The Real War

Rating:
Summary: A crystal clear examination of the Cold War.
Review: An excellent book. Mr. Nixon spelled out the realities of the Cold War conflict, the true nature of our Soviet adversary, and the steps necessary to win the conflict and prevent the devastating consequences of full scale military conflict.

The veracity of this work is borne out by the subsequent actions of the Reagan administration to call the Soviets' bluff and force the collapse of their empire.

Even in today's post Cold War era, this book should be read not only for its explanation of our past but also for its additional guidance in dealing with the hazards of today. The lessons from this work shed a stark light on the current administration's actions in military and diplomatic affairs.

Rating:
Summary: A Blueprint for victory in the Cold War
Review: The Real War, written in 1979, was a rallying cry for a declining and struggling United States. The U.S. was still trying to overcome the tragedies of Vietnam and Watergate and, to make matters worse, the Soviet Union appeared to have gained the iniative in the Cold War. The Soviets had expanded into Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America and were drawing on those nations vast natural resources. During these trying times, Americans were looking for strength from their leadership but, unfortunately, President Jimmy Carter could not provide it. Rather than respond to Soviet aggression, Carter refused to stand up to the Soviets and allowed them to globally expand. Furthermore, inflation from the Great Society and Vietnam had devastated the economy and Carter's approval ratings fell to 20%. When the Soviet backed Khomeini took U.S. hostages at the Iranian Embassy, Carter approved a failed rescue operation that stunned the nation and led to his malaise speech, in which he claimed that the U.S. was in a state of crisis and he did not know what to do.

Although a former President, Nixon put his prolific grasp of foreign policy and his understanding of the Soviets into action. Having fought the Cold War for 40 years, Nixon knew and understood the Soviets and his analogy, that the Soviets pick 'soft' targets, was amazingly accurate. These soft, or easy targets, were picked due to the fact that the Soviets knew that the U.S. would not respond. Thus, the Soviets expanded in the 1970s because they knew that Carter would not respond and, after the divisions of Vietnam, the Soviets and many U.S. citizens did not believe that the U.S. could respond. Essentially, it was widely held that the U.S. was no longer a world power and that it could not compete globally with the Soviets.

Nixon's experience taught him that if the U.S. responded with decisive force and determination that the Soviets would back off because they knew that they could not compete economically and militarily with the U.S. Nixon also spells out the dangers of the expanding Soviet Union, declaring that if the U.S.S.R. was able acquire oil from the Middle East, the natural resources in Africa and Latin America, than it would have a decisive advantage against the free world. After all, at the time, 100% of Japan's oil, 75% of Europe's oil, and 50% of the U.S.'s oil was from the Middle East and if the Soviets were able to cut off that resource from the Western World, than the Soviets could subject the West to its bidding.

Although the "wars of Liberation" that the communists claimed to be fighting often sounded ideal, these wars always resulted in totalitarianism. For instance, Nixon cites the people of Vietnam who discovered that communist liberation usually resulted in death, re-education camps, flawed economic systems, poverty, and most importantly, the loss of civil liberties. Thus, the only way to avoid this totalitarianism was for the United States to lead and use deterence against Soviet expansion.

Historically, the concept of responding with decisive force is almost a blueprint for Reagan's foreign policy. Reagan was able to reunite the country and slowly rebuild confidence in the military and in the U.S.'s national will. In the 1980s, Reagan met the expansion of communism with force: he liberated Grenada in less than a day, aided anti-communists in Latin America, and took a strong stand with Israel against Soviet financed and armed terrorist groups. And, just as Nixon predicted, if the Soviets were stood up to at 'soft targets,' they would stop expanding. And this is exactly what happened.

In the Real War, history will concur that Mr. Nixon's revelations were indeed correct and were integral in the U.S.'s defeat of Communism. After all, if not for Nixon's ideas embraced by Reagan, the Soviets may have expanded and have been able to funnel the economic resources of Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East into its own economy and we might still be fighting the Cold War today. The Real War is highly reccomended to any reader but should be a mandatory book for all students of history and political science!

Rating:
Summary: A Blueprint for victory in the Cold War
Review: The Real War, written in 1979, was a rallying cry for a declining and struggling United States. The U.S. was still trying to overcome the tragedies of Vietnam and Watergate and, to make matters worse, the Soviet Union appeared to have gained the iniative in the Cold War. The Soviets had expanded into Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America and were drawing on those nations vast natural resources. During these trying times, Americans were looking for strength from their leadership but, unfortunately, President Jimