Bush Books

If one is interested in the small wars of liberation that were ongoing on the African continent during the late sixties and early seventies, this story will not fulfill your quest for knowledge. The author may indeed have been and excellent soldier,but as a writer he leaves much to be desired. I was looking for something much more substaning then this tale. The atocities that were commited against white settlers and their families appears to have been glossed over. Not really a bad read,but just not quite right.

This is the fascinating story of the Rhodesian Selous Scout extraordinary Dennis Croukamp. This legendary scout established the tactics, techniques and procedures for small team and singleton reconnaissance (recce) operations that were so successful in the Rhodesian Bush War that the South African Special Forces (5 Recce) adopted these same techniques in their Border War (you can read about the South African exploits in the book "Journey Without Boundaries by Andre Diedericks).

The Rhodesian Selous Scouts was a visionary organization that took various tactics to extremes with success, this outfit was not afraid to "think out-side the box". They mastered and used tactical combat tracking with extraordinary results. They also employed a technique they are most famous for, that of pseudo-operation which they used to ultimately infiltrate terrorist cells and nets to disrupt and eliminate terrorist "underground" and infrastructure. And finally they mastered the art of singleton/small team operation which this book covers in-depth. There is a lot of lessons to be taken away from this book that still can be applied today. The American military in general do not like to operate in small teams outside the special operations community. Back in the day "regular" military snipers operated as singletons then in two man teams (Sniper and spotter), now today most conventional snipers operate in three-man teams and greater! So as you can see this method of operation is ultimately falling to the wayside. This book shows and proves it can be used successfully (risk vs. reward!) in counter-insurgency operations and special operations.

Now back to the book. It covers Crouks career in the Rhodesian Army were he first served in the Rhodesian Light Infantry (RLI) and were he was initially decorated for valor (he would later become one of Rhodesia's most decorated), following the RLI Crouks attends the dreaded Selous Scouts selection and is selected to be a member of this elite unit commanded by Reid-Daly (you can read his book "Pamwe Chete - The Legend of the Selous Scouts"). Once in the Selous Scouts Crouks found that the "cloak and dagger" life of pseudo-operations was not as exciting as he hoped (as most fire fights and kills were done by the RLI and Fireforces), so Crouks moves on to the elite Recce Troop within the Selous Scouts to find the excitment/action he so missed, this is were he became the Rhodesian military reconnaissance specialist a true subject matter expert. Crouks goes on to see action in the all the border areas of Rhodesia as well as conducting external operations (cross border) in Mozambique, Zambia and Botswana. Also Crouks was instrumental in the employment of military free-fall in the Recce Troop.

This book also has a lot of references (corrections and additions by both gentlemen) to the Reid-Daly book "Pamwe Chete" as for a long time Reid-Daly and Crouks were on the "outs" over incidents in the past during their service together in the Selous Scouts, so much that Reid-Daly had cut all (or most of) the exploits by Crouks out of his book. In Crouks writing this book he contacted Reid-Daly to set the recorded straight and in doing so they both are now somewhat friends again. So this book is like the lost chapters or appendix to "Pamwe Chete". So to truly get the full story of the Selous Scouts you need to read both books to finally get the complete history.

This book was originally titled as "Only My Friends Call Me Crouks - Rhodesian Reconnaissance Specialist". Finally I cannot recommend this book more; it is a superb read for any one interested in counter-insurgency. It is a ideal read for the true military professional and a must read for the Rhodesian Bush War enthusiast or historian.

....This book is solid shop talk for those interested in defense policy, broaching many issues while consistently focusing on ways to limit (but not necessarily reduce) defense spending. O'Hanlon argues that aggregate defense spending must increase modestly to preserve US interests at home and abroad, but that sensible cuts can be made elsewhere to offset the increase. Some expenditures should be considered essential, such as replacing aging equipment which was acquired during the Reagan administration. However, these costs can be tempered by limiting, though not eliminating, acquisitions of cutting edge technology while replenishing fleets with existing, effective, and less costly technology. O'Hanlon makes a compelling argument (financial and otherwise) in favor of moving away from a two-war defense framework to one which enables the US to simultaneously tackle three engagements of varying intensities, something on the level of Desert Storm plus Desert Shield plus Bosnia / IFOR. Many of O'Hanlon's arguments on homeland defense, while valid, have been discussed in more detail elsewhere (e.g. "America's Achille's Heel"). His arguments for a limited missile defense (focusing primarily on boost-phase missile intercepts and the need for additional research) are solidly stated, and probably more so in his book "Defending America". A very thorough discussion of the China-Taiwan issue is provided, exploring potential military threats from both sides in detail. O'Hanlon argues that China's current military threat to Taiwan is almost negligible and that only a Chinese blockade of the island would be likely to require outside military intervention. The military and tactical strengths and weaknesses of both countries are discussed in turn, while exploring the delicate line the US must walk between antagonism and pacification in the region.

