New Book Illuminates Top Levels of Government Heading Into Iraq

April 17, 2008 RSS Feed Print

I haven't finished reading Douglas Feith's War and Decision: Inside the Pentagon at the Dawn of the War on Terrorism, but I feel secure in saying that it is an extraordinarily frank and persuasive book. Feith, who served as under secretary of defense for policy from 2001 to 2005, has been criticized harshly and, I think, unfairly for somehow lying us into Iraq. In War and Decision he presents his view, fortified by generous quotes from government documents, reports, and memorandums. He should be saluted for getting many materials declassified so that we can have a clearer idea of what was actually going on at the top levels of government. I have long been struck by the contrast between what we can read today about the acts of leaders in World War II and what I gather was available to readers at the time. This book provides our first in-depth look at the inside of the Bush administration's national security top leadership from one who was there.

One warning, however: Those who are looking for dirt on Feith's colleagues in government are not going to find it here. He seems to be at pains to relay the arguments of those who had different views fairly and accurately. He concedes some mistakes of his own. And he contradicts much of what has become conventional wisdom about the Iraq war. To whet your appetite, here is an excerpt from the introduction:

Readers who have invested time and faith in the current public affairs literature may find it jarring to discover that key Administration figures—Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Richard Armitage, Paul Wolfowitz, myself, and others—made arguments and advocated policies that run directly counter to the positions usually associated with them. For example:

  • It was the Pentagon "neocons" who continually urged the President to tone down his democracy rhetoric.
  • The most powerful analysis of the downsides of going to war in Iraq came not from the State Department or the CIA, but from Donald Rumsfeld.
  • The Pentagon-CIA dispute over the Iraq-al Qaeda relationship began with objections by Defense officials about the CIA's politicization of intelligence, not the other way around.
  • The work of the State Department's Future of Iraq project on post-Saddam political transition was opposed not by Defense officials, but by Colin Powell and Richard Armitage.
  • It was CIA officials who predicted that Iraqis would launch pro-U.S. uprisings after the start of the war.
  • It was State Department officials who advocated a multiyear U.S. occupation of Iraq.
Tags:
Iraq,
Iraq war (2003-2011)

Reader Comments Read all comments (6)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Real good theme. Thanks, webmaster(s) ;)

Jessica_Alba of OK 4:02PM April 25, 2008

Bush and the GOP were responisble for the elimination of Libya's nuclear weapons program, the shutting down of Pakistan's mad nuke scientist and his efforts to help evil regimes acquire nukes, and the stopping of Saddam's plans to re-start his nuke program.

As a result of US efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, millions of Muslims (all over the globe) have turned against the terror tactics of al Qaeda. The democratically elected govt of Iraq gets stronger every day. History will show that Bush and the GOP got it done despite the desperate efforts of the Dems and the MSM to defeat the United States.

Stan of TN 2:44PM April 21, 2008

Northern Pike, I prefer:-

'Seventh bullet point

The most important bullet point of all.

*It was President Bush, the Republicans and the conservative half of the Democratic Party that are responsible for this $3 trillion successful campaign against the world's bad guys.'

Adolf Fiinekensein 5:19PM April 18, 2008

Michael Barone

Michael Barone

U.S. News Weekly

Subscribe Today

Order the new U.S. News Weekly digital magazine at a special low introductory price!

Michael Barone is a senior writer for U.S.News & World Report and principal coauthor of The Almanac of American Politics. He has written for many publications—including the Economist and the New York Times.

Thomas Jefferson Street Blog

Obama’s Contraceptive 'Compromise' Doesn't Pass the Smell Test

The so-called "accommodation" on contraceptive coverage reinforces the administration's commitment to its pro-choice agenda.

On Women in Combat, Rick Santorum Insults Military Men

To suggest that the men in our armed forces cannot control their emotions is a real slap at the professionals who wear the uniform.

To Avoid a Failed February, Mitt Romney Needs a Big Idea

Mitt Romney needs a big idea to rouse enthusiasm for his campaign.

How Mitt Romney Should Respond to the Improving Economy

Even if the economy continues to improve, Mitt Romney still can present a better plan than Barack Obama's.

The Problems With the Catholic Church and Birth Control

The Catholic Church's stance on birth control is a slippery slope, as an Obama administration ruling highlights.

Democrats Rebelling Against Obama Birth Control Policy

Some Democrats are among most publicly opposed the an Obama policy requiring religious institutions to cover contraceptives.

Catholic Birth Control Fight About Healthcare, Not Just Religion

The framing of the issue of required contraceptive coverage in religious terms obscures the real question.

Rick Santorum's Sweep Means It’s Still Anybody’s Race

The GOP finds itself in the unusual position of not being sure who its nominee will eventually be.