What Every American Should Know about the Rest of the World: Your Guide to Today's Hot Spots, Hot Shots and Incendiary Issues [Paperback]

I bought this book last year because I really liked the concept - a sort of brief guide to the world for Americans. Many of us, myself included, are lacking a good understanding of other parts of the world. And we rely too much on the dominant media to "educate" us on the facts, conditions and histories of countries that are important or where problems make them a place to be concerned about.

That said, this book gets a mixed review from me because it does well in some areas and poorly in others.

What I liked:

It's organized well - starting with the places that are "ticking" time bombs and gradually working down the ratings of volatility to the nations that are "talkers" (as opposed to "doers" I suppose). That concept groups countries with similar problems, outlooks, histories, etc. near each other in the book. Because so many issues tend to cross national boundaries it makes it easy to see how the same situation developed or has been addressed in neighboring places.

It's not a big book, especially since the topic is the world, and so it has to boil down the issues and histories into some brief points. For the most part the author does a good job of identifying what is really important to know.

What I didn't like:

Some of the synopses are so brief as to not be very useful.

Inaccuracies were too common. Both my sons take honors level history classes and while reading this book they complained of statements that they thought were wrong. We sat down together and researched the points that they found fault with - and the boys were on the money. Much of it has to do with how brief some of the author's comments are - it resulted in over simplification of some complex subjects that came across as misleading. Not exactly wrong, but if you are familiar with the subject being discussed you would likely shake your head and say "that's really not an accurate way to describe the facts."

There were several points on which the author just got the important facts wrong. For example, in the section on Somalia on page 143 there is a box containing one very long paragraph that describes what is commonly known as the "Battle of Mogadishu". Among the things the author got wrong was an allusion that warlord Mohamed Farrah Aidid might have been tipped off about the US operation by his son who was a Marine "supposedly helping out the U.S. with translation." Aidid's son Hussein Farrah Aydid was a Marine Reservist and had been sent to Somalia to translate and serve as a liaison with his father. However, that had only lasted for three weeks and the younger Aydid had been back at his job the City of West Covina engineering department, updating water maps, counting cars in traffic, etc. for more than ten months before the battle took place.

The same section is full of other blatant errors, some of which are minor - "the image of a dead Marine being dragged through the streets..." is inaccurate because there were no Marines present in Somalia or participating in the operation. The Marines had operated in country earlier, and from time to time there were some Marine units offshore, but not for the events described by the author.

Some are significant errors. Such as the author's statement that the Somali militia forces brought down two Blackhawk helicopters using "land-to-air missiles..." Inaccurate because the Somali's actually used Soviet era Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPGs) which are relatively unsophisticated weapons compared to ground to air missiles. The realization that a Blackhawk was susceptible to incapacitating damage by something as simple and cheap as an RPG was something of a shock. That is an important point. Perhaps more importantly, it is a unproven but widely held belief that Al Qaeda was responsible for discovering this weakness and providing slightly modified RPGs and training to the Somalis in an effort to hurt and embarrass the U.S. The author failed to mention that and it would seem important considering the importance given in other parts of the book to Al Qaeda and terrorism in general.

The same paragraph has inaccurate statements about the goal of the mission that sparked the battle and the basic facts of when and how elements were introduced into the operation and what role they played.

Others have commented on what appears to be the interjection of politically motivated bias on the author's part. It was apparent when I saw it, slightly annoying (just give me the facts and let me make up my own mind about how I feel about what I've learned) but I learned to just discount it and skip past it.

Conclusion:

A darn good idea and well organized, but too skimpy on details in some parts and too many major errors to be trusted. That last part was the kiss of death for the book as far as I'm concerned. If I can find that many blatant errors in one paragraph I have no confidence in anything else I read. I might give it another half star if Amazon would let me, but not a full three stars.

The author states her purpose on the first page of her intro, and I quote: "to provide you with a contextual mapping of the world's geopolitical hot spots, and a familiarity with the names, terms and ideas you need to know to decipher global events".

She succeeds admirably at her goal, giving 3-15 page summaries of "fast facts" (about population, unemployment, ethnicity,religion, exports, etc.), historical background (focusing, though, just on the history leading up to the "hot" issues of today), and key players in the country's government. She makes no claim to cover everything, instead providing a listing of websites and print resources where the reader can go for more information.

My quibbles are these: some of her website links are incorrect/obsolete, some refer to subscriber sites where a $99 annual fee is required to access. There are some glaring copy errors: on page 299, she refers to Africa as a country rather than a continent. Finally, her views are somewhat left of center, and her predictions on results of a war in Iraq haven't happened (e.g. Israel bombing Iran) -- at least, not yet.

All in all, though, a useful book -- similar to the way foreign language phrase guides are useful when you're traveling in a country where you don't know the language too well.

Disclosure: I read only 1 page of the book.

Recently I saw this book in a book store and checked the page about my country - Bulgaria.

According to the book, Bulgaria gained independency in 1991 from the Soviet Union. Well, actually Bulgaria was never part of the Soviet Union and it gained independency for the last time (the first Bulgarian state was founded in the 7th century but then we are on the Balkans ;))) from Turkey in 1878.

The book also leaves the impression that Bulgaria is ruled by the local mafia. Of course crime is a problem for Bulgaria but this is an overstretch, to put it mildly. Then the autor says that the economy is in bad shape (an absolute truth) but the $1 billion loan from the IMF might help. Which $1 billion exactly? Bulgaria is constantly repaying old and getting new loans from the IMF, etc. Is this a book for 5 year olds?

To sum up. As an international student in the US and with many of the most intelligent people I have ever met in my life being Americans, I have a hard time fighting against the proliferated opinion that Americans are ignorants. Instead of helping this book makes matters worse. I believe Americans are smarter that the author thinks.