Fee Download America's Destruction of Iraq, by Michael M. O'Brien
America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien In fact, publication is really a home window to the globe. Even many people could not such as reading publications; guides will certainly consistently provide the precise information concerning reality, fiction, encounter, adventure, politic, faith, and also more. We are here a web site that offers collections of publications greater than guide shop. Why? We offer you bunches of numbers of connect to obtain the book America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien On is as you need this America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien You could discover this book effortlessly right here.
America's Destruction of Iraq, by Michael M. O'Brien
Fee Download America's Destruction of Iraq, by Michael M. O'Brien
America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien. Learning to have reading behavior is like discovering how to attempt for eating something that you truly do not really want. It will certainly require more times to assist. Additionally, it will certainly additionally little make to offer the food to your mouth as well as swallow it. Well, as reviewing a book America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien, in some cases, if you should read something for your new tasks, you will feel so lightheaded of it. Also it is a book like America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien; it will certainly make you really feel so bad.
Reviewing America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien is an extremely beneficial interest and doing that can be undertaken any time. It suggests that reading a book will certainly not restrict your activity, will not compel the time to invest over, and will not invest much money. It is a very economical and also obtainable point to buy America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien However, with that really affordable thing, you could get something brand-new, America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien something that you never ever do and enter your life.
A new encounter can be gotten by checking out a book America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien Also that is this America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien or various other publication collections. Our company offer this publication because you can find more points to encourage your ability as well as knowledge that will certainly make you better in your life. It will be likewise helpful for the people around you. We suggest this soft data of the book below. To understand how to obtain this book America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien, find out more here.
You could locate the link that we offer in website to download and install America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien By purchasing the economical price and also get completed downloading, you have actually completed to the first stage to obtain this America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien It will be nothing when having bought this book as well as do nothing. Review it and also disclose it! Spend your couple of time to simply review some sheets of page of this publication America's Destruction Of Iraq, By Michael M. O'Brien to review. It is soft file and simple to review anywhere you are. Appreciate your new practice.
America's Destruction of Iraq by Washington insider Michael M. O'Brien details the origins of radical Islamic terrorism now spreading across the Middle East and North Africa. The outgrowth of America's involvement in Iraq, culminating with its March 2003 invasion, is the Islamic State-the most violent terrorist organization in history. Michael O'Brien is an outlier: a conservative and former political appointee in the administration of George W. Bush, with an abiding contempt for the political and military mismanagement of the Iraq War, officially referred to as Operation Iraqi Freedom. A graduate of West Point and former Infantry officer, and a former U.S. government Contracting Officer, O'Brien saw the effects of the Iraq invasion from the inside out-not as a soldier but as a contractor advising the new Iraqi Army and Ministry of Defense on its physical infrastructure, including the acquisition of land and Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) originally built for Coalition forces. Compounding in outrage, compelling in detail, Michael O'Brien condemns the waste of tens of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars, and the needless loss of American and Iraqi lives. The Bush administration's desire for war was built on fabricated intelligence and the political agendas of a handful of senior officials. But it is the senior American military for whom O'Brien has his greatest disdain. They should have known how to properly execute the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, and the courage to tell their political superiors what it would take to succeed, come what may to their careers. America's Destruction of Iraq is a detailed exposé of the "military-industrial complex" President Eisenhower warned America of in 1961. Only someone with Michael O'Brien's background and experience, who was at the heart of America's so-called 'reconstruction' of Iraq, can accurately describe America's intervention in Iraq for what it is: a disaster in magnitude equal to the quagmire of the Vietnam War.
- Sales Rank: #3591400 in Books
- Published on: 2015-08-13
- Original language: English
- Number of items: 1
- Dimensions: 9.02" h x 1.25" w x 5.98" l, 1.91 pounds
- Binding: Hardcover
- 488 pages
Most helpful customer reviews
13 of 14 people found the following review helpful.
An essential 3-star read...
By John P. Jones III
I've read several books on America's misadventure and failings in Iraq, which culminated with the invasion in 2003, and have been ongoing ever since. Overall accounts by Thomas Ricks in Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq, 2003 to 2005 and Rajiv Chandrasekaren in Imperial Life in The Emerald City: Inside Iraq's Green Zone each tell the depressing story well. Michael O'Brien's account is more depressing still. He is a graduate of West Point, was a Captain when he left the Army, and worked in real estate for numerous years before he signed on as a contractor for an unspecified company (to avoid law suits, as he says) to work on real estate issues in Iraq. He was there for 14 months, 2006-07. Real estate? At first glance, for a war, one would not think you'd need a real estate specialist. Fallow ground for making a blockbuster movie, like American Sniper [HD]. But glance again, and wars really do carry a significant "this is all about real estate" component. On a more particular basis, when a given piece of real estate is taken over for a "fire base," what happens to the claims of ownership nurtured via living on the land with ancestors going back over 5,000 years? And when that "fire base" is transferred from American military "ownership" to Iraqi military "ownership," is everything accounted for... or nothing? O'Brien freely admits he did not do his job...but it was not for lack of trying. In this book, he looks back in (justified) anger, and has produced this rambling polemic.
Like some other reviewers, I found myself agreeing with a lot O'Brien had to say, and disagreeing with a lot, also. It is very well-trodden ground to say that Bremer should not have disbanded the Iraqi military. In fact, O'Brien must make that precise point at least 50 times. (Is there anyone who thinks Bremer's actions were well-founded?) Likewise, that Rumsfeld was the key architect of the invasion plan, and he committed far too few troops to it. He also states that virtually all the generals (save Shinseki) lacked the moral courage to stand up to Rumsfeld (it would have "hurt their careers.") I also appreciated what O'Brien said about Colin Powell, and how he gave his "credibility" to the Iraq invasion in the infamous WMD speech at the UN... but also that O'Brien had gone back and quoted from Powell's cover-up report on the massacre at My Lai.
What makes the book a worthwhile read is his experience in Iraq, as a contractor. It is "SNAFU" to the third power. Conflict upon conflict, among those supposedly on the same side. Inter-service rivalries among the Marines, Army, Navy and Air Force, all wanting "a piece of the action." Of course, all the military despises the "contractors," such as O'Brien, since they are making the "big bucks." Reserve units, vs. the regular full-time military. And our Iraqi allies, who we are "nurturing" for the big takeover? Best not to tell them anything, and exclude them from meetings in which we turn over the bases to them. One telling anecdote: O'Brien decides to go to the "Inspector General" (I.G.) over egregious wrong-doing. The I.G. is one of the cadets who was kicked out of West Point in a cheating scandal in 1976 (and re-admitted two years later!). O'Brien ends up being aggressively cross-examined by a Marine Colonel ... and, of course, the complaint goes nowhere.
As for my disagreements with O'Brien, they are numerous. He makes comparisons between Iraq and Vietnam. Fair enough. He at least says that with Vietnam as a "role model" as to how not to do it, Iraq is worse. Fair enough, again. The author asks: "How is it that men with high levels of education... vast experience in government... could turn right around and repeat the mistakes of Vietnam, almost as if it was scripted?" But at another part of the book, he says "...if we had only had 500,000 troops in Iraq"... no one would have stood against us. What? Isn't that precisely the number we had in Vietnam? He goes on to claim that President Nixon "almost won the with Operation Linebacker..." What, redux? O'Brien is in favor of the draft. Fair enough, again, and even provides a telling quote from Napoleon on the differences between a citizen and professional army. At one point, he is saying we have the finest Army in the world, at another he is attacking the volunteer military as "a social welfare system that throws money at kids who want to buy a new car," and goes on to say they are WAY over paid! What!... redux, redux, compared to a contractor in Iraq? Wasn't that the one of the "rubs" in forming a "collaborative team"?
Rambling? O'Brien manages to excoriate Jimmy Carter over Iran, drag Obama's birth certificate into the book, declares that Roosevelt "gave Eastern Europe to `Uncle Joe,'" that Gore tried to steal the election in Florida using well-fingered "chads," (O'Brien was on the scene, supporting Bush),and claims that on the way to Baghdad "our forces were up against thousands of plain clothed guerilla fighters who were hiding behind every tree, rock, wall and doorway." He also claims that the Department of State is a "liberal/pacifist" department. He displays considerable racism at times with quotes such as "typical of any Middle Eastern businessman. Screw the client in order to make more money now..."... before he moves on to take on the Italians!
Overall, I am glad I read it, and it did improve my understanding of the continued failure(s) in American foreign policy... but there was also a significant downside to the read. 3-stars.
8 of 9 people found the following review helpful.
A wild ride with some genuine insight and sharp observation, and some total poppycock
By Aaron C. Brown
This book is written with energy and passion, and much of it is based on the author's first-hand observations. As a West Point graduate who served in a variety of contract roles both in the US and overseas, he was high enough up to see the big picture but close enough to the reality to keep his head on straight; and he was independent of any organization that would shape his perspective or insist on his silence. He has no personal career ax to grind (although he is not shy about dishing on people who failed to hire him).
On the negative side, this is a pure "Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" book. There is no moderation, no uncertainty, no equivocation in his account; and his opinions are rendered just as forcefully whether they are based on careful observation, expert knowledge, some book he read or some nonsense that he misheard somewhere. His Abrams is stuck in fourth gear, he doesn't care whether or not he's got a map, and his ammunition is unlimited. He is not even consistent. He appreciates the evil and incompetence that underlay the Vietnam War, but anyone who didn't serve is labeled a coward. There are plenty of reasons other than cowardice to avoid a war, including thinking the war is wrong, or hopeless, or not worth your life; moreover there are cowards who enlist and brave people who oppose the war. I do agree with the author that people who didn't serve have no business ordering others to fight -- both as a matter of morality and for the practical reason that war experience is required to make rational judgments about war.
For all his experience, the author is naively romantic about war. He does a good job of chronicling some of the cynical calculations that led the US to its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and to the leadership failures that contributed the mostly bad outcomes. But every war ever fought has been supported for selfish reasons, people who hope for political gain as well as people who hope for financial gain, not to mention people who want adventure and people with anger management issues and people who like bossing other people around and people who want promotions and people who like to watch things blow up from safe distances. Every war has atrocities and injustices and waste.
What the author fails to do is to measure the venality and incompetence of the Iraq war against the reasons for fighting it. It wasn't as if the US had the option of ordering an honorable war executed flawlessly, such a thing does not exist. Saying you like war but hate the profiteers and mistakes and horrors is silly. However, the author is not big on balancing, he's angry about the bad stuff, and that's enough for him. And once he's decided he doesn't like something, anything is fuel for his anger, Norman Schwarzkopf's waistline, Tommy Franks foul mouth, anything.
If you judge a war by adding up the bad things, you are logically forced into pacifism. I think that's a reasonable philosophy, although I'm not one myself. Personally I think you should fight when you are attacked, period. I do not support wars to make the world safe for democracy, or to promote justice, or to get revenge, or to end some intolerable situation, or on speculation or for fun or profit (I also oppose metaphorical wars on poverty, drugs, terrorism or anything else; neither real nor metaphorical wars are ever good answers to problems; they're things are reduced to when you have no alternative but surrender). But I agree with the author that once you do go to war, you fight until your enemy surrenders unconditionally. The only good thing about war is that it is followed by peace, and conditional surrenders generally fail to produce lasting peace. But the key is to identify your enemy precisely, are you fighting Hitler, or Nazism, or Germany, or fascists, or something else (the author appears to agree with Patton that we were fighting totalitarians so we should have marched on to fight Russia)? The 19 people who attacked the US on 9/11 were already dead; but we could have defined the enemy as the people who planned and aided the attack, or all of al-Qaeda, or the Taliban, or all violent fundamentalists, or all terrorists, or a number of other formulations (not, by the way, including Iraq).
The author seems to waver from his "destroy the enemy completely" (his version of my "insist on unconditional surrender") philosophy when he speaks approvingly of Colin Powell's emphasis on having an exit strategy (Colin Powell is one of the few people in the book to get mixed reviews). When you are attacked your exit strategy is simple, it's not to lose. An exit strategy implies that you stop fighting at some pre-determined point short of total victory. I don't believe in exit strategies, because if you need one, you shouldn't enter. Wars are far too horrible and unpredictable to be used when you're hoping to get ahead on points; and sorta-wars are excuses for horrific violence in pursuit of goals that cannot morally justify killing.
The book covers a lot more than the bad way we entered Iraq and the worse way we stayed there. The author has some first-hand experience in the Florida election recount in 2000, the organization of Homeland Security and a few other events of the last 25 years where politics, violence and leadership intersect. He's clear and honest in his assessments of these things, although few readers will follow him to the extremes he pushes his judgments.
