I really enjoyed this book. The writing is done really well and it gives you a feeling for what goes on in war. This isn't a very happy book, but I would absolutely recommend it to anyone with an interest in the war. One of the things I liked about it was that it doesn't seem to be political at all. If you are for the war or against it, you will enjoy this book. ( )

Excellent first-hand reporting from someone who was there and interacted with Iraqi citizens and American soldiers. ( )

Through the eyes of Dexter Filkins, a foreign correspondent for the New York Times, we witness the rise of the Taliban in the 1990s, the aftermath of the attack on New York on September 11th, and the American wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Filkins is the only American journalist to have reported on all these events, and his experiences are conveyed in a riveting narrative filled with unforgettable characters and astonishing scenes.

This book is listed as one of the top non-fiction books of 2008 by both the LA Times and NY Times. Initially I suspected that this was due to the fact that the author had ties to both papers, but the book proved its worth. Dexter Filkins' personal accounts places you in the war-torn countries of Iraq and Afghanistan, and captures the humanity of the combatants as well as the civilians caught up in the war zones. The book is also insightful as to what a reporters life is like when covering a war. I gained a lot of respect for Filkins as a reporter, who demonstrated significant bravery in covering the wars. He wasn't always imbedded with the troops, but drove himself through Iraq, developed his contacts, writing his story in an engaging style. He describes the full spectrum of the war, from house-to-house fighting, Taliban extremism, warlords, soldiers perspectives, grieving families, struggling civilians, the generals and leaders of the war torn region. I enjoyed it more than another similar book about Iraq, "No True Glory", by Bing West.

( )

A montage equivalent of reportage? All the wars blend into one and I guess that's one of the points the author is making. Despite being quite personal you won't read much in terms of reflections or analysis. Maybe it's an exercise left to the reader. ( )

excellent pieces on the US involvement in the Middle East. ( )

You know what you're in for when you step into a book about the Iraq war after 9/11 written by a New York Times writer. It's going to be bleak, maybe a bit odd, and it's going to be fair. Filkins's book is all of that but what stands out to me is his deft pacing and striking language. While this could easily have devolved into a series of anecdotes, there are thematic guy wires helping the reader stay on course. There is darkness here. A lot of it. But there's just enough light and humor that the humanity doesn't disappear. There's also an adept sense that neither Filkins himself nor the Iraqis understand the disaster that befell that country in the wake of the US invasion. This book doesn't seek to explain or dissect but tells the story of the people involved and how they coped. A wonderful book full of honesty, humanity, and horror. ( )

It was good, I think maybe my rating is an aberration. I started the book thinking that this was a book from a soldier's point of view and continuously kept wondering how this guy could walk out of situations he didn't like or want to be in. Finally I reread and found the sentence where he talks about photojournalism. Still, it was just "good" not fabulous. A long long story of tidbits of the author's experiences in occupation zones and war zones, but not a lot of character depth.

The audiobook narrator was great and I do recommend this for anyone wanting to get smatterings of the Iraq wars and occupations. I'm more of a goal oriented reader so maybe that's why I liked it less. ( )

Already, the Iraq War is fading from our memory. 2003 already seems in the distant past, and the withdrawal in 2011 is getting there. Still wrought with civil war, our attention has already shifted to other wars, both present and potential: Iran, Libya, Syria.

This amnesia should be surprising. the Vietnam War—a similar quagmire—traumatized the nation, and led to a suspicion of the military that only started to thaw by the time of Desert Storm. Yet there's one important difference: the draft is gone, and an all-volunteer army increasingly draws from rural and poor youth, all categories nearly invisible in the media. Rather than a shared sacrifice, war is increasingly waged using the unprivileged few.

This forgetting and ignorance, which had already started during the occupation itself, means the public isn't so easily soured by war—making books like The Forever War all the more crucial as reminders of just how crazy the times were. Crazy is almost a cruel way to describe the events, as that doesn't capture the very real suffering inflicted on all parties involved, but especially Iraqi civilians. For them there was no withdrawal coming, no salve to the daily reality of trying to balance the hope of collaboration with the sobering knowledge that it would make them a _target for violence.

It's apt that the writing style reflects this craziness, a pointillist vision through dozens of discrete events, all adding together to chronicle the deeply dysfunctional occupation. At first, the institutional corruption and the violence are two separate problems. Before long, though, they merge: sectarian militias made official instruments of the state, carrying out civil war under police uniforms.

