Fiasco Revisited
OK, I admit that I hate it when people review something without actually looking at it, so in the interest of being fair, I've had a look at a book that I said bad things about recently without having read it. No I didn't pay for it, I obtained the copy through a friend before he could burn it.
Fiasco, The American Military Adventure in Iraq by Thomas E. Ricks of the Washington Post is a book that has a definite point of view. That view is summed up quite well on page three where Mr Ricks writes,"President George W. Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003 ultimately may come to be seen as one of the most profligate actions in the history of American foreign policy. The consequences of his choice won't be clear for decades, but it already is abundantly apparent in mid 2006 that the US government went to war in Iraq with scant solid international support and on the basis of incorrect information-about weapons of mass destruction and a supposed nexus between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda'a terrorism-and then occupied the country negligently."
He then lays out the case that the policy of containment was working, that Operation Desert Fox came close to toppling the Hussein regime (page 19). The Army is/was at odds with the SECDEF because of his misguided policies in regards to the administration of "transformation". But then the soldiers who are smart enough to dislike the SECDEF are too stupid to manage/fight the insurgency in Iraq.
Out of curiosity, I flipped to the index to see what had been written about a significant event in my life...the fight in Sadar City which culminated in AUG of 2004. The events there were covered on pages 337-338 and mostly concentrated on the fact that 1st BCT patrols from the 1st CAV encountered a lot of resistance, and the FOBs got hit with a lot of indirect fires. He fails to mention that by the time 1st CAV left the AO, the area around Sadar City had pretty much settled down and numerous civil affairs projects had or were taking place in that section of Baghdad.
That in a nutshell is the problem I have with the entire book. Mr. Ricks has found a conclusion and has found events and people who support that conclusion. He doesn't present the ENTIRE picture and at times presents only part of the story. I tried to read this book hoping that like the book Cobra II I could find some documentation of events that would be worth putting up with the authors obvious political leanings. As far as I could find there is no such reward in his book, only the condemnation of our efforts and damnation of anything to do with or in support of the current administration.
Frankly I'd rather read the instructions for my wrist watch than wade through 439 pages of this predictable crap.
Fiasco, The American Military Adventure in Iraq by Thomas E. Ricks of the Washington Post is a book that has a definite point of view. That view is summed up quite well on page three where Mr Ricks writes,"President George W. Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003 ultimately may come to be seen as one of the most profligate actions in the history of American foreign policy. The consequences of his choice won't be clear for decades, but it already is abundantly apparent in mid 2006 that the US government went to war in Iraq with scant solid international support and on the basis of incorrect information-about weapons of mass destruction and a supposed nexus between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda'a terrorism-and then occupied the country negligently."
He then lays out the case that the policy of containment was working, that Operation Desert Fox came close to toppling the Hussein regime (page 19). The Army is/was at odds with the SECDEF because of his misguided policies in regards to the administration of "transformation". But then the soldiers who are smart enough to dislike the SECDEF are too stupid to manage/fight the insurgency in Iraq.
Out of curiosity, I flipped to the index to see what had been written about a significant event in my life...the fight in Sadar City which culminated in AUG of 2004. The events there were covered on pages 337-338 and mostly concentrated on the fact that 1st BCT patrols from the 1st CAV encountered a lot of resistance, and the FOBs got hit with a lot of indirect fires. He fails to mention that by the time 1st CAV left the AO, the area around Sadar City had pretty much settled down and numerous civil affairs projects had or were taking place in that section of Baghdad.
That in a nutshell is the problem I have with the entire book. Mr. Ricks has found a conclusion and has found events and people who support that conclusion. He doesn't present the ENTIRE picture and at times presents only part of the story. I tried to read this book hoping that like the book Cobra II I could find some documentation of events that would be worth putting up with the authors obvious political leanings. As far as I could find there is no such reward in his book, only the condemnation of our efforts and damnation of anything to do with or in support of the current administration.
Frankly I'd rather read the instructions for my wrist watch than wade through 439 pages of this predictable crap.
posted by Outlaw 13 at 18:26
<< Home