Bomb Power: The Modern Presidency and the National Security State

by Garry Wills

A groundbreaking examination of how the atomic bomb profoundly altered the nature of American democracy.

In Bomb Power, bestselling author Garry Wills presents a blistering critique of excessive executive power and official secrecy, drawing a direct line from the Manhattan Project to the usurpations of George W. Bush. He reveals how the atomic bomb transformed our nation down to its deepest constitutional roots-by dramatically increasing the power of the modern presidency and redefining the government as a national security state-leaving us in a state of continuous war alert for nearly seven decades. Bold and incisive, Bomb Power casts the history of the postwar period in a new light and sounds an alarm about the continued threat to our Constitution.

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, American History, War, Military Fiction, International Relations

288 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1979

About the author

Garry Wills is an American author, journalist, political philosopher, and historian, specializing in American history, politics, and religion, especially the history of the Catholic Church. He won a Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction in 1993.
Wills has written over fifty books and, since 1973, has been a frequent reviewer for The New York Review of Books. He became a faculty member of the history department at Northwestern University in 1980, where he is an Emeritus Professor of History.

Reviews

[brian · Rating 3 out of 5]

1. in the 70s, nixon took the american economy off the gold standard.
after that, american money was kind of an abstraction - backed by futures. backed by nothing.

a friend of mine came up with this scenario: a guy walks into a deli and tosses some beer on the counter. the clerk asks for payment and the guy takes out a gun: "fuck you." the guy leaves with whatever he wants.

the american money that was formerly backed by gold, is now backed by 'fuck you' -- the bomb, in no small part, makes that possible.

but i think the story goes much deeper and farther than application to america's economy. it goes, in some sense, toward our very existence as a nation.

during vietnam, nixon & kissinger created the 'madman theory' - they attempted to make leaders of other countries think the president was insane, that he could drop the bomb at any minute. fearing this, the theory went, hostile leaders would kowtow before us. american foreign policy was - and is - backed by 'fuck you.'


2. despite america's obsession with 'rugged individualism', despite the belief that our origins lie in the throwing off of a despot so we do all we can to fight despotism… we are human. and man's default position, i believe, is fascism. for this reason, democracy must be doubly triply quadruply treasured and safeguarded.


3. during the bush presidency gary wills wrote a nytimes op-ed in which he stated that the president wasn't his commander in chief. he was, of course, hit with a barrage of clever & jingoistic witticisms along the line of 'love it or leave it!' wills's point was that the president is, in fact, not his commander in chief. the constitution specifies:


Article II, Section 2, Clause 1:

The President shall be Commander of Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States; and of the Militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States.


the president has no direct power over any civilian. but we've arrived at a point in which we believe the president has powers that the constitution doesn't provide… because the modern day president does, in fact, have powers that s/he was never intended to possess.


4. the manhattan project laid the seeds for the national security state in that the executive branch funneled two billion dollars behind congress's back and created a kind of shadow government outside the chain of command in order to develop the bomb. it was necessary, yes, but it was truman - with the help of acheson, kennan, and numerous others - who, after the development and deployment of the bomb, during the early years of the cold war, consolidated the national security state and laid the framework for its permanence -- for a permanent state of war, even in a time of peace. and congress, of course, is equally as culpable in giving up much of their power.

the bomb made it all possible. when other presidents tried to expand executive power they hadn't the means. but the bomb -- the bomb laid all the power in one man's hands and created endgame scenarios in which the american president could, to use acheson's words, 'scare the hell out of' the american public into near submission on anything.


5. fast forward a number of decades to a point in which the executive branch had either 1) overthrown, 2) was instrumental in the overthrowing of, or 3) had failed in an attempt to overthrow - the governments of iran, guatemala, chile, syria, and indonesia; engaged in undeclared wars against korea and vietnam; bypassed congress to launch military escapades in lebanon, grenada, panama, libya, haiti, kosovo, bosnia, etc… but nothing, of course, compares to what went down under george w. bush's eight years of constitution trampling.

sure, you say, lincoln temporarily shut down habeus corpus and FDR created the internment camps. american history is filled with stories of executive overreach. yes, but none of them claimed it their routine right as president to do so. cheney/addington/yoo differed in that they claimed the president had the right to declare war, disregard habeus corpus, create military tribunals, wiretap american citizens without a warrant, and torture suspected bad-guys. (isn't it cute how torture apologists always leave 'suspected' from that last sentence?)


6. we've arrived at a point in which we watch this exchange between John Yoo and Notre Dame law professor Douglas Cassel...


CASSEL: If the president deems that he's got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person's child, there is no law that can stop him?

YOO: No treaty.

CASSEL: Also no law by Congress - that is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo.

YOO: I think it depends on why the president thinks he needs to do that.


…and it's business as usual.


7. now, i can get into a whole rant about how we differ from any other nation not in our inherent toughness or any of that nonsense but in the uniqueness and badassness of our constitution and that it is the rule of law that truly is the shining city on the hill… but i won't. because, really, who needs to hear that shit again?


8. and for all y'all who believe the current president to be an exception…

"The truth of this was borne out in the early days of Barack Obama's presidency. At his confirmation hearings to be head of the CIA, Leon Panetta said that "extraordinary rendition" was a tool he meant to retain. Obama's nominee for Solicitor General, Elena Kagan, told Congress she agreed with John Yoo's claim that a terrorist captured anywhere should be subject to 'battlefield law'. On the first opportunity to abort trial proceedings by invoking 'state secrets' - Obama's Attorney General, Eric Holder, did so. Obama refused to release photographs of "enhanced interrogation". The CIA has earlier illegally destroyed taped depictions of such interrogations - and Obama refused to release documents describing these tapes. The President said that past official crimes would not be investigated - certainly not for prosecution, and not even in terms of an impartial "truth commission" just tying to establish a record. He said, on the contrary, that detainees might be tried in Bush's unconstitutional "military tribunals."


9. bomb power is an important book. and should be read. but it's frustrating in that the subject deserves a deeper, more thorough treatment. a book tracing the creation of the national security state -- a mammoth, complex subject -- deserves more than a few pages on, say, iran/contra, or only a few sentences regarding clinton's invasion of haiti... and it does seem, at times, that in order to hammer a point home in as small a page count as possible, wills simply brushes aside much of the issue's complexity and engages, perhaps, in a bit of presentism. but i suppose it's a common dilemma: write a non-fiction book that one actually wants non-academics to read, one that might have some kind of impact… you can't toss out one of those 850 pg doorstoppers.

[Kelly · Rating 5 out of 5]

True words. Garry Wills is probably the most under-appreciated historian working today. His previous books are intense, provocative and intellectually bulletproof; this latest one is no exception. His thesis in "Bomb Power" is that the advent of the nuclear age irrevocably changed the nature of executive power in America, tilting it towards an imperial presidency, a state of perpetual war, and a corrosive dependence on secrecy. That David Hoffman can win a Pulitzer ("The Dead Hand") while Garry Wills' exposé on nuclear politics drifts by virtually unnoticed is a testimony to the power of confirmation bias with respect to the former and to the unwelcome nature of truth with respect to the latter (or vice versa, depending on how ideologically blinkered a reader might be).

To be fair, "Bomb Power" isn't a work of investigative journalism. There are no new revelations here (at least not for those familiar with the various legacies of deceit that trail our federal government like slug slime). What Wills has done is to give a clear and unifying context within which to view old scandals and betrayals; i.e., as part of a pattern of erosion in which Congress's constitutional role is continually being subverted and diminished.

[Mason · Rating 5 out of 5]

Few books BRING THE RECEIPTS as readily as this one

[Vheissu · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book will appeal to those readers who have an interest in recent American politics and international affairs. There is little new here that will be unfamiliar to area specialists, which is not to say that the book is without merit. Wills provides a comprehensive review of the origins and birth of the "national security state," and I agree with his criticisms of it. His arguments are persuasive and his evidence is compelling.

The title refers to the growth of presidential power due to the existence of nuclear weapons. He argues that the Manhattan Project was not just the rationale for growing presidential power but also a model for it. The Manhattan Project was arguably unconstitutional yet forgivable in wartime. The manner in which it was conducted--extreme secrecy, concentration of power in the hands of a single person, confiscation of private property, suppressing the Constitutional rights of American citizens, even contemplated assassinations--was less forgivingly applied to other areas of policy and resulted in contemporary arguments for a "unitary" executive. "Wartime" became a permanent feature of American life after World War II and the shift of power from the Congress to the president has become virtually irreversible. Wills' argument may be simplistic but it is nevertheless persuasive.

The abuses of power and outright criminality of U.S. officials in the pursuit of "national security" are well-documented both here and in innumerable public documents and scholarly works. Wills notes that in virtually all of these cases, American adversaries knew precisely what the United States was up to. Only Congress and the American public were deceived.

