Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Obama's Wars

3.61 of 5 stars 3.61 · rating details · 2,382 ratings · 259 reviews

In Obama’s Wars, Bob Woodward provides the most intimate and sweeping portrait yet of the young president as commander in chief. Drawing on internal memos, classified documents, meeting notes and hundreds of hours of interviews with most of the key players, including the president, Woodward tells the inside story of Obama making the critical decisions on the Afghanistan Wa...more In Obama’s Wars, Bob Woodward provides the most intimate and sweeping portrait yet of the young president as commander in chief. Drawing on internal memos, classified documents, meeting notes and hundreds of hours of interviews with most of the key players, including the president, Woodward tells the inside story of Obama making the critical decisions on the Afghanistan War, the secret campaign in Pakistan and the worldwide fight against terrorism. At the core of Obama’s Wars is the unsettled division between the civilian leadership in the White House and the United States military as the president is thwarted in his efforts to craft an exit plan for the Afghanistan War.

“So what’s my option?” the president asked his war cabinet, seeking alternatives to the Afghanistan commander’s request for 40,000 more troops in late 2009. “You have essentially given me one option. ...It’s unacceptable.”

“Well,” Secretary of Defense Robert Gates finally said, “Mr. President, I think we owe you that option.”

It never came. An untamed Vice President Joe Biden pushes relentlessly to limit the military mission and avoid another Vietnam. The vice president frantically sent half a dozen handwritten memos by secure fax to Obama on the eve of the final troop decision.

President Obama’s ordering a surge of 30,000 troops and pledging to start withdrawing U.S. forces by July 2011 did not end the skirmishing.

General David Petraeus, the new Afghanistan commander, thinks time can be added to the clock if he shows progress. “I don’t think you win this war,” Petraeus said privately. “This is the kind of fight we’re in for the rest of our lives and probably our kids’ lives.”

Hovering over this debate is the possibility of another terrorist attack in the United States. The White House led a secret exercise showing how unprepared the government is if terrorists set off a nuclear bomb in an American city—which Obama told Woodward is at the top of the list of what he worries about all the time.

Verbatim quotes from secret debates and White House strategy sessions—and firsthand accounts of the thoughts and concerns of the president, his war council and his generals—reveal a government in conflict, often consumed with nasty infighting and fundamental disputes.

Woodward has discovered how the Obama White House really works, showing that even more tough decisions lie ahead for the cerebral and engaged president.

Obama’s Wars offers the reader a stunning, you-are-there account of the president, his White House aides, military leaders, diplomats and intelligence chiefs in this time of turmoil and danger.(less)

ebook, 0 pages

Published September 27th 2010 by Simon & Schuster (first published 2010)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

Obama

4th out of 25 books — 8 voters

Best Presidential Biographies

51st out of 110 books — 101 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 3,000)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Oct 16, 2010 Chris rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: afghanistan

Fascinating account of decision making in the White House. Reads like a thriller. Obama relies too much on his Chicago Mafia but is firmly in charge. Rahm was a mistake. He wouldn't even show Jones, the NSA, drafts of speeches. The NSA had to listen to them like the rest of the nation and Obama let this happen. General Jones, a class guy, was not respected. I almost wanted to laugh and cry hearing the account of the war planning. I could have gotten more precise and sound advice from a bunch of...more

like 6 likes · see review

Aug 12, 2011 Jonathan Mckay added it · review of another edition

First: The title has a typo. It should be titled 'Obama's war' as there is no reporting on decisions related to Iraq.

The Good:

Woodward has remarkable access. He paints a picture that makes sense, and has more anecdotes about the top levels of government than anyone. Woodward shows how decision making happens, and that White House politics is really a permutation of regular office politics (both in Republican and Democrat administrations). He keeps good track of all the actors rather than relyin...more

like 1 like · see review

Jan 16, 2013 Dave rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: general-non-fiction, political

The author is Bob Woodward and due to his status as a journalist, he is granted access the decision makers. The president inherited an 8 year war poorly manage and poorly resourced with little or no direction and no planned exit strategy. This book provides insight in the decision making process, and the reasoning behind the policies. It included General Petraeus, Mike Mullins, Biden, Gates, McChrystal, join chiefs, Emanuel, H. Clinton. The personality conflicts between the major players and the...more

like · see review

Nov 28, 2011 Trena rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: The Steely-Nerved Politico

While the boyfriend and I both enjoy reading, we have completely different tastes. I am history and science; he is politics and law. However, on our trip to Ecuador I was afraid of running out of book (1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus, the perfect companion for a trip to South America) and so I "borrowed" the copy of Obama's Wars he'd brought with him.

I was fascinated. I'd always suspected Bob Woodward of resting on his Watergate laurels for the past 37 years (I know exactly...more While the boyfriend and I both enjoy reading, we have completely different tastes. I am history and science; he is politics and law. However, on our trip to Ecuador I was afraid of running out of book (1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus, the perfect companion for a trip to South America) and so I "borrowed" the copy of Obama's Wars he'd brought with him.

I was fascinated. I'd always suspected Bob Woodward of resting on his Watergate laurels for the past 37 years (I know exactly how long because I was born about two weeks after Nixon resigned), but it turns out the man still puts in the time and shoe leather to do great investigative journalism. He does leverage his laurels to some extent--but only to get access to top aides and decisionmakers, including an interview with the President himself, so that he remains on top of the blockbuster journalism game.

The plural of "wars" in the title is a misnomer, as the book covers Obama's decisionmaking process for his Afghanistan strategy and mentions Iraq only occasionally and tangentially in that context. It is an almost day-by-day account of the people, documents, ideas, and personalities that influenced the President's strategy in Afghanistan, starting as soon as he was elected.

The information Woodward gained access to is astonishing, almost uncomfortably so. I am all for open government, but I am not certain I want Karzai to know the Americans think he is an unmedicated bipolar nor the Pakistani leaders to know exactly what we think of them (treacherous liars). There are national security implications to these opinions, which are obviously at odds with the official party line governing our relations with those nations.

The two big pictures impressions I took away from the book are:
1) How in the hell does the President have time to do *anything* other than deal with Afghanistan, much less all the other foreign policy issues, and much much less domestic issues (which won't get us killed, but will get him un-elected)? No wonder Bill Clinton aged about 30 years in office. He did 30 years of work in those 8 years.
2) All hell could break loose at any moment from any number of unstable leaders and regions of the world. And I mean all hell. 9/11 would look like a picnic. I think this is why I prefer history. The scary parts are over.

A deduction of one star for some sloppy editing in the beginning of the book--whole passages would be repeated within 20 pages or so--and while Woodward made a valiant effort it was still impossible to remember who was whom, and more importantly who hated whom, in the large cast of characters. That is probably my limitation as a reader and non-politico, though.(less)

like 2 likes · see review

Aug 27, 2011 Nancy Spagnolo rated it 4 of 5 stars

The first thing that becomes clear when you start reading Obama’s Wars, Bob Woodward’s latest foray inside the Oval Office, is that there was a lot of cooperation from the administration. An exposé this is not. President Obama even sat for an hourlong on the record interview with Woodward. Quotes from that interview are interspersed throughout the book. This is also not a light read by any stretch of the imagination. It’s packed with facts and figures. I figured it would take me a day or so to r...more

like · see review

Mar 05, 2011 Frank Kelly rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: 2011, central-asia, foreign-policy, intelligence, iran, islam, military, national-security, north-africa, pakistan, sept6-sept6, strategy, afghanistan

Bob Woodward has literally formed a cottage industry of in-depth, exhaustively researched books on the presidency. We read his three volume set on the Bush White House, the Clinton White House and a host of other books on Washington, power, intrigue and crisis. All ranged from good to excellent in what they offer in terms of insight. This books falls close to the “excellent” category.

Woodward’s first book on the Obama Administration takes the reader through the transfer of power and leadership o...more

like 1 like · see review

Jan 02, 2011 Mal Warwick rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

We may not always say so, at least by using the same term, but what we look for in a President is, above all, leadership. Obama's Wars -- Bob Woodward's most recent behind-the-scenes report, a sort of current history -- provides a front-row seat on the leadership style of Barack Obama. As I view the scene Woodward portrays, President Obama comes off looking really good as a leader.

Obama's Wars is, essentially, an account of the months-long period in 2009 when President Obama, the members of Nati...more We may not always say so, at least by using the same term, but what we look for in a President is, above all, leadership. Obama's Wars -- Bob Woodward's most recent behind-the-scenes report, a sort of current history -- provides a front-row seat on the leadership style of Barack Obama. As I view the scene Woodward portrays, President Obama comes off looking really good as a leader.

Obama's Wars is, essentially, an account of the months-long period in 2009 when President Obama, the members of National Security Council (including Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton), and the Pentagon brass were wrestling with one another over how to approach the war in Afghanistan. It's the stuff of which a graduate school case study in policy-making might be made -- and quite a good one at that.

If you approach this book with the often-oversimplified notion that the battle lines would break down neatly, with the generals and the admirals on one side and the civilians on the other (especially in a Democratic Administration), you'll be very surprised. As Woodward vividly shows, some of the most dogged opposition to the proposed U.S. troop buildup in Afghanistan came from military men, both active and retired. And one of the most consistently hawkish figures in the exhausting debate was Secretary Clinton.

But even those characterizations are highly misleading. The debate Obama led in 2009 about the Afghanistan war was an immensely complex matter with a multitude of possible policy outcomes -- none of them good. The resulting compromise -- and it was that, after all -- incorporated ideas from all sides. However, if a good compromise is marked by making "both" sides equally unhappy, Obama's compromise was a curious one. It appears to have made "both" sides happy. The Pentagon exulted in receiving a large number of fresh troops for Afghanistan, believing that conditions on the ground there would require them to pursue their recommended tactics despite opposition from the White House, and convinced that the July 2011 withdrawal data Obama insisted on would slip by months and years. The political staff in the White House, by contrast, were content to give the generals the extra troops, believing that conditions on the ground would make it impossible for them to pursue their recommended tactics and knowing that the President would insist on sticking with the July 2011 date for the beginning of a withdrawal.

What most impressed me about Barack Obama -- and I firmly believe historians of the future will bear this out -- was the fortitude he displayed in resisting simple-minded formulas and half-baked claims. In the course of the great debate about Afghanistan, there was an abundance of both. The President, with considerable support from Vice President Joe Biden, more than held his own with the military brass. And, judging from the history of our last half-dozen Presidents or so, that's saying a lot.

Woodward's strength as a reporter is that he gets the story right -- or so it would appear, since to the best of my memory no one has ever successfully refuted any of the incidents reported in his books. He relies on intensive and repeated interviews with all the principals. (After all, who would dare turn down the man who toppled Richard Nixon's Presidency?) Even if a statement here or an interpretation there may be off a few degrees, Obama's Wars can give you the feeling that you are witnessing up close one of the most fateful national policy debates of recent years.(less)

like 2 likes · see review

Dec 30, 2010 William Breakstone rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

BOOK REVIEW

Obama’s Wars by Bob Woodward

Reviewed by Bill Breakstone, November 28, 2010

When Bob Woodward’s latest book, “Obama’s Wars,” was released for publication some six weeks ago, it was lavishly promoted with personal appearances by the author on just about every single talk show, and also accorded notoriety by some striking revelations of a personal nature of aides within both White House and Pentagon circles. I put off reading the volume as it seemed the critics and talking heads had more...more

like 1 like · see review

Nov 27, 2010 Larry rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

A very easy read that offers great insight into the inner workings of the current administration. This is supposed to be a book that highlights Bush's mishandling of the war in Afghanistan, and what Obama has done in his first 18 months in office to turn the war around. What it really does is highlight the current administration's inexperience, ignorance, and foolishness. One recurring theme is the how Obama is unable to listen to the information he is given, digest it, then make an authoritativ...more

like · see review

Nov 18, 2010 Lee added it

As usual, Woodward produces a hastily written book which is more a collage of interviews than anything else. Then again, Woodward has access--and one can learn a lot about the process by which Obama decided on his surge. Two facts emerge in sharp relief: First, the military didn't give Obama any serious options/alternatives besides what they wanted. They "rolled" him, as numerous players claim, giving him two impossible options and one option they preferred. Second, no one in the military could...more

like 1 like · see review

Nov 16, 2010 Michael Griffith rated it 3 of 5 stars

I don't know if I want these wars to end to see Woodward write about something else or continue, since I clearly am eating this stuff up.

This is the first Kindle book I've read, which I read on Donna II and Harley (Samsung Galaxy S and 13" MacBook Pro, for those of you that don't know the names of my computers...shut up). I feel like this is the ideal kind of book for this format, versus a novel or a think piece. It's like an extended newspaper article or blog and I'm thinking of reading Game Ch...more I don't know if I want these wars to end to see Woodward write about something else or continue, since I clearly am eating this stuff up.

This is the first Kindle book I've read, which I read on Donna II and Harley (Samsung Galaxy S and 13" MacBook Pro, for those of you that don't know the names of my computers...shut up). I feel like this is the ideal kind of book for this format, versus a novel or a think piece. It's like an extended newspaper article or blog and I'm thinking of reading Game Changer in the same way.

To the actual book- as always, Woodward's style is more like a newspaper or anything. The prose are short and not complex- he's not adding anything to literature.

His content, on the other hand, moves people in Washington. An earlier leak in the process of writing the book of troop assessments and criticism of the pace of the Afghanistan Strategy Review influenced the process. After the book was published, National Security Advisor Jim Jones was fired.

There are not many giant surprises in this book- it's an historical look at the past few years and how President Obama tackeled the wars he inherited. These books serve more as gossip than anything else and the immaturity of a number of the factions, especially the military, is shocking.

What comes to light is Obama's leadership style, which is commendable, especially given questions during the campaign about his lack of experience. The anecdote reported by Rolling Stone in the infamous McCrystal story about Obama being immitated by the military brass does not come through at all in this book.

Nonetheless, the military carefully attempted to box in the President. His demand for a clear strategy, his clear definition of objectives, and demand that his staff go back to the drawing board show a smart, thoughtful executive. One thing that isn't entirely captured in this book are the other concerns the President had going on simultaneously, such as the economy, health care, the Russian nuclear treaty, and the whole of the rest of domestic policy.

The book is a fascinating insider's perspective, but reads like a long newspaper article.(less)

like 1 like · see review

Oct 17, 2010 Steven Peterson rated it 4 of 5 stars

Every time I read one of Bob Woodward's books, I wonder why people are so open to speaking with him. They must know that their words and ideas will appear in print. And not always in a flattering manner. . . .

This work focuses on Obama's work with his often fractious foreign policy-national defense-intelligence team. We read of the actors' views of the process of whither to go in Afghanistan. The focus is the run-up to President Obama's decision on a "surge" in Afghanistan.

We see many facets of...more

like 1 like · see review

Oct 01, 2010 Malcolm rated it 4 of 5 stars

Book review:

Obama’s Wars

Author: Bob Woodward

Simon & Shuster 2010

Bob Woodward is one of America’s best known investigative journalists having started his career at the Washington Post along with Carl Bernstein exposing the Watergate scandal that finally led to Richard Nixon’s resignation.

Woodward is impeccable in his research of President Obama’s first eighteen months in office. We learn inside stories related to Obama’s cabinet selections, the personalities of the power brokers in the Whit...more

like · see review

Nov 25, 2012 Eddie Taylor rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

As usual, a fascinating read by Bob Woodward. All in all a very good read. Not too partisan, IMHO, just very detailed and in-depth discussion of the subject which is good and bad as at times it can be very tedious in some sections. Not sure why it is called "Obama's Wars" - plural - as the main focus is solely on the war in Afghanistan.

Mr. Woodward provided a lot of good "behind" the scenes detail of the give and take of providing more troops to fight the war in Afghanistan. Interesting how the...more

like · see review

Mar 30, 2011 Ben rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: war, politics, nonfiction

"Hello political laymen and ignorant ideologist. This is Bob Woodward. Here's what's going on".

Bob Woodward's account of the political and military conduct during the wars on terror is captivating, even for those of us with little war-time governing acumen. The book is strikingly nonpartisan in its approach, which is to be expected from the likes of Woodward; though the account is not without its sympathies or specific player perspectives. And the narrative is so thorough that it leaves virtuall...more "Hello political laymen and ignorant ideologist. This is Bob Woodward. Here's what's going on".

Bob Woodward's account of the political and military conduct during the wars on terror is captivating, even for those of us with little war-time governing acumen. The book is strikingly nonpartisan in its approach, which is to be expected from the likes of Woodward; though the account is not without its sympathies or specific player perspectives. And the narrative is so thorough that it leaves virtually no space for readers to insert their own skeptical assumptions and "common sense" prejudices.

This understandably anti-climactic drama unveils a government at odds with itself. In the center ring is Pentagon vs. White House; a monumental battle royale. The fighters come meet, pound their gloves together, and, to the surprise of everyone in the arena, simultaneously turn to face the same outside crisis. They swing mercilessly, and seemingly aimlessly, at the seminal threat a world away while sparingly dispensing jabs at one another.

The book unveils a setting outside of political pop culture; beyond the television ads, town hall meetings, debates, talk shows, etc. While reading, I hardly imagined these people as the characters selling domestic policy issues to the American public. These people cranked the machine, a cold machine, without sweeping poetics and political rhetoric.

I found myself thinking not about the redundant strategic meetings in the Situation Room, the hard-nosed positions of the uniformed and political advisers ironically isolating Obama to decide how to proceed in the AfPak region, the spineless "options", but rather about the nature of the conflict they were trying to fight.

When Obama took office, it seemed that no one knew what the objectives were in Afghanistan, how Pakistan was involved, and most importantly how to wage war on a terrorist enemy. Like Vietnam, not only in its potentially interminable escalations, the fight in Afghanistan was against an enemy who didn't follow "civilized" rules of engagement. Woodward described a one-on-one conversation he had with President Obama's National Security Adviser, retired General James L. Jones, U.S. Marine Corps:

During an hour-long conversation mid-flight, he laid out his theory of the war. First, Jones said, the United States could not lose the war or be seen as losing the war.

'If we're not successful here,' Jones said, 'you'll have a staging base for global terrorism all over the world. People will say the terrorists won. And you'll see expressions of these kinds of things in Africa, South America, you name it. Any developing country is going to say, this is the way we beat [the United States], and we're going to have a bigger problem.' A setback or loss for the United States would be 'a tremendous boost for jihadist extremists, fundamentalists all over the world' and provide 'a global infusion of morale and energy, and these people don't need much.'

Jones went on, using the kind of rhetoric that Obama had shied away from, 'It's certainly a clash of civilizations. It's a clash of religions. It's a clash of almost concepts of how to live.' The conflict is that deep, he said. 'So I think if you don't succeed in Afghanistan, you will be fighting in more places.

'Second, if we don't succeed here, organizations like NATO, by association the European Union, and the United Nations might be relegated to the dustbin of history.'

Third, 'I say, be careful you don't over-Americanize the war. I know that we're going to do a large part of it,' but it was essential to get active, increased participation by the other 41 nations, get their buy-in and make them feel they have ownership in the outcome.

Fourth, he said that there had been way too much emphasis on the military, almost an overmilitarization of the war. The key to leaving a somewhat stable Afghanistan in a reasonable time frame was improving governance and the rule of law, in order to reduce corruption. There also needed to be economic development and more participation by the Afghan security forces.

It sounded like a good case, but I wondered if everyone on the American side had the same understanding of our goals. What was meant by victory? For that matter, what constituted not losing? And when might that happen? Could there be a deadline?

I think about other countries which have lived under the ominous threat of terror for decades. As modern technology progresses, terrorism is no longer tribal, national, regional...it's becoming global. Obama is in a position, as Bush was, to either watch America be enveloped into that global union of terror-stricken nations, or to lead the fight against it. But his enemy is not a person or government; it's a world, an idea. The enemy in the ring manifests itself as a phantom; a freezing, cancerous mist of horror. It's little wonder that these men and women running the American government can't seem to agree, compromise or even describe the same enemy!

Unfortunately, if we are to learn from the mistakes of history, someone has to make those mistakes from which we learn. I fear that the novelty of fundamental extremism permeating the modern, global world will test President Obama's resolve and, more importantly, the American people's ability to understand the real issues.(less)

like · see review

Dec 11, 2010 Kevin Kizer added it · review of another edition

It's really says something when no one -- NO ONE -- involved in the war could/can give the President a solid explanation of how the war will be won and what victory will look like. The veritable hornet's nest.

After completing this I was blown away how territorial and obstinate the military leadership is/was. They wanted 40K troops and gave the President three options -- two of which were unrealistic. They thought this would make the President choose the 40K option. But the Prez called them out,...more

like · see review

Dec 17, 2010 Vivian Valvano rated it 5 of 5 stars

I have respected Bob Woodward's reporting ever since the Watergate reporting and ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN. This book leaves me very scared and upset. Woodward's research and reporting, his uncanny ability to get numerous sources to speak even if he cannot name them, and his excellent conducting of on-the-record interviews yield a frightening picture of the Obama administration and Afghanistan. Obama comes across as essentially too much of a professorial deliberator (he has a penchant for outlinin...more I have respected Bob Woodward's reporting ever since the Watergate reporting and ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN. This book leaves me very scared and upset. Woodward's research and reporting, his uncanny ability to get numerous sources to speak even if he cannot name them, and his excellent conducting of on-the-record interviews yield a frightening picture of the Obama administration and Afghanistan. Obama comes across as essentially too much of a professorial deliberator (he has a penchant for outlining items by number or letter as meetings go on, and he takes far too long to come to any conclusions ... if he ever does). His one real conclusion recounted here is his November 2009 decision of Afghanistan Pakistan strategy, including the 30,000 troop buildup. It is painful to read about how long it took for the president to make a decision and how much time was spent, a good deal of it not productively, as far as I can see. Obama's "supporting cast," so to speak, of the vice-president, strategic cabinet members, an assortment of military men, the presidential advisers, some intelligence personnel. . . (seemingly ad infinitum), continually vie for his attention; most, in the meantime, seem to be self-serving; some seem to be outright fools, in my humble opinion. I will record here a few items that cement my prior opinion that Afghanistan is a futile war and we should get the hell out. In March 2009, General Petraeus and Richard Holbrooke ran into Helen Thomas, the 88-year old Hearst columnist, and she accosted them: "What the hell are you doing in Afghanistan? This is Vietnam all over again. . . . And anyway, what are you screwing around in Iraq for? You know it's going to hell when we leave." I would never have imagined myself agreeing with something written by Bill Kristol, but in summer 2009 (after Woodward had gone to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India with General Jones), in Kristol's weekly column he "suggested that General Jones was in over his head and that Obama was on the path of a 'Whiskey Tango Foxtrot presidency.'" "Whiskey Tango Foxtrot" is a euphemism for "WTF," i.e., "What the ----" (I shall be decorous and trust that you understand). (I am sorry to say that it seems to me that Obama is in over his head in the Commander-in-Chief department.) After President Obama announced the new strategy in November 2009, according to Woodward, "Petraeus said privately,' You have to recognize that I don't think you win this war. I think you keep fighting. It's a little bit like Iraq, actually. Iraq is a bit of a metaphor for this. Yes, there has been enormous progress in Iraq. But there are still horrific attacks in Iraq, and you have to stay vigilant. You have to stay after it. This is the kind of fight we're in for the rest of our lives and probably our kids' lives.' Perhaps the most pesssimistic view came from Richard Holbrooke. 'It can't work,' he said." (Dear God, did we learn nothing from Vietnam? Let us get out of there.)(less)

like · see review

Dec 01, 2010 Adrian Carpio rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Woodward continues his profiles of administrations at war not only internationally but also within itself.

I was shocked to see how dysfunctional Obama's National Security Team was and probably still is. Jealousy. Cliques. The military trying to ram their only viable option down the president's throat. It was extremely disconcerting that so many people worried about their egos while our men in Afghanistan were basically ignored for the past 7 years since the start of the Iraq War.

I have read othe...more

like · see review

Mar 19, 2012 Chris rated it 3 of 5 stars

I saw a review on a big book distributor web site a week or two ago from a man named "Mark" mentioning that there was a question in his mind about which wars were a part of the plural "Wars" in the title. Good point. Even though I didn't go into the reading of this book with that in mind, I find myself wondering that myself.

This book is really about setting up the backdrop of policy decisions relating to the conflict in Afghanistan from around 2008 until mid-2010. It covers a lot of the backgrou...more

like · see review

Oct 19, 2010 Steve Van Slyke rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: current-events

It seems like whenever I read one of Woodward's books I find myself asking, "Shouldn't this have been kept secret?" For example, he details the US contingency plan in the event of a 9/11-style attack coming from Pakistan (150 simultaneous drone strikes at Al Quaeda, Taliban, extremist sites within Pakistan). I can only surmise that Woodward was allowed to divulge this because we *wanted* the enemy to know (or think) that that was our plan. Otherwise, to divulge it seems ludicrous. And at the end...more It seems like whenever I read one of Woodward's books I find myself asking, "Shouldn't this have been kept secret?" For example, he details the US contingency plan in the event of a 9/11-style attack coming from Pakistan (150 simultaneous drone strikes at Al Quaeda, Taliban, extremist sites within Pakistan). I can only surmise that Woodward was allowed to divulge this because we *wanted* the enemy to know (or think) that that was our plan. Otherwise, to divulge it seems ludicrous. And at the end of the book, in an appendix he presents the full text of a SECRET/NOFORN document which lays out the specifics of the Afghan war strategy, none of which is earth shattering, but there are lines I'm sure they wish Afhgan President Hamid Karzai hadn't been able to read.

Be that as it may I am enjoying the glimpse behind the curtains at the amazing tangled web of overlapping responsibilities that Obama has to ride herd on (sorry for the mixed metaphors) in order to attempt to get a consensus on such an important issue. It seems as though once the campaign is over and the election is won, the cohesion that got them there begins to evaporate as egos vie for position and influence. We are now seeing the fallout of that as numerous resignations are being announced.

In Obama's own words he says he is able, because of his age, to view the civilian-military leadership partnership differently than those who lived through Viet Nam. He doesn't see it through a "we-they," "hawk-dove" kind of lens and doesn't believe the military is trying to undermine him. I sincerely hope he's right on that one.

What was most astounding to me was, as they were well into the strategic review process (pg 207), "They had not found a way to articulate why the United States was in Afghanistan." And then even later on (pg 269) "What is the mission? What are we trying to do? What are the objectives." We're talking about generals that have been at this since late 2001. (We all know why we went there to begin with but why are we there now?) You would have thought every officer and non-com in the field could recite this chapter and verse and be totally consistent with his brothers. Not so.

In the end, Obama has to write it out himself. Petraeus made the comment that he didn't think any US president had ever, prior to this, written five single spaced pages of war instructions.

In some ways it was a painful read, as much as it is unappetizing to watch your morning sausage being made, and yet it was a satisfying peek into the realities of strategic decision making. To be able to lead a long, complex, detailed and politically charged process like this strategic review requires an individual of unique capabilites.

(less)

like · see review

Nov 04, 2010 Kyle rated it 4 of 5 stars

It never ceases to amaze me how Woodward can get his sources to talk so openly. This book is no exception, and it reads like a political thriller.

Woodward takes us through the quagmire of Afghanistan that the Bush Presidency has left for Obama, and how the president has to take in and appreciate what the military brass is advising while maintaining his duty as civilian commander-in-chief. The military wants to have a 15-year timeline -- and that is on top of the 9 years we've already been there....more

like 1 like · see review

Feb 04, 2012 David Fox rated it 3 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Political junkies

Shelves: reviewed, presidents

An Afghan Quagmire: The White House vs. the CIA vs. the Pentagon

Reading Woodward's dissection of the foreign policy planning process determining how many troops we would commit to Afghanistan, for how long & whether we would pursue a counterinsurgency or counterterrorism or hybrid of the two nearly 18 months after the action is an illuminating exercise. It becomes patently clear that so many different agendas crowded the negotiating table that it was almost impossible to reconcile them all...more

like · see review

Nov 20, 2010 Rodney rated it 2 of 5 stars

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. As a historical record, I'm not positive Bob Woodward is a completely reliable source. What he does do however, is start the process of looking closer into the Presidential decision making process as a historical first draft. We do not know how these decisions will play out in the future and books like this keep revisionts from going back and saying that is not what happened.

I will say up front that I am not a supporter of the policies and political theories of President Obama. That is not to sa...more As a historical record, I'm not positive Bob Woodward is a completely reliable source. What he does do however, is start the process of looking closer into the Presidential decision making process as a historical first draft. We do not know how these decisions will play out in the future and books like this keep revisionts from going back and saying that is not what happened.

I will say up front that I am not a supporter of the policies and political theories of President Obama. That is not to say that I found a great deal of fault with his war decision making process in this book. Like many governmental decisions, there was too much analysis, too little thinking, and far to many people involved in presenting opinions. However, after visiting Dover, I'm surprised any President is able to send troops into battle.

Things I liked about the Presidents management:
1. Avoided being forced into a decision he did not want to make, even though after the decision was made to send more troops, the Generals stated this is what they wanted after all. I am not sure that is face saving or a negotiation concept.
2. From all appearances, he did appear to make this decision outside of politics.
3. Solid grasp that many of the problems lie with Pakistan.

Things that worried me:
1. Group think. While the President correctly identified there was nothing new being presented, it did not appear that he forced anyone to come up with a new concept.
2. Staff issues. There are too many voices in the room.
3. Final Interview. The President does appear to have a strong ego as many stories have put forth.
4. I worry that his commitment to this decision was not 100%. I have no proof of this other than a personal viewpoint. If the President is not committed, it would be better off to remove the troops. This could lead to chaos.

Overall and interesting look and well worth reading. Some of the principles.

General Peteraus - Appears that Bob Woodward painted him in a very bad light. I have no idea if this is a warning due to a possible Presidential run, but he comes off and single minded and arrogant.

Vice-Preside Biden - It appears from this books description that he's a total blow hard lose cannon that no one really respects. It is ironic however, as the book pointed out, that his idea appears to be the only one currently showing signs of success.

Secretary Clinton - Appears level headed and competent, but not trusted.

(less)

like · see review

Oct 05, 2010 Drake rated it 4 of 5 stars

Terrific reporting! Typical Woodward, long rambling insider gossip, incredible access to personal meetings, memos, and reports, along with a lack of editorializing which plagues modern journalism. ‘Obama’s Wars’ is one of his best books in years. It concentrates on the decision and pressures leading to the military surge in Afghanistan, from the generals pushing for more troops on one end, to Biden snipping in the other. As usual, Woodward provides a fly on the wall insight that can somehow appe...more

like 1 like · see review

Jul 28, 2011 Matt rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: audiobook

I quite enjoy Woodward and his political tales. This was no exception. Looking at the two current wars in which the US is involved (and has dragged Canada into as well), I wanted to see what the new Administration would do and how they would handle these Bush gifts.

Woodward uses interviews and weaves a great tale of what Obama did, from his time as a senator, to president-elect, to POTUS, as it pertained to these two wars. Years of... well sitting around flexing muscles. Woodward uses many other...more

like · see review

Dec 01, 2010 Dennis rated it 3 of 5 stars

I do not know Woodward's motivation in writing this book, nor his objective. It left me with the impression that Obama is not a strong leader in situations of the magnitude of the war in Afghanistan, though he is surrounded by some pretty strong willed and opinionated people. The book leads one to see Obama more politically motivated when it comes to tough decisions as Commander-in-Chief, but I guess that is to be expected. He did tend to balance input from the military side of the equation, whi...more

like · see review

Aug 04, 2012 Richard rated it 3 of 5 stars

Obama's Wars is really about one war ... Afghanistan. Woodward provides a lot of details, and they give the truth that Obama filled his key war and security advisory positions with the same individuals who led his 2008 presidential campaign. From before Inaugeration day these individuals looked at everything that was brought to the president through a lens of the political issues that they would raise. Everything gets a political spin. It is also apparent, and stated by several contibutors to Wo...more

like · see review

Jul 23, 2011 Glen Demers added it · review of another edition

If you've read Bob Woodwards previous books on these wars you'll no doubt notice a stunning contrast to the way the war was previously handled. President Obama wanted more than one option for getting out of Afghanistan and literally forced the Pentagon to come up with them. The uniformed leaders weren't used to the Whitehouse saying "No" to them, their business is war and they wanted to keep rolling along playing the president for a fool, like they'd been doing.

President Obama gathered all the k...more

like · see review

Jun 25, 2011 Lisa rated it 3 of 5 stars

I enjoyed this book much more than I expected to. Much more than political gossip, it provided insight into the processes, mindsets, and personalities behind Obama's Afghanistan war policies. What I appreciate about the book is that Woodward gives the facts and does not editorialize much. It is difficult, in my view, to gain a solid understanding of the wars through most media because of the political slant given to the information. Just give me the facts, and let me construe them.

Unfortunately,...more

like · see review

Jan 07, 2013 Matthew rated it 4 of 5 stars

This was a very interesting book made so by the excellent writing of Woodward combined with the even better source material. By using sources actually close to the President including actual key players made the story of the Afghanistan war enthralling.

One of the most interesting aspects of this book was what sources Woodward used. They were predominantly military and people opposed to the President's course of action. I was surprised at the lack of sources from withing the White House staff it...more

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 99 100 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend it | Stats | Recent status updates

combine
Other Editions (15)

More editions...

Videos About This Book

Add a comment

Genres

Politics

96 users

Non Fiction

56 users

History

51 users

War

39 users

Biography

32 users

Politics > Presidents

26 users

Politics > Government

25 users

Science

24 users

Biography > Autobiography

22 users

War > Terrorism

21 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Bob Woodward

Robert "Bob" Upshur Woodward is an assistant managing editor of The Washington Post. While an investigative reporter for that newspaper, Woodward, working with fellow reporter Carl Bernstein, helped uncover the Watergate scandal that led to U.S. President Richard Nixon's resignation. Woodward has written 12 best-selling non-fiction books and has twice contributed reporting to efforts that collecti...more

More about Bob Woodward...

Books by Bob Woodward

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About Obama's Wars

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from Obama's Wars

“...Obama said, 'I welcome debate among my team, but I won't tolerate division.” — 8 people liked it

“Sometimes,doing nothing is the best reaction.” — 4 people liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: Obama's Wars
avg rating	preview: Obama's Wars Goodreads rating: 3.61 (2382 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9297629-obama-s-wars?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1284359141l/9297629.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9297629-obama-s-wars?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Obama's Wars by Bob Woodward[/url]

Obama's Wars

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website