Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Assignment #25: Korean War
mre


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 338
Date:
Assignment #25: Korean War


Korean War Analysis [Part 1] 
Sources: http://www.trumanlibrary.org/calendar/viewpapers.php?pid=290, http://www2.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/05/documents/macarthur/,
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/specials/0005/korea.documents/truman.macarthur.html

Assignment: Read through the documents and information presented in the links above and answer the question below.

In his address to Congress, President Truman had to balance a number of competing objectives.

1. He had to appear to take a firm stand against communism, yet not appear too threatening.
2. He had to demonstrate commitment to the war, yet justify his limited objectives.
3. He had to defend his decision to fire General Douglas MacArthur, yet not appear defensive.

Questions: 1) In your opinion, how well did President Truman achieve each of these objectives? 2) Was Truman's policy and war strategy justified and was it effective? Explain in detail with specific reference to America's foreign policy regarding Korea and Communism.

Evaluation: You will receive 15 points for posting an insightful or thoughtful comment that answers the discussion questions. You will receive 15 points for posting one reply or comment to another person's comment.


Korean War Analysis [Part 2]

Source: The Harry Truman Museum, http://www.trumanlibrary.org/,
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/korea/large/index.htm

Background: On June 29, 1950, five days after North Korean forces attacked South Korea, President Truman responded to questions on America's involvement in Korea as follows:

We are not at war. . . . The Republic of Korea was set up with the United Nations' help. It is a recognized government by the members of the United Nations. It was unlawfully attacked by a bunch of bandits . . . . The United Nations Security Council held a meeting and passed on the situation and asked the members to go to the relief of the Korean republic. And the members of the United Nations are going to the relief of the KoreanRepublic to suppress a bandit raid on the Republic of Korea. - President Harry S. Truman, Press conference response, June 29, 1950 [Public Papers of the President]

Assignment: Answer the question below and post one comment concerning the decision making process in the early days of the Korean War and one comment or reply to another person's comment. Post responses to these questions regarding the above statement and the decision making process you observed at the Truman digital archives.

Question: 1) Why did President Truman focus on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea? 2) Who did President Truman seek advice from in deciding what to do in Korea? 3) Why was Congress not consulted? 4) Was Truman's decision making process effective and how did his decisions alter or sustain American foreign policy at the time?

Evaluation: You will receive 20 points for posting an insightful or thoughtful comment that answers the discussion questions. You will receive 20 points for posting one reply or comment to another person's comment.


Korean War Analysis [Part 3]

Source: http://www.safran-arts.com/42day/history/h4apr/texts/oldsfade.html, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/filmmore/transcript/transcript3.html

Background: General MacArthur was frustrated by what he perceived as political interference with military efforts to win the war in Korea. Among the actions he wished to purse were to bomb China and enlist the forces of former Chinese leader Chiang Kai-shek, now living in Formosa (Taiwan), against the Chinese. Fifty years later, Korea is still split between North and South and North Korea is reported to be developing nuclear weapons.

Assignment: Read MacArthur's speech above and answer the following questions.

Question: 1) Do you agree with General MacArthur that there the U.S. should have pushed for total victory in Korea in the 1950's or was Truman correct in advocating a more limited war? 2) Is MacArthur justified in his criticism? 3) Was he right concerning military strategy its foreign policy implications?  4) Why do you think MacArthur forced the issue by publicly criticizing his Commander in Chief? 5) What do you think MacArthur hoped to accomplish? 6) Was Truman right to fire MacArthur? 7) Why or why not?

Evaluation: You will receive 15 points for posting an insightful or thoughtful comment that answers the discussion question. You will receive 15 points for posting one reply or comment to another person's comment.



-- Edited by mre at 12:30, 2008-03-19

-- Edited by mre at 12:31, 2008-03-19

__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 16
Date:

Korean War Part 1

1. I feel President Truman achieved these objectives fairly well. He stated his reasons and position on each of these issues.
2. I feel his war policy was justified. He felt that the communist regimes were trying to rid the world of freedom and as a nation; we cant just stand by and watch this happen. He wants all of the peaceful nations in the world to join together against this cause. He says that aggression in any part of the world is a threat to peace everywhere and should be confronted and stopped. His goals are to stop another World War 3 from happening.


__________________
Annifreed Sinjour


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 35
Date:

mre wrote:
Korean War Analysis [Part 3]

Source: http://www.safran-arts.com/42day/history/h4apr/texts/oldsfade.html, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/filmmore/transcript/transcript3.html

Background: General MacArthur was frustrated by what he perceived as political interference with military efforts to win the war in Korea. Among the actions he wished to pursue were to bomb China and enlist the forces of former Chinese leader Chiang Kai-shek, now living in Formosa (Taiwan), against the Chinese. Fifty years later, Korea is still split between North and South and North Korea is reported to be developing nuclear weapons.




just wanted to fix that typo that i found while reading.gif this. lol!

 



__________________
Toxin.jpg


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 15
Date:

  1. He achieved each of these goals well he excited the people up against communism and at the same time did not create a mass panic of them.  He was also for the war but only for certain reasons stated and he did not want to go beyond Korea.  Then finally he also told why he had to fire Gen. MacArthur but did not seem as if he was getting too much fire from it in his own cabinet.
  2. His policy for the war in Korea was strictly for fighting the spread of communism and the threat that if it did spread it would threaten the United States.  It was effective because he was stating very specifically that he did not wish to enter into a WWIII.


__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 15
Date:

Anna wrote:

Korean War Part 1

1. I feel President Truman achieved these objectives fairly well. He stated his reasons and position on each of these issues.
2. I feel his war policy was justified. He felt that the communist regimes were trying to rid the world of freedom and as a nation; we cant just stand by and watch this happen. He wants all of the peaceful nations in the world to join together against this cause. He says that aggression in any part of the world is a threat to peace everywhere and should be confronted and stopped. His goals are to stop another World War 3 from happening.



I feel that she interpreted the documents the same way that i did too.  It is agreed that he wanted to prevent a WWIII and protect the freedoms that communism threatens.  So i would have to say that i agree with what anna says, i just wished there had been more insight.



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 15
Date:

Part II

  1. President Truman didnt want to seem as if he is the one asking for war and as a part of the United Nations the United States has an obligation to the U.N. to help in Korea when it requested for help.
  2. Truman consulted with the United Nations on what to do in Korea and pushed to help them.
  3. He did not want to seem as if he was personally pushing for the war in Korea and wanted the backup of the U.N.
  4. His decision was effective the fact that the United States did go to war in Korea to prevent the spread of communism.  In a way it altered foreign policy in the fact that congress was not consulted before entering into a conflict.