On one point I quibble with Wills' account. Congress, and in turn American voters, was often complicit in the growth of secret, presidential power. Congress willingly delegated powers to the president since World War II, at least in part because Members wished to avoid responsibility for the illegal and brutal actions undertaken by our government. Voters, too, closed their eyes, shut their mouths, and covered their ears when people like Seymour Hirsch warned them of crimes committed in their name. When Congress stood up to presidential abuses, as with the War Powers Resolution, its efforts were half-baked and timid in the extreme, creating loopholes for the national security state and that were willfully ignored by one administration after another in any case.

Wills wonders if the country can ever return to the days when the Constitution ruled and Congress took responsibility for the conduct of government. Many of us ask the same question and wind up with the same conclusion as Wills: Probably not.

[Breann Hunt · Rating 4 out of 5]

certainly a departure (in my opinion) from style of Nixon Agonistas, but nonetheless another Gary Wills banger. the most surprising turn of events is that he had me nodding along to his constitutional originalist arguments… so there’s that. also learned a lot about how much Harry Truman sucks. love learning new things, thanks Gary

[Piker7977 · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bomb Power falls into the "Imperial America" category of historiography. This perspective takes a critical look at America's foreign policy and sees it as belligerent and self-serving. A fair number of these histories looks at the consequences of events and wars, but Wills focuses his study around the executive branch of the republic. His intended thesis is that the dubious duty of America's nuclear weapons has helped the presidency run away with power. While the actual pages drifts away from this argument, the examples and instances are worth reading.

There is not a lot in here about bombs as there is about the security state. When you read Bomb Power you encounter a hodgepodge of mini-narratives that describe how presidents have abused their constitutional privileges and sought to undermine their political restraints. The balances found in the different branches have mutated into a pseudo-monarchy in which the power of the executive must be preserved and strengthened or else other nations will not take his or her notions to launch a nuke seriously.

The thing about this book is that it tells such a small part of the "Imperial America" story. There are better books out there from a variety of topics. I found Wills's history and writing to be mediocre. You can get the same themes from better writers (Gore Vidal) or better histories from other historians (Stephen Kinder and Andrew Bacevich). Plus, the thesis is not mentioned enough to make it convincing. There is no doubt that nukes have made the president a force to be reckoned with, but that is derivative of the rise of the America's global hegemony coupled with the rise of the security state. I don't think that Wills completely convinces his readers, nor himself, about why the bomb has become the most powerful force to shift authority toward the presidency. However, his arguments to fight into a larger narrative that examines a failed postwar foreign policy, the undermining of the democratic aspects of our republic, and how despotism is on the rise in modern America.

Perhaps we shall she an updated edition in which Wills examines how an ill-informed neophyte has gained access to the most powerful office in the world and what the scenarios are for leveraging nuclear capabilities for political gains.

[Luke LeBar · Rating 4 out of 5]

Garry Wills completes a tour de force in this short yet comprehensive book. I knew I had to read this after the Know Your Enemy episode done on this book with the historian Erik Baker. I will link that below as I highly recommend that episode. The warning of the book is simple, the President is an elected quasi dictator who has subverted the American Constitution, including the powers explicitly given to Congress, and that this process has continued almost totally without stoppage (with the exception of Jimmy Carter) regardless of political party or person in office. All of this, Wills claims, began during the Manhattan project and spread to almost every facet of American governance. This is “Bomb Power,” and Wills says that it “emanated outward like a radiation cloud.”

The creation of the Bomb was illegal. The dropping of the Bomb was a moral travesty. Wills clearly fears the power of the Bomb and views the men who lobbied for its use as arrogant and violent men. Wills shows that there was never any question in Truman’s mind about whether the Bomb would be used. Once it was created, it had to be dropped. The wages of sin are death. The Bomb is a totem of our sin of pride, and there is no question that it brings death. Wills does a good job showing that many of the justifications for dropping the bomb were manufactured after the dropping of the Bomb and that the Department of War believed that the U.S. could have defeated Japan without Atomic means. However, because the Bomb was a secret for even the highest ranking military and civilian officials, a logical and wise decision could not be made about its use. Secrecy is the regime maintainer of the Bomb.

The National Security State and its monopoly on secrecy is the child of the Bomb. Wills goes step by step through the construction of the National Security State. Every memo and executive order is covered. Most steps are taken in secret, outside the reach of the democratic process. Those that are taken by Congress are then twisted or ignored by the Executive branch in order to continue their work in secret. What happens over time, is that secrecy becomes not a tool to save lives, but to save the President and the military from embarrassment.

Where this all cashes out is a Presidency that is largely outside the democratic process. Because there is so much classification and secrecy surrounding the National Security State, we as citizens of this country cannot evaluate whether we want our government to do these things or not. Bomb Power is how we end up torturing people, it’s how we end up with never ending wars that are unjust in the first place. It’s how we end up with a drone killing an NGO worker and his kids when he gets home from work.

This book made me angry and sad. War is bad; it may be just, but it is always bad. Wills runs on this implicit assumption. Wills loves democracy and republican government. I do too. The idea that issues of life and death are outside of democratic action and in the hands of one man is inimical to my impulses. I hate the Bomb and I wish we had never built it. This system of Bomb Power is so vast, so big. No individual can rest power away from the Bomb. The only thing we have left is to pray for forgiveness from God, to love our neighbors and families, and to work every day against the logic of the Bomb, the logic of death, decay, and domination. I join Garry in being an enemy of the Bomb.

Link to KYE elisode: https://open.spotify.com/episode/6tyN...

[Greg Brown · Rating 3 out of 5]

I expected the strong version of Wills' thesis going in—the nuclear bomb and project to build it begat most of the post-WW II world order and government organization—and got something a bit weaker: some of the tools they used to build and deploy the bomb were useful enough that subsequent administrations started deploying it for all sorts of uses. Honestly, Wills could just as easily have written the book about secrecy as a tool in the Cold War, and it probably would have made for a clearer structure to the book as well.

Hiroshima in America does a better job of cataloguing the psychic break caused by using the bomb on a populace, along with the window of time where Truman thought the US had unstoppable power that would never be matched by its enemies. Trying to recapture and enjoy that unipolar dominance describes a lot of the efforts made during the Cold War, and in a more comprehensive fashion than Wills' secrecy-centric narrative, especially one that tends to just focus on the exceptional outbreaks like the Cuban Missile Crisis or Watergate.

The Bomb and The Doomsday Machine do a much better job of describing the giant organizing apparatus built up to justify and deploy the bomb, while Wills just occasionally refers to the web of air bases for deploying bombers before returning to his preferred subject.

Probably the most interesting part of the book was as a trip back to the mindset of 2009, when there were hopes that Obama would rollback Bush's executive overreach and unaccountable conduct in the war on terror. Since then, Obama mainly worked to set the conduct of the war on firmer legal grounds while minimally changing the actual moral atrocities being committed, turning drones into a giant regimented system of death and destruction, still with minimal accountability but some sheen of procedural justice.

Wills' bigger problem is he thinks the answers to his problems lie in the US Constitution, or a firmer adherence to its principles, when it's clear over the last decade that nobody really cares about it? We have a Federalist Society appeals judges and a Supreme Court that clearly decides whatever's convenient; a legislative branch totally inert and incapable of dealing with standard business, much less actual looming crises like climate change, homelessness, aging, and health care; and an executive branch that's arguably the most representative at the moment but still disappointing and full of careerists past their expiration date. Really, more depressing than any of the shit Wills complains about here.

[Christopher · Rating 5 out of 5]

Executive Orders shape modern American foreign and domestic policy. The WSJ recently reported on President-elect Trump's anticipated plans to execute many such Orders in the early days of his second term. Trump’s transition team is actively preparing a broad range of Orders to implement immediate and significant policy changes. Trump’s Executive Orders are expected to address trade and the economy, immigration, energy and the environment, and government reform.

The exponential rise of Executive Orders is part of a broader expansion of presidential power in the United States, particularly since WWII and the development of nuclear weapons. Historian Gary Wills contends that the immense authority required to manage national security in the nuclear age fundamentally altered the balance of power in the U.S. government, shifting it toward the executive branch. Wills argues that the atomic bomb — and the executive authority it symbolized — marked a turning point in the development of an "imperial presidency," where the President's use of Executive Orders became central to U.S. governance, often bypassing democratic processes and accountability. This concentration of power, according to Wills, laid the groundwork for an authoritarian shift in American politics. The presidency increasingly relies on unilateral tools, such as Executive Orders, to sideline Congress on critical policy decisions and erode checks and balances imposed by the Constitution.

And Americans seem increasingly accustomed to this new state of play. The next time you hear tariffs discussed in the media, observe how the President’s power to unilaterally promulgate tariff policy isn’t debated – it’s assumed. Long gone are the days of intense Congressional debate on the “Tarriff of Abominations,” or the "Smoot-Hawley Tarriff." Taxes on imports are just another token of presidential fiat in post-WWII America. In a world where one person can end human civilization with the push of a “big red button,” what good are checks and balances?

Really enjoyed this book I picked up from Dan Carlin’s “Destroyer of Worlds.”

[Luke · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is not his best work. Perhaps this suffers from having read Katznelson's "Fear itself" earlier, this book seems to be splenetic and wounded rather than insightful.

As a long time fan, this is a disappointment.

[Randal · Rating 3 out of 5]

Wills does a decent job exploring the growth of the presidency beyond its constitutional limits and beyond the original intent of the office, but he fails to follow through on his thesis that this massive growth of executive power has been derived primarily from the president's sole authority over "the Bomb".

Instead, what Wills actually ends up doing is presenting a case in which every president since Truman has relied on real, perceived, or invented crises to enhance their power. Some of these crises were bomb-related, but not all, or even most. While he begins with a look at Truman, his later chapters examine Reagan-era and Bush, Jr.-era usurpations that have little or nothing to do with nuclear weapons or nuclear crises. By about halfway through the book, Wills is no longer talking about "bomb power," so much as he is talking about "fear power"—scaring the hell out of the American people in order to enhance the scope of the executive branch.

I had hoped for a deeper examination of the presidency's use of nuclear threats, presidents' refusals to repudiate a US first strike, and Americans' erroneous views of the Bomb as an ultimate ace in the hole.

[Reid Belew · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really incredible deep dive into how the creation of the bomb severely altered the executive branch. The bomb had to be made in secret. Secrecy demands lying. Lying begets lawlessness. Unchecked lawlessness in one branch of government centralizes power. Now presidents declare war without congressional approval, severely overreach with the scope and breadth of executive orders, overclassify government documents, yada yada yada. The bomb required imperial action that allows us to shoot it off from and to anywhere in the world, hence our worldwide military base network. To quote the book:

“If the President has the sole authority to launch nation-destroying weapons, he has license to use every other power at his disposal that might safeguard that supreme necessity. If he says he needs other and lesser powers, how can Congress or the courts discern whether he needs them when they have no supervisory role over the basis of the claim he is making? To challenge his authority anywhere is to threaten the one great authority. If he is weakened by criticism, how can other nations be sure he maintains the political ability to use his ultimate sanction?”

[Tim Combes · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wills paints a great portrait of how the secrecy surrounding the Manhattan Project helped lead to the national security state, the increased power of the executive branch, and the erosion of the constitution.

Bomb Power is both helped and hindered by its relative brevity. On one hand, the briskness with which he makes his case perhaps weakens its overall impact. On the other hand, I still found myself getting a little lost even with its brevity. But that could be due to my own intellectual limitations coupled with the fact that I was listening to this on audiobook, often while driving, folding laundry, or doing the dishes.

No president (aside from maybe Carter) escapes Wills' ire. Most striking was perhaps his description of presidential overreach during the Bush and Cheney years. I think the mania around Trump (both of the warranted and delusional variety) has memory-holed just how bad of a president Bush Jr was. And the afterword paints a disappointing picture of the then fledgling Obama administration.

[Andrew McGrail · Rating 5 out of 5]

As someone with a only sparse knowledge of American government and foreign policy, this book was insightful and shocking.

I agree with other reviewers in that the theme of the bomb thesis was not completely carried through the narrative - past 1953 the chapters branch into other matters, equally engaging - however, I feel this point is still made strongly; that the development of the bomb and the secrecy around it was a roadmap for future administrations to act outside the law and without the knowledge or consent of the public or congress.

I particularly enjoyed learning about the approx. 114 U.S. attempts at regime change throughout the 20th century, and the efforts it went to in trying to depose Castro and others.

Others will no doubt come to this with an already solid knowledge on the subjects and may therefore learn nothing new, however from my own uninformed perspective it was a fascinating read.

[J McNett · Rating 5 out of 5]

“A president is greatly pressured to keep all the empire’s secrets. He feels he must avoid embarrassing the hordes of agents, military personnel, and diplomatic instruments whose loyalty he must command. Keeping up morale in this vast shady enterprise is something impressed on him by all manner of commitments. He becomes the prisoner of his own power. As President Truman could not not use the Bomb, a modern president cannot not use his huge power base. It has all been given him as the legacy of Bomb Power, the thing that makes him not only Commander in Chief but Leader of the Free World. He is a self-entangling giant.”

