middle east

I have read this book. I think the people giving it one star are ideologues who couldn't open their minds to ANYTHING outside of bombing muslims to make them submit to our will.

The author sounds like the few CIA workers who have TRIED to wake up the agency AND our government to the realities of Islamic terror. I, for one, do not think this book's detractors are average joes. They sound like ideologues who do nothing but discredit ideas and opinions to suit their agendas. Do you critics understand the CIA's role? They give intelligence advice to the President and Congress so foreign policy decisions can be made. Sorry, but you can't ALWAYS shoot the messenger. The person interpreting the data needs to have a good head.

Sure the CIA dropped the ball on 9/11 and with regards to the invasion of Iraq (even though I think Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney helped speed the misinformation up to get what they wanted) but from what has come out in these 9/11 hearings, the President and his cabinet refused to listen when information contrary to their agenda was given to them. I do remember the CIA saying back in November of 2002 that they DID NOT think Iraq was an IMMINENT threat. I do remember this and then ALL OF A SUDDEN politics took hold and they changed their tune (hmmm...sounds like POLITICAL PRESSURE!)

Reading this book, I realized that the author is completely on target with his observations. If he is truly the man who was in charge of chasing Bin Laden, I would assume he is steeped in vast knowledge of the Middle East, it's cultures and personalities. His viewpoint makes sense. We need to change our approach if we wish to purge extremists from the Middle East. No, I do not think Muslims are "humiliated" by our successes, they are humiliated because America treats everyone of them like terrorists and supports Israel wholeheartedly.

I am not saying we should ditch Israel, but like any friend, we need to have more stern dialogue with them and change some things.

I dunno...the Middle East is a mess, but since I have strong knowledge of the region, I can say that we helped in this mess and we MUST clean it up. The author has a point of view that may help break it down for my other countrymen to understand the situation better.

The writer evidently (according to the Boston Phoenix) was involved in tracking Bin Laden for the intelligence authorities. The book is a well-argued well-written brief: one should read it responsively, trying to counter the author's arguments. He is making a case on how to analyze Bin Laden's actions, how to predict what Al Quaeda will do, and how to fight Al Quaeda. There are specific policy prescriptions, and specific analyses of policy mistakes. I think this is a very important book - whether one agrees or disagrees with the author, he gives facts, backed by publicly available cites and references, which enable the reader to make informed judgments. Very well-written. The author must be a first-rate analyst. I believe that it is rare that the general public gets to read material of this calibre on issues of such moment.

Sorry, no secrets were found but Anonymous has good insights when "analysis" runs into the "message".

Given the recent stable of anti-Bush books, you would think this book is part of the race for first-place in that crowded field. I would disagree. "Hubris" belongs with Steve Coll's "Ghost Wars" or Robert Baer's "Sleeping With the Devil..." and "See Know Evil..." If you must be political... read "America Alone" by Halper and Clarke. "Hubris" will compliment the reading of any of these books and if you have not read them... I suspect you will.

Any way you read "Imperial Hubris", it is likely you will not be disappointed.