__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 15
Date:

Part III

  1. Now using the technology of being able to look back at what could have been done I would have agreed with what MacArthur wanted, but at the time I would have agreed with Truman because I would not want to overly hurt a people a world away.
  2. He is because he is on the front lines and wants to get home, so he wants to fight a more decisive, deadly war.
  3. No, he has no real right to tamper with foreign policy which is why he could not make the big decisions he wanted, he needs to get the presidents consent.
  4. Im sure he did not think he would get fired, but instead get the United States fired up against the enemy and press the president to see it his way so to speak.
  5. I think he hoped to accomplish a decimation of Korea and destroy its lands to prevent the spread of communism and end the war decisively.
  6. Yes, it was his place.
  7. MacArthur had no right to publicly go against the president and talk badly about him.  The president is the man in charge and he is the one who makes the decisions.  And, ultimately he was his boss, so when he went against him he deserved to get fired.



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Date:

Korean War Analysis [Part 1] 
Sources: http://www.trumanlibrary.org/calendar/viewpapers.php?pid=290, http://www2.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/05/documents/macarthur/,
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/specials/0005/korea.documents/truman.macarthur.html

Assignment: Read through the documents and information presented in the links above and answer the question below.

In his address to Congress, President Truman had to balance a number of competing objectives.

1. He had to appear to take a firm stand against communism, yet not appear too threatening.
2. He had to demonstrate commitment to the war, yet justify his limited objectives.
3. He had to defend his decision to fire General Douglas MacArthur, yet not appear defensive.

Questions: 1) In your opinion, how well did President Truman achieve each of these objectives? 2) Was Truman's policy and war strategy justified and was it effective? Explain in detail with specific reference to America's foreign policy regarding Korea and Communism.

Evaluation: You will receive 15 points for posting an insightful or thoughtful comment that answers the discussion questions. You will receive 15 points for posting one reply or comment to another person's comment.


Question 1
1) In my opinion, I feel that President Truma achieved the first objective very well. He tried to convince Americans that the communists were our enemies, and that we had to defeat them before they defeated us. " If they were to succeed, the United States would be numbered among their principal victims." I don't think he was very threatening at all. He mainly stated the basic facts and tried to persuade the people to go along with his opinion without seeming threatening.
2) I feel he stated why he wanted to go into the war, backing up his decisions to join it. He didn't simply jump into it without leaving a detailed explanation.
3) He fired the General very respectively. Although it was widely known that Truman didn't exactly favor McArthur, he still fired him with dignity and gave him reasons for his actions.
Question 2
President Truman's main goal was to stop a potential WWIII from happening. I think his policy for this was effective. He was going to stop the Communists from controling the world's different governments. He wants to teach the enemy a lesson. He also wants men in the world to stand up and fight for freedom., and wants the world to have peace. One of his greatest fears was Communism reaching the US.


__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Date:

Evaluation: You will receive 15 points for posting an insightful or thoughtful comment that answers the discussion questions. You will receive 15 points for posting one reply or comment to another person's comment.



I agreed with both Ashley & Anna's comments about the second question. I also felt President Truman was justified with his war plans, and his main goal was to keep the world's countries from entering into a WWIII. I also agree with Anna when she stated that President Truman was terribly afraid of Communism spreading into the United States.


__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Date:

Korean War Analysis [Part 2]

Source: The Harry Truman Museum, http://www.trumanlibrary.org/,
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/korea/large/index.htm

Background: On June 29, 1950, five days after North Korean forces attacked South Korea, President Truman responded to questions on America's involvement in Korea as follows:

We are not at war. . . . The Republic of Korea was set up with the United Nations' help. It is a recognized government by the members of the United Nations. It was unlawfully attacked by a bunch of bandits . . . . The United Nations Security Council held a meeting and passed on the situation and asked the members to go to the relief of the Korean republic. And the members of the United Nations are going to the relief of the KoreanRepublic to suppress a bandit raid on the Republic of Korea. - President Harry S. Truman, Press conference response, June 29, 1950 [Public Papers of the President]

Assignment: Answer the question below and post one comment concerning the decision making process in the early days of the Korean War and one comment or reply to another person's comment. Post responses to these questions regarding the above statement and the decision making process you observed at the Truman digital archives.

Question: 1) Why did President Truman focus on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea? 2) Who did President Truman seek advice from in deciding what to do in Korea? 3) Why was Congress not consulted? 4) Was Truman's decision making process effective and how did his decisions alter or sustain American foreign policy at the time?

Evaluation: You will receive 20 points for posting an insightful or thoughtful comment that answers the discussion questions. You will receive 20 points for posting one reply or comment to another person's comment.


1) He focused on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea because I feel he wanted to get his message across. I think that by letting the other countries that had close ties with the US know why and what we were doing in Korea, they would support us if we had a time of need.
2) He sought advice and help from the United Nations.
3) Congress was not consulted because he felt that by telling Congress that he wanted to go to war they would go against him. Without getting Congress's consent it would not be considered a declared war. He wanted to know what the United Nations felt about the war, because he felt it was greater than just the United States.
4) I think his decisions were effective. He didn't really go back on anything he said and told the United Nations that he went to war to fight off Communism, and justified this.

  1. His decision was effective the fact that the United States did go to war in Korea to prevent the spread of communism.  In a way it altered foreign policy in the fact that congress was not consulted before entering into a conflict.

I agree with what Ashley said here. It was the first time that Congress wasn't consulted first before entering into a conflict. I think the way she answered this question was very insightful.



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Date:

Korean War Analysis [Part 3]

Source: http://www.safran-arts.com/42day/history/h4apr/texts/oldsfade.html, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/filmmore/transcript/transcript3.html

Background: General MacArthur was frustrated by what he perceived as political interference with military efforts to win the war in Korea. Among the actions he wished to purse were to bomb China and enlist the forces of former Chinese leader Chiang Kai-shek, now living in Formosa (Taiwan), against the Chinese. Fifty years later, Korea is still split between North and South and North Korea is reported to be developing nuclear weapons.

Assignment: Read MacArthur's speech above and answer the following questions.

Question: 1) Do you agree with General MacArthur that there the U.S. should have pushed for total victory in Korea in the 1950's or was Truman correct in advocating a more limited war? 2) Is MacArthur justified in his criticism? 3) Was he right concerning military strategy its foreign policy implications?  4) Why do you think MacArthur forced the issue by publicly criticizing his Commander in Chief? 5) What do you think MacArthur hoped to accomplish? 6) Was Truman right to fire MacArthur? 7) Why or why not?

Evaluation: You will receive 15 points for posting an insightful or thoughtful comment that answers the discussion question. You will receive 15 points for posting one reply or comment to another person's comment.


1) I don't agree with General MacArthur. I think that if the decisions on war were left up to him they would all be very extreme and crazy. President Truman's way of thinking was much more processed, and not just throw around. He was correct on advocating for a more limited war. It made it seem less crazy, and not so dangerous.
2) I don't think he was justified in his criticism. He was thinking mainly for himself and not for the greater good of the countries involved.
3) I think that the General wanted to make decisions greater than him. He really had no right to decide the things he wanted to decide.
4) I think he pushed the issue this way because he thought he could make the President look bad if he criticized him, and the other leaders and people would greater value his views.
5) I think he wanted to accomplish a total victory no matter how many lives he took.
6) I think he was right in firing MacArthur.
7) He had no right to criticize his Commander in Chief no matter how much he disagreed with his views. There have been many Generals who have disagreed with their Commanders, but they have enough respect no to publicly embarass them.



Evaluation


  1. MacArthur had no right to publicly go against the president and talk badly about him.  The president is the man in charge and he is the one who makes the decisions.  And, ultimately he was his boss, so when he went against him he deserved to get fired.


I said something close to what Ashley said here. General MacArthur had no right to go against the President just because they didn't share the same types of views.

__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 35
Date:

Korean War Analysis [Part 1] 

 

Questions: 1) In your opinion, how well did President Truman achieve each of these objectives? 2) Was Truman's policy and war strategy justified and was it effective? Explain in detail with specific reference to America's foreign policy regarding Korea and Communism.

 

1.)      In my opinion I believe executed each of these objectives with pin-point precision.  In his speech he made communism to be the aggressor and the one that was wrong and that we needed to defend the free countries around the world to keep them free from the tyranny of communism and to stop the Soviets liberation or else we would slowly lose them one by one and become outnumbered; if we do not take a stand and show the soviets that we mean business now, the small fire that is communism will turn into and uncontrollable roaring blaze.  He demonstrated his commitment by reassuring that we would help the people of Korea and that a change in command in the Far East does not mean a change in policy and justified his limited objectives by stating that we did not want to start a war by pushing the Communists and get completely entangled in the vast conflict in Asia which would be what the Soviets wanted, to waste our resources.  And lastly he defend his position about firing MacArthur well as he said that he did regret doing so but deemed it necessary as one  individual is not greater than the whole, the U.S.

2.)      His policy and strategy was justified because he sought out to protect freedom from the communist and to stop them from spreading and conquering.  We needed to stop communism because the Soviet leaders would take away most rights from the people they had control over and would enforce their own views and ways upon them.  His strategy is to show the Soviets that we as a nation, along with the U.N., will stand up to them and preserve freedom, being defense in nature and plan so as not to antagonist, but to leave the door open to peace talks and in doing so will put the responsibility on the Soviets to decide whether to be the aggressors or to settle this peacefully.  Truman seeks to isolate this conflict in Korea and make an example to the Soviets so as not to spread the conflict to the whole of Asia or more; he wants to avoid an all-out war and a show of power and strength by the U.N. and the U.S. will show them that they cant win and would be foolhardy to continue to spread the violence beyond Korea.  It was effective because shortly after on March 20, 1951 the U.N. was prepared to talk about the conditions of settlement in Korea and on Jul 15, 1953 an armistice was signed. 

 


Korean War Analysis [Part 3]

Question: 1) Do you agree with General MacArthur that there the U.S. should have pushed for total victory in Korea in the 1950's or was Truman correct in advocating a more limited war? 2) Is MacArthur justified in his criticism? 3) Was he right concerning military strategy its foreign policy implications?  4) Why do you think MacArthur forced the issue by publicly criticizing his Commander in Chief? 5) What do you think MacArthur hoped to accomplish? 6) Was Truman right to fire MacArthur? 7) Why or why not?

1.)      I believe MacArthur was being a little bit ambitious and did not completely understand the political ramifications involved and thus President Trumans limited war was a better and safer way to go to avoid an all out war.

2.)      He is partially justified in his criticisms as he is right there in the midst of fighting and knows the situation best but even he himself fails to see some options and possibilities open to him like situation with General Matthew Ridgway where Ridgway decided to remain optimistic even when faced with the military problems of limited war and straightened out the Eighth Army and built up, step by step, a good offensive line whereas MacArthur only saw his forces annihilating the enemy or retreating.

3.)      He was right that a fight with Communism was a Global one and that we could fight on two fronts if the enemy could but he was wrong in that he assumed that the Soviets wouldnt enter an all-out war with us if we started to fight China, just like when he thought the Chinese wouldnt enter the fight in Korea.

4.)      He did so, I think, because he wanted to in a way get back at the President for firing him and to argue his position to try and show that he was right ; he also liked attention such as this and couldnt stand anyone challenging his authority.

5.)      He hoped to gain support for him among the officials and to possibly run for president. 

6.)      I believe he was.

7.)      He was because not only was MacArthur challenging his boss but he was planning a war strategy was risky and Truman wanted to take a safer route to avoid another world war.



__________________
Toxin.jpg


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 35
Date:

Korean War Analysis [Part 2]

Question: 1) Why did President Truman focus on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea? 2) Who did President Truman seek advice from in deciding what to do in Korea? 3) Why was Congress not consulted? 4) Was Truman's decision making process effective and how did his decisions alter or sustain American foreign policy at the time?

1.)      He did because not only would they provide relief to American troops but it showed that collective security would work and that we werent just involving ourselves for our own sake but joined with the U..N. to fight off the Soviets who were trying to conquer and control Korea.

2.)      He sought advice from the Department of state and other principal American decision makers in the Blair meetings.

3.)      Congress was not consulted because calling a meeting of congress would take too long in determining a proper plan of action in Korea and he did not want to formally declare war which, if he did, would grab the soviets full attention and possibly create the beginning of another world war.

4.)      His decision making process was effective as it eventually ended the war but with Korea being split after an armistice and prevented a third world war from breaking out and this sustained the current American policy because the U.S. did not want another world war and prevented one from beginning through a policy of collective security via the U.N.