Wills makes painfully and abundantly clear that power is not only self-replicating but self-protecting too. And, similar to some of the arcs seen in his earlier “Kennedy Imprisonment,” those who open up new avenues of power often become powerless to hold off their growth.

[Ben · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Bomb Power" provides an insightful historical tour of the use of executive power, spanning from the Korean War to the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, offering a rich factual backdrop. While the book excels in chronicling these events, it falls short in depth of analysis and exploring alternative strategies to the expansion of executive power. The author's critical tone against this evolution, though likely justified, seems one-sided due to the lack of a strong counter-argument or presentation of perspectives that support this growth in executive power. Despite these limitations, I recommend the book, especially for readers interested in factual accounts of historical events, but advise them to be aware of the need for more analytical depth and balanced viewpoints.

[Don Heiman · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Bomb Power: The Modern Presidency and the National Security State” by Garry Wills was released for publication in 2010. Wills is a recipient of the 1993 Pulitzer Prize and he won the National Medal for the Humanities in 1998. His 2010 book is a history of American politics that explains in amazing detail how the invention/dropping of the atomic bomb profoundly changed American justice, counter intelligence, and Presidential constitutional accountability. Wills’ history gives the reader an exceptional foundation for understanding both the strength and weakness of American political practices and social responsibilities that determine and often undermine our American freedoms. (A/L)

[Kevin Schafer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another tip of the hat to Know Your Enemy for another great read.

Although I am fully "Wills-pilled", the cynic in me did see an old man who just hated GW Bush and wanted to make it everyone's business. The most damning criticism I have read/believe is that Wills does not connect bomb/bomb power to the eventual unitary executive.

On a more charitable note, this book did connect some disparate threads covered in previous books. The book pairs well with the Jakarta Method (about the excesses of anti-communism fervor) and Tomorrow, The World about the development of the post-war hegemony, designed by America.

[Nate · Rating 2 out of 5]

Wills has an interesting premise that the presidential power over the bomb has given rise to a culture of illegitimate secret keeping. It may be true, but to me the argument was not made well enough, or at least succinct enough. He basically revisits the making of the bomb followed by his premise and then proceeds on a litany of US classified incidents that happened since. I'll admit I stopped 2/3 of the way through as I've already heard these stories.

All in all, it's an interesting idea but should have been an article instead of a book.

[Horza]

"Take a look at Harry Truman. He wouldn't have done… If you think Hiroshima, not exactly a nice act, but it did end the Second World War probably, right? Nagasaki. He wouldn't be doing that. He said, 'I do not want to do that because my opponents will indict me.' You have to give a president full and total immunity." - Donald Trump, January 21, 2024

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

As with any book by Garry Wills that I have ever read, this one is erudite, well-written and well-argued. This one is also very depressing--a 70-year tale of increasing government secrecy for many not very good reasons, and the increasing accumulation of unconstitutional Presidential power and the national security state.

[Harry · Rating 2 out of 5]

Wills succeeds in being clever and erudite but not much more than that. Bomb Power's thesis about the expansion of the Executive holds little water, and the prose is dense and inaccessible. The first few chapters are worth reading for the author's dive into the Manhattan Project - the rest of the book is not.

[Trevor Riley · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book looks at how the transition of the "modern presidency" has turned into the gatekeeper of the world's most destructive weapons, with very little accountability on how and when these can be used.

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

Eye opening and scary

[Adam · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is deeply, deeply disturbing.

[Zach Brumaire · Rating 5 out of 5]

Essential contribution to the theorization of executive power in a post-nuclear age.

Note: C.R. Schmitt's Political Theology.

[Zachary · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first half was slow but the second was full of interesting history that details the expansion of both formal and informal Presidential powers.

[Greg Kelly · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is a great documentation of how power has been concentrated in the executive branch since the 1940s. However, the author only sporadically relates the Manhattan project and nuclear bomb back to his analysis.

[reading! · Rating 3 out of 5]

very informative & interesting information, to much polisci jargon

[Peter Bath · Rating 4 out of 5]

An amazing diagnosis of the Amerikkkan empires crimes in the 20th century, which then offers the remedy of The Good Old Constitution