cover image Endgame: The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror

Endgame: The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror

Thomas McInerney, Paul Vallely. Regnery Publishing, $27.95 (256pp) ISBN 978-0-89526-066-6

Dismissing critics of the Bush Administration's approach to the war on terror, this hawkish manifesto calls for more of the same. The authors, both retired generals and Fox News pundits, allow that terrorism involves a worldwide network of Muslim radicals aiming at a global Islamic empire and possibly plotting nuclear attacks on American cities. But they insist that the spread of terrorism will not be stanched through""the law-enforcement paradigm of counterterrorism"" or the settlement of Middle East political crises, but by going after the state sponsors (including Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran and North Korea) that the authors identify as being part of the""Web of Terror."" The authors nod to soft measures--encouraging democratization and public diplomacy initiatives--to foster moderation in the Muslim world, but the heart of their agenda is regime change. As the authors would have it, North Korea must dismantle its nuclear program or face U.S. invasion. Syria, unless it stops supporting terrorism and coughs up the Iraqi WMDs the authors say it's hiding, should also be invaded. Saudi Arabia should be nudged toward a diversified economy and political reform, but if Islamic radicals take over, it too must be invaded. Iran, too big to invade, should be slapped with an embargo and naval blockade, while Pakistan should be enticed with aid packages into curbing its nuclear proliferation and cracking down on the Taliban and al-Qaeda. The authors' ambitious schedule of ultimatums and conquests leads them to focus almost exclusively on the U.S. military, for which they recommend the Rumsfeld doctrine of light, mobile forces, supplemented by additional weapons spending. Homeland security gets scant attention beyond vague proposals for a Terrorist Security Department and Special Terrorist Courts involving substantial infringements on due process. With little analysis of costs and feasibility and not enough attention to homeland security, the authors' blueprint may not satisfy those who don't already support the ready use of U.S. military might. Photos.