Filkins' book works because it captures the street-level degeneration, shows how the civilians are pulled between the will of the state and the much more dangerous will of the insurgency—or really, how that dichotomy is false, concealing a much more complex tug-of-war between powers, some clothed in official authority and others not. It's hard to go into much more detail, because in some sense this book is all detail; it resists summary, and therein is its power. Sorry if this sounds like a mess as a result. ( )

The Forever War is war as recorded in a journal. The best comparison I have to it are Thomas Goltz's books, but this is much less gory or political and more observational. Just stories, not always chronological.

Filkins spent years in Afghanistan and Iraq. He saw the ins and outs of both wars from the front lines and lived to tell the story. What he saw wasn't exactly the same thing that Americans wanted to see. For example, when 5,000 Marines assault a city where there is no running water, how do you use the bathroom? You kick down the doors random peoples' houses, or mosques and fill theirs to an overflowing mess.

"There were always two conversations in Iraq-- the one the Iraqis were having with the Americans, and the one the Iraqis were having among themselves."


Filkins saw throughout the Iraq war that U.S. troops and actions were overwhelmingly hated, even where they were glad to be rid of Saddam. Where there was cooperation with Americans to work, rebuild, police, etc., Iraqis took the money, did some work, and resented it. "Nobody likes being told what to do. The Americans are the occupiers." There was always an understanding that one day-- one way or another-- the Americans would leave, the sooner the better. The price they'd imposed outweighed the benefit, at least in the Iraqi's shortened lifetimes.

"I long ago quit believing that the Defense Department knew any better than I did."


It was never just Sunni vs. Shiite vs. Kurd (Kurds are hardly mentioned in the book), you have so many Arab tribes maintaining power and status in certain neighborhoods of certain cities. Mix in foreigners streaming in, criminals on the loose, people just looking for a quick buck through kidnapping, extortion, blood feuds demanding reprisals, etc. and you have a real mess.

This book makes me look at Bush's Decision Points (my review) differently, and more angrily-- even though I've already read Fiasco (my review) and other books on Iraq. I think President Bush's administration made the mistake of thinking democracy would heal all wounds--and quickly. Democracy (not to mention a free market) however, requires a level of trust that does not exist in many Arab countries at any level. An elected Shiite majority quickly settled scores with Sunnis, leading to outright civil war-- as Filkins documents the evidence of showing up slowly but surely.
How dumb were we to think this would all be over quickly or even be above 50% likely to turn out "well?" Filkins, by and large, isn't critical of the war-- he just observes events and conversations as they happen. He tells one poignant story of how he had to have a dealing with the CIA and reached a conclusion they were incompetent, when it turns out he was being duped by Iraqis he had long trusted and thought he was helping. He admits to his own ignorance.

For the first several chapters, I'd assumed Filkins spoke Arabic. He sometimes has quick conversations with a hostile crowd before diving back into his truck for safety. Later, he says he never learned Arabic and talks about the role of his translators. That takes some of the shine off the book, but not a lot. But I'm struck by how little anyone knows anything in these situations. After reading President Bush's Decision Points, it seems years later the attitude of Iraqis on the ground never really filtered up to him, or he doesn't fully believe the accounts of people like Filkins.

I did admire Filkins' courage in his forays into Afghanistan before the fall of the Taliban and the perspective it gave him when he was in New York for 9/11, and traveling along with the Northern Alliance immediately after 9/11 (for which he won a Pulitzer Prize). What's it like to be in a Syrian household, where your gracious host is ranting against American and pops in a videotape of an American being beheaded in Iraq, eagerly enjoying and praising it?

Filkins shows a very sensitive side. He records random encounters with children, while he's jogging, in stores, etc. He includes descriptions of the women and children he sees, as well as dogs and others, bringing the brutal human aspects of war home. He records the random conversations he has with the soldiers, and the difficult conditions. Filkins feels particularly responsible for one particular soldiers' death and meets with his parents when the battalion returns to the U.S. I hope his insurance pays for whatever counseling he most likely needs. ( )

Dexter Filkins has written a classic, a moving book about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, about the soldiers and civilians embroiled in the wars, and about what it means to be a journalist covering war. I came away impressed anew with the bravery of our young men and women who serve in the military, and I came away with a zeal to somehow find a way to channel that courage and energy into nonviolence. Stay tuned! ( )

