Ive been listening to Dan Carlin's newest podcast of "Hardcore History", history fans should really check it out. His latest podcast is entitled "The Destroyer of Worlds" which talks about the Nuclear Age of the world from 1945-1962. His first 2/3 of the program focuses on 1946-1952, and the Truman response to the new world. Carlin pretty much leans toward the argument that the US government abruptly changed due to the atomic question, and the Truman administration was caught learning on the go. But he also leans that Truman may in fact be the best president in the Cold War until Ronald Reagan because of the political pressure of furthering the nuclear program and the determination to avoid WWIII at all costs with generals like Patton, MacArthur, and Lemay itching at the bit to fight another total war. Harry Truman has often been criticized for multiple things such as not wiping the Russians of the face of the earth when they weren't an atomic power before 1949, Firing Mac, and not listening to Oppenheimer on the Hydrogen Bomb. But do those criticisms miss the point that Carlin suggests in that the overall goal was to avoid a 3rd World War at all costs.
So is Truman actually one of the best presidents, or he was he a weak one?
So is Truman actually one of the best presidents, or he was he a weak one?
Last edited:
Does everything have to devolve to Trump or Obama ? I don't know if Harry was promoting his daughter's career as much as lambasting the music critic. That is a good point, however. Imagine the reaction if President Trump sent a similar letter to someone.:eek2:
