Selling the Korean War: propaganda, politics, and public opinion in the United States, 1950-1953

2009 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 530-532
Author(s):  
Andrew Preston
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Malcolm MacMillan Craig

<p>This thesis examines the Truman administration's non-use of nuclear weapons during the Korean War, June 1950 to January 1953. It investigates the entirety of the Truman administration's experience of the Korean War, rather than focusing on certain key periods. By examining official documentation, memoirs, newspaper reports, and information about public opinion, this thesis explains why the Truman administration chose not to utilise the atomic arsenal. It examines the opinions and influence of significant decision makers such as President Harry S. Truman, Secretary of State Dean Acheson, and Director of the Policy Planning Staff Paul H. Nitze. Truman, as president and ultimate decision maker, will be paid special attention, not least on account of his unique experience of having ordered the atomic attacks on Japan in 1945. This thesis also looks into the position of high-ranking military officers, such as General Omar N. Bradley, General Hoyt S. Vandenberg, and General Matthew B. Ridgway. In order to explain non-use, this thesis also investigates the influence of foreign allies and foreign opinion, particularly that expressed by the United Kingdom, the United States' most important ally. The role of public opinion within the United States is also considered. By examining in detail all of these factors and building a composite picture of the forces acting upon the administration, this thesis provides a more rounded and nuanced view of non-use by the Truman administration during the Korean War than that offered by the existing scholarship. It demonstrates that non-use was always a complex and problematic matter.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Malcolm MacMillan Craig

<p>This thesis examines the Truman administration's non-use of nuclear weapons during the Korean War, June 1950 to January 1953. It investigates the entirety of the Truman administration's experience of the Korean War, rather than focusing on certain key periods. By examining official documentation, memoirs, newspaper reports, and information about public opinion, this thesis explains why the Truman administration chose not to utilise the atomic arsenal. It examines the opinions and influence of significant decision makers such as President Harry S. Truman, Secretary of State Dean Acheson, and Director of the Policy Planning Staff Paul H. Nitze. Truman, as president and ultimate decision maker, will be paid special attention, not least on account of his unique experience of having ordered the atomic attacks on Japan in 1945. This thesis also looks into the position of high-ranking military officers, such as General Omar N. Bradley, General Hoyt S. Vandenberg, and General Matthew B. Ridgway. In order to explain non-use, this thesis also investigates the influence of foreign allies and foreign opinion, particularly that expressed by the United Kingdom, the United States' most important ally. The role of public opinion within the United States is also considered. By examining in detail all of these factors and building a composite picture of the forces acting upon the administration, this thesis provides a more rounded and nuanced view of non-use by the Truman administration during the Korean War than that offered by the existing scholarship. It demonstrates that non-use was always a complex and problematic matter.</p>


Author(s):  
Gregg A. Brazinsky

This chapter shows how the PRC’s search for greater status brought with it new obligations. China’s desire to stand at the helm of an Eastern revolution compelled the CCP to offer assistance to other Asian revolutionaries. The chapter argues that this mindset was a key factor in Beijing’s decisions to enter the Korean War and provide training and assistance to the Viet Minh. The United States, on the other hand, sought to prevent the PRC from gaining stature through its role in these conflicts. It often cited deflating China’s prestige in Asia as a motive for both fighting on in Korea and aiding the French in Indochina.


Author(s):  
Heike Wieters

Chapter 3 is a case study on CARE’s work in Korea during and after the Korean War. It traces CARE’s response to a presidential aid appeal in the United States, shows how American NGOs competed for donor dollars and media attention. In addition, it depicts the difficulties private humanitarian players encountered in a foreign setting involving a refugee crisis and a tight web of players with different stakes, meaning military players, Korean and United States government agencies, United Nations organizations as well as diverse foreign aid agencies.


2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suhi Choi

Abstract Since its fiftieth anniversary, memorialization of the Korean War has taken place in towns and cities across the United States. As a case study of this belated memory boom, this essay looks at the Utah Korean War Memorial, erected by local veterans in 2003 at Memory Grove Park, Salt Lake City. Situated in both the local and national contexts of remembrance, the memorial resonates largely with three mythical scripts, with themes of resilience, local pride, and the good war, all of which have allowed veterans to negotiate tensions between individual and collective memories. This case study reveals in particular how the official commemoration of the war has shifted local veterans' rhetorical positions from potential witnesses of subversive realities of the war to uncritical negotiators whose legitimization of the very process of mythologizing memories has ultimately alienated them from their own experiences during and after the war.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document