Towards the end of the war, no country had actually launched an attack on one another. In that same way, this reviewer feel the central idea of the book was that the Cold War brought an end to the use of military strength and ability as the perfect definitions of power as perceived five years before the start of Cold War. Gaddis also inspects some of the famous and important people who helped to resolve the war that had changed. Gaddis focuses on the Cuban errors of Nikita Khrushchev which resorted in President Kennedy misinterpreting and almost went to war. Khrushchev slipped rocket-fired weapons into Cuba, mostly as an effort to spread revolution throughout Latin America. Gaddis focuses on the early-1980s when Reagan 's was re-supplying with guns, missiles, etc and repeated attention-getting talk to the 'Evil Empire ' which caused Moscow to believe that America had advanced plans for a nuclear strike this way the need to prepare would be in that same way. Gaddis also focuses on Dwight Eisenhower 's skillful efforts to avoid a nuclear conflict. For example, Gaddis provides a …show more content…
He develops his arguments by relating to thinking about how people think and idea-based explanations of why things work or happen the way they do and the opinions of different history experts. However, he seems to have be bias by presenting the United States as the innocent party while the Soviet Union is the Evil Empire. Despite these faults, the argument is forceful well researched and supported by excellent governmental information that was received storehouses of old