Why We Lost

A General's Inside Account of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars

By: Daniel Bolger

Narrated by: Steve Coulter

Length: 20 hrs and 40 mins

Publisher's summary

A high-ranking general's gripping insider account of the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and how it all went wrong.

Over a 35-year career, Daniel Bolger rose through the army infantry to become a three-star general, commanding in both theaters of the U.S. campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. He participated in meetings with top-level military and civilian players, where strategy was made and managed. At the same time, he regularly carried a rifle alongside rank-and-file soldiers in combat actions - unusual for a general. Now, as a witness to all levels of military command, Bolger offers a unique assessment of these wars, from 9/11 to the final withdrawal from the region.

Writing with hard-won experience and unflinching honesty, Bolger makes the firm case that in Iraq and in Afghanistan, we lost - but we didn't have to. Intelligence was garbled. Key decision makers were blinded by spreadsheets or theories. And at the root of our failure, we never really understood our enemy. Why We Lost is a timely, forceful, and compulsively listenable account of these wars from a fresh and authoritative perspective.

Download the accompanying reference guide.

©2014 Daniel Bolger (P)2015 Audible Inc.

Good, but not great.

I found this book to be very interesting and filled with noteworthy anecdotes surrounding many battles in both Afghanistan and Iraq. However it lacked more insight into the political aspects of what drove both of these conflicts. As much as I appreciated the many battlefield stories I was looking for more insight and perhaps reasoning behind the battles. Maybe there really isn't any good reason why we went there why we are still in Afghanistan. I fear our country will make the same mistake in the future as long as Pride and money are at the Center of our political landscape.

Good but incomplete narrative of The GWOT

Bolger makes a compelling argument of how the US lost the GWOT terror and why. The US military prior to 9/11 was modelled to win lightning wars like Desert Storm, but became an occupying force caught in protracted open-ended counter insurgency operations.

A bunch of short stories with an overarching point

The author makes his point with a bunch of well-written short stories that put you in the shoes of generals in HQ and sergeants on the battlefield

Detail and Unexpected Frankness

The book recounts a story very close to all of us yet virtually unknown to most. America’s great struggle to find and defeat her enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan. The book is intricately detailed yet at times intimately human. One flaw may be the seeming repetitiveness of the narrative.. but this is a flaw of reality’s not of the author’s. The author transcends the partisan narratives of the war with which we are bombarded and have become so familiar. These are human being trying to do a job, from the two presidents to the tens of thousands of men and women who serve. Their ultimate problem alas lay not in their ability to defeat the enemy but in their ability to answer the question that the author so often emphatically asks: who is the enemy?

Overall good but as much opinion as fact

Afghan and Iraq vet here, I appreciate the history of the wars, which was for the most part incisive and accurate. Leans a little far into editorial in some parts, in my opinion, but taken with a grain of salt good analysis.

Wow, from a vets view !

First off , I was in Iraq during the initial invasion and I’m a practicing Muslim. I just finished both the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich and Vietnam a history. The Iraq war, I was always conflicted with but this Generals inside view in the context of military history has given me more pride in serving during the war. He is right about we made costly missteps during our long campaign against the terrorists and at one point we could of won in Iraq but our right to fight and preserver is proper. As a military historian Daniel Bolger has given a proper understanding why we fought and many ideas on how we should win a long term military planning to combat the terrorist threat. His insight on military strategy gives the book lot of depth. My only compliant I wish it was more layered with many different perspectives of all sides of the issues like the other history books I finished. But more likely too early in history to make such a layered history book.

History more than analysis

Long on history and very short on analysis. I enjoyed the history and had to settle for only a hint of what the title promises.

Good book, misleading title

Any additional comments?

The title "Why We Lost" would perhaps be appropriate for the epilogue only.

The rest of this book, consists of a series of vignettes of western intervention in the Middle East and South Asia from the end of the Cold War up until the time of writing. The title's tagline "A General's Inside Account of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars" is also inappropriate. If, indeed, the author was present at any of the actions described, it is not clearly stated, and much of the discussion following these engagements followed closely with mainstream interpretation and opinion; the author's personal reflections on these events was not immediately apparent.

To be clear, however, this is a great book. Bolger condenses extensive, multi-source research into a great narrative, and incorporates the view from both troops on the ground, and commanders at home. As a narrative of the wars from a coalition point of view, it is a great contribution.

A General's account of the post 911 wars

This account was the insiders' perspective I was looking for. He didn't seem to be too judgmental or bitter. He just told the story and threw in plenty of tales of the front lines. His analysis was even keeled, I thought. The narration and recording quality was good as well.

Highly recommend this title!

This book is less "why we lost" and more "here's what happened". It was a great book, I just felt that it's title want justified until the epilogue though.