You’ve got a Kindle.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle Cloud Reader.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Enter your mobile phone or email address
By pressing "Send link," you agree to Amazon's Conditions of Use.
You consent to receive an automated text message from or on behalf of Amazon about the Kindle App at your mobile number above. Consent is not a condition of any purchase. Message & data rates may apply.
Follow the Author
OK
Obama's Wars Hardcover – Bargain Price, September 27, 2010
| Bob Woodward (Author) Find all the books, read about the author, and more. See search results for this author |
| Price | New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook, Unabridged
"Please retry" |
$0.00
| Free with your Audible trial | |
|
Audio CD, Abridged, Audiobook
"Please retry" | $4.00 | $4.37 |
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.
From the Washington Post
By Steve Luxenberg, September 22, 2010:
President Obama urgently looked for a way out of the war in Afghanistan last year, repeatedly pressing his top military advisers for an exit plan that they never gave him, according to secret meeting notes and documents cited in a new book by journalist Bob Woodward.
Frustrated with his military commanders for consistently offering only options that required significantly more troops, Obama finally crafted his own strategy, dictating a classified six-page "terms sheet" that sought to limit U.S. involvement, Woodward reports in Obama's Wars.
According to Woodward's meeting-by-meeting, memo-by-memo account of the 2009 Afghan strategy review, the president avoided talk of victory as he described his objectives.
"This needs to be a plan about how we're going to hand it off and get out of Afghanistan," Obama is quoted as telling White House aides as he laid out his reasons for adding 30,000 troops in a short-term escalation. "Everything we're doing has to be focused on how we're going to get to the point where we can reduce our footprint. It's in our national security interest. There cannot be any wiggle room."
Read the full Post news report on Obama's Wars.
- Print length464 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherSimon & Schuster
- Publication dateSeptember 27, 2010
- Dimensions6.12 x 1.4 x 9.25 inches
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Customers who bought this item also bought
Editorial Reviews
From Booklist
About the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
1
On Thursday, November 6, 2008, two days after he was elected president of the United States, Senator Barack Obama arranged to meet in Chicago with Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence (DNI).
McConnell, 65, a retired Navy vice admiral with stooped shoulders, wisps of light brown hair and an impish smile, had come to present details of the most highly classified intelligence operations and capabilities of the vast American espionage establishment he oversaw as DNI. In just 75 days, the formidable powers of the state would reside with the 47-year-old Obama. He would soon be, as the intelligence world often called the president, “The First Customer.”
McConnell arrived early at the Kluczynski Federal Building, an austere Chicago skyscraper, with Michael J. Morell, who had been President George W. Bush’s presidential briefer on 9/11 and now headed the Central Intelligence Agency’s analysis division.
Two members of Senator Obama’s transition team from the last Democratic administration greeted them: John Podesta, Bill Clinton’s chief of staff for the final two years of his presidency, and James Steinberg, a former deputy national security adviser in the Clinton White House.
“We’re going to go in with the president-elect and hear what you guys have got to say,” Podesta said.
McConnell paused awkwardly. He had received instructions from President Bush. “As president,” Bush had told McConnell, “this is my decision. I forbid any information about our success and how this works” except to the president-elect. McConnell knew Bush had never been comfortable using the terminology “sources and methods.” But what the president meant was that nothing should be disclosed that might identify human spies and new techniques developed to infiltrate and attack al Qaeda, fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and defend the nation.
“John, sorry,” McConnell said. “I’d love to be able to accommodate, but I didn’t make these rules.” He related Bush’s instructions—only the president-elect and anyone designated to take a top national security cabinet post could attend. “Neither of you are designated. So I can’t. I’m not going to violate the president’s direction.”
“Okay, I got it,” Podesta said, barely concealing his irritation. Podesta had had all-source intelligence access before, as had Steinberg. He thought this was not helpful to Obama, who was largely unfamiliar with intelligence briefings.
Obama arrived still in full campaign mode with ready smiles and firm handshakes all around. He was buoyant in the afterglow of victory.
Two months earlier, after receiving a routine top secret briefing from McConnell on terrorism threats, Obama had half joked, “You know, I’ve been worried about losing this election. After talking to you guys, I’m worried about winning this election.”
“Mr. President-elect, we need to see you for a second,” Podesta said, steering him off to a private room. When Obama returned, his demeanor was different. He was more reserved, even aggravated. The transition from campaigning to governing—with all its frustrations—was delivering another surprise. His people, the inner circle from the campaign and the brain trust of Democrats he had carefully assembled to guide his transition, were being excluded. The first customer–elect was going to have to go it alone.
McConnell and Morell sat down with Obama in a private, secure room called a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, or SCIF. It was an unusually small room in the center of the building where a bathroom might normally be located. Designed to prevent eavesdropping, the SCIF was windowless and confining, even claustrophobic.
At first, this would be something of a continuation and amplification of the earlier briefing McConnell had given candidate Obama. There were 161,000 American troops at war in Iraq and 38,000 in Afghanistan. Intelligence was making significant contributions to the war efforts. But the immediate threat to the United States came not from these war zones, but from Pakistan, an unstable country with a population of about 170 million, a 1,500-mile border with southern Afghanistan, and an arsenal of some 100 nuclear weapons.
Priority one for the DNI, and now Obama, had to be the ungoverned tribal regions along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border where Osama bin Laden, his al Qaeda network, and branches of the extremist insurgent Taliban had nested in 150 training camps and other facilities.
Combined, the seven regions forming Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) were about the size of New Jersey. The extremist groups and tribal chiefs ruled much of the FATA and had footholds in Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier province.
In September 2006, Pakistan had signed a treaty ceding full control of the FATA’s North Waziristan region to Taliban-linked tribal chiefs, creating a kind of Wild West for al Qaeda and the Taliban insurgents attacking the U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
In the earlier briefing, McConnell had laid out the problem in dealing with Pakistan. It was a dishonest partner of the U.S. in the Afghanistan War. “They’re living a lie,” McConnell had said. In exchange for reimbursements of about $2 billion a year from the U.S., Pakistan’s powerful military and its spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), helped the U.S. while giving clandestine aid, weapons and money to the Afghan Taliban. They had an “office of hedging your bets,” McConnell said.
Dealing with the ISI would break your heart if you did it long enough, McConnell had explained. It was as if there were six or seven different personalities within the ISI. The CIA exploited and bought some, but at least one section—known as Directorate S—financed and nurtured the Taliban and other terrorist groups. CIA payments might put parts of the ISI in America’s pocket, McConnell had said, but the Pakistani spy agency could not or would not control its own people.
The Pakistani leadership believed the U.S. would eventually withdraw from the region, as it had toward the end of the Cold War once the occupying Soviet forces retreated from Afghanistan in 1989. Their paranoid mind-set was, in part, understandable. If America moved out again, India and Iran would fill the power vacuum inside Afghanistan. And most of all, Pakistan feared India, an avowed enemy for more than 60 years. As a growing economic and military powerhouse, India had numerous intelligence programs inside Afghanistan to spread its influence there. Pakistan worried more about being encircled by India than being undermined by extremists inside its borders.
The best way out of this would be for Obama to broker some kind of peace between India and Pakistan, the DNI had said. If Pakistan felt significantly more secure in its relations with India, it might stop playing its deadly game with the Taliban.
In his September overview, McConnell also discussed strikes by small unmanned aerial vehicles such as Predators that had sophisticated surveillance cameras and Hellfire missiles. The covert action program authorized by President Bush targeted al Qaeda leadership and other groups inside Pakistan. Although classified, the program had been widely reported in the Pakistani and American media.
Only four strikes had been launched in the first half of 2008, Obama had been told. The U.S. had uncovered evidence that the Pakistanis would delay planned strikes in order to warn al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban, whose fighters would then disperse. In June 2008, McConnell had taken human and technical intelligence to President Bush showing multiple conversations between an ISI colonel and Siraj Haqqani, a guerrilla commander whose network was allied with the Afghan Taliban.
“Okay,” Bush had said, “we’re going to stop playing the game. These sons of bitches are killing Americans. I’ve had enough.” He ordered stepped-up Predator drone strikes on al Qaeda leaders and specific camps, so-called infrastructure targets. It was like attacking an anthill—the survivors would run away in the aftermath. These “squirters” were then tracked to the next hideout, helping to build the intelligence data on terrorist refuges.
Bush had directed that Pakistan receive “concurrent notification” of drone attacks, meaning they learned of a strike as it was underway or, just to be sure, a few minutes after. American drones now owned the skies above Pakistan.
In addition, McConnell had given President Bush intelligence showing that the Pakistani ISI had helped the Haqqani network attack the Indian embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, on July 7, four months earlier. The U.S. had warned India, which had put its embassy in a defensive posture. But it was not enough. Fifty-eight people were killed and more than 100 injured in a suicide bombing.
McConnell had then moved during the September briefing to one of the most pressing worries. Al Qaeda was recruiting people from the 35 countries who didn’t need visas to enter the United States. It was paying them good money, bringing them into the ungoverned regions by the dozens, training them in all aspects of warfare—explosives and chemical—and trying to have them acquire biological weapons.
“We’re a big open sieve,” McConnell said. “They’re trying to get people with passports that don’t require a visa to get into the United States.” Al Qaeda had not succeeded yet, but that was the big worry. “We can’t find any cell in the United States, but we suspect there may be some.”
That got Obama’s full attention. Some of the 9/11 hijackers had operated for nearly 18 months in the United States before their attacks. As he had said at the end of that meeting, there were reasons to worry about winning the ele...
Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.
Product details
- ASIN : B004MKLRRO
- Publisher : Simon & Schuster; First Edition (September 27, 2010)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 464 pages
- Item Weight : 15.2 ounces
- Dimensions : 6.12 x 1.4 x 9.25 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #3,774,331 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #4,985 in United States Executive Government
- #13,080 in Deals in Books
- #179,424 in United States History (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Bob Woodward is an associate editor of The Washington Post, where he has worked since 1971. He has shared in two Pulitzer Prizes, first in 1973 for the coverage of the Watergate scandal with Carl Bernstein, and second in 2003 as the lead reporter for coverage of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
He has authored or coauthored 18 books, all of which have been national non-fiction bestsellers. Twelve of those have been #1 national bestsellers. He has written books on eight of the most recent presidents, from Nixon to Obama.
Bob Schieffer of CBS News has said, “Woodward has established himself as the best reporter of our time. He may be the best reporter of all time.”
In 2014, Robert Gates, former director of the CIA and Secretary of Defense, said that he wished he’d recruited Woodward into the CIA, saying of Woodward, “He has an extraordinary ability to get otherwise responsible adults to spill [their] guts to him...his ability to get people to talk about stuff they shouldn’t be talking about is just extraordinary and may be unique.”
Gene Roberts, the former managing editor of The New York Times, has called the Woodward-Bernstein Watergate coverage, “maybe the single greatest reporting effort of all time.” In listing the all-time 100 best non-fiction books, Time Magazine has called All the President’s Men, by Bernstein and Woodward, “Perhaps the most influential piece of journalism in history.”
In 2018 David Von Drehle wrote, “What [Theodore] White did for presidential campaigns, Post Associate Editor Bob Woodward has done for multiple West Wing administrations – in addition to the Supreme Court, the Pentagon, the CIA and the Federal Reserve.”
Woodward was born March 26, 1943 in Illinois. He graduated from Yale University in 1965 and served five years as a communications officer in the United States Navy before beginning his journalism career at the Montgomery County (Maryland) Sentinel, where he was a reporter for one year before joining the Post.
Photos, a Q&A, and additional materials are available at Woodward's website, www.bobwoodward.com.
Customer reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Obama's Wars is well-written, comprehensive, and un-biased, which is refreshing for a book about politics. Woodward has amazing access to all of the top leaders in both Congress and the White House, and takes the reader into the discussions and decisions that took place in the White House.
The fact that this book is as un-biased as is humanly possible bears repeating. Political books usually are written from a partisan point-of-view, but this one is the exception. The reader feels as if he was actually present and able to come to his own conclusions, instead of reading the author's conclusions.
Woodward gives an open, honest, unbiased, and very detailed account of the aspects of the Obama administration's investigation and decision-making process into the Afghan war and the extension of that war into Pakistan. Most of the book covers the administration's review of the current military situation and their subsequent decision on the number of forces to add to Afghanistan and the role those forces should play.
For the first time I felt that I had a somewhat accurate picture of many of the people at the top of the US government. While most of this material is not surprising, the accounts of Vice President Biden and the top military leadership did take me by surprise and gave me a new understanding of those parties.
My only complaint about the book is that it doesn't always give dates or a clear picture of other events unrelated to the war discussions going on at the same time.
This was a very good book and I have already begun going through Woodward's older books. I very much recommend it for anyone with political interests, regardless of political affiliations.
Woodward takes the reader behind the scenes to the strategy review sessions that take place among the top advisers: SECDEF Bob Gates, NSA James Jones, SECSTATE Hilary Clinton, CENTCOM Dave Petraeus, ISAF Commander Stanley McChrystal, Chairman of the JCS Mullen, and administration officials GEN Lute, Rahm Emanuel, and many others. There are deep divisions but also thoughtful and thorough discussions. The President himself is very ambivalent about a long term expensive commitment that he will have to pass on to HIS successor and distract his administration from domestic goals. Yet, he campaigned on a promise to properly resource Afghanistan and criticized the Bush administration for concentrating too much on Iraq and forgetting about where the genesis of 9/11 was -- Afghanistan -- and where the al Qaeda threat still remains -- along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. He puts in his own handpicked General, Stanley McChrystal, to turn things around. Yet when McChrystal comes up with his assessment, detailed here in Afghanistan Commander's Assessment , the president is not sure he wants to send in so many additional troops that McChrystal is requesting.
Some in the Obama administration argue that the president is "being rolled" by the military. They think that Obama is being boxed in where he HAS to give McChrystal what he wants. However, think about it from the point of view of the military. They were rolled by Bush/Rumsfeld through 5 years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, given a counterinsurgency mission without the resources to effectively carry it out. Rumsfeld goes so far as to dictate individual unit assignments for the theater -- holding back on most them for the initial Iraqi invasion. When Iraq started looking like a failure the military leadership were criticized for not standing up to Rumsfeld and telling him the truth about what was happening and how to stop the losses. THEY had been rolled. So, having learned from that catastrophe, they took a stand on Afghanistan and told the president this is how it needs to be if he wants to achieve his objectives in Afghanistan.
Obama's Wars will be studied in the military schools and by senior national security policy makers for years to come. The decisions made will be evaluated, in due time, on their success and failure. Understanding the decision making process and the issues involved is a major contribution of Woodward's latest. Highly recommended.
If you like this book from Woodward, also recommend U.S. Army U.S. Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual by none other than GEN David Petraeus, USA.
Woodward is able to construct a narrative that shows the reader the civilian-military and even military-military rivalries within the Obama Administration as they try to figure out how to deal with the Afghanistan War and our “allies” in the Karzai family. It really isn’t a question of right or wrong as most rational actors will act in their own self-interest or their organizations interest as the case may be. I thought it was also interesting because the American public hears the decisions presidents make, but often little about the decision making process itself.
Obama’s Wars is a terrific book for those who want to know about presidential decision-making processes and those who just want a juicy narrative about the conflicting parties in a presidential administration.
