Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Truman vs Macarthur korean war
U. S. involvement in the Korean War
U. S. involvement in the Korean War
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Truman vs Macarthur korean war
Somebody ... Wanted ... But ... So ...
North Korea Want all of Korea under the Communist Rule together as a whole They were stopped by reinforcements, United States and United Nations, which caused a hold up in the progress Korean War began
General MacArthur Defeated the Koreans Truman did not allow that because they had certain orders to follow He gained permission to attack them without them knowing, while others still fought in the front line
President Truman To win the war by the correct way, which used less violence MacArthur had other ideas, and he did his own thing and ignored President Truman Truman took away MacArthur’s leadership of being a General and sent him home
China Safe zone so they had peace to do their work China worried that the US would break into China if the US and South Korea were
…show more content…
Each response must be in your own words and in complete sentences as well as include evidence from the lesson.
1. How did General Douglas MacArthur react to the events in Korea? What was his stance on the Korean War?
General Douglas MacArthur reacted to the events in Korea by thinking he could do anything he wanted to them because he was liked by the American people. He wanted to stop Korea entering China.
2. How did President Truman respond to the events in Korea? What was his stance on the Korean War?
President Truman was not happy about the events in Korea. He wanted everything to end right away, and that things have gotten out of control.
3. Which leader's actions were the most justifiable—General McArthur's or President Truman's? Support your claim with evidence from the lesson.
I think President Truman’s actions were more justifiable because he pulled the plug on MacArthur when he got out of control in Korea.
4. Would the outcome of the Korean War have been different had General MacArthur not been fired? Why or why not? Support your claim with evidence from the
I believe that President Truman saw what the African American troops were going through and I guess he felt that it was time that Americans should be integrated and no more “separate but equal”.
The Korean War changed the face of American Cold War diplomacy forever. In the midst of all the political conflict and speculation worldwide, the nation had to choose between two proposed solutions, each one hoping to ensure that communism didn?t sweep across the globe and destroy American ideals of capitalism and democracy. General Douglas MacArthur takes the pro-active stance and says that, assuming it has the capability, the U.S. should attack communism everywhere. President Harry Truman, on the other hand, believed that containing the Soviet communists from Western Europe was the best and most important course of action, and that eliminating communism in Asia was not a priority.
The United States vows to protect the democratic South Korea. American forces defend South Korea but are almost pushed on the peninsula . Douglas Mccarthur is in charge of the American forces. He stages an impressive counter attack that pushes the North Koreans all the way back to China. This is when China enters the warand pushes American forces back to the 38Th parallel. In 1953 , the war ended In a stalemate. (document C)
His coercive and informational power, however, were not as effective. His coercive power and defensive approach made it challenging to connect with his civilian leadership, which caused many disagreements between the two. His informational power was the deciding factor for President Truman to relieve General MacArthur for insubordination. President Truman’s legitimate power and referent power were effective in that his subordinates respected him, and most of the time supported his decisions. He coercive power was effective in the end when he relieved General
The first reason on why Truman made the right decision was because the atomic bomb ultimately helped to prevent the deaths of American troops. There would have been over 100,000 losses during the first stage of the attack against Japan, leading to over one million casualties of just Americans during the defeat of Japan(Tucker 1). Although there is no way to confirm the amount of predicted deaths, any amount of American deaths would have been avoided with the use of the atomic bomb. Comparing a million predicted deaths of Americans to the 140,000 (±10,000) that were actually killed in the Hiroshima bomb(Faragher 4), the decision implementing the bomb was executed in the correct way.
Offner, Arnold. “‘Another Such Victory’: President Truman, American Foreign Policy, and the Cold War.” Taking Sides: Clashing Views On Controversial Issues in United States History. Ed. Larry Madaras and James M. SoRelle. 14th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2011. 291-301.
Throughout history, there have been countless wars between different groups of people because of race, religion, economic basis, and endless other reasons. More often than not the party that initiated the war was not justified in doing so based on Douglas Lackey’s “just war theory”. One action initiated by the United States that has been furiously debated since the decision was made is the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, and later Nagasaki. While some argue that President Harry S. Truman was wrong in making the decision that he did, I will be arguing that he was correct in deciding to drop an atomic bomb on Hiroshima because there is clear evidence that shows his actions were justified with both statistical proof as well as that the choice coincides with the criteria for “just war theory”.
Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on the Japanese cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, proved to be the best he could have made considering the position he and America were in and due to the fact that it prevented worse tragedies from occurring. The dropping of the atomic bomb had many positive effects. For one thing, the end of the war would not have been coming soon if Truman had not ordered the bombs to be dropped. The dropping of the bombs did cause tragedy and death, but not as bad as the death rate would have been if the bombs had not been dropped. It all boils down to this: if you were in President Harry S. Truman’s position, would you have let the world’s deadliest war prevail until there was no one left to
During 1950 there was much opposition to the thought of ending the Korean War. While the United States of America and the United Nations Command sought out to peacefully end the war, both North Korea and South Korea were hell-bent towards unifying the Korean peninsula in their own image. While at this time South Korea, was an ally of
On June 25, 1950 the North Korean army attacked South Korea, crossing the 38th Parallel. Pentagon officials were stunned, and had no immediate contingency plan ready. Some said little could be done, while others suggested it was the beginning of Stalin's plot to take over the world. Truman and his circle of advisers sat firmly in this latter group. Immediately upon the invasion, these advisors discussed the prospect of sending General Douglas MacArthur, the US commander in the Far East, to lead a military response.
Both sides of the war had suffered tremendous losses and the numbers would have continued to grow over the course of the war. By choosing to drop the atomic bomb on Japan, I believe the lives saved in the long run outweigh the initial number of lives lost. There is no way to put a price of one human life against another, but the total number of deaths prevented could have been multitudes compared to the hundred thousand killed in the atomic blasts. From the numbers alone, I support President Truman’s utilitarian
General Douglas MacArthur also believed that the dropping of the atomic bombs were militarily unjustified. He thought the war could have need ended wit...
To choose whether or not it was morally sound to use the atomic bomb, we must first examine the background as to what circumstances it was dropped under. In 1945, American soldiers and civilians were weary from four years of war, yet the Japanese military was refusing to give up their fight. American forces occupied Okinawa and Iwo Jima and intensely fire bombed Japanese cities. But Japan had an army of 2 million strong stationed in the home islands guarding against Allied invasion. After the completion of the Manhattan Project, For Truman, the choice whether or not to use the atomic bomb was the most difficult decision of his life. First, an Allied demand for an immediate unconditional surrender was made to the leadership in Japan. Although the demand stated that refusal would result in total destruction, no mention of any new weapons of mass destruction was made. The Japanese military commander Hideki Tojo rejected the request for unconditional s...
To what extent was Harry Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki justified?
Historian Robert James Maddox starts the debate by siding with Truman and states that he made the right decision in dropping the bomb. Maddox uses several influential meetings, speculations and the presidents’ personal opinions on the situation to defend his statement. Some examples he uses include, Japanese military power and mentality, saving American lives, and unconditional surrender. In short, because the use of the atomic bomb occurred, the Japanese military lost their lust to fight to the end, countless lives were saved, and Japan surrendered. Therefore, although many Japanese lives were lost in the conflict the right decision was made by Harry Truman to authorize the usage of the bombs.