Members with This Book
Most Helpful Reviews
see all reviews
Liked It1 of 1 members found this review helpful “One more look at mistakes made in Iraq...this one gives particularly good information about military aspects; about different personalities of field commanders, different tactics and strategies--and problems that occur when "decision-makers" don't listen to troops in the field.” see full review » see other reviews » |
Newest Reviews
see all reviews-
“I think that Fiasco might be the last Iraq book that I read for a couple of months. It is too depressing to think that even with all of this information, current policy makers do not think to reconsider strategy. The next two days might prove me wrong, but I do not think that the American people believe that there should be accountability for the level of errors made. It seems likely that control of the House will shift by a small margin and control of the Senate might even remain in Republican control.
MOF wrote this review Sunday, November 22 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
The political reasons given for the war were a sham. The real reason was to transform the Middle East. The CPA was not there to rebuild. It was to change the politics, economy and culture of Iraq.
Much of the book is not about politics however. It is about military strategy and tactics and what defines the two. Strategy is understanding what kind of war you are fighting. Then there is movement of large units. Finally there is tactics. The most contentious point from this prospective is that the military plan was bad. What seemed obvious at the time that a light and quick strike was best for all occasions proved wrong. Afghanistan taught the wrong lesson. It is more important to secure the country with boots on the ground. Astonishingly there were only 247 tanks in the initial invasion.
Like many military books it is full of management advice. Part of the issue was psychological. W's feelings about his father will be analyzed forever. Less prominent are Rumsfeld's feelings about Powell. He was determined to discredit the "Powell Doctrine" of overwhelming force. Other management critics are throughout the book. Rumsfeld erred by giving a management job to a thinker.
But the story of Iraq is a summary of how not to win an insurgency. The hallmarks of failure:
- primacy of military direction of counter insurgency
- priority to kill-capture the enemy
- battalion size operations the norm
- military units concentrated on large bases for protection
- Special forces focused on raiding
- adviser effort a low priority ”“A well written, lucid narrative of the American invasion of Iraq and its after-effects. Its a terrifying, disturbing book written with chilling detail and context. The invasion itself is not seen as immoral but a strategic mistake. The characters and audience is American. Iraqis rarely figure in this reality. ”
sree harsha r wrote this review Wednesday, November 4 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“Ricks is a phenomenal reporter. He has a way of putting together multiple and complex events and people in a clear, and cogent text. Read it for a great history of the Iraq War '03-05. ”
Joel G wrote this review Sunday, October 25 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“Well organized, well told story of the 2003 Iraq invasion and aftermath. The title pretty much says it all--although, 'dereliction of duty' is probably also an appropriate description of what happened at the highest levels. Will check out the continuation, "The Gamble" next. ”
Chris A wrote this review Tuesday, October 13 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No“This is a great piece of investigative journalism. Ricks does a sensational job of Bush administration's lead-up to the war, going as far back as neo-conservative's call for preemptive war in the mid 90s. Then, years before Bush, Ricks points out that the U.S.'s cause was in dire need of more troops as well as a change in philosophy. He led the call for David Petraeus to oversee the Iraqi operation. Looking back, there wasn't much Ricks got wrong.”
Rob P wrote this review Tuesday, July 7 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“Interesting insight into the issues in Iraq. ”
Izzy A wrote this review Monday, July 6 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No“Excelent -an extremely detailed accounting - the only "bad" thing I can say is I had to put it down once in awhile because I was so angry at the way we mishandled things”
Jim G wrote this review Wednesday, June 17 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“I have mixed feelings about this book. For those of us who did not support the reasons for the war from the beginning, much of the pre-war information does not come as a surprise. The fact that the Bush administration carefully constructed reasons to go to war is painfully obvious at this point in time. What I did find amazing is just how much pressure was put on military leadership to plan and execute the invasion by the non-military leadership. The level of disrespect shown toward the military is shocking. If the military is there to perform actions which take specific training, and the military leadership are then trained to plan such action, the argument can be made that it was a failure of the civilian government that led us into quagmire that we find ourselves in.
Kaz Hope wrote this review Thursday, May 28 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
The book draws information from large sources within the military and some within the government of the Bush administration. While it does mention the issues of torture, it is clear that the author does not discuss the number of Iraqi citizens killed as a result of the US led military action. Again, the book's focus is on how the leadership failed. While US military forces are in a terribly difficult situation, I honestly believe that the problems that have surfaced because of the invasion and occupation of Iraq need to be placed on all participating members of American society. A civilian leadership who lied to obtain their political objective. Military leadership that could not convince the government of the potential, and eventual, problems. The military itself for the encouragement of mistreatment, or torture, and lastly the American public who just sat back at watched. This is a shameful period of our history, which has yet to be concluded, and we collectively share the burden of responsibility for the death caused.”“Shocking”
Rebecca H wrote this review Tuesday, May 26 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“Seemingly thorough review of the development of the war from the brigade level up to the defense department, from before the invasion through the first year or two of the war. Retiring after the Kuwait restoration, having spent 27 years as an officer in the Army, I found the ring of authenticity in his narrative.
John H wrote this review Sunday, April 12 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
It is a little tedious as the author repeats the same facts and time frames. I would think he had finished with the development of his story for a particular period and moved on, when all of a sudden I would finds him back in the same place. I had the sense he was trying to hit a certain word minimum for his publisher without doing any more research.
”