A fast read. War reporting, from the ground, gives us a view from 6 feet, and sometimes at 3 feet when they’re crouching to dodge the snipers. The war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Nothing new or unexpected, but gripping nonetheless. ( )

Grim, brutal and good. Filkins, who’s currently reporting for the NY Times in Afghanistan, gets you up close and personal with all the chaos and contradictions of that region, mostly focused on Iraq in the 3 years after the invasion. He certainly can’t escape his Western bias, but Filkins’ works hard to get both the official and unofficial versions from across the spectrum, and gains your trust (unlike some of his newspaper’s “reporting” during the lead up to the invasion). He also does a great job of dropping you in the middle of some really insane—and sometimes genuinely touching—moments, especially in Baghdad, where sectarian conflict (including various gang-style power grabs within religious/tribal groups) combined with American military operations against non-Iraqi jihad fighters turns that city into the stuff of nightmares. On that point, be prepared for frank descriptions of truly horrifying deeds of medieval-style violence. ( )

This is a well-written book that sheds a huge amount of light on the Iraq occupation. Dexter Filkins was in-country for five years, and seems to have stayed mostly out of the Green Zone, thanks in no small part to the New York Times, which ran its bureau like a military compound, and hired a small private army. Despite this one imagines it took some degree of courage on the author’s part too, although he would probably frame his “risk-assessment” somewhat differently. Chiefly because of this, but also because of Filkins’ previous time in Afghanistan, it’s an invaluable text for anyone seeking an understanding of that time. I can tell you it is an infinitely superior work to anything written by British civil administrators in the CPA; Rory Stewart or Hilary Synnott, conceited British snobs who understood very little of what they saw.

It has unfairly but inevitably drawn comparisons with Herr’s Despatches. Despatches is a seminal but an entirely different work. Herr was present in a war that was saturated with media presence; Filkins in Iraq is a more solitary light. Also, Herr’s work is infused with introspection, and a weird kind of lyrical war-poetry. What Herr saw was not intrinsically important in terms of reportage, what Filkins saw is. There are stories and anecdotes in this book which will open your eyes. While he makes several stylistic nods towards Herr, Filkins has something else to bring to the table. He has more to focus on.

For all this it is still in parts an infuriating book. Filkins sees everything through American eyes, but this isn’t so terrible, because he never pretends not to. He wears his subjectivity on his sleeve. A review of The Forever War in the Herald argued it was refreshing to read a book on Iraq that wasn’t an argument, but there is an argument in this book, latently, or at least a tacit acceptance of the war as something without a moral dimension, as something that just happened, and that probably should have. There is too running through this the implication that the Iraq invasion wasn’t a moral disaster, that Islam has something dark and violent and its heart, that the Americans that fought there were making some kind of positive contribution.

Further, there is the old American insularity. There is far more scorn poured on the Iraqi people than on US soldiers. Political motivations back in Washington, George Bush, Bremer, American attitudes towards the Middle East and foreigners in general, these things aren’t mentioned at all. When, concluding, he talks of those Iraqis and Pakistanis lucky enough to come into the New York Times’ orbit, and thereby later get visas for America, his tone is slightly sickening. As if there was nothing really out there, beyond the borders of the States, no countries or cultures worth living in, nothing really to be built or saved. When he was in Iraq he might as well have been in outer space, he adds. I suspect Filkins’ social alienation post-Iraq is not just the trauma of coming back from a war zone, but also the sign of a huge cognitive dissonance. It will remain so until he figures out an argument he can live with.

As informative and competent as this book is, it’s probably best to accompany it with a more thoughtful analysis. I would recommend Jonathan Steele’s Defeat. ( )

NYT journalist Dexter Filkins describes his experiences reporting from Afghanistan and Iraq over many years in a series of viginettes. Some reviewers have described this reporting without editorializing, but a more accurate description might be reporting without contextualizing, which can be a kind of editorializing in of itself. So for example, we get a series of viginettes from Taliban-ruled Afghanistan, then one from ground-zero after 9/11, then more from Afghanistan once the regime is being toppled and then a shift to Iraq, where the rest of the book stays (except for a final more introspective chapter from Cambridge, Massachusetts after he has left the war zone). What the link between Iraq and 9/11 and Afghanistan is, and why the United States is engaged in a 'Forever War' there is really left to the reader to work out. Generally the on-the-ground reporting is very good, but for those who want a fuller overview of the post 9/11 wars, this should probably be read in conjunction with a different book ( )

A fast read. War reporting, from the ground, gives us a view from 6 feet, and sometimes at 3 feet when they’re crouching to dodge the snipers. The war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Nothing new or unexpected, but gripping nonetheless. ( )

Excellent! ( )

To be honest, on one level I'm a little disappointed with this book. The title, I thought, promised some sort of explanation as to why Iraq / Afghanistan and the entire war on terror is potentially a perpetual conflict America (or the West) could get bogged down in and one it will find very hard to win.