Every citizen needs to read and think about the future of national defense. This book is one of the core readings.

Among the recommendations in this book that make it essential reading for anyone concerned with streamlining and revitalizing national security, I consider the following to be sensible:

1) cost savings should not be achieved through the wholesale abandonment of overseas commitments (13);

2) achieve additional cost savings as well as increased operational utility by sharply limiting spending on the most advanced weapons and mobility systems, applying the savings to maintaining readiness and buying larger numbers of "good enough" weaponry (83);

3) citing Stephen Rosen-he could also have cited Colin Gray-he urges a slowdown in the so-called Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) while emphasizing that true RMA's are less about technology and more about the very best mix of people, time, and information to produce innovation (88);

4) in this vein, he noted the continued excessive focus on mobility platforms rather than C4I or joint service experimentation (90);

5) homeland defense needs several billion more dollars per year (129), a recapitalization of the U.S. Coast Guard by with at least a $750 million a year increase (135), and a sharply increased focus on setting C4I security standards for unclassified communications and computing networks across the nation, with roughly $100 million a year additional;

6) politely put, National Missile Defense is best conceptualized as theater missile defense (TMD, 143); and

7) Taiwan would be a nightmare for all sides.

Among the assertions in this book that give me pause are

1) defense down-sizing in the past ten years has been successful, trimming a third of the budget and manpower while retaining quality and cohesion (p. 1);

2) that 3% of the Gross Domestic Product is adequate for defense spending and we do not need to go to the less-than-traditional 4% (3-4);

3) that the Marine Corps should be employed to relieve Army troops in the Balkans (57) or Korea (80);

4) that North Korean armored forces would have great difficulty breaking through Allied lines to Seoul (71);

5) that rogue nations like North Korea would attempt to provide their infantry with chemical protective gear when using chemical weapons (73);

6) that US airpower is both a rapid-response solution for distant threats as well as an overwhelming response for sustained threats (76, passim);

7) that arsenal ships are survivable in off-shore loiter mode (111); and

8) that an overseas deployment rate of 8% of the total force is too high (227).

Having said that, and with all my reservations about a book, no matter how talented the author, that does not preface its discussion of force structure with a review of the recommended strategy, and a discussion of the recommended strategy with a review of the real-world right-now threat, I have to rate this book a solid four in terms of seriousness of purpose and utility of content.

It would be twice as valuable if it included a thorough discussion of what kind of Global Coverage intelligence investment is needed in order to make defense forces relevant and capable in the future; and if it included a discussion of how defense forces are but the most expensive instrument of national power, and must be designed and funded in consonance with the other instruments, and especially the severely underfunded diplomatic, economic, and cultural instruments.

The author, easily one of the top three citizen-reviewers of the national security spending program, ultimately recommends less expensive weaponry, a different two-war capability ("1+A+i"), selective reductions in overseas deployments, more defense and less nuclear offense, selective increases in homeland defense including the U.S. Coast Guard and joint experimentation, and a modest increase (roughly $25 billion) of the defense budget that would combine with his recommended savings to yield the $60 billion or so transformation delta that others have recommended.

I like and recommend this book. Out of context, however, it is a dangerous book, for it will lead an inexperienced President and a Cold War team to the conclusion that only a transformation of the traditional military (Program 50) is necessary. O'Hanlon has done it again-he has provided the baseline from within which a reasonable public debate about defense transformation might ensue. The military issues he addresses comprise both the foundation and one of the four corners of our future national security-my concern about this book is that it is completely isolated and makes no mention of the other three corners without which we cannot maintain a proper roof over our heads: intelligence (threat understanding), strategy, and Program 150 soft power-power that today is both silent and emaciated.

