|
Marching Toward Hell: America and Islam After Iraq | 
 enlarge | Author: Michael Scheuer
Publisher: Free Press
Category: Book
List Price: $27.00
Buy Used: $1.91
You Save: $25.09 (93%)
New (53) Used (23) Collectible (2) from $1.91
Rating:  30 reviews
Sales Rank: 25816
Media: Hardcover
Edition: 1
Pages: 384
Number Of Items: 1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.2
Dimensions (in): 9.1 x 6.1 x 1.4
ISBN: 0743299698
Dewey Decimal Number: 327.73056
EAN: 9780743299695
ASIN: 0743299698
Publication Date: February 12, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: May contain remainder marks. Over 3.5 million customers served. Order now. Selling books online since 1995. Few left in stock - order soon. Code: A20080828185333M
| |
| Also Available In:
|
| Accessories:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
When Michael Scheuer first questioned the goals of the Iraq War in his 2004 bestseller Imperial Hubris, policymakers and ordinary citizens alike stood up and took notice. Now, Scheuer offers a scathing and frightening look at how the Iraq War has been a huge setback to America's War on Terror, making our enemy stronger and altering the geopolitical landscape in ways that are profoundly harmful to U.S. interests and security concerns. Marching Toward Hell is not just another attack on the Bush administration. Rather, it sounds a critical alarm that must be heard in order to preserve the nation's security. Scheuer outlines the ways that America's foreign policy since the end of the Cold War has undermined the very goals for which we are fighting and played right into bin Laden's hands. The ongoing instability in Iraq, for example, has provided al Qaeda and its allies with the one thing they want most: a safe haven from which to launch operations across borders into countries that were previously difficult for them to reach. With U.S. forces and resources spread thinner every day, the war has depleted our strength and brought al Qaeda a kind of success that it could not have achieved on its own. A twenty-plus-year CIA veteran, Scheuer headed the agency's Osama bin Laden unit, managed its covert-action operations, and authored its rendition program. Scheuer spent his career developing strategies to keep America safe, by any means deemed necessary by the presidents he served. It was his job to take available intelligence and devise plans to protect Americans, without considering bias, position, or even existing alliances. In Marching Toward Hell, Scheuer takes on the questions of "What went wrong?" and "How can we fix this?" and proposes a plan to cauterize the damage that has already been done and get American strategy back on track. He lists a number of painful recommendations for how we must shift our ideological, military, and political views in order to survive, even if that means disagreeing with Israeli policy or launching more brutal campaigns against terrorists. America holds its destiny in its hands, Scheuer says, yet not nearly enough has been done to defend America and destroy its Islamist enemies. This is an eye-opening, alarming, contentious, and ultimately fascinating examination of how far off track the War on Terror has gone, and a critical read in understanding what we must do to save it.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 25 more reviews...
 Former top spook is critical of U.S. foreign policy. Very pessimistic February 13, 2008
Citizen John (Washington, DC)
157 out of 172 found this review helpful
Michael Scheuer, PhD and former CIA career officer, made a big splash in June 2004 as the anonymous author of Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror. At that time he contradicted Rumsfeld and other officials by informing us there was an insurgency in Iraq.
Now Scheuer tells us where we're going. We're going to hell.
Marching Toward Hell claims that U.S. foreign policy is often based on faulty assumptions and is driven by some lobbyists whose interests are different than those of the American people. This book goes well beyond the themes of Imperial Hubris.
Dr. Scheuer's book merits 5 stars. He sacrificed his career at the CIA in order to publicly denounce the 9/11 Commission for having become politicized. He did this at a time when other insiders protected their careers and are only now coming out. He's also superb at explaining the relationship between the intelligence community and elected officials in the U.S.
Scholars take Scheuer seriously because of his 22-year career as a top intelligence analyst and also the success of his first book, Imperial Hubris. He stalked and studied Osama bin Laden (ObL) for years and urged superiors to remove ObL no less than 10 times when the opportunity arose. No action was taken each time for political reasons.
ObL has recommended Scheuer's book, Imperial Hubris, to the American people in a taunting missive. Marching Toward Hell strikes back with recommendations aimed at helping the American people to wise up.
According to Scheuer, U.S. policymakers still prefer to present the bin Laden Movement as a lunatic fringe even though it has broad appeal in the Islamic world. Also, U.S. support of Israel and U.S. troop presence contributes to the popular perception within the Muslim world that the West is bent on destroying Islam.
As if that wasn't disturbing enough, Scheuer says that some officials possibly never intended to win in Iraq (and certainly not before the 2004 presidential election). Otherwise, more troops would have been sent. While the logic of this argument is irrefutable, it is almost too disturbing to think about.
Other points: the fact that very few political leaders have children serving in the wars is disturbing on many levels; the divide in the U.S. between the political elite and the rest of the people has never been wider; and young people will be sent to war in the coming 8 years regardless of election results.
Scheuer concludes that the U.S. cannot avoid war with Islamists, that it will be much more violent that what we've seen so far, and also that it's too late to win in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Scheuer is angry for several reasons including the reluctance of Americans to understand Muslim viewpoints, the Bush administration dismissal of Middle East experts' wisdom and advice, and the lack of political leadership regarding energy policy.
Marching Toward Hell includes a thoughtful proposal that is already being discussed seriously in the nation's universities. A summary of Scheuer's proposal (The Scheuer Proposal) is that the U.S. must reduce its foreign commitments and to first focus on domestic security, including stationing the Army along America's borders. Problems with U.S. foreign policy include operating without regard to the best interests of the country and also budget limitations. Simultaneously, the country would begin to take steps to reduce oil dependency. Then the U.S. would prepare to defeat its enemies such as Al-Qaeda.
Among other things, the Proposal calls for effective use of intelligence assets and willingness to use the military differently, more violently. The Scheuer Proposal is filled with surprises and brings into question to what extent it speaks for the intelligence community as a whole.
The author says foreign policy is going to become more important, not less. He wants America to change its message to Muslims by changing foreign policy. This means, among other things, to stop the current brand of support provided to Israel and to remove troops from the Arabian Peninsula. The wars, he says, are lost regardless - that we're in a fourth generation war where adversaries have a scorched earth strategy, leaving nothing for the occupier to occupy anyway. Remarkably, he goes much further and includes Russia, China and India as countries against Islam that the U.S. supports. Even so, he concludes that the U.S. cannot avoid an even more violent war with Islam.
In my view, the Scheuer Proposal cuts across so many emotional pressure points that Scheuer is guaranteed to get the attention of Middle America this time. I think the least contentious point is to change the way the President and Congress use the intelligence information and assets provided by taxpayers at great expense. The most controversial point is probably assignment of blame to Israeli lobbyists for encouraging the war in Iraq. (Notably Scheuer does not blame these lobbyists for the mismanagement of same. He also says this has made Israel less secure.) And the weakest point of the Scheuer Proposal is probably the lack of specifics for how the U.S. will reduce its energy dependency. The Scheuer Proposal relies heavily on a successful new energy policy.
Possibly Scheuer thinks hell is our destiny as the Proposal holds that alarming horror is in our future. Such an approach from such a man attracts and holds the reader's interest as if by a spell.
Outstanding and Very Timely! February 14, 2008
Loyd E. Eskildson (Phoenix, AZ.)
76 out of 89 found this review helpful
Scheurer's CIA career and innate intellect combine in "Marching Toward Hell" to create an outstanding and very timely book. He begins by pointing out that our bipartisan governing elite has an unquenchable ardor to have the U.S. intervene abroad in all places. Some prefer diplomatic, others military, humanitarian, covert, and/or foreign aid mixed with Christian proselytizing. The result is that we live in a prolonged Cold War hangover that creates more problems than it solves.
Scheuer's intent in the book is to reconstruct how the U.S. found itself with an untenable set of foreign policies and national security strategies on 9/11, and to explain the costs of trying to maintain them.
U.S. ties to Israel, a state that contributes nothing to America's economic welfare or strategic security, are absurd, per Scheuer. Responding to those claiming Israel has a "right to exist," he states that Darwin's "survival of the fittest" applies; further, "Are we to also resuscitate the USSR, Sparta, etc.?" "You form your country, and you take your chances."
The second major nonsensical decision that burdens America is our doing little in response to the '73 oil embargo. Thus, we have ended up playing both sides (Israel vs. the Arab states) in a religious fight-to-the-finish.