__________________
Toxin.jpg


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 23
Date:

Kelby

 

Assignment #25 - Korean War, Part 1

 

  1. In your opinion how well did Truman achieve each of the objectives?

I believe that President Truman did a good job in meeting objective #1. He stood firm against communism without appearing threatening. He outlined what the Communist position was and how their intent was to spread communism throughout the free world and he added that the United States would also be targeted as one of the victims. He was very clear in explaining the U.S. position in response to the communist threat, which was to meet it head on at the very beginning.  He explained that the Communist plan was one of conquest and that they were targeting one country at a time.  He painted a picture of the Communist as evil and bold.  He told the American people that by standing by South Korea that the U.S. was preventing World War III.   He told the people that this has been successful in preventing aggression in other countries in the free world and has helped the free world countries see that freedom can stand up to communism. He should confidence that the U.S. and the free world could be successful working together through the United Nations.  He also reassured the American people that the military of the U.S., Western Europe and the remainder of the free world was getting stronger and that should discourage the Communist rulers from continuing their fight.

Objective #2 was also met. He did show that he was committed to the war and he explained why he wanted to limit it to Korea and not extend the war to other parts of Asia. He clearly outlined three reasons for limiting the conflict: first, to save lives of the American fighting men, second,  to safeguard the security of our country and the remainder of the free world and third, to prevent a third world war.

Objective #3 was also met.  The President tactfully described his decision to relieve General MacArthur of his duties, explaining that General MacArthur did not agree with the U.S. position in Asia and in order to avoid doubt or confusion that he had to be removed of his duties.  He praised the General as one of the United States greatest commanders but that one individual was not more important than world peace.    

  1. Was Trumans policy and war strategy justified and was it effective? Explain in detail with specific reference to Americas foreign policy regarding Korea and Communism.

Trumans policy and war strategy was justified based on  U.S. foreign policy.  Containment was the keystone of American foreign policy it was the rationale for the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall plan, NATO and NSC-68.  The United States wanted to spread a vision of freedom around the world and also to establish free trade.  In addition they wanted peace in the world. They were against communism and the spread of communism and they saw communism as a threat to freedom, peace and justice. I dont believe that his policy and strategy was fully effective. It did keep the U.S. out of a larger war which possibly would have evolved into World War III but it did not bring a swift end to the Korean war which dragged on into the Eisenhower administration and it did not deter the spread of communism to other nations.

 

Part 2.

 

  1. Why did President Truman focus on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea?

President Truman focused on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea because it was proper procedure under the charter of the United Nations for the United Nations to take action if aggression occurred.  Aggression was contrary to the charter and there were provisions in the charter for dealing with aggression.  By focusing on the United Nations action he would explain U.S. position as responding to the decision of the United Nations and the U.S. would not be seen as the one taking action on their own.

  1. Who did President Truman seek advice from in deciding what to do in Korea?

President Truman received advice from a group of his advisors which included:  Secretary Acheson, Secretary Johnson, Secretary Matthews, Secretary Pace, Secretary Finletter, General Bradley, admiral Sherman, General Vandenberg and General Collins.  He met with all of these men at Blair House on June 25, 1950.  His main advisor was Secretary of State Dean Acheson who took President Truman aside before the meeting and met with the President alone in the Cloakroom.

  1. Why was Congress not consulted?

He did not consult Congress because Truman did not consider it an act of war.  He described the United States response to the invasion of South Korea as a response to a request from the United Nations to give relief to the Korean republic and to stop the raid on the Republic of Korea under the guidance of the United Nations.

  1. Was Trumans decision making process effective and how did his decisions alter or sustain American foreign policy at the time?

Trumans decision making process involved listening to advisors and using all of the information presented to make a cautious and educated decision based on all of the facts presented and also on the possible outcomes.  He used the United Nations and the NATO alliance as part of his decision making and did not involve Congress until the decision to enter the conflict had been made.  The process was effective at the time because the objective of supporting Korea without entering or creating World War III was met.  I think that his decision making process altered American foreign policy somewhat by his inclusion of the United Nations in the decision making process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Part 3.

 

  1. Do you agree with General MacArthur that the U.S. should have pushed for total victory in Korea in the 1950s or was Truman correct in advocating a more limited war?

Im not sure that MacArthurs plan would have given U.S. a total victory. No one is really sure what the results would have been.  It could have started another world war. I think that he was making a determination without having all of the facts and that he was placing his opinion over the decision of the President which was a safer way to prevent war on a much larger scale.    

  1.  Is  MacArthur justified in his criticism?

MacArthur has a right to his opinion but he should have discussed his differences with the President and the other advisors and he should have been more open to accepting their plan.  His criticisms were based on his inability to look at the situation objectively and to consider options other than his own.  He should have attempted to be more understanding and accepting of the Presidents plan.

  1. Was he right concerning military strategy its foreign policy implications?

I think that he was correct in stating that the communist threat was global and that the United States had to remain aware of the threat.  I agree with him that the U.S. should make every effort to stop the forced take over of other countries by the communist regime and also he was correct in stating that the U.S. could fight on two fronts.  I think that he was mistaken though by believing that the Soviet would not enter a war in support of China and if that had happened the results could have been disastrous and most likely would have started world war III.

  1. Why do you think MacArthur forced the issue by publicly criticizing his commander in Chief?

I think that MacArthur himself was being criticized and after serving his country nobly for fifty-two years he wanted to set the record strait and prove that he was not a warmongerer.  He wanted people to understand his position regarding his proposed military strategy regarding China.

  1. What do you think MacArthur hoped to accomplish?

I think that he hoped to clear his name and to change peoples opinion toward him since he was getting ready to retire from a long and honorable career.  He did not want this episode to cast a shadow over his entire career.

  1. Was Truman right to fire MacArthur? 7.  Why or why not?

Truman did not trust MacArthur to follow Trumans plan and he thought that if MacArthur ignored Truman and went ahead with his own plan that a third world war would start. So given those facts he was correct to remove MacArthur from his position due to insubordination.

