general

Bill Sammon is a working member of the press whose assignment is at the White House. Thus his book is much better informed and more accurate than most other books about President Bush that have been published thus far (the book by Karen Hughes is the obvious exception). He has far more information from interviews of the key foreign policy officials in the administration and has personally observed far more than, for example, Bob Woodward, whose generally favorable view of President Bush is weakened by the fact that Woodward does not cover the White House and had to depend mainly on second- and third-hand sources for his information.

Sammon gives a balanced assessment of the way in which key issues were handled leading up to the Iraq war. Several reviewers claim the book favors the President. Have they read the book? In fact the first chapter is a vigorous critique of decision-making in the White House, and numerous mis-steps are pointed out in the succeeding chapters.

Many of the previous reviews of this book seem to be opinions of George W. Bush by people who have a strong emotional dislike of him, rather than evaluations of the book. This reader believes that anyone will find the book factual and valuable in forming an opinion of the President.

I agree with other reviewers that Rewriting History and The Dittohead Guide To Adult Beverages are great conservative books, but Misunderestimated by Bill Sammon is the best of the year. Unlike Woodward, Sammon enjoyed unprecedented access to the president and his inner-circle, interviewing the president for several hours in privacy on his Mt. Crawford ranch and meeting with insiders Condi Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Karl Rove, Andrew Card, etc. The insider take and direct quotes make this one of the best political books in years and the first true inside look at the Bush president since it began. Definitely check out this book.

"Let's forget the fact he sent us to this "war" against a country that can't have a democracy (Anyone with the most minimum knowledge of history and/or anthropology knows that the idea of getting into a country and/or society (That has NEVER, in hundreds of years, had a democracy because of historical factors)"

Can one get any more bigoted? The same could have been said for Japan, Russia, Israel, etc.

"with tanks and bombs to "introduce" the "freedom" is dangerous, ridiculous and impossible)."

Like in Germany, Japan, Spain, Itay, the Phillipines, etc.?

"Being against an illegal war (It is illegal. In front of our laws and in front of the International laws) "

It is in no way illegal. But I'll let an Iraqi citizen put it this way:

"Because Iraqis have a lot to deal with regarding their daily life needs and the fact that we're not a major player in international politics, it becomes understandable that they pay less attention than the rest of the world to the legal complexities of the war and most of them see this war legitimate simply because it lead to their solvation and freedom.

You cannot tell a man that saving him and his family from torture, humiliation and death was a mistake and it should've not been done because it's illegal. This is almost an insult to Iraqis to hear someone saying that this war was illegal. It means that our suffering for decades meant nothing and that formalities and the stupid rules of the UN (that rarely function) are more important than the lives of 25 million people.

Still, this is not only about us and despite how inconvenient the present international law is, we do care about preserving normal and healthy relations among all countries, especially the strong ones. As the future of the world will be endangered if there was a lack of coordination among these strong nations not to mention a dispute.

I always find myself wondering; what is legitimacy? Is it ink on paper that some beaurocrats in the UN agreed on and have used it for decades to suck the blood of poor people while they give their "legitimate representatives" like Saddam, Gaddafi and Omar Al-Bashir comfortable seats in NYC to say all that crap about "the US breaching the international law, violating human rights and threating world's peace" while these regimes slaughter their people in millions?