Customer Reviews

War by Other Means: An Insider's Account of the War on Terror

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

Whether or not you agreed with the Bush administration's policies on the war on terrorism, Yoo gives an inside account of the thought process the Administration went through. Once again, one might have disagreements, but none can argue Yoo doesn't back up what he believes.

John Yoo has become the boogeyman for liberal angst over President Bush's policies in the War on Terror. Gitmo, electronic eavesdropping, torture/interrogations and habeas corpus issues have all sat at the top of the list of grievances by anti-war types without any real discussion over what their alternatives would be. Yoo presents a cogent, balanced argument for why these policies were put into place using strict legal reasoning. He defines torture within the context of the war on terror based upon our country's longstanding case law (Eisentrager, for example) rather than some emotive, normative argument as his detractors have resorted to. Like it or not, the Bush Admin's legal rationale for pursuing these policies is sound, as evinced by the Obama/Holder continuance therein. A recommended read for all interested in an insider account of Justice's OLC and the Bush Admin's war against terrorism.

As a vetran of the Iraq war it was interesting to learn some of the process that was going on in the White House before and during the war. It just goes to show how Liberals/Progressives dont understand or try to study anything before they condem it. Its disturbing how they defend killers from harsh interigations when most of the interigations they performed i had to indure every day at Basic Training. And how every special forces in the US military has to go through waterboarding as part of their training and not a word from the Progressives about how it is torture. How can anyone defend killers and not the military that protects them from the killers?

Yoo's concept of the "unitary executive" is unconstitutional and ahistorical, while justifying the legal use of torture is illegal (in U.S. and international law), immoral, unethical and unChristian.

As legal scholar Jeremy Waldron wrote:

"It is dispiriting as well as shameful to have to turn our attention to this issue [of torture]. In 1911 the author of the article on "Torture" in the Encyclopedia Britannica wrote that `the whole subject is now one of only historical interest as far as Europe is concerned...'. Perhaps what is remarkable is not that torture is used, but that it is being defended by well-known American jurists and law professors like ... John Yoo... of Berkeley... Alan Derschowitz... of Harvard... Jay Bybee... of the Ninth Circuit Court."

Waldron's quote is from `Torture and Positive Law: Jurisprudence for the White House', Columbia Law Review 105 (2005) 1684-1685. Besides Waldron, other American jurists have spoken out forcefully against torture. See the special issue of the Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 37 (2006) that was devoted to essays on American torture since 2002.

In "Not a Suicide Pact," Judge Richard Posner offers an argument for sweeping executive power in the "war on terror" both better reasoned and more thoughtful than John Yoo does here. Still, as one of the architects of the Bush policy, Yoo's work offers a fascinating, and at times chilling, insight into the thinking within the White House. For the most part, Yoo's arguments remain on at best fragile legal footing, often cherry picking evidence and benefiting greatly from the fact that this book, like all books, is a monologue rather than a discussion. Despite that, one might at least hope that, as a lawyer, Yoo would at least create defenses that pass the smell test.

Examples abound of thin arguments in support of administration policies. One must, however, give Yoo credit for taking positions few would want to make, such as arguing for the constitutionality of the since repudiated internment of Japanese in WWII as an example of the legitimate use of executive war powers. Of course that the Senate had, in '42, actually declared war, is a detail given scant attention. Nor does the author ever give much consideration to the rather ambiguous notion of "a war on terror" never choosing to wonder as to how one determines the end date to such a struggle. Likewise does this self proclaimed conservative claim that the post 9/11 Congressional resolution for war in Afghanistan gave the president cart blanch to violate civil liberties, this despite the fact that the majority of legislators state that this was far from their intent. So much for conservative notions of legislative intent.

Nor does Yoo seem bothered by contradictions in his own argument. Thus, he claims that citizens need not worry about executive excess, since these will be reined in by the judiciary. Yet at the same time, he decries the judiciary as overly meddlesome. Similarly disturbing is the author's apparent ease in dismissing the central role the constitution gives the legislature in governing, in effect turning the Framer's intent on its head by arguing for a near unrestrained executive.

In the end, simply for the window Yoo offers into the administration, this book proves worthwhile, though all and all the view proves frightening. Though I disagree with him often in his book, Judge Posner offers a far more thoughtful and honest defense of current efforts by the White House to claim greater power. Yoo, on the other hand, here will convince no one other than those true believers who've already shared the cool Aid.

"War by Other Means" is a must-read for anyone who wants to be a well-informed critic, supporter, or observer of the Bush Administration's response to 9/11. And it's all the more compelling because it's written by John Yoo, the man who authored much of the legal analysis behind the Administration's war on terror, while serving as deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel from 2001 to 2003.

"War by Other Means" examines all aspects of the war on terror, including the NSA wiretapping controversy, the Patriot Act, the legal status of enemy combatants, coercive interrogation of detainees, key Supreme Court decisions, the applicability of the Geneva Conventions, military commissions, and the cases of specific terrorist suspects, such as Jose Padilla.

Throughout the book, Yoo's central theses are that 1) during wartime, the boundaries of the separation of powers shift, giving the President, as commander-in-chief, broader authority; and 2) in Yoo's words, "it would be a mistake to believe that the Constitution's framework for criminal justice should apply to war." Yoo explains that "[Criminal justice] involves the fundamental relationship between the people and its government, and so ought to be regulated by clear, strict rules defining the power given by the principal to its agent. [War], however, involves a foreign enemy who is not part of the American political community, and so should not benefit from the regular peacetime rules that define it."

I highly recommend "War by Other Means." You may not agree with Yoo's theses, but his arguments are sure to be thought-provoking, and you'll come away with an in-depth understanding of the legal case for expanded presidential power in wartime.

WAR BY OTHER MEANS: AN INSIDER'S ACCOUNT OF THE WAR ON TERROR is not your ordinary survey of 9/11: comes from one of the members of a skeletal staff at the Office of Legal Council who stayed behind while Washington, D.C. evacuated in the aftermath of events, and thus offers the observations of one who had a ringside seat to the politics behind the response to al Qaeda. It was John Yoo's analysis which led to some of Bush's most controversial approaches and politics, from Guantanamo Bay to military trials and the Patriot Act: WAR BY OTHER MEANS surveys not only events and personalities, but the even more important legal foundations of these decisions, offering an unprecedented view of events key to any thorough understanding.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

While many, perhaps most, will disagree with Professor Yoo's conclusions his reasoning and analysis are thorough and detailed. Most of the negativity expressed the other reviews seemingly stems from ignorance. There is a large body of scholorship devoted to the historical foundations of 'the executive power' as vested in a 'President of the United States' per the Constitution. People may not be aware of the broadness of this power and its historical uses. Professor Yoo not only argues that these powers exist but that he is a champion of preserving them. One may disagree with the use, expanison or preservation of such powers but it is flying in the face of 230 years of precedant to claim no such powers exist.

John Yoo succeeds in explaining the legal and policy justifications for the major issues attendant to the war on terror. In careful prose, interspersed with copious legal case law, background and practical analysis, Yoo establishes in eight weighty but readable chapters the legal underpinnings for such hot button issues as the non-application of the Geneva Conventions, the Patriot Act, NSA and the recent allegations about wiretapping, the media myths about Guantanamo, interrogation and the need for military commissions. His unemotional treatment of these issues is far preferable than having these crucial issues politicized by media writers like Andrew Sullivan, politicos like Ted Kennedy, and the emotional silliness of Keith Olbermann. These are issues too important to be left to the sophomores.

Anyone who really wants to understand how the legal decisions in the War on Terror were made, rather than depend on the red state-blue state polemical attacks, should read John Yoo's book. That he perceived his first duty to be to protect the nation and to protect those in our military and intelligence services, who are on the front lines, rather than to protect political correctness or the Bush administration, is to his credit. He, too, is a soldier defending us, but in his case, moral rather than physical courage was called for. This Marine veteran says thank you to him.

Robert A. Hall
Author of "The Good Bits."