There are approximately 50 million Americans with no form of health insurance. And yet, of the 250 million or so that do, many die from illnesses for which treatment is available but which they cannot afford. Insurance companies - being corporations - exist primarily to make profit; that is their essence, regardless of whatever other purpose they serve. Thus, every time they deny a claim, that means business is better. Not surprisingly, these companies oftentimes refuse payment for treatment on questionable grounds, in order to increase their profits, thus leaving some sick people unwell and untreated (sometimes fatally so). Citizens in Canada, England, France and - yes - even Cuba (plus many other countries) have universal access to health care, and the cost of their treatment is largely covered (or reimbursed) by the government. This "socialized" medicine is often not nearly as inefficient, slow or tyrannically run as the American Medical Association would have you believe. Many of these countries' citizens in fact prefer their health care systems to what they know of the United States' system.

That paragraph took me less than two minutes to reread. Let's say it takes you three minutes. Well, then I have just saved you exactly two hours. Maybe you can use it to write your Congressman demanding reform of the American health care system.

This is a book on a fascinating topic, written moderately well. The question at its center - are we comfortable with the increasing privatization of our military, and all the attendant questions it raises - is a good one. Unfortunately, the author's answer is a foregone conclusion from page one, and the reader is expected to agree from the same starting point. This was frustrating, and this book did not answer my questions, merely emphasizing them instead. Often, the author cites DoD officials, leaders in the "private security contracting" industry, and political supporters as if the points they raise are so ridiculous they speak for themselves. If the reader is not beholden to a specific political agenda, but genuinely curious about these issues, I think s/he will find many times that these individuals will raise a good point. Scahill needed to argue clearly and concisely why the things they were saying were so offensive. Lots of research done for this book, but it did not quite add up to the damning conclusion the author reaches.

If anything, the disaster in Iraq should prove that the world's emerging security threats cannot be solved through traditional military solutions. Many of the cases cited in the book, from Sierra Leone, to car bombings in the Middle East, to the ravages of Darfur, prove that the worst cases require new answers - more mobile, more efficient, more versatile forces, buoyed by more in-depth intelligence.