US policies which are claimed to be taken to protect its citizens create the very conditions which further threaten its citizens. Operations which are claimed to provide credibility to US action ended up destabilizing and radicalizing many nations. Chomsky see that many nations see the terrorist actions as a just war of resistance against an invading army. In many cases, the actions would be considered crimes should the US law apply to its own actions. Crimes and violations are crimes and violation no matter who commits them. Rules apply to all, with them being able to be invoked against those who laid them down. The way a nation presents record of judging defendants will be used as the principle of judging the nation in the future.

While the Bush administration sent suspected militants to detention camps, the Obama administration killed them. Both are not in accordance with international law, but killing suspected militants using drones is an act of terrorism on a populous. There have been numerous US operations which lead to the death of many innocence to target supposed criminal without providing proof of crime to the international court. The US invaded countries whose targets are not serious threats causing radicalization within the countries as they saw military as an attack on their religion.

The way a state should try to resolve a conflict is best illustrated by Nicaragua. When Nicaragua was subject to violent assault in the 1980’s by the US, the Nicaraguan government went to the World Court. Although the World Court ruled in favor of Nicaragua, the US government dismissed the judgment and escalated the attacks. Nicaragua then went to the Security Council which asked the US to observe international law, which was vetoed by the US. A third attempt to cease US hostility was made at the General Assembly but with no different result.

When dealing with internal affairs, actions are taken to identify precisely who was at fault and the reasons behind the terror events. When dealing with foreign affairs, claims of who is at fault is enough with suspicious and little to no effort understand why there was a need to resort to terror. Rather than to vindicate claims to elucidate circumstances, the US holds international human rights laws in contempt. Without hearing the reasons and motives behind supposed innocent or guilty, the actions taken are not remembered with pride.

The goal of bin Laden was to get Americans into small but expensive wars which will bankrupt the government. US presidents continuously fell into bin Laden’s plan. Bin Laden could not radicalize many without the interventions of the US making the US his only indispensable ally. The raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound was a violation of international law from the invasion itself to the planned assassination.



The US supports hatred and violence when directed at enemies, but does not appreciate the hatred it nurtured turned against it. Strategies included pressuring allies to stop supplying arms to an area in the hope that the area would seek to supply itself via an enemy of US, thereby providing the appropriate propaganda for more violence. Normally, the sovereignty of states is revoked when they provide sanctuary to terrorists. Chomsky finds that the US is self-immunized against international law and conventions.

Without defeat of forced to acknowledge reality, powerful states tend to suppress their own crimes. War on terrorism does not actually target terrorism because the Western power do not abide by their own official definition of the term. The actions of the US make the US appear as a leading terrorist state by the US own definition. Terrorism is a weapon being used by the most powerful nation. US stance on international affairs is leading to greater violence. US is the only country condemned for international terrorism by the World Court. Following the international rules leads to stability with the alternative being to react with extreme violence thereby escalate the cycle of violence.
( )

I think I bought this book fairly recently as part of a discount deal. I had heard of Chomsky and read interviews that he has given over the years so I am familiar with his viewpoint. This is a very short book, my edition, which is an updated one still only has 170 pages so this review will be pretty short.

The book isn't a book as such but more a collection of interview transcripts which have been collated and expanded upon by way of short pieces by Chomsky. Due to this, various points are repeated from time to time and I found this a little annoying. A lot of ground is covered in this short book though and I think it would make a good introduction to this line of political thinking. The points are mostly well explained even though I was familiar with them from The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein.

I'm conflicted with my rating for the book. It loses marks for the fact that it is a collection of interviews rather than a cohesive book. My conflict comes from the fact that this book was initially published in November 2001 with the intention to get the work out there. This means that the rough nature of it is understandable but I still would have preferred my updated edition to more 'book like'. ( )

Biography and History > Bush Administration And Beyond > George W. Bush > North America > Roosevelt Administration And Beyond > United States