George W. Bush so far so good, George had to do what the man had to do, Never be the man of His fathers stature...but the book do give the reader a rare insight of the President. Iraq was a no win situation but the dirty job had to be done,there is no turning back now.

There are a lot of interesting essays in this book, but the overall impression I got from it was simply that somone needed the money from selling this book. It's just too early to render any kind of meaningful judgement about the Bush presidency, especially since it's ongoing. Most of the information in these essays is familiar to anyone following politics and this administration on a regular basis.

Nonetheless, if you're looking for a quick scholarly examination of Bush's presidency so far (and by so far I mean up to mid-2003, when these essays were written), this book is worth taking a look at.

On the evening of 9/11, Bush told his cronies, "This is a great opportunity." The US ruling class seized the chance to expand its empire.

Its attack on Afghanistan killed more than 3,000 civilians and overthrew the Taliban government - which had not attacked the USA. It failed to get the Al Qaida leadership, which had attacked the USA. Then Bush, with Labour's support, attacked Iraq, which has never attacked the USA, killing, according to The Lancet`s recent estimate, more than 100,000 Iraqi civilians, mostly women and children.

The US occupation government in Iraq and its puppet have kept Saddam's labour laws banning some trade unions and forbidding all strikes. In June 2003, US troops stormed the Iraqi Workers' Federation of Trade Unions' offices and arrested its leaders.

The authors trace the bones of empire in the drive for oil and bases. They describe the Bush crowd and Bush himself. They note the traditional US ruling class aim of `scaring the hell out of the American people.' As ever, empire brings aggressive wars `to prevent war', violent military occupations and vile war crimes.

The US is indeed a giant with feet of clay. Its military forces are dispersed over 153 countries. Its leadership is pathetically inadequate to the impossibly huge tasks of running an empire. Its economy is overstretched. The government deficit was $375 billion last year, the trade deficit $435 billion, so Bush had to borrow $500 billion abroad. An empire in decline produces chaos at home and abroad.

How do the authors suggest that we beat this empire? By building links between the campaigning environmental, peace and anti-globalisation groups, and by ever-bigger demonstrations and Forums! But occasional international contacts between activists change nothing. The endemic failures of the Second and Third Internationals prove this beyond doubt.

Their approach is pure anarchism. It rejects working in trade unions and rejects workers' nationalism - it is a recipe for permanent subjection and defeat. Only solid working class politics, rooted in national trade unions, can defeat the capitalist classes who run the empires.

Imperial Overstretch at first glance seems an odd title for a book about a nation that was founded in a revolution against an empire. Indeed, the principles upon which it was created were based on the democratic concepts of the Enlightenment. The United States of America was to be a republic whose ideology held the concepts of imperialism and colonialism to be anathema. The authors, however, in this concise, well reasoned, and well-documented book, present a compelling case for the fact that the US began its imperial growth virtually from its beginning.

Empires have existed since the beginning of recorded history. As a civilization becomes successful, it grows, conquering new lands in hopes of increasing its wealth. Paul Kennedy described the organic process of the growth and decline of empires in his book The Rise and Fall of Great Powers. It is from Kennedy that the authors get the term imperial overstretch. As an empire grows, it expands its wealth and the military power needed to protect that wealth and to make new conquests. However, this process of growth contains the seeds of its own destruction. The larger the empire becomes, the more of its economic production is devoted to the military costs required to maintain and expand its power. At some point, the imperial power reaches overstretch and begins its decline as the cost of maintaining that power becomes more than the economy can sustain. Sustainable power ultimately results from a strong economy rather than a strong military.

Roger Burbach and Jim Tarbell have applied this mode of analysis to the United States at the beginning of the Twenty-first century. Although the US does not have a colonial empire like Rome or Britain had, its military and economic hegemony translate into imperial power. The book shows how the current Bush administration in general, and the war in Iraq in particular, have pushed the nation into imperial overstretch and decline. The heart of this slim, eminently readable volume is an analysis of the Bush administration and the war in Iraq. It shows how the war is part of an attempt to establish US hegemony in the oil and gas rich areas of Southern Asia. It looks at how the Bush administration achieved power, and the incompetent way it has abused that power, especially in Iraq. It gained power with the support of an unprecedented fund raising apparatus among the ranks of corporate conservatives, especially in the energy industries, and a well-organized fundamentalist Christian right. Unfortunately the ability to gain political power does not guarantee the ability to govern effectively. Influence over decision making within the administration is tightly controlled by a group of hubristic neo-conservative and militarist zealots. The war on terrorism, and the war on Iraq, which the administration has dishonestly convinced the American public are one in the same, has been a series of arrogant, bad decisions that were disastrously executed.

All of this has appeared in the media, but not enough of it in the mass media. The best selling books on the war in Iraq tend to focus on narrower subjects. Burbach and Tarbell have put it all together into a coherent analysis, which shows how and why it happened. It places the war into an historical context, and presents the likely economic results of the debacle. It is an important book that is essential reading for anyone who wants a comprehensive understanding of the war in Iraq and its likely outcome.

It is easy to understand the tragedy of the Iraq war in terms of human suffering and wasted resources, but why should one be concerned about the decline of yet another imperial power? The United States gained its international hegemony after World War II, in no small measure due to the encouragement of its allies. At that time, it was responsible for roughly 50% of the world's economic output. But the Cold War was basically a series of wars of containment. The Bush administration has gone beyond that by trying to expand its imperial power through wars of preemption, with dangerous disregard to international institutions and alliances. The US has become a rogue nation. The international system that was created at the end of World War II is in danger of collapsing. (Bush to the UN: Vote with us or become irrelevant.) The dangers of war and terrorism have increased. Secondly, the US is still the world's largest economy, and the rest of the world depends on a healthy US economy. The trade deficit is currently about a half trillion dollars per year and growing, and the United States has a net debt obligation to the rest of the world of around three trillion dollars. Projections for the future are even bleaker. Most of this has been caused, as Kennedy suggests, by the military expenditures necessary to try to maintain global hegemony.

Burbach and Tarbell, however, refuse to succumb to bleak depression. They find hope in such growing grassroots movements as environmentalism, anti-corporate-globalization, and anti-war. They see the ultimate solution as a fundamental change in our current capitalist system (something which they admit could take centuries). Unfortunately, neither the US nor the planet can afford to wait centuries. Something needs to be done now. What is required is a change of government to one willing to work within the international system to maintain peace and stop despoiling the environment. This is more than imperial decline. It may be our last chance to avoid global decline

This book was very interesting and had some valuable insight into combating an insurgency type of conflict. The human aspect written into the short stories gave the book great character. I would recommend this book to anyone preparing to conduct counterinsurgency operations.

I bought this book thinking I'd get an action packed book full of gunfights, death and combat. What it is, is a compilation of humorous stories written by what Americans call a "reservist." The author was drafted into the territorials and served part time, well hardly part time if you ask me. Six weeks on, six weeks off, in the Rhodesian Security Forces. He served for a hell of a long time and did see some action. This book is not so much about the action as the funny stuff that happens along the way. This book was good. I read it in two days. It's very light reading and is downright funny. It gives a different perspective than Cock's Firefore or Warren's At The Going Down Of The Sun, as the author speaks of his farm and civilian life as well. If you're a current or former military man, you will definitely appreciate the humor in this book. Highly reccomended.

Others have described Rove as "grooming Bush" (vs. a subordinate), shaping policy based on politics, co-president, and manager of a never-ending Bush campaign. However, Moore does not make it clear whether Bush is primarily following political advice to determine policy, or using political advice to implement desired policy - I suspect it is both.

One of Rove's favorite models is Mark Hanna, businessman and counsel to President McKinley. Hanna resisted government efforts to break up giant corporate and mining trusts, thereby providing them with the ability to control labor and wages, while raising a very large amount (for those days) to elect McKinley. Not surprising, Bush (Rove?) has followed an analogous path, supporting business at almost every turn, while raising very large amounts for his campaigns. However, Bush (Rove?) did bend his devotion to free trade (NAFTA, CAFTA) to provide steel tariffs in an effort to boost voter support in W. Virginia and Pennsylvania.

Moore also traces Rove's history of dirty tricks - including bugging his own office to boost his Republican client for governor (battery only had 10-hour life, was fresh when discovered, there was no evidence of a break-in, and Rove had shortly before seen a similar tactic used in a movie), working with an FBI henchman (later shown to have planted evidence in the Ruby Ridge murder trial) to pursue political enemies, having surrogates attack Gov. Anne Richards, Sen. John McCain, and Sen. John Kerry with vicious whisper campaigns (respectively - lesbian, fathering a black child and mentally unbalanced, and not the brave hero he appeared to be).

Another interesting incident involved Rove campaigning for Chair of the College Republicans. Through "aggressive methods" (challenging as many opponent electors as possible through the flimsiest of reasons), the election became a tie that was appealed to George Bush ('41) when he was Chair of the Republican Party. Bush chose Rove based on his anger at Rove's opponent's exposing Rove's teaching of dirty tricks, then later asked Rove to help '43. (Loyalty over all - doesn't say much for Bush '41 either.)

Finally, Moore suggests that Rove supported a strategy of expanding the War on Terror to Iraq, as Osama was not being caught and Iraq would provide a more attractive conventional opportunity. The Democrats then ended up between a rock and a hard place, per Rove's machinations - pressure for the Iraq resolution was intense as the War on Terror had already been declared, and the situation was acerbated by Bush's claim that "the greater the threat, the greater the risk of inaction" - setting up a scenario where searching for facts was viewed as counterproductive. In addition, talk against Iraq would have looked silly if it had been known that North Korea already had the bomb - so the White House (Rove?) kept this information under wraps for 12 days until after passage of the Iraq resolution.

Since I didn't read Bush's Brain, most of the material in this book was new to me, and fascinating. Ironically, the book made my impression of Rove somewhat more sympathetic than before: the "Revenge of the Nerd" theme resonated a bit, and I found myself thinking "Why can't the Democrats get more guys like this?". That this thought crossed my mind is a symptom of the sorry state that politics has reached in this country.

Liberalism and its challengers is a thorough and balanced look at recent American History. Dr. Hamby goes through many of the recent Presidencies giving an open minded and fair evaluation of recent American History. Not clouded by the misinformation of the revionist historians movement this book is very fair. A good and informative read.

I found this book to be a fair minded explaination of how liberalism moved onto the center stage of American thinking in the '30s and still holds sway with a large but shrinking population in the '90s.

The use of biography shows the reader that there really is no vast left wing conspiracy out to turn the US into a nanny state. There are only individual people who have idea about how to solve problems. Sometimes those ideas are good, other times they are not so good.

Mr. Bush's biography of Tilghman is more a review of the war in the Western Theatre than it is a biography. The lack of personal letters for source material and the author's reliance on the Official Records of the War of the Rebellion may account for the latter. However, the text contains misplaced modifiers, errors in subject-verb agreement, and at least one plural adjective modifying a singular noun ("twelve foot.")

As a collector of Biographies and memoirs of Civil War Generals, I have the James Raab dual biography of Generals Shoup and Tilghman. Bryan Bush's new biography of Lloyd Tilghman far surpasses this work. Mr. Bush has seemingly approached this project as a labor of love, and his enthusiasm for his subject comes across well in a book that is well researched and enhanced with lots of interesting photos. General Tilghman was one of so many Confederate Generals who lost their lives in battle. His bravery is unquestioned, but the author DOES call into question Tilghman's decisions at Fort Henry and Champion's Hill to step down from his command responsibilities to fight in the front lines. The first instance led to his capture and the command evolving to incompetents such as Generals Floyd and Pillow at Ft. Donelson, and the second instance led to his death.
Well done, Mr. Bush.

"Misstating the State of the Union" is a collection of concise, matter-of-fact articles, each presenting some claim by a right-wing figure such as Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, or Bill O'Reilly, followed by a refutation of that claim. The counter-arguments are documented with citations and endnotes, giving the reader the opportunity to decide the credibility of claim and counter-claim.

The articles in this small book are grouped by topic and gathered into nine chapters. These chapters cover: the overall health of the economy, the deficit, national security policy, health care, education, the environment, senior citizens' issues, public safety, and values.

The text has the same general drift as postings on the related website, mediamatters.org. For me, the book has added value compared to the website because the text is more polished and the items have been brought together as an organized whole.

