This book examines the Korean War; the paradigm of America's conflicts with communism. He argues that; like so many wars; the Korean War was fought broadly along the lines of the war before; World War II. It shows; however; that the consequences of this error were limited by the State Department. The book examines the roles; leadership; personalities and prejudices of five key commanders - President Harry S. Truman; General Douglas MacArthur; General Matthew B. Ridgway; General Mark W. Clark and Admiral C. Turner Joy. It goes on to look at the crucial issues that confronted them during the conflict: Truman's decision to commit US forces to war without congressional approval; MacArthur's pressure for an assault on Inchon; and the decision to open truce negotiations. The book analyzes the ground-level results and long-term consequences of command decisions; and explores the course the war might have taken had certain crucial decisions been taken differently.
#2548274 in Books 1985-07Ingredients: Example IngredientsOriginal language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.75 x 6.50 x 1.25l; #File Name: 0029077400320 pages
Review
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful. An excellent; scholarly read. A must for all NY historians.By b.dwyer@mail.psyc.memphis.eduDavis has done an excellent job of painting a word picture of 1740s New York City; and its white residents' fears and concerns about slavery. The story of the uncovering of the "plot" and the subsequent executions of 34 people (white and black) is at one once a scholarly piece of work and an adventure tale. My only complaint was that Dr. Davis did not speculate as to the motivations of some of the white "plot leaders." Were Hughson and his wife merely tavern owners who tried to use Blacks for their own personal gain; or were they sympathetic with the plight of the slave and abolitionists 125 years before it was popular? Being a descendant of John Hughson; I was particularly interested in this question. None of my calls to Prof. Davis were returned.4 of 4 people found the following review helpful. Narrative account gives to much credence to biased sourcesBy A CustomerDavis's book seeks to make the history of the events of 1741 more engaging by presenting them in a sort of narrative form. Unfortunately; this method does not allow for the necessary critical analysis. The major resource available to historians studying these events is a journal of the proceedings written by one of the judges in the case; and he wrote his journal for the explicit purpose of defending the proceedings against criticism. While Davis shows some skepticism in his handling of the sources; making the history into a narrative forced Davis to take his biased source a little too much at its word. Nonetheless; it is a fascinating subject and well worth exploring.
