What do you think?
Rate this book
An End to Evil: How to Win the War on Terror
An End to Evil charts the agenda for what’s next in the war on terrorism, as articulated by David Frum, former presidential speechwriter and bestselling author of The Right Man, and Richard Perle, former assistant secretary of defense and one of the most influential foreign-policy leaders in Washington.
This world is an unsafe place for Americans—and the U.S. government remains unready to defend its people. In An End to Evil, David Frum and Richard Perle sound the alert about the dangers around the continuing threat from terrorism, the crisis with North Korea, the aggressive ambitions of China. Frum and Perle provide a detailed, candid account of America’s a military whose leaders resist change, intelligence agencies mired in bureaucracy, diplomats who put friendly relations with their foreign colleagues ahead of the nation’s interests. Perle and Frum lay out a bold program to defend America—and to win the war on terror.
Among the topics this book
• why the United States risks its security if it submits to the authority of the United Nations
• why France and Saudi Arabia have to be treated as adversaries, not allies, in the war on terror
• why the United States must take decisive action against Iran—now
• what to do in North Korea if negotiations fail
• why everything you read in the newspapers about the Israeli-Arab dispute is wrong
• how our government must be changed if we are to fight the war on terror to victory—not just stalemate
• where the next great terror threat is coming from—and what we can do to protect ourselves
An End to Evil will define the conservative point of view on foreign policy for a new generation—and shape the agenda for the 2004 presidential-election year and beyond. With a keen insiders’ perspective on how our leaders are confronting—or not confronting—the war on terrorism, David Frum and Richard Perle make a convincing argument for why the toughest line is the safest line.
This world is an unsafe place for Americans—and the U.S. government remains unready to defend its people. In An End to Evil, David Frum and Richard Perle sound the alert about the dangers around the continuing threat from terrorism, the crisis with North Korea, the aggressive ambitions of China. Frum and Perle provide a detailed, candid account of America’s a military whose leaders resist change, intelligence agencies mired in bureaucracy, diplomats who put friendly relations with their foreign colleagues ahead of the nation’s interests. Perle and Frum lay out a bold program to defend America—and to win the war on terror.
Among the topics this book
• why the United States risks its security if it submits to the authority of the United Nations
• why France and Saudi Arabia have to be treated as adversaries, not allies, in the war on terror
• why the United States must take decisive action against Iran—now
• what to do in North Korea if negotiations fail
• why everything you read in the newspapers about the Israeli-Arab dispute is wrong
• how our government must be changed if we are to fight the war on terror to victory—not just stalemate
• where the next great terror threat is coming from—and what we can do to protect ourselves
An End to Evil will define the conservative point of view on foreign policy for a new generation—and shape the agenda for the 2004 presidential-election year and beyond. With a keen insiders’ perspective on how our leaders are confronting—or not confronting—the war on terrorism, David Frum and Richard Perle make a convincing argument for why the toughest line is the safest line.
288 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
7 people are currently reading
138 people want to read
About the author
David Frum
26 books164 followersDavid J. Frum is a Canadian American journalist active in both the United States and Canadian political arenas. A former economic speechwriter for President George W. Bush, he is also the author of the first "insider" book about the Bush presidency. His editorial columns have appeared in a variety of Canadian and American magazines and newspapers, including the National Post and The Week. He is also the founder of FrumForum.com (formerly NewMajority.com), a political group blog.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
June 6, 2020
This is warmongering propaganda. A neocon revelry of dangerous militant colonials who in their self-righteous indignation attempt to moralize their war-crimes and atrocities.
Where does "freedom" — ; the very "goal" of the war on "terror", fit into the belief that we must all carry biometrical cards?
"If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear!" This is is the war cry of fascists and authoritarians. It's said when they are eroding your human rights, social liberties, and attempting to brainwash and alter your beliefs for their own personal benefit.
Encouraging other Americans to "report suspicious activity" and simultaneously believing that law enforcement and immigration officers don’t have enough powers and must be given more carte blanche in dealing with the populace is the war cry of dictators and totalitarians. These are actual domestic and foreign policy recommendations from the book, and the only two I will address, for I do not have the time to pick apart the infinitude of insolent claims made.
Where does truth fit into the numerous factual inconsistencies, intellectual dishonesty, and bad faith arguments in this book, written by one of the architects of one of the greatest lies, cons, and manipulations of American foreign policy throughout our history?
Where does empathy fit into the American constitution that every man, woman, and child is entitled to the pursuit of happiness? I guess I missed the fine-print saying if you're Iraqi, N.Korean, or Iranian, you're out of luck and should be murdered because you have resources America needs.
Empathy, freedom, and truth have no place in the ideology advocated in this "book", because this nearly 300-page rant is propaganda. It's a militarist, fascist, surveillance police-state that is as self-righteous, black-and-white, and moronic as it is ignorant and nonsensical. The only reason why Frum is "anti-Trump" now is because Trump is blatant and obvious in his xenophobia, in his racism, in his sexism, and in his cruelty. Make no mistake, Frum and co. are idelogically identical to Trumpism and Republicanism. We may only hope that a day will come wherein publishers will turn down such hogwash and opt for more informative, historically accurate, and apt analysis of foreign policy and global politics, that would be the true end to evil.
Where does "freedom" — ; the very "goal" of the war on "terror", fit into the belief that we must all carry biometrical cards?
"If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear!" This is is the war cry of fascists and authoritarians. It's said when they are eroding your human rights, social liberties, and attempting to brainwash and alter your beliefs for their own personal benefit.
This is the loss of freedom we face when our privacy is taken from us. This is life in former East Germany, or life in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. And it's our future as we allow an ever-intrusive eye into our personal, private lives.
Too many wrongly characterize the debate as "security versus privacy." The real choice is liberty versus control. Tyranny, whether it arises under threat of foreign physical attack or under constant domestic authoritative scrutiny, is still tyranny. Liberty requires security without intrusion, security plus privacy. Widespread police surveillance is the very definition of a police state. And that's why we should champion privacy even when we have nothing to hide.
Encouraging other Americans to "report suspicious activity" and simultaneously believing that law enforcement and immigration officers don’t have enough powers and must be given more carte blanche in dealing with the populace is the war cry of dictators and totalitarians. These are actual domestic and foreign policy recommendations from the book, and the only two I will address, for I do not have the time to pick apart the infinitude of insolent claims made.
Stalin's regime relied heavily on "mutual surveillance," urging families to report on each other in communal living spaces and report "disloyalty."
Where does truth fit into the numerous factual inconsistencies, intellectual dishonesty, and bad faith arguments in this book, written by one of the architects of one of the greatest lies, cons, and manipulations of American foreign policy throughout our history?
Where does empathy fit into the American constitution that every man, woman, and child is entitled to the pursuit of happiness? I guess I missed the fine-print saying if you're Iraqi, N.Korean, or Iranian, you're out of luck and should be murdered because you have resources America needs.
Schwarz documents that war advocates like Frum still can't tell basic truths about Iraq even as they adopt the posture of contemplation and remorse. In particular, Frum's claim that Saddam maintained a nuclear weapons program until 1996 is indisputably false.
"Of course it's about oil, it's very much about oil, and we can't really deny that. From the standpoint of a solider who's now fought in the middle east for six years – my son-in-law's fought there for four years, my daughter's been over there, my son has served the nation; my family has been fighting for a long time."
Gen. John Abizaid, former commander of CENTCOM speaking about the Iraq War. "People say we're not fighting for oil. Of course we are. They talk about America's national interest. What the hell do you think they're talking about? We're not there for figs." ~ US Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel, about the Iraq war back in 2007.
Empathy, freedom, and truth have no place in the ideology advocated in this "book", because this nearly 300-page rant is propaganda. It's a militarist, fascist, surveillance police-state that is as self-righteous, black-and-white, and moronic as it is ignorant and nonsensical. The only reason why Frum is "anti-Trump" now is because Trump is blatant and obvious in his xenophobia, in his racism, in his sexism, and in his cruelty. Make no mistake, Frum and co. are idelogically identical to Trumpism and Republicanism. We may only hope that a day will come wherein publishers will turn down such hogwash and opt for more informative, historically accurate, and apt analysis of foreign policy and global politics, that would be the true end to evil.
May 1, 2018
The title of this book tells us a lot about where conservatism, especially Neo-conservatism, was in the early 2000's. A true Burkean would treat "An End to Evil" as a ridiculous statement, which indeed, it is. The book should be subtitled "Two Unreconstructed Neocons Show Why Liberals Are at Fault for Everything in the World, including why the Iraq War Became a Disaster." In short, while I found some value in certain points, this book is really just an ideological screed rather than a serious foreign policy document.
So what then can scholars get out of this book? I'd still say if you are a scholar of neocons or USFP in the early 21st century then this is a pretty good snapshot of ideological neocon thought. All the themes are there: UN-bashing, liberal-bashing, Europe-bashing, CIA-bashing, unilateralism, universalism re: Western values, a Bernard Lewis-is take on Islam (which I agree with, a little bit), the revolution in military affairs, and the continuation of the regime change approach to rogue states. Of course, when they wrote their first edition of this book, the neocons were riding high in that sweet window between invading Iraq and Iraq collapsing into insurgency. So to get a sense of that emotional high point, this book is a useful vehicle. Other than that, even the writings of Kagan and Kristol are more nuanced and effective than this book. Kudos to Frum for moderating and reconsidering his views since then; I now quite enjoy his writing in the Atlantic.
