具体描述
This book is unlike other RAND publications. While it is based in part on objective research, particularly as it applies to knowing the enemy, it also includes the personal reflections of someone who has thought about terrorism for decades. I initiated RAND's research on terrorism in 1972 with a simple memorandum that observed that this phenomenon was likely to spread and increase and could create serious problems for the United States and its allies; therefore, I proposed, we should take a serious look at it...This book differs from other RAND publications in yet another respect. The reader will find strong personal opinions on these pages. There is much concerning the conduct of the war on terror that I agree with: the muscular initial response to 9/11, the removal of the Taliban government, the relentless pursuit of al Qaeda's leaders and planners, the increasingly sophisticated approach to homeland security, and, although I have deep reservations about the invasion of Iraq, President Bush's determination to avoid an arbitrary timetable for withdrawal. The list of things with which I do not agree is longer: the needless bravado, the arrogant attitude toward needed allies, the exploitation of fear, the exaggerated claims of progress, the serial bending of history and fact, the persistence of a wanted-poster approach while the broader ideological struggle is ignored, the rush to invade Iraq, the failure to deploy sufficient troops there despite the advice of senior military leaders and the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority, the cavalier dismissal of treaties governing the conduct of war, the mistreatment of prisoners, the unimaginable public defense of torture, the use of homeland security funding for political pork barrel spending, and the failure to educate and involve citizens. This book is not intended to serve any political agenda. Its sole objective is to reckon how America can defeat its terrorist foes while preserving its own liberty. Throughout the Cold War, Americans maintained a rough consensus on defense matters, despite substantive disagreements. Unity did not require the suspension of honest differences or of civilized political debate. But today's fierce partisanship has reduced national politics to a gang war. The constant maneuvering for narrow political advantage, the rejection of criticism as disloyalty, the pursuit by interest groups of their own exclusive agendas, and the radio, television, newspaper, and Internet debates that thrive on provocation and partisan zeal provide a poor platform for the difficult and sustained effort that America faces. All of these trends imperil the sense of community required to withstand the struggle ahead. We don't need unanimity. We do need unity. Democracy is our strength. Partisanship is our weakness...Excerpt from "Unconquerable Nation: Knowing Our Enemy, Strengthening Ourselves". As the United States battles a fierce insurgency in Iraq, pursues a tenacious Taliban movement in Afghanistan, and wages a global campaign to dismantle the jihadist terrorist enterprise responsible for 9/11, many Americans are asking, "Where are we in this global struggle? Who are we fighting? What are we fighting against? What are we fighting for?" On the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Brian Michael Jenkins presents a clear-sighted and sober analysis of where we are today in the struggle against terrorism. An internationally renowned authority on terrorism, Jenkins distills the jihadists' operational code and suggests how they might assess their situation very differently than how we might do so. He outlines a ferociously pragmatic but principled approach that goes beyond attacking terrorist networks and operational capabilities to defeating their entire missionary enterprise by deterring their recruitment, encouraging defections, and converting those in captivity. Jenkins believes that homeland security should move beyond gates and guards and become the impetus for rebuilding America's decaying infrastructure. He advises Americans to adopt a realistic approach to risk and get a lot smarter about security. America needs to build upon its traditions of determination and self-reliance and, above all, preserve its commitment to American values of democracy, civil freedom, and individual liberties. Preserving these values is no mere matter of morality, he argues; it is a strategic imperative. How we deal with the terrorist threat is one of the major challenges of this century. Jenkins points the way forward.
