Fiasco?

Websters On-Line Dictionary defines a fiasco as the following:

Main Entry: 1fi·as·co
Pronunciation: fE-'as-(")kO also -'äs-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -coes
Etymology: French, from Italian, from fare fiasco, literally, to make a bottle
: a complete failure

I ran across an ad pimping this new book by Thomas Ricks, who is the military scribbler in chief for the Washington Post the other day.

When I first saw it, my thoughts were why the HELL would I want to read that. Because any objective observer would be hard pressed to characterize the war in Iraq by that definition.

So why would he and his editors choose to name a book about the war in Iraq (OIF) by that name? Were they purposely choosing a title that would stir up people like me thereby creating a buzz where the rest of the country would notice the book? Or is Mr. Ricks idealogically driven and in fact believes that the entire campaign was and is a complete waste of time, assets and manpower? Or are they trying to sell the book to the anti-war crowd hoping that the other side would still buy it based on Mr. Ricks past works like Making the Corps.

This is the review at Amazon:

Amazon.com
Fiasco is a more strongly worded title than you might expect a seasoned military reporter such as Thomas E. Ricks to use, accustomed as he is to the even-handed style of daily newspaper journalism. But Ricks, the Pentagon correspondent for the Washington Post and the author of the acclaimed account of Marine Corps boot camp, Making the Corps, has written a thorough and devastating history of the war in Iraq from the planning stages through the continued insurgency in early 2006, and he does not shy away from naming those he finds responsible. His tragic story is divided in two. The first part--the runup to the war and the invasion in 2003--is familiar from books like Cobra II and Plan of Attack, although Ricks uses his many military sources to portray an officer class that was far more skeptical of the war beforehand than generally reported. But the heart of his book is the second half, beginning in August 2003, when, as he writes, the war really began, with the bombing of the Jordanian embassy and the emergence of the insurgency. His strongest critique is that the U.S. military failed to anticipate--and then failed to recognize--the insurgency, and tried to fight it with conventional methods that only fanned its flames. What makes his portrait particularly damning are the dozens of military sources--most of them on record--who join in his critique, and the thousands of pages of internal documents he uses to make his case for a war poorly planned and bravely but blindly fought. --Tom Nissley

Frankly I don't know. After wading through the opening chapter of Cobra II where I was "entertained" by the political leanings and clairvoyance of the authors, I'm not sure I could stand another round of that nonsense. Especially given that I'm returning to the "cradle of civilization" (it may have been born there but it left town as soon as it could) shortly, I'm not sure I want to spend my valuable time reading something that asserts that I wasted my time there the first time and I and all my comrades are wasting our time now. I'm also not sure I want to line the pockets of people who don't believe in what I'm doing and are implying that the 2,500+ killed over there were in vain.

Have I read the book? No I have not.

Is it fair that I criticize the book without reading it? Perhaps not, but if the author wanted me to read it, he shouldn't have entitled the book, Fiasco. Last time I looked the title of a book was meant to describe to the reader the contents of said book. With a title like Fiasco, I don't feel the need to go any further. "With a name like Smucker's it's got to be good", right? In this case I'll never know...at least not with my money...and even then not anytime soon.

Call me judgmental (I've been called worse) but I've been there (Iraq) and even though Mr. Ricks has traveled there 5 times (according to the interview at Amazon.com), hanging out in the FOB talking to strap hangers and the General doesn't equate to knowing what's really going on. Do I have all the answers? Oh, hell no, I certainly don't. And while mistakes have certainly been made over the course of this conflict, and things may have been run better...to call it a "fiasco" is a mistake as well. Fiasco a word so strong that it has stopped me from even considering buying a book. I wonder how many feel the same?