So what then can scholars get out of this book? I'd still say if you are a scholar of neocons or USFP in the early 21st century then this is a pretty good snapshot of ideological neocon thought. All the themes are there: UN-bashing, liberal-bashing, Europe-bashing, CIA-bashing, unilateralism, universalism re: Western values, a Bernard Lewis-is take on Islam (which I agree with, a little bit), the revolution in military affairs, and the continuation of the regime change approach to rogue states. Of course, when they wrote their first edition of this book, the neocons were riding high in that sweet window between invading Iraq and Iraq collapsing into insurgency. So to get a sense of that emotional high point, this book is a useful vehicle. Other than that, even the writings of Kagan and Kristol are more nuanced and effective than this book. Kudos to Frum for moderating and reconsidering his views since then; I now quite enjoy his writing in the Atlantic.
October 20, 2010
Words can't capture the casuistry contained in this wretched and evil book of war-mongering fabrications by an architect and a mouthpiece of the Iraq war. Atrocious and violently objectionable through and through.
October 26, 2021
Seriously outdated but good background for terror group s and US/Worlds reactions.
Often I like to look back and see if the pundits got it right and often they get it terribly wrong. Some humility would have made this a useful experience but it sounds to me as if someone on the far right used this as their guide and then removed themselves from any responsibility? Wonder whom?
This is the hard line on dealing with c0untries the USA does not agree with. I believe if we had followed this strategy the rate of global terror and hatred towards the USA would have increased manifold.
The cure for terror is not war. It is neither capitulation nor bribery which Frum and friend inaccurately state repeatedly. You need to work with allies and create a blend of policies that control illegal activities. But to dictate without proper understanding of the costs, human and financial, means we will continue to lurch from mistake to mistake as we see with the prolonged and ineffectual Afghan experience.
But with hindsight that is plain to see now.
Often I like to look back and see if the pundits got it right and often they get it terribly wrong. Some humility would have made this a useful experience but it sounds to me as if someone on the far right used this as their guide and then removed themselves from any responsibility? Wonder whom?
This is the hard line on dealing with c0untries the USA does not agree with. I believe if we had followed this strategy the rate of global terror and hatred towards the USA would have increased manifold.
The cure for terror is not war. It is neither capitulation nor bribery which Frum and friend inaccurately state repeatedly. You need to work with allies and create a blend of policies that control illegal activities. But to dictate without proper understanding of the costs, human and financial, means we will continue to lurch from mistake to mistake as we see with the prolonged and ineffectual Afghan experience.
But with hindsight that is plain to see now.
October 24, 2017
Interesting insight into neocon theory
April 11, 2018
An interesting prospective from the Hawks. There is no way to make the war in Iraq a good idea, but still gave some prospective to the geopolitical realities of the area.
April 17, 2020
The toughest line is the safest line.
September 6, 2013
Possibly the worst book I've read in quite a while.
The authors have a few good ideas, but lose them among rabid political rants and straight factual error. Did you know California was the biggest state in the union? Neither did I, but they seem to think so. They also believe the looting of the museums in Iraq to be "alleged" and are convinced the never found weapons of mass destruction that sparked off the invasion are still out there, somewhere. Or so it seems. Sometimes they are a bit unclear.
As I said, some good ideas, but they don't make their case well, and I'm not sure how they think belittling other countries will make the cooperate with the US.
They also seem willing to justify actions by people they approve of, but condemn similar actions by those they do not.
Could have been a very informative, useful, book, but didn't get there.
The authors have a few good ideas, but lose them among rabid political rants and straight factual error. Did you know California was the biggest state in the union? Neither did I, but they seem to think so. They also believe the looting of the museums in Iraq to be "alleged" and are convinced the never found weapons of mass destruction that sparked off the invasion are still out there, somewhere. Or so it seems. Sometimes they are a bit unclear.
As I said, some good ideas, but they don't make their case well, and I'm not sure how they think belittling other countries will make the cooperate with the US.
They also seem willing to justify actions by people they approve of, but condemn similar actions by those they do not.
Could have been a very informative, useful, book, but didn't get there.
Read
June 16, 2008Although highly recommended by a neo-conservative friend of mine, Frum's ringing endorsement of the Bush doctrine is even shakier four years after publication. I hesitate to disparage Frum, but find his clearly drawn distinctions of "Good v Evil" hardly sustainable given the difficultly in implementing any Middle East policy. What parts I did read, however, proposed very sensible domestic policies to tighten our borders and diminish the potential for a terrorist attack on our own soil.
May 28, 2008
Great book. The former assistant secretary of defense, Richard Perle, lays out some subtle but essential points in understanding the war on terror.
October 18, 2008
It was OK. Unsettling. Don't read it on a plane.
December 25, 2013
Informative.
January 24, 2025
Exhibit #A in Zbigniew Brzeziński's argument that neocon warhawks suffered from a Manichean worldview.
December 23, 2021
A book written with good argumentation, and bad intentions.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews