Name : Intan Nabila Putri Amelia

Student ID : 016202005023
Course : US Foreign Policy – International Relations Batch 2020

THE ORIGINS OF MASSIVE RETALIATION

Public opinion supported Truman's decision to take action against the United States in June 1950. The
Korean invasion is mainly investigated by the military. The same is true of the large and expensive
armed forces that the government mobilized after the war. However, in 1952, the thirst for war and
weapons decreased significantly. Discouraged voters and Republicans use it together during the
bloody war in Korea. In addition to investing in the Truman crisis, Eisenhower received support based
on his promise of a continuing process of political reform. One is a commitment to reducing public
spending in general, and security spending in particular. The military budget, which accounts for about
70 percent of federal spending, focuses primarily on reducing the deficit.

While all republics can agree on the need for budget cuts, forming a new foreign policy consensus is
not easy. This process requires a delicate balance. Eisenhower, however, will have to weigh in on the
stronghold of the party led by Senator Robert Taft, which Republicans opposed in the presidential
election. Taft and his supporters, known as "members", found that Democrats were more interested in
international cooperation (especially NATO) and were reluctant to seek international cooperation.
Eisenhower, on the other hand, took into account the "international" wing of the party, which he
recognized, and was firmly committed to the importance of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
and the defense of Europe. This equation is further complicated by the pressure to implement truly
innovative strategies. Bilateral foreign policy has also lost the interest of international activists due to
the bitterness of US engagement in Korea, and after twenty years of democratic control of the White
House, some are content with policies that are clearly not moving forward.

An interesting phrase in the context of strategic dialogue is that great revenge is more symbolic than
literal. Key members of the Eisenhower administration were concerned about American progress.
They used words to do things. Nuclear power system energy efficiency before development.
Eisenhower and his colleagues emphasized the purpose and usefulness of force in a different way than
their Truman colleagues. For example, the leaders of the Republican Republic, the Soviet Union, and
the People’s Republic of China rejected the U.S. nuclear deal. They found that the present prevented
it. The development of nuclear power is a kind of strategy for the Korean War, capable of overcoming
any other multifaceted challenge. In fact, when the Republicans were in power for a year, they cut
Eisenhower. He acknowledged that international conditions had changed by early 1953 and the United
States had relied on nuclear weapons as its primary means of war, but Truman's planners in early 1956
saw no relevance in this.called the Korean War, but they have no ancestor at all. These changes did
not diminish that the Eisenhower administration obtained nuclear and strategic forces from the
Democrats on terms.

Therefore, it is important not to call it a major change. In the world of national security, experts call it
the "voice of color." But while this is "unfair" to the government, there are two major benefits of
retaliation. And violence. It has affected national security. The Great Rebellion is a good example of
a high and rising Republican. He did a lot of politics before joining the Kennedy administration. When
Democrats came to power in 1961, they returned to the Eisenhower service provided to Democrats
last year. Not surprisingly, Kennedy's mission was to implement the new concept of "simplicity" that
his leaders had begun to develop.