American policies are further undermined by human rights groups - eg. they pushed the Senate to pursue human rights for Afghan women instead of us being able to try to get the Taliban to turn over Bin Laden. Other secondary issues have stayed our hand numerous times - eg. blowing up Iraq's Intelligence Service headquarters at night (minimize casualties) in response to its effort to assassinate Bush I in Kuwait, and calling off multiple efforts to kill Bin Laden.
Scheuer believes we have lost both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, and that launching the Iraq War was a major blunder. Further, we need to stop believing that a "post-war Marshal Plan" will change the hearts and minds of Arabs - not unless we stop backing Arab tyrants and Israel.
As for Europe, Scheuer sees it becoming overrun by Muslim immigrants and their children. Meanwhile, its support for the U.S. is weakening - witness the recent fall of supporting leaders in the U.K., Spain, and Poland.
Concluding, Scheuer states that Islam is the fastest growing religion, U.S. officials have lied to citizens (providing erroneous reasons why terrorists hate us - eg. "they hate democracy)," instead of telling the truth while counteracting terrorists, and the U.S. is VERY vulnerable to more terrorism subce we've cut funding to help Russia secure its nuclear weapons, failed to close our borders, and failed to even propose an effective energy policy.
As for "preventing follow-up terrorist attacks in the U.S.," Scheuer is unimpressed - they're simply defeating us without bombs, through dragging us down towards bankruptcy. His recommendation - focus on "America first" - issues that truly threaten our survival.
Scheuer For President? February 17, 2008
Athanasius (NYC)
38 out of 54 found this review helpful
Along with a handful of writers, including Mark Steyn and Pat Buchanan, Michael Scheuer writes books that should be read by any and all Americans who are concerned with something foundational -- our lives.
America faces all sorts of threats -- e.g., the end of the Hollywood writers' strike. But the most serious threat of all is the large number of Muslims (not "Islamo Fascists") committed to killing us. And what are those sworn to protect us doing in the face of this extreme hostility? Well, outside of mouthing politically correct platitudes, not a whole lot.
Things would be different if Scheuer were in charge. A couple of for-instances. First, we would bring to an end the archaic and self-defeating policy of Israel-pandering (and Abe Foxman can rant and rave all he wants. He's a whining Christophobe, worthy of no more than a sneer of unmitigated contempt). Second, we would bring to a halt President Bush's fatuous Wilsonianism. Along with Scheuer and a multitude of other Americans, I couldn't care less if democracy -- of any type or to any degree -- is brought to Afghanistan, Iraq, or even to the EU. It's an experiment that's largely failed here in the West; it has no chance of success in a part of the world where the history and culture are about as antithetical to democracy as matter is to antimatter. Iraqui women now have the right to vote? Goody! That's been worth the gallons of blood American servicemen have gushed forth, hasn't it? Scheuer is right: If we go into battle, it should be for reasons beneficial to us, and the war should be short and decisive.
Well, Scheuer isn't in charge. But McCain, Clinton, or Obama soon will be. God help us.
Getting Repetitious, A Tiny Bit More Direct This Time Around March 21, 2008
Robert D. Steele (Oakton, VA United States)
34 out of 48 found this review helpful
The author was not a "spook." He was an analyst. Analysts do not work under cover and they very rarely if ever go in harm's way.
What I admire most about this author is that he kept his integrity, as did Dick Clarke. Both stand in sharp contrast to Tony Lake and Sandy Berger and Madeline Albright in the Clinton Administration, and Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, George Tenet, and Condi Rice in the Bush Administration.
Folks have been reluctant to understand that from the first book by Anonymous, this author has been practically shouting from the rooftops:
BIN LADEN IS RIGHT. BIN LADEN HAS LIMITED OBJECTIVES.
The fact is that the US armed presence in the Middle East, first off remaining in Saudi Arabia, a violation of the promise Dick Cheney made, and second of all being loyal to the despotic, debauched Saudi "Royal" family that is consuming the national commonwealth at the expense of the people, are both legitimate grounds for any well-educated revolutionary and patriot to say ENOUGH.
I only give this book four stars because as right as the author is, the end of the book and its varied prescriptions are the only really new ground (from this author) and they are basically no more or less than any well-schooled PhD would tell you: put your own house in order, do no harm, support no despots, and mind your own business.
Of the author's previous books, I continue to regard Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror as the best, and recommend that it be read AFTER reading:
Web of Deceit: The History of Western Complicity in Iraq, from Churchill to Kennedy to George W. Bush
Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA
Breaking the Real Axis of Evil: How to Oust the World's Last Dictators by 2025
The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic (The American Empire Project)
See No Evil
Sleeping with the Devil: How Washington Sold Our Soul for Saudi Crude
For a broader more sensible strategic perspective, consider:
A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility--Report of the Secretary-General's High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change
Plan B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization, Third Edition
Collective Intelligence: Creating a Prosperous World at Peace
Bottom line: Bush is a village idiot with a semblance of integrity. Cheney is a nakely amoral war criminal who should be run out of town--he's not worth impeaching. The well-intentioned managers of the Department of State, Department of Defense, and the US Intelligence Community do not have a clue about how to create a long-term global strategy to create a prosperous world at peace. They are trapped in pyramidal organizations and have all--without exception--lost the ability to think for themselves. Thus does the Republic stagger to its demise.
 Scheuer shoots his own (thin) message in the foot March 21, 2008
Stephen J. Snyder (Lancaster, Texas United States)
27 out of 46 found this review helpful
Michael Scheuer comes off as a Tridentine Catholic for whom half the world ended at Worms, 1521, and the rest on a Paris tennis court in 1789. Or else, as though he had just stepped out of the receiving line at a soiree for Andrew Jackson's first inauguration.
In short, he dishonestly tries to write two books under one title. One is about his attempt at Realpolitik in the Middle East/Muslim world. The other is a screed, a diatribe, about alleged "culture wars" in America and how, in his view, secularists are trying to take over our country.
As for any plaudits for Scheuer's alleged Realpolitik, this is not Realpolitik but rather Scheuer's schizophrenic distortion of that.
From questioning our relationship to Israel to analyzing just how broad our professional class' ignorance of the Muslim world is, one can find actual Realpolitik in new books. Mearsheimer and Walt admirably cover what's wrong with our one-way relationship with Israel, while Robert Fisk, though not a current or former intelligence agent, gives a wonderful journalist's insight on today's Arab "street." I suspect that another retired or soon-to-retire CIA agent has done (if I don't know about it), or will do, better on the intelligence insider information part of Realpolitick.
Or, a better book amongst the just-published? Fred Kaplan's "Daydream Believers."
And, even in Realpolitik, he often gets it wrong, such as his call to have annihilated Iraq in the Gulf War.
Elsewhere:
1. He puts Reagan on an undeserved pedestal for "toppling" the USSR, ignoring that country's internal fissures while calling Gorbachev a "nuclear gangster";
2. Openly wonders whether the First Amendment can successfully be extended to the religious liberty of atheists and generally decries "secularism," "atheism" and (implied atheist) "European elites";
3. Repeats the Carter "malaise" myth;
4. Blames "environmental purists" whose "fanaticism" keeps us from having "reasonable and much-needed environmental protections";
5. Apparently doesn't believe in a free press, when he talks about "the U.S. military stupidly televised its killing of Muslims" in the Gulf War (I'm unaware of the existence of a Military Channel);
6. Claims humans are hardwired for war, both overstating claims of realistic empirical psychology and making the elemental "is" vs. "ought" mistake David Hume describes;
7. Stereotypes NGOs as "antinationalist organizations";
8. And, speaking of schizophrenic, can rip a person to shreds on page, then praise them to the heavens the next.
And that's just in the first third of the book.
Later on, Scheuer:
1. Supports his work in developing the CIA "extraordinary renditon" program;
2. Lays much of the blame for starting the U.S. Civil War on the North;
3. Wants to use the Army and Marines as Border Patrol, either ignoring, or being unaware of, how that has not worked well in the recent past;
4. Misdefines "American exceptionalism."
Beyond this, the only bits of insight that he forcefully gets right is that we've lost Afghanistan and need to move on, and that the nuclear arms/power deal with India hugely, and stupidly, undercut Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf with his own military and the ISI.
In short, don't bother reading this mix of diatribe and canard. Basically, think of Pat Buchanan as a career CIA officer and you have the tone of this book about right.
I also have a gripe about his inconsistent transliteration of Arabic words.
He does update "Bekaa," as in the Lebanese valley, to "Biqa," but "Shi'ite" is spelled "Shiite."
And, some of his footnotes are so long, part of their material should have been incorporated into the bod of the text in some way.
|
|
|
|
| |