作者简介
目录信息
读后感
用户评价
坦白讲，这本书的文风非常冷峻，甚至带着一丝批判的锋芒，毫不留情地撕开了某些被美化的历史表象。作者的语言风格极其凝练，很少有华丽辞藻的堆砌，更多的是精准、有力的陈述，如同手术刀般剖开问题的核心。我喜欢这种直面真相的勇气。书中关于权力运作机制的分析，尤其令人印象深刻，它揭示了在复杂体制下，个体意志如何被巧妙地规训和利用。这种对权力机制的剖析，具有极强的现实意义，让我反思我们当前所处的社会环境。阅读过程中，我时常感到一种智力上的挑战，因为作者的论证链条非常紧密，如果漏掉任何一个环节，都可能导致对全盘逻辑的误解。这要求读者必须保持高度的专注。它不是一本可以轻松翻阅的休闲读物，它要求你全神贯注地与其“搏斗”，但一旦你跟上了它的节奏，那种豁然开朗的成就感是无与伦比的。
这本厚重的史册，甫一翻开，便扑面而来一股苍凉而又激昂的气息。作者的笔触如同久经风霜的匠人之手，雕琢着历史的纹理，那些曾经被尘封的往事，那些在时代洪流中挣扎求存的面孔，此刻都被赋予了鲜活的生命力。我尤其欣赏作者对于宏大叙事的驾驭能力，他能在关键的历史节点上，精准地切入微观视角，让我们得以窥见普通人在时代巨变下的挣扎、选择与坚守。书中对某个特定历史时期社会结构变迁的剖析，深入骨髓，那些复杂的权力博弈和潜藏的文化暗流，被梳理得井井有条，逻辑严密却又不失文学的感染力。阅读过程中，我时常会停下来，沉浸在那些描绘的场景中，仿佛能嗅到彼时的硝烟味，能感受到人心深处的波澜。整本书的行文节奏把握得极好，张弛有度，既有磅礴激越的篇章，也有细腻婉转的叙事，体现了作者深厚的文学底蕴和对历史的敬畏之心。它不仅仅是一部历史记录，更像是一面映照人类精神韧性的镜子，引人深思，久久不能忘怀。
我必须承认，这本书的叙事张力堪称一绝。作者仿佛是一位高明的戏剧导演，深谙何时该聚焦特写，何时该拉远景展现全貌。故事的推进并非平铺直叙，而是充满了戏剧性的转折和高潮，让人欲罢不能。我记得有那么一个章节，描述了一场旷日持久的围困战，作者对环境的描写，对心理压力的渲染，简直是教科书级别的。他没有过多渲染悲壮，而是着重于那种近乎麻木的日常坚持，这种“反高潮”的处理，反而带来了更深层次的震撼力。更难能可贵的是，作者在处理如此沉重的主题时，依然保持着一种克制的幽默感，这种幽默不是为了调侃历史，而是作为一种必要的精神调剂，让读者得以喘息，也让人物的形象更加立体丰满。这本书的文学价值和历史洞察力达到了一个罕见的平衡点，它既能满足我对深度研究的渴望，又能提供一场酣畅淋漓的阅读体验，绝对是近年来读到的最精彩的作品之一。
这本书给我的感觉是，它更像是一部关于“精神地理学”的探讨。作者似乎并不满足于梳理事件的来龙去脉，而是将更多的笔墨聚焦于特定群体在面对绝境时，其内在精神世界的构建与重塑。我特别注意到，书中对于“信念”这一抽象概念的描绘，非常具有创新性。他通过对一些边缘人物群像的刻画，展示了信仰如何在看似最不可能存活的环境中，成为支撑个体存在的核心支柱。叙事风格上，它摒弃了传统历史作品中常见的线性叙述，而是采用了一种螺旋上升的结构，不断地在过去、现在和假设的未来之间穿梭，这种跳跃感初看或许有些挑战，但细品之下，却能体会到作者试图构建的复杂因果网络。这种结构本身就隐喻了历史的非线性特征，令人耳目一新。我从中读出的，不仅是历史事件的因果，更是一种关于人类精神耐力的哲学拷问，思考良久，难以释怀。
翻开这本书，我的第一印象是它展现出了一种罕见的、近乎偏执的细节还原度。作者似乎对那个特定时空的一切元素都怀有近乎宗教般的虔诚，从服饰的纹路到街巷的气味，再到那个年代特有的俚语和表达方式，都被细致入微地捕捉并呈现出来。这种对“真实感”的极致追求，使得阅读体验变得异常沉浸，我感觉自己不是在阅读文字，而是在观看一部高清晰度的历史纪录片。特别是书中对几次关键性文化冲突的描述，没有采取简单的二元对立，而是深入探究了双方认知体系的根本差异，那种智力上的交锋和思想的碰撞，读来令人大呼过瘾。作者似乎拥有一种超凡的共情能力，他能站在任何一个历史人物的立场上进行思辨，即便他们的选择在后世看来或许充满争议，也能让人理解其背后的必然性。读罢，我感觉自己的知识图谱被大大拓宽，很多过去模糊的概念突然变得清晰起来，这绝对是一部值得反复咀嚼的学术精品，其深度远超一般的通俗读物。