In this book, we have a refreshing rebuttal of the steady onslaught by conservative media on honest, intelligent debate of the issues. Reading "Misstating the State of the Union" is an excellent way to develop one's critical skills, when hearing things from either the right or the left. I recommend it highly.

The reason for four instead of five stars in this review is simply that for me there are several other books in this area that rank higher on the "must read" scale. For more detail on the organized right-wing campaign of disinformation from the viewpoint of an insider, see David Brock's "The Republican Noise Machine". For an encylopedic and copiously documented account of misrepresentations from the Bush administration during its first three years, see Alterman and Green's "The Book on Bush".

I'm a big fan of Media Matters.org as an indispensable resource for fighting back against right wing disinformation. The mission of the website is to highlight the lies and hypocrisy of Republican pundits and politicians. Personally I can only handle so much Conservative tripe before I feel sickened so I tend to be an infrequent visitor but when I do stop by I'm always amazed at how comprehensive, scrupulously researched and well crafted the site is. It's clearly a partisan site but as long as the researchers stay honest I don't have a problem with partisanship.

`Misstating the State of the Union' is sort of an extension of Media Matters in that the author uses quotes from pundits and politicians in order to shed a spotlight on the disingenuous nature of people like Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Shawn Hannity, and Michael Savage. Misstating is a rather brief book at 146 pages that tackles a lot of different topics. It talks about economics but `Neoconomy' did it better. It talks about the culture war but `What's the Matter with Kansas' did it better. It talks about science but `The Republican War on Science' did it better. What the book does well is offer quick point by point refutations of Republican claims on just about every major issue of the last five years from global warming to gay marriage. The two sections I found most informative were the chapters on Health care and Education. The author also did a good job of disproving the theory that Republican's are tough on crime while Democrats are soft.

Perhaps the biggest strength of the Right is a complete lack of shame. Shame causes you to avoid lying and when you're caught in a lie shame causes you to recant the lie or at least stop repeating it. The final chapter of the book is titled `No Sense of Shame' and this is perhaps the defining feature of this generations GOP. Republican's have become so consistent in their mendacity that it's no longer shocking or even mildly surprising to hear a Bill O'Reilly quoting studies that don't exist or Limbaugh giving out numbers on the cost of education that are plucked out of thin air. When caught in a lie they simply repeat it believing they can literally reshape reality by altering perceptions. Luckily Media Matters is there to collect and catalog the garbage. If you're a progressive who needs a quick guide for composing arguments to defend liberal values `Misstating the State of the Union' is a great place to start.

I admit it - I'm a relative newcomer to the world of Mage: the Ascension, and to White Wolf in general (right now, I'm in the midst of my first game ever, for which I'm the ST *gulp*). But I have to admit - next to the Guide to the Technocracy, this is probably the most solid and useful Mage book I've seen.

The book is divided into four sections - Nephandi, Marauders, Infernalists, and Umbrood. The Nephandi chapter is probably the best - it gives scads of information on all manner of Nephandic beings, practices, and yes, even the Spheres of the Qlippoth. The Nephandic chapter is solid and useful. And the art takes a turn for the disturbing . . . *shudder*

The Marauder chapter is also fun, but not quite so fun as the chapter on Nephandi. There's a lot of chatter about just what Marauders are. In short, it tells you all the things you need to know in order to create a Marauder or even to play as one.

The chapter on Infernalism is detailed and interesting, and probably the most utile one in the entire book (utile, yes, but not as interesting as the one on the Nephandi). There's information on Soul Trade, various demons, and anything you need to add the ultimate seeker of power into your chronicle. However, I wouldn't give the players the power of infernalism, considering how easy it is to become powerful quickly . . .

Finally, the chapter on Umbrood. This is where the chapter falls down. It's done almost entirely in a series of letters, which can get old really fast. In truth, I didn't even read the whole thing. It just got old very, very quickly.

All together, the Book of Madness is an essential read for anybody who wants to create a Mage chronicle involving the wilder side of the Mage universe.

It was necessary to bring this book into the new framework of the post Reckoning world of darkness, and this book pulls it off with substance as well as style. Like the original it covers the denizens beyond the pale and thier dark and twisted agendas, but this version does things in a more sinister style and was worth the price for an upgrade. I recommend it, but if you aren't planning on dealing with these elements, the book may best be avoided for your campaign.