The Pros And Cons Of The Korean War

With the victory at the conclusion of World War II, Americans experienced an all time high and viewed Dwight D. Eisenhower, Presidential candidate, as a savior—the man who defeated Nazi leader Adolf Hitler, and the man who ended the Korean War (after becoming President). Despite his early success, it soon became one of his administrations to avoid long, expensive, and inconclusive wars similar to Korea. While doing this, they also intended to balance the budget and control taxes and inflation. This became a challenge with increased hostilities between the United States and the Soviet Union. They set out to accomplish these missions through a strategy of both worldwide alliances and overwhelming and advanced technology. Eisenhower prioritized the development of nuclear arms and vessels with which to utilize them as it would be a more cost effective and sustainable than to fund a large standing …show more content…
should be seen as a kind of ‘bargaining’ process… each side bargained with the other about… the ground rules...by deliberately escalating the conflict a certain amount but not more or by ostentatiously holding itself to some particularly obvious limitation.” One of these obvious limitations could be an escalation to an atomic war. In order to achieve this however, critics of Massive Retaliation noted that a conventional ground force would be a necessity. Other critics of the deterrence strategy, many of them foreign allies, doubted America’s resolve to escalate to a nuclear war in defense of a city not even in America. As a result of such criticisms, a new plan known as “Flexible Response” was developed. Once again, a strategy of deterrence this time however, the resulting counterattack would not necessarily be of such a mass scale. It could be anything from ground troops inadvertently drawn in (driving America to participate) to a full scale nuclear