Top reviews from other countries
A reviewer can reasonably be expected to tell his readers what the book is about, so let me say candidly that I’m guessing about that to a certain extent. Why ‘WarS’ – plural? The one war in question is the war in Afghanistan, but I more than half suspect that Woodward is elevating the Washington infighting to some kind of war status. One does not have to be American to be familiar with the backstabbing, leaking and doublespeak that goes on. What astonished me was not so much its extent as the downright blatancy of it. Here are cabinet decisions, painstakingly kept clear, being questioned as if they had never happened. Here are military strategies, still undecided and under powerful questioning, being aired in the public prints by the very generals who were still supposed to be part of the decision-making process. Obviously we have to keep in mind the scenario of a rookie President, not yet 50 years old, with a mere 4 years’ experience in the US Senate and no service in the armed forces. All the same you could not precisely say that Dwight D. Eisenhower on taking office as President lacked military background, yet as far as establishing his writ in Washington we know what his predecessor said
‘That goddam general will sit in this goddam chair and he’ll say
“Do this” and “Do that” and not one goddam thing will happen.’
What the story is largely about is the way that the inexperienced but cerebral and determined young president got used to this and by the end of the book was becoming more forceful with his supposed subordinates. He sacked General Stan McChrystal for one glaring offence, and that not the first such either. Interestingly, Woodward seems to say that this took the military aback, so I would have loved to see what the history of this kind of situation was. Whether this book is intended in part as a study of Obama’s development as a leader in certain particular circumstances I don’t know, but whether it is or not, even a plain listing of the relevant instances could hardly avoid creating this impression. By the end of this long book the war in Afghanistan is still in progress, but it appears at least the actions being taken are in accordance with Commander-in-Chief’s commands-in-chief.
The style of the book does not sit with me very well, but this is the great Bob Woodward and this is one particular kind of American journalism even if not my own favourite kind. It is really the chronicle of a war of ideas, but it is presented entirely as a string of statements by the participants. To try to get more of an impression of these men of destiny (plus Hillary of course) I turned gratefully to the set of b/w plates infixed to the middle of the volume. Here we found mainly middle-aged men in suits or uniforms, and all of course white except for the c-in-c himself. Whether they are all made of ticky-tacky I couldn’t say, but they all look the same to me. The drama of ideas here was real and it was to say the least important, but the ideas are purveyed to us by these waxworks, and I could not help feeling at times that this presentation trivialised the issues. There is even another basic question on which I can’t make up my mind, and it’s whether the battle-forces correspond, at least roughly, to uniforms versus civilians. It works out like that at times, but these dramatis personae consist of individuals, and when they organise themselves into alliances the alliances keep re-forming their memberships. I wonder whether Bob Woodward has some update for us regarding this in the new era of Trump.
Very rightly Bob Woodward explains, or tries to explain, in his preface how he managed to come by so much confidential information, and I am not going to summarise, or try to summarise, this in a review, as I think that would just pile a Mount Pelion of speculation and uncertainty on top of the Ossa of doubt that Woodward has already assembled. Having a set of talking heads to put all this vital data across to us is the kind of semi-chatty idiom that does not appeal to me. What should be a Thucydidean exposition of forceful ideas forging history through the mouths of major spokesmen (plus of course Hillary again) becomes a kind of rambling set of meeting-minutes. I have seen it apparently suggested by another reviewer that this makes the book too long, and I would have to admit that I found it a slightly laboured read. Never mind, it’s Bob Woodward, and it will be a long time if ever that I shall read an account of all this whose honesty I can simply take as read from the start.
The content of the book is very interesting. Woodward proves once again he is unique in acquiring often damning information about the failures of George W. Bush and members of Barack Obama's inner circle. But some of information is stretched out over four or five pages when it could easily have been cut down to one. Sometimes the words went over my head and I had to force myself to re-read whole sections of the book, something I never had to do with 'The Price of Politics'.
Slightly disappointing but worth a read.