Away from his direct experience, he is much less reliable. He thinks the antiwar movement in the US stopped suddenly when the draft ended. He is as certain that Franklin Roosevelt and George Marshall knew the attack on Pearl Harbor was coming (including the exact time) as that Santa Claus is a myth. He is outraged that the civil rights of suspected terrorists are allowed to hamper investigations that might save lives (if something disappears upon suspicion, it is not a right, and if you don't believe in risking lives for rights, you don't deserve rights). I could put in a much longer list here, but you get the idea.
The book presents some fascinating observation of important events, with some expert opinions about military and political leadership, unintended consequences, honor and competence. It's mixed with some entertaining rants, and some nutty stuff, muddled logic, unenlightened thinking and silly error. It works as a whole because it is suffused with honesty. A lot of it is wrong, but it's not calculated untruth or dogma, the guy makes up his own mind. Sometimes he sees clearly, sometimes his vision's a bit blurred, and sometimes he must be high on something he picked up on his travels. But it's all him.
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful.
More a rant than a serious critique
By Patrick D. Mahaney
I served in Iraq as a "contractor" at approximately the same time as did Mr. O'Brien and much of what Mr. O'Brien states in critiquing the over-all Iraq post-war operation is true, or mostly true, or at least plausible. However, Mr. O'Brien's book is more of a sophomoric rant than a concise and coherent critique of the Bush administration's plan to develop an "democratic" Iraq. I served as a senior level civilian police supervisor on the CPATT/MNSTC-I staff. (The reader will get a full dose of the acronyms if he or she obtains the book.)
There was a great deal of uncertainty, confusion, lack of direction, and a general lack of a coherent plan during the 18 months that I served in Iraq under the State Department line of command. (I won't refer to it is a "chain of command" because the State Department didn't seem to have a intelligible or coherent chain of command while in Iraq). A great part of the problem was National Presidential Security Directive 67 (NPSD-67) signed off by President Bush which gave DoD the overall mission of Iraq reconstruction and redevelopment, and the other government agencies were cut out of the loop, so to speak. Fundamentally, the fault lies with a small group of decision makers in the White House - Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, aided and abetted by National Security advisor Rice - that made a unilateral decision to invade, decapitate, and then occupy Iraq with a wishful hope of establishing a democratic state in the Middle East. It was just a intellectual pipe dream of some of the neo-cons within the Bush administration (with Paul Wolfowitz the primary architect) that some how Saddam's police state could easily be replaced by a democratic state recognizing and respecting human rights. Time has now proven how vapid and intellectually bankrupt that neo-con idea was.
Mr. O'Brien's book hits on some of these topics, yet for some reason, gets wildly off-track in criticizing a host of other persons and institutions that had little or nothing to the do with the Iraq war and post-war occupation. Mr. O'Brien clearly needed a good editor to help reduce the repetitious criticism of Paul Bremer and a number of other individuals. For some reason, O'Brien takes numerous 'pot-shots' at the National Guard and Reserve soldiers serving in Iraq. My experience was substantially different. Most National Guard combat formations (infantry and armor) and MP units did as well as the regular Army in occupation duties. What Mr. O'Brien may be criticizing is the flood of reserve officers drawn from the IRR (Individual Ready Reserve) which is basically a "holding pool" for personnel with minimal level of training to serve a filler in time of war. I agree that many IRR officers were misfits and incapable of providing competent military service, but O'Brien paints with far too broad a brush in his carping and gratuitous criticism of the National Guard troop units.
Ten years after serving in Iraq, it is now fully apparent to me the war was unnecessary, ill-conceived, and based on faulty premises. There was no strategic threat to the United States if Saddam had remained in power. He was basically penned in by the 'no-fly' zones and the trade embargo. There was no need to flex our military might in taking down a third world dictator.
America's Destruction of Iraq, by Michael M. O'Brien PDF
America's Destruction of Iraq, by Michael M. O'Brien EPub
America's Destruction of Iraq, by Michael M. O'Brien Doc
America's Destruction of Iraq, by Michael M. O'Brien iBooks
America's Destruction of Iraq, by Michael M. O'Brien rtf
America's Destruction of Iraq, by Michael M. O'Brien Mobipocket
America's Destruction of Iraq, by Michael M. O'Brien Kindle
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar