|
And Japan has not sought revenge since as far as I know of. We are war with Al Qaeda and terrorism is offten a major facet of war. And did I hear him call the Byzantine Empire, the Holy Roman Empire.Skip this one. When it seems not to, he say for example Rome succeeded so well 'in spite of' it's terrorist tactics not because of.
And yes, civilians are killed often - I guess this is what Carr calls terrorism. It seems truer than Carr's categorical statements.Written in 2002, there is no comment on the Iraq War. I listened to the audiobook version of this book and it was painful. The reader's voice was annoying and I couldn't wait for the book to be over.As far as the book goes, I don't think it was that great. I was not utterly convinced that 9/11 is of the same flavor of terrorism as troops overstepping boundaries during wartime. It would seem to me that bombing is more to destroy an enemies resources that what 9/11 was - destroy American symbols and innocents.Even more doubtful is Carr's contention that his widely defined terrorism ALWAYS backfires on those who use it.
Is the lesson here that a large enough act of terrorism can actually lead to success for the terrorizers. Yes, creating malice in people will usually cause them to be malicious. But not the only and probably not the most dominant. We killed a lot of civilians which directly contributed to us winning the war against Japan. We would call that latter war crimes but the 'war on terror' is of a definitely different sort of war. Of course the nuclear bombing of Japan seems to contradict Carr's premise. OK, you do learn some history of how warfare has been conducted over the past 2000 years.
Terror is one way that can happen. One must also consider motivations: is the motivation of saturation bombing the same as 9/11. So in his view, what happened on 9/11 is not so strange in the history of warfare. Like most things, terrorism is a term that is a spectrum of tactics and not a one size fits all definition.
Whatever biases the author has, they appear to be personal. So even the central message of the book is muddied by inconsistencies.And beyond that message, this book has little to offer, and is badly flawed by its single-mindedness, its rush to judgement about complex events, its deliberate ignorance of obvious counter arguments, and a tendency to patronize the audience by asserting that events be interpretted his way, even when more familiar interpretations are more convincing.On the plus side, I see no political bias or propaganda. This book is elequent and occasionally hits a nerve. But basically it's message is simply: Terrorism (or war against civilians to achieve a political effect) is a self-destructive method of warfare, because the reaction to terror is more often than not outrage rather than capitulation.Carr goes beyond this to suggest that there are no exceptions to this rule, when some obvious exceptions come to mind (eg., Hiroshima, the extermination of the American Indians, and the frequent mass killings of any inconvenient population by various nations throughout history).
Carr's approach (and use of history) not only describes the ultimate futility of terrorist actions, but attempts something few people in the media dare to do -- provide context and comparative understanding. He is a challenging, provocative author, always avoiding self-righteousness and easy targets.Buy -- and read -- with confidence. Some readers expecting historical fiction might not appreciate Carr's subject matter, but it is important to remember that military history is Carr's field of expertise.
This is far from the simplistic rants one comes to expect in this area; Carr always takes his book in the right direction and (thankfully). Carr is, as always, the man to seek in such matters. expects his audience to bring more than a working knowledge of the subjects at hand.
Despite some unfair negative press, this book is yet another example of Carr's masterful writing style and unparalleled ability to create strong, lasting images. His prose is clear and direct, yet always intellectually sound. I only wish he gave us more non-fiction for his love (and knowledge) of the subjet is quite apparent.
Knowing this going in, I was able to immerse myself and enjoy from beginning to end.After September 11, it is important to have a reasonable, intelligent response that avoids sensationalism and fear-mongering. Our plight might seem unique and unprecedented to those in the full arrogance of their Americanism, but Carr rightfully dashes such nonsense, demonstrating that terror, far from a "Middle East problem," is (and has been) world-wide in scope, taking various shapes and employing wide-ranging tactics.Above all, however, Carr is simply a wonderful writer.
|