 

 



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 15
Date:

BreanneCabral wrote:

Korean War Analysis [Part 2]

Source: The Harry Truman Museum, http://www.trumanlibrary.org/,
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/korea/large/index.htm

Background: On June 29, 1950, five days after North Korean forces attacked South Korea, President Truman responded to questions on America's involvement in Korea as follows:

We are not at war. . . . The Republic of Korea was set up with the United Nations' help. It is a recognized government by the members of the United Nations. It was unlawfully attacked by a bunch of bandits . . . . The United Nations Security Council held a meeting and passed on the situation and asked the members to go to the relief of the Korean republic. And the members of the United Nations are going to the relief of the KoreanRepublic to suppress a bandit raid on the Republic of Korea. - President Harry S. Truman, Press conference response, June 29, 1950 [Public Papers of the President]

Assignment: Answer the question below and post one comment concerning the decision making process in the early days of the Korean War and one comment or reply to another person's comment. Post responses to these questions regarding the above statement and the decision making process you observed at the Truman digital archives.

Question: 1) Why did President Truman focus on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea? 2) Who did President Truman seek advice from in deciding what to do in Korea? 3) Why was Congress not consulted? 4) Was Truman's decision making process effective and how did his decisions alter or sustain American foreign policy at the time?

Evaluation: You will receive 20 points for posting an insightful or thoughtful comment that answers the discussion questions. You will receive 20 points for posting one reply or comment to another person's comment.


1) He focused on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea because I feel he wanted to get his message across. I think that by letting the other countries that had close ties with the US know why and what we were doing in Korea, they would support us if we had a time of need.
2) He sought advice and help from the United Nations.
3) Congress was not consulted because he felt that by telling Congress that he wanted to go to war they would go against him. Without getting Congress's consent it would not be considered a declared war. He wanted to know what the United Nations felt about the war, because he felt it was greater than just the United States.
4) I think his decisions were effective. He didn't really go back on anything he said and told the United Nations that he went to war to fight off Communism, and justified this.

  1. His decision was effective the fact that the United States did go to war in Korea to prevent the spread of communism.  In a way it altered foreign policy in the fact that congress was not consulted before entering into a conflict.

I agree with what Ashley said here. It was the first time that Congress wasn't consulted first before entering into a conflict. I think the way she answered this question was very insightful.



first thank you for finding my answers insightful.  Also i found her insight on why congres was not consulted very interesting as to the fat that Truman felt that the war was larger than the United States and that congress would go against the war simply for the fact that the president wanted it,im not sure about that as being a motive, but im sure you found it somewhere, ,thats different.



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Date:

Korean War part 1

 

  1. President Truman achieved each of these objectives.  He took a stand against communism and did not appear threatening because he simply aided Korea, when they asked for it. He also kept a world war III from forming. He had a plan that was effective but not over the top.
  2. Trumans policy and war strategy was justified and effective also. His strategy was to fight communism, before it would endanger the United States. The policy was effective because they was no world war III. It was prevented from happening.


__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 15
Date:

from kelby:
  1. Do you agree with General MacArthur that the U.S. should have pushed for total victory in Korea in the 1950s or was Truman correct in advocating a more limited war?

Im not sure that MacArthurs plan would have given U.S. a total victory. No one is really sure what the results would have been.  It could have started another world war. I think that he was making a determination without having all of the facts and that he was placing his opinion over the decision of the President which was a safer way to prevent war on a much larger scale.  

i like the fact that kelby has this position because it contadicts my own.  I think she was right to bring out the fact that he did not have all the facts and could not have made an informed decision.  She is right because one needs all the facts in order to make an informed decision, which he would have been unable to do.



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Date:

Kelby wrote:

Kelby

Assignment #25 - Korean War, Part 1

  1. In your opinion how well did Truman achieve each of the objectives?

I believe that President Truman did a good job in meeting objective #1. He stood firm against communism without appearing threatening. He outlined what the Communist position was and how their intent was to spread communism throughout the free world and he added that the United States would also be targeted as one of the victims. He was very clear in explaining the U.S. position in response to the communist threat, which was to meet it head on at the very beginning.  He explained that the Communist plan was one of conquest and that they were targeting one country at a time.  He painted a picture of the Communist as evil and bold.  He told the American people that by standing by South Korea that the U.S. was preventing World War III.   He told the people that this has been successful in preventing aggression in other countries in the free world and has helped the free world countries see that freedom can stand up to communism. He should confidence that the U.S. and the free world could be successful working together through the United Nations.  He also reassured the American people that the military of the U.S., Western Europe and the remainder of the free world was getting stronger and that should discourage the Communist rulers from continuing their fight.

Objective #2 was also met. He did show that he was committed to the war and he explained why he wanted to limit it to Korea and not extend the war to other parts of Asia. He clearly outlined three reasons for limiting the conflict: first, to save lives of the American fighting men, second,  to safeguard the security of our country and the remainder of the free world and third, to prevent a third world war.

Objective #3 was also met.  The President tactfully described his decision to relieve General MacArthur of his duties, explaining that General MacArthur did not agree with the U.S. position in Asia and in order to avoid doubt or confusion that he had to be removed of his duties.  He praised the General as one of the United States greatest commanders but that one individual was not more important than world peace.    

  1. Was Trumans policy and war strategy justified and was it effective? Explain in detail with specific reference to Americas foreign policy regarding Korea and Communism.

Trumans policy and war strategy was justified based on  U.S. foreign policy.  Containment was the keystone of American foreign policy it was the rationale for the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall plan, NATO and NSC-68.  The United States wanted to spread a vision of freedom around the world and also to establish free trade.  In addition they wanted peace in the world. They were against communism and the spread of communism and they saw communism as a threat to freedom, peace and justice. I dont believe that his policy and strategy was fully effective. It did keep the U.S. out of a larger war which possibly would have evolved into World War III but it did not bring a swift end to the Korean war which dragged on into the Eisenhower administration and it did not deter the spread of communism to other nations.

Part 2.

  1. Why did President Truman focus on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea?

President Truman focused on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea because it was proper procedure under the charter of the United Nations for the United Nations to take action if aggression occurred.  Aggression was contrary to the charter and there were provisions in the charter for dealing with aggression.  By focusing on the United Nations action he would explain U.S. position as responding to the decision of the United Nations and the U.S. would not be seen as the one taking action on their own.

  1. Who did President Truman seek advice from in deciding what to do in Korea?

President Truman received advice from a group of his advisors which included:  Secretary Acheson, Secretary Johnson, Secretary Matthews, Secretary Pace, Secretary Finletter, General Bradley, admiral Sherman, General Vandenberg and General Collins.  He met with all of these men at Blair House on June 25, 1950.  His main advisor was Secretary of State Dean Acheson who took President Truman aside before the meeting and met with the President alone in the Cloakroom.

  1. Why was Congress not consulted?

He did not consult Congress because Truman did not consider it an act of war.  He described the United States response to the invasion of South Korea as a response to a request from the United Nations to give relief to the Korean republic and to stop the raid on the Republic of Korea under the guidance of the United Nations.

  1. Was Trumans decision making process effective and how did his decisions alter or sustain American foreign policy at the time?

Trumans decision making process involved listening to advisors and using all of the information presented to make a cautious and educated decision based on all of the facts presented and also on the possible outcomes.  He used the United Nations and the NATO alliance as part of his decision making and did not involve Congress until the decision to enter the conflict had been made.  The process was effective at the time because the objective of supporting Korea without entering or creating World War III was met.  I think that his decision making process altered American foreign policy somewhat by his inclusion of the United Nations in the decision making process.

Part 3.

  1. Do you agree with General MacArthur that the U.S. should have pushed for total victory in Korea in the 1950s or was Truman correct in advocating a more limited war?

Im not sure that MacArthurs plan would have given U.S. a total victory. No one is really sure what the results would have been.  It could have started another world war. I think that he was making a determination without having all of the facts and that he was placing his opinion over the decision of the President which was a safer way to prevent war on a much larger scale.    

  1.  Is  MacArthur justified in his criticism?

MacArthur has a right to his opinion but he should have discussed his differences with the President and the other advisors and he should have been more open to accepting their plan.  His criticisms were based on his inability to look at the situation objectively and to consider options other than his own.  He should have attempted to be more understanding and accepting of the Presidents plan.

  1. Was he right concerning military strategy its foreign policy implications?

I think that he was correct in stating that the communist threat was global and that the United States had to remain aware of the threat.  I agree with him that the U.S. should make every effort to stop the forced take over of other countries by the communist regime and also he was correct in stating that the U.S. could fight on two fronts.  I think that he was mistaken though by believing that the Soviet would not enter a war in support of China and if that had happened the results could have been disastrous and most likely would have started world war III.

  1. Why do you think MacArthur forced the issue by publicly criticizing his commander in Chief?

I think that MacArthur himself was being criticized and after serving his country nobly for fifty-two years he wanted to set the record strait and prove that he was not a warmongerer.  He wanted people to understand his position regarding his proposed military strategy regarding China.

  1. What do you think MacArthur hoped to accomplish?

I think that he hoped to clear his name and to change peoples opinion toward him since he was getting ready to retire from a long and honorable career.  He did not want this episode to cast a shadow over his entire career.

  1. Was Truman right to fire MacArthur? 7.  Why or why not?

Truman did not trust MacArthur to follow Trumans plan and he thought that if MacArthur ignored Truman and went ahead with his own plan that a third world war would start. So given those facts he was correct to remove MacArthur from his position due to insubordination.



i like how Kelby broke down part 1 of the assignment. I agree with her answer, and she brought up good points.



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Date:

Korean War Part II

 

  1. President Truman focused on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea because he didnt want it to look like it was our war. If he was involved with the United Nations it would look like not only the U.S. but the entire world was dealing with this issue.
  2. President Truman got advice from the United Nations.

  3. Congress was not consulted because this was not an act of war. Therefore it did not concern this body of government.

  4. Trumans decision making process was effective. He wanted to fight of communism by any logical means necessary and that what he succeeded in doing.



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Date:

BreanneCabral wrote:

Korean War Analysis [Part 2]

Source: The Harry Truman Museum, http://www.trumanlibrary.org/,
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/korea/large/index.htm

Background: On June 29, 1950, five days after North Korean forces attacked South Korea, President Truman responded to questions on America's involvement in Korea as follows:

We are not at war. . . . The Republic of Korea was set up with the United Nations' help. It is a recognized government by the members of the United Nations. It was unlawfully attacked by a bunch of bandits . . . . The United Nations Security Council held a meeting and passed on the situation and asked the members to go to the relief of the Korean republic. And the members of the United Nations are going to the relief of the KoreanRepublic to suppress a bandit raid on the Republic of Korea. - President Harry S. Truman, Press conference response, June 29, 1950 [Public Papers of the President]

Assignment: Answer the question below and post one comment concerning the decision making process in the early days of the Korean War and one comment or reply to another person's comment. Post responses to these questions regarding the above statement and the decision making process you observed at the Truman digital archives.

Question: 1) Why did President Truman focus on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea? 2) Who did President Truman seek advice from in deciding what to do in Korea? 3) Why was Congress not consulted? 4) Was Truman's decision making process effective and how did his decisions alter or sustain American foreign policy at the time?

Evaluation: You will receive 20 points for posting an insightful or thoughtful comment that answers the discussion questions. You will receive 20 points for posting one reply or comment to another person's comment.


1) He focused on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea because I feel he wanted to get his message across. I think that by letting the other countries that had close ties with the US know why and what we were doing in Korea, they would support us if we had a time of need.
2) He sought advice and help from the United Nations.
3) Congress was not consulted because he felt that by telling Congress that he wanted to go to war they would go against him. Without getting Congress's consent it would not be considered a declared war. He wanted to know what the United Nations felt about the war, because he felt it was greater than just the United States.
4) I think his decisions were effective. He didn't really go back on anything he said and told the United Nations that he went to war to fight off Communism, and justified this.

  1. His decision was effective the fact that the United States did go to war in Korea to prevent the spread of communism.  In a way it altered foreign policy in the fact that congress was not consulted before entering into a conflict.

I agree with what Ashley said here. It was the first time that Congress wasn't consulted first before entering into a conflict. I think the way she answered this question was very insightful.



I can see where Breanne is coming from when answering these questions. I agree with what shes saying, and i like how she always clarifys things, she words her responses in a simple way which everyone can understand.



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Date:

Korean War Part III

 

1. No, I dont agree with General MacArthur. I dont trust him. I dont think he would make the right decisions in a time of war. I think if things were left up to him, we would be put in a bad situation. I think that Truman was correct in advocating a more limited war, his ways seemed more logical and effective. 2. No, I dont think MacArthur was justified in his criticism. 3. No, he was right. He was taking advantage of the power he had, and he wasnt making the right choices. 4. MacArthur forced the issue by publicly criticizing the Commander in Chief so he could get attention; he also wanted people to agree with his views. He was stubborn and thought his ways where the correct ways.  5. MacArthur basically wanted a victory no matter what was at stake. 6. Yes, Truman was right in firing MacArthur. 7. There was no need for MacArthur to criticize the Commander and Chief. Even if they did not have the same views, it was not the right thing to do.

__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Date:

ashley wrote:

Part III

  1. Now using the technology of being able to look back at what could have been done I would have agreed with what MacArthur wanted, but at the time I would have agreed with Truman because I would not want to overly hurt a people a world away.
  2. He is because he is on the front lines and wants to get home, so he wants to fight a more decisive, deadly war.
  3. No, he has no real right to tamper with foreign policy which is why he could not make the big decisions he wanted, he needs to get the presidents consent.
  4. Im sure he did not think he would get fired, but instead get the United States fired up against the enemy and press the president to see it his way so to speak.
  5. I think he hoped to accomplish a decimation of Korea and destroy its lands to prevent the spread of communism and end the war decisively.
  6. Yes, it was his place.
  7. MacArthur had no right to publicly go against the president and talk badly about him.  The president is the man in charge and he is the one who makes the decisions.  And, ultimately he was his boss, so when he went against him he deserved to get fired.



Ashley brought up a good point in answering question 1. I usually don't use  that type of thought process she used when responding to that question.



__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 35
Date:

Kelby wrote:

 

Kelby

Assignment #25 - Korean War, Part 1

  1. In your opinion how well did Truman achieve each of the objectives?

I believe that President Truman did a good job in meeting objective #1. He stood firm against communism without appearing threatening. He outlined what the Communist position was and how their intent was to spread communism throughout the free world and he added that the United States would also be targeted as one of the victims. He was very clear in explaining the U.S. position in response to the communist threat, which was to meet it head on at the very beginning.He explained that the Communist plan was one of conquest and that they were targeting one country at a time.He painted a picture of the Communist as evil and bold.He told the American people that by standing by South Korea that the U.S. was preventing World War III.He told the people that this has been successful in preventing aggression in other countries in the free world and has helped the free world countries see that freedom can stand up to communism. He should confidence that the U.S. and the free world could be successful working together through the United Nations.He also reassured the American people that the military of the U.S., Western Europe and the remainder of the free world was getting stronger and that should discourage the Communist rulers from continuing their fight.

Objective #2 was also met. He did show that he was committed to the war and he explained why he wanted to limit it to Korea and not extend the war to other parts of Asia. He clearly outlined three reasons for limiting the conflict: first, to save lives of the American fighting men, second, to safeguard the security of our country and the remainder of the free world and third, to prevent a third world war.

Objective #3 was also met.The President tactfully described his decision to relieve General MacArthur of his duties, explaining that General MacArthur did not agree with the U.S. position in Asia and in order to avoid doubt or confusion that he had to be removed of his duties.He praised the General as one of the United States greatest commanders but that one individual was not more important than world peace.


Part 2.


  1. Was Trumans decision making process effective and how did his decisions alter or sustain American foreign policy at the time?

Trumans decision making process involved listening to advisors and using all of the information presented to make a cautious and educated decision based on all of the facts presented and also on the possible outcomes.He used the United Nations and the NATO alliance as part of his decision making and did not involve Congress until the decision to enter the conflict had been made.The process was effective at the time because the objective of supporting Korea without entering or creating World War III was met.I think that his decision making process altered American foreign policy somewhat by his inclusion of the United Nations in the decision making process.

Part 3.


  1. What do you think MacArthur hoped to accomplish?

I think that he hoped to clear his name and to change peoples opinion toward him since he was getting ready to retire from a long and honorable career.He did not want this episode to cast a shadow over his entire career.


 




Kelby, I like your answer for numero uno on part uno as it, as I believe it, effectively answers the question wholly without digression.Personally I liked it a bit more than my own.

 

 

I also like your fourth answer for part two but do not agree with that very last part of your answer which makes it sound like he his changing American foreign policy or will change it based on what the U.N. says.I believe he took the U.N. policies into consideration but I believe his final decision would ultimately be whatever is best for the U.S. regardless of the U.N. decision.

 

 

And lastly I like your answers for part 3, maybe some of them need a little fine tuning, but I do not agree with number 5.Did he not get one of, if not, the greatest welcoming back parade/ceremony in the history of the U.S., even overshadowing Eisenhower's?He did and thus I do not think he needed to convince people to change their opinions to clear his name because most people already thought highly of him.



-- Edited by Toxin at 03:54, 2008-03-24

__________________
Toxin.jpg


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 13
Date:

1. He had to appear to take a firm stand against communism, yet not appear too threatening.
2. He had to demonstrate commitment to the war, yet justify his limited objectives.
3. He had to defend his decision to fire General Douglas MacArthur, yet not appear defensive.

Truman achieved his first objective of taking a firm stance against communism by continually driving the notion that the Communist world (the Soviet Union) is planning to conquer all of Asia and that the U.S. fighting in Korea is containing the spread of Soviet influence.

He achieves his second objective by stating that our presence in Korea was to prevent World War III and contain the spread of communism throughout Asia. Against claims that he should have gone farther and invaded China and our other Asiatic enemies Truman says that by actually invading these countries would be exacerbating the problem and could potentially escalate to a global general conflict, exactly what we were trying to prevent.

He also achieves his 3rd and final objective by saying that the reason he fired McArthur was strictly because he went against the policy of only fighting in Korea, and by going against that policy he could have created a very dangerous scenario because of the reasons above.


Question: 1) Why did President Truman focus on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea? 2) Who did President Truman seek advice from in deciding what to do in Korea? 3) Why was Congress not consulted? 4) Was Truman's decision making process effective and how did his decisions alter or sustain American foreign policy at the time?

Truman focused primarily on the UN to explain U.S. involvement in Korea probably to shift some of the full blame and responsibility from the U.S. to the UN by saying The United Nations Security Council held a meeting and passed on the situation and asked the members to go to the relief of the Korean republic. This would also bolster public and possibly congressional support of the war.

President Truman seemed to have sought the advice of the UN in deciding on the issue of Korea since he mentions that the UN made a decision, not him. Congress was not consulted because Truman stated We are not at war and also that Korea was being attacked by a bunch of bandits. In this case congressional support is not needed to send troops.

By consulting the UN he kept good relations with most of the countries on the security council (since they sided w/ Truman), and because they approved Trumans proposal he was able to execute a more forceful impact against the spreading communist powers in Asia.




Question: 1) Do you agree with General MacArthur that there the U.S. should have pushed for total victory in Korea in the 1950's or was Truman correct in advocating a more limited war? 2) Is MacArthur justified in his criticism? 3) Was he right concerning military strategy its foreign policy implications? 4) Why do you think MacArthur forced the issue by publicly criticizing his Commander in Chief? 5) What do you think MacArthur hoped to accomplish? 6) Was Truman right to fire MacArthur? 7) Why or why not?

Seeing the issues from both sides I would have to say that Trumans idea of a limited war seems more acceptable and poses the least risk of Soviet intervention and thus has a far less chance of sparking a global nuclear conflict than McArthurs total victory policy. However I must say that McArthur makes some very valid points that justify his argument. One of his best points is this one Some may say to avoid spread of the conflict into an all-out war with China. Others, to avoid Soviet intervention. Neither explanation seems valid, for China is already engaging with the maximum power it can commit, and the Soviet will not necessarily mesh its actions with our moves. where he states that the U.S. could definitely fend off Red China since they have already done so and the Soviets, although also Communist would not necessarily engage in open war w/ the U.S. because an open conflict would be just as horrifyingly devastating to Russia as to its enemy.

Besides the fact that he was angry at the president because he was fired and dishonored, he probably pushed the issue publicly to perhaps sway public and congressional opinions and to shift the path of the war to the one he agreed with. For the sake of preserving policy, Truman did the right thing in removing McArthur, however militarily it was a stupid move because McArthur was possibly the best officer in the service at the time and having him in command would have definitely changed American progress in the war for the better.



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 23
Date:

Comment on Dan (Toxin) response to Part 1

 

Dan gave a very good critique of President Trumans speech.  I liked the analogy of fire that he uses to explain how quickly and fiercely communism would spread if ignored.  His opinion regarding the President meeting the stated objectives was similar to mine.  We agree on the fact that the President met each objective effectively.  In regards to number 2 again we agree that President Trumans policy and strategy was justified but we differ in our opinion as to whether it was effective.  Dan believes it was effective because it led to the signing of an armistice but I feel that it was only partially effective because although a third World war was prevented, Korea remained a divided nation and ultimately the spread of communism was not stopped.

 

 

 

Comment on Ashley response to Part II

 

I agree with Ashley that President Truman did not want to seem like the one asking for war he definitely did not want other nations to see the United States as the aggressor in Korea and so he presented U.S. involvement as an obligation to the United Nations.  It is true Ashley that he received information from the United Nations in order to make his decision regarding Korea but his primary advisors were the group of Secretarys and military officials that he met with at the Blair House.  I agree with Ashley that foreign policy was altered when the President did not consult Congress but relied on the United Nations to forge the United States in the Korean War.

 

 

 

Comments on Dan(Toxin) response to Part III

 

Dan raises some interesting points in his answer to part 3.  I fully agree with 1) that he was ambitious and lacked a full understanding of the issues at hand.  I  think that he makes a great point by demonstrating the difference between  MacArthur and Ridgeway and the way that they handled the military problems that they were faced with.  Im not sure that I would agree that MacArthur was gathering up support for a run for the presidency though.  I think that he just wanted to present his position to Congress and settle any differences that he had with the President before he retired from the military.



__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 30
Date:

PART I

1) In your opinion, how well did President Truman achieve each of these objectives?
- I think that Truman faced a number of obstacles during his presidency, and it seems that for the three listed objectives he did all he could to let others in on what he was doing and gave them a detailed explanation for many of his decisions. I also think that he was able to accomplish all of those objectives well, while maintaining a good public persona.

2) Was Truman's policy and war strategy justified and was it effective? Explain in detail with specific reference to America's foreign policy regarding Korea and Communism.
- President Truman wanted to do just about anything to stay out of another world war, especially if it was going to be a war fought almost in its entirety with nuclear weapons. However he was not going to just let communism take over. Much of his strategy was to have all non-communist nations join together to overthrow communist governments and I do think that this is a plausible strategy.


__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 30
Date:

PART II

1) Why did President Truman focus on the United Nations to explain American involvement in Korea?
- America had been responsible for many wars over previous years. For us to be the ringleaders of another assault, even if it was against communism, would have made us look like bullies and therefore make us targets for attacks. Also since the formation of the U.N. its main goals were to keep peace between nations so it was in everyones best interest to use the United Nations to involve America in Korea.

2) Who did President Truman seek advice from in deciding what to do in Korea?
- The United Nations.

3) Why was Congress not consulted?
- President Truman did not want to go to war at all. He wanted to stop the spread of communism in Korea, and inevitably elsewhere and so he did not want to have to go through Congress and make it look like he wanted to declare war.

4) Was Truman's decision-making process effective and how did his decisions alter or sustain American foreign policy at the time?
- I believe that his course of action was effective and that his decisions were the best ones for the time. His decisions, however, only sustained foreign policy because very little was accomplished in the fight against communism.


__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 30
Date:

PART III

1) Do you agree with General MacArthur that there the U.S. should have pushed for total victory in Korea in the 1950's or was Truman correct in advocating a more limited war?
- I agree with President Trumans position in a limited war. I think that a full scale attack could have led to world-wide issues.

2) Is MacArthur justified in his criticism?
- Although I agree he is justified in providing criticism for the Presidents course of action, I do not agree with the way he wanted to wage war. Granted he and the troops were the ones there but that doesnt really give him the authority to launch a full-scale attack against Trumans policies.

3) Was he right concerning military strategy its foreign policy implications?
- I dont think he was. MacArthur wasnt really thinking about what kind of implications launching an attack against Korea, and the communist world for that matter would bring. To him, getting America in and out was the best option and the only way to do that was to launch a full-scale attack.

4) Why do you think MacArthur forced the issue by publicly criticizing his Commander in Chief?
- I think that MacArthur wanted public opinion in his favor by releasing the Presidents foreign policy regarding Korea, as well as his own. People were starting to fear communism more and more and he used this as ammunition against Truman.

5) What do you think MacArthur hoped to accomplish?
- I think that by swaying public opinion he hoped to force Truman to go along with his ideas.

6) Was Truman right to fire MacArthur?
- Yes

7) Why or why not?
- I feel that as the leader [Commander in Chief] of the military Truman had the authority to call the shots when it came to dealing with his policies regarding communism and Korea specifically, and that he had every right to fire MacArthur is he challenged that.


__________________
mre


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 338
Date:

grades updated 4.01.08

__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard