Clarke was one of the first to rush into print on leaving the Bush White House. He was one of the first to have a book to alert the public of Bush's fixation on Iraq at the expense of Bin Laden. Others leaving the White House such as O'Neill, soon followed. How, with this evidence the country is still fighting these old enemies wihout finding Bin Laden is remarkable.

While some will say the book is already dated, no longer relevant, I believe that it is very relevant, explaining as it does how badly a tranistion from president to president can be. ( )

I approached this book skeptically, as I do with all books written by those who recently left the government and write a tell-all book. The skepticism was warranted. First, a few positives: The book has value in explaining a bureaucratic account of the country's counterterrorism efforts prior to 9/11. It provides a useful explanation of the various governmental processes in place during a rough span of about 10 years, and these are important years simply because they pre-date an horrific attack on the Nation. But the account is a limited one. Although the author had access to some internal government deliberations, he was clearly not an "insider" in either the Clinton or Bush administrations. He was certainly a high level bureaucrat, but not someone truly close to the President. The author finds little to criticize in the small amount of self-reflection that the book contains, but has plenty of citicism of others.

The book is by now (2009) quite dated; the law has changed, the players have changed, and our national security strategy has changed since the publication of the book.

Overall, this book has limited usefulness in understanding the time period discussed, but it does have some value for those interested in how the bureaucracy worked during a defined period.. ( )

audio CD

I can't give this book 5 stars--horror really isn't my genre, and I'm not a fan of depressing endings.

Richard A. Clarke was a counterterrorism expert who served under 4 administrations--from Reagan through G. W. Bush. Against All Enemies tells about the war on terror, focusing primarily on what led up to 9/11 and the response to it.

Otto von Bismarck said "Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made." (or something like that--I've seen it quoted several ways) and that's certainly true in this case. An even better quote might be the daffynition of Politics, n: Poly "many" + tics "blood-sucking parasites".

It's ugly. Very ugly. Politicians pursuing their own agendas, refusing to listen to advice that doesn't fit, being distracted from or prevented from taking action because of politics, etc., etc.

One last quote:

"It is not in the nature of politics that the best men should be elected. The best men do not want to govern their fellowmen." ~George E. MacDonald.

True, but does it have to be so far in the other direction?

If I had it to do over again, I'd read this in small doses instead of straight through. It was way too infuriating and depressing to read all at once. ( )

Richard Clarke has worked in the area of national security for the past 30 years. He was head of counterterrorism affairs for Presidents Clinton and Bush II. In this book, he severely criticizes the current Bush Administration for its lack of interest in terrorism and al Qaeda before 9/11, and its disastrous decisions afterwards.

He first explores the Reagan and Bush I reactions to events like Lockerbie, TWA 800, and the Beirut bombing that killed over 200 American soldiers. The word "terrorism" had not yet entered the American lexicon. Whatever else is said about the Clinton Administration, at least President Clinton took the threat from al Qaeda very seriously, and tried to do something about it.

There were several opportunities to get Osama bin Laden during the Clinton years. Unfortunately, the reports that he was in a certain building at a certain time were never rock solid. Even if they were totally reliable, it takes time to get the report from Afghanistan to Washington, and for the appropriate orders to be sent to the ships or planes in the area. No senior al Qaeda figure, especially bin Laden, was going to stay in one place for any length of time. If the US had bombed innocent people, it would have been a public relations disaster.

The second Bush Administration came into office much more concerned about Iraqi terrorism than about al Qaeda (according to Clarke, for no good reason). When he tried to impress upon senior White House officials the seriousness of the threat from al Qaeda, he was met with bureaucratic delay after delay. Bush's decision to invade Iraq (again, according to Clarke, for no good reason) gave al Qaeda a propaganda coup of immense proportions.

After 9/11, the Bush Administration should have worked to improve relations with the frontline states, like Iran and Saudi Arabia, that are most vulnerable to al Qaeda. It should also have worked to improve relations with Islam, in general. These things were not done. Officially, there was no federal money available to fix the gaping holes in America's domestic vulnerability to terrorist attack, but there was plenty of money to invade Iraq.

Could 9/11 have been prevented, even if all parts of the intelligence community were running like a well-oiled machine (another area of criticism from Clarke)? Perhaps not. If a major attack didn't happen on that particular day, it would have happened some other day. This book is a huge wake-up call, and it is very highly recommended for all Americans. If I could, I would give this book three thumbs up. ( )