside track of an administration that was obviously obsessed with starting a war with Iraq. It is clear that the intelligence supporting WMD and the Iraqi/Al Qaeda link was vaporous, and that the claims of the Administration were grossly embellished. Woodward leaves no doubt in my mind that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al were all aware of the fact that the intelligence was insufficient to support either their claims of WMD in Iraq or an Iraqi link to international terrorism. What is unanswered is why they were so doggedly determined to place tens of thousands of Americans in harm's way while diverting attention and resources from real and necessary counterterrorism efforts. Was it because they believed that an invasion of Iraq would be a political quick win -- to impart a sense of security (albeit a false one) to millions of frightened post 9/11 Americans by demonstrating "resolve" and attacking (in a manner sanctioned by the Al Saud family, of course) an Arab nation? Was it because of concerns over the long term viability of the Al Saud family and the perceived need to install a puppet government in Iraq to secure a source of oil in the inevitable event that the Al Sauds are overthrown by Saudi Arabia's Islamist majority? Or was it to vindicate Dubya's daddy? Can one really believe that the war with Iraq will somehow bring stability to the Middle East? I would like to think that Woodward's book will stimulate readers to question the real motives of the second Bush Administration, although I am less than optimistic that this will happen. Hopefully we will all learn the answers sooner than later, however. Whatever the reasons, after having read Plan of Attack, it is more obvious to me now than ever before that the Bush Administration lied to and played upon the fears of Congress and the American people to legitimize its own political agenda. And while some may excuse Bush's actions as demonstrating resolve and others (including Dubya himself) may call it divine influence, to my way of thinking, it is insanity.
Rating:
Summary: Bad Down Bush Bush
Review: If we only could all adopt the Teddy Kennedy way of life and have a health care system like Romania, then things will be perfect and the birds will twitter in the trees, and John Kerry will be elected president.
Rating: 
Summary: An open canvas for NeoCon lies
Review: Just shows when you let Lying Repugnantcans tell their side of the story, you get a lot of posturing, a lot of lying, and greater obscurity of the facts. Thank Jesus I didn't spend a dime to read this book. Pulling it out of the dumpster was quite worth it, as I can clearly see how when you perpetuate a lie, in the feeble-minded it becomes fact.
Rating: 
Summary: dull writing, inside portrait
Review: Woodward, to his vast credit, is a fly on the wall for lots of major moments during the administration's march to war. Unfortunately, he needs a better editor to filter out some of the snippy and irrelevant scenes. Overall a worthwhile book, though. Bush haters, you best check this out.
| 