Filkins doesn't provide any analysis on that level. Nor does he bring much analysis to the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan besides some rather bland statements that things are tricky there because the people have been through a lot and naturally, as foreigners, they're not going to behave the same as we would.

Having said that and been disappointed with it, I still think this is a very good book. If you go into it just wanting snapshots of what these countries were like, from a reporter who spent years on the ground there, then you'll get a very satisfying account. Many of Filkins' vignettes are extremely sad and provide details of the minutiae of life in these countries that get glossed over in the news reports or column inches devoted to these conflicts.

So from that point of view I think this is an excellent book and one has to admire Filkins for putting himself in a lot of danger. It's just a shame the author couldn't draw some significant conclusions from everything he saw, instead of just relating the horrific events he witnessed. That would have made this a great book instead of just a good one. ( )

This is an outstanding collection of journalistic snapshots from the post-2001 wars, first in Afghanistan and then Iraq. Each chapter, or chapter section, relates a story or event in anywhere from three to a dozen pages. It's usually a war story in which the author figures personally, such as when accompanying US soldiers in combat, or interviewing politicians or combatants on all sides.

The writing is fluid, focused, and not overstated. The author rarely quotes himself in his interviews or descriptions but lets others supply the dialogue while he freely relates his own state of mind and feelings.This method seems to work well, and he does not use this book as a preaching platform. He also acknowledges that his conversations with Afghanis and Iraqis was almost always through intrepid and amazingly brave interpreters.

Not every episode or journalistic snapshot is dated in this book, nor are they presented sequentially, other than the ones involving Afghanistan appearing first. This timelessness, or absence of progressive narrative, is at times annoying, but it does contribute to the title's meaning--the war has been going on and on, and will continue to do so. Here the term "war" refers to the collection of actions and attitudes on the part of the US government that it calls the War on Terror.

There's a statement made at the beginning of the film, The Hurt Locker, that war is a drug. If so, it would seem to apply to the author, who stayed on in Iraq, year after year, outside the Green Zone, putting himself through one dangerous situation after another. In the book's final sentences the author obliquely refers to the costs he paid in weaning himself off this drug. ( )

Vietnam was still fresh when I read Dispatches by Michael Herr. The intimacy and immediacy and apparent formlessness of the book unsettled me, but of course it felt like Vietnam, dark and frightening, shifting and hard to pin down. And now Dexter Filkins has done the same for this too too similar war. I find this even better and more compelling than Dispatches. Is that because I'm thirty years older and know more of the world? Whatever the reason, this is wonderful reporting, painful, brutal and ultimately frustrating as the war it tries to describe. ( )

The Forever War was an excellent, excellent, excellent book. It was not just an explanation of why the war in the Middle East is going on, but a first hand account of being over there as a reporter, and as a soldier. There are some very powerful passages. Highly recommended. ( )

It is time to get out of this mess. The Afghan War will never end and we are not helping. Filkens is an interesting an observant reporter and I may be reading my own biases into this book. ( )

The author had a great deal of experience reporting from Afghanistan and Irag and gives detailed insight into the local situation during his time in each war arena. A more personal account of the actual participants then can be gleaned from news accounts. ( )

Magnificent, chilling, and compelling war reporting. Still working my way through, but immensely impressive.

Some days I thought we had broken into a mental institution. One of the old ones, from the nineteenth century, where people were dumped and forgotten. It was like we had pried the doors off and found all these people clutching themselves and burying their heads in the corners and sitting in their own filth. It was useful to think of Iraq this way. It helped your analysis. Murder and torture and sadism: it was part of Iraq. It was in people's brains. ( )

If you read only one book about Afghanistan and Iraq this is it. The rare non-fiction that"ll make you want to cry. Strongly recommend. ( )