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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.    

2. 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.

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. 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.    

2.  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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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.

 

 

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.

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.    

2. 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.

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. 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.    

2.  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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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.

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.

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.

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 3^rd 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.

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.

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.