Please read through the attached packet of scenarios.

For each scenario, write a few sentences with

what you think the person should do and your explanation of why they should follow that course of
action.
 
1) You
 
It is February 1947, and British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin has just told you Britain can no longer
afford to support the Greek government's fight against the communist opposition. Your intelligence
agencies warn that British support is the only thing preventing a communist victory.
 
Advisers urge you to fill the void left by Britain's withdrawal. They warn that if Greece falls to
communism, Turkey could be next, and other nations could follow. But isolationist Republicans in
Congress oppose extending U.S. military and financial resources -- they want to spend the money at
home.
 
Your aides draw up two main options: Ask Congress to fund the fight against communism in Greece and
Turkey; or seek the same support through the United Nations.
 
Where do you go for aid?
 
 
Your Answer: I would support the Britain’s army, and help with the void, and fight against the
communist nation.

What Actually happened:

 
2) You are Joseph Stalin.
 
It is 1947, and the United States and its allies have just announced the European Recovery Program, also
known as the "Marshall Plan."
 
The initial proposal offers aid to all European nations, even the Soviet Union and its socialist allies. The
aid is badly needed: postwar economic conditions are grim throughout Eastern Europe.
 
Your aides are split: some feel the assistance offered by the Marshall Plan could be helpful, while others
view it as a form of financial imperialism.
 
Your goal is to maintain control of your Eastern European neighbors. If you accept Marshall Plan aid or
allow your satellites to accept it, you risk giving the West greater influence in your sphere of authority.
But if you reject the program, you risk provoking resentment among your allies.
What do you do?

Your Answer: I would accept the program, to help improve the Eastern European hemisphere.

What Actually happened:

 
3) You are Joseph Stalin.
 
It is 1949, and it is becoming clear that your blockade of Berlin has been an overwhelming failure. The
British-American airlift has succeeded in supplying enough food and coal to maintain the city for nearly a
year -- and there are no signs of it slowing anytime soon.
 
Perhaps more important, the blockade has been a public relations disaster: Your intelligence agents tell
you that it may be pushing other European nations toward a formal U.S.-European strategic alliance.
Meanwhile, the West's counter-blockade of coal, steel and machine tools is beginning to hurt.
 
If you lift the blockade, you risk losing face by backing down. If you don't, you risk a continuing
counter-blockade and further damage to your international image. If you extend the blockade to the air,
you could end the airlift -- or start World War III.
 
What do you do?

Your Answer: Lifting the blockade is the best choice in this scenario, and having to throw away your
pride is better, then wasting more resources, for another World War.

What Actually happened:

 
4) You are South Korean President Syngman Rhee.
 
It is 1953, and the Korean War has been raging for three years. After several bloody see-saw advances
and retreats, the fighting has ground to a stalemate just north of the 38th parallel, where it all began.
 
Armistice negotiations have resulted in an agreement that would end the war at the current battle lines -- a
net gain for South Korea. Furthermore, U.N. forces would be allowed to remain in South Korea to
protect against future attacks from the North.
 
All the other combatants are ready to sign the agreement. You had hoped to unify North and South
Korea, but the war has taken a devastating toll: Approximately 1 million South Koreans and 2 million
North Koreans have already died in the conflict.
 
What do you do?

Your Answer:

What Actually happened:

 
5) You are a Hollywood screenwriter.
 
It is 1947, and you have just been called before the House Un-American Activities Committee to testify
about communism in Hollywood.
 
In the 1930s, you attended a few Communist Party meetings. After learning more about communist
ideology and about abuses in the Soviet Union, you long ago abandoned any interest in communism. In
fact you consider yourself firmly anti-communist.
 
But now the committee wants you to name the names of the people you saw at those Communist Party
meetings nearly two decades ago. A few of these people are now your friends. And you have already
seen what happens to anyone who is identified as a communist before the committee: They have been
publicly vilified by the committee and blacklisted by the motion picture industry. But if you don't
cooperate, you
could face the same fate.
 
What do you do?

Your Answer:

What Actually happened:

 
6) You are Nikita Khrushchev.
 
It is 1956. After only a couple of years in power you have tried to reform the Moscow regime by
denouncing the Stalinist past and promoting a more progressive brand of communism. But now your
commitment to reform is presenting a dilemma in Poland.
 
After a workers' strikes snowballed into anti-government protests, Polish leaders appear to be making a
bid for increased independence from Moscow. They want to restore Wladyslaw Gomulka to the
Communist Party leadership. You object to this because Gomulka was expelled from the party in 1951 for
supporting Tito's break with Stalin; his reinstatement now would signal unprecedented independence for a
Soviet satellite.
 
To maintain control, you have ordered Soviet troops to advance toward Poland's main cities. Gomulka
declares that if you use force, the Polish army and people will rise up against the Soviet Union. But if
you let him take office, he agrees to remain a loyal member of the Warsaw Pact.
 
You are torn between taking a hard line and sending in the tanks -- as Stalin would have done -- or
backing off, allowing greater independence for Poland and other satellites.
 
What do you do?

Your Answer:

What Actually happened:

 
7) You are Nikita Khrushchev.
 
It is 1960, and your forces have recently downed a U.S. U-2 spy plane. You have already scored a
propaganda coup by forcing President Eisenhower to admit, belatedly, that the plane was on a spy
mission. Now you must decide what to do with the pilot, Francis Gary Powers, who sits in a Soviet
prison awaiting his fate.
 
You could release Powers and hope to score propaganda points by claiming the amnesty demonstrates the
humane and magnanimous nature of the Soviet government. Or, you could put him on trial and hope to
score propaganda points by exposing U.S. espionage efforts.
 
What do you do?

Your Answer:

What Actually happened:

 
8) You are John F. Kennedy.
 
It is 1961, and after only a few months in office you face a challenge from the Soviets. Premier
Khrushchev has issued an ultimatum on Berlin: The Western powers must join the Soviet Union in
signing a peace treaty with the two German states; recognize East Germany; and withdraw from Berlin by
year's end. Western access to Berlin would require East German permission. Any violation of East
German territory would be regarded as an act of aggression.
 
If you don't sign, Khrushchev promises to sign his own treaty with East Germany with substantially the
same terms. The message is clear: Withdraw from West Berlin, or you may be forced to leave.
 
If you call his bluff and stay put, you risk a major confrontation with Moscow -- perhaps even military
conflict. If you withdraw, you risk appearing weak to your allies and to the Soviets, who might respond
with even more provocative policies in the future.
 
What do you do?

Your Answer: In this regard, we must stay put and

What Actually happened:

 
 
9) You are John F. Kennedy.
 
It is October 1962, and you are confronted with a grave crisis. Reconnaissance photographs reveal the
Soviet Union is building offensive missile sites in Cuba. Once deployed, these missiles would have a
range reaching most of the United States, and they could be tipped with nuclear weapons.
 
You convene your most trusted advisers to weigh your options. The group, known as the ExComm,
rejects limited air strikes, fearing they would be ineffective. The discussion turns to three main options:
first, a major air offensive to knock out the missile sites, anti-aircraft units, and the Soviet-Cuban
offensive military capacity; second, an all-out invasion of Cuba; and third, a naval blockade of all future
Soviet arms shipments to Cuba, combined with a demand that all Soviet offensive military installations
on Cuba be removed immediately.
 
You are determined to prevent the deployment of these missiles. Ignoring them is not an option.
 
What do you do?

Your Answer:

What Actually happened:

 
 
10) You are U.S. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara.
 
It is 1964, and the Soviet Union has begun deploying an anti-ballistic missile (ABM) system to protect
the country and its intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). This threatens to destabilize the nuclear
balance: If Soviet ABMs can successfully intercept U.S. ICBMs in flight, before they reach their targets,
Moscow would theoretically have a nuclear advantage in any future Cold War crisis.
 
To counter this threat and restore the nuclear balance, you have three main options. First, the United
States could build its own ABM system. But this would be costly and take time; the system is still in
development. A second option would be to deploy newly developed Multiple Independently Targeted
Re-entry Vehicles (MIRVs) -- which can launch several warheads from a single missile. This could
potentially overwhelm the Soviet ABM system; however, it is an offensive system that would leave your
ICBMs without an ABM defense. A final option would be to try convincing the Soviets, through
negotiations, to abandon their ABM deployment.
 
Which strategy do you choose?

Your Answer:

What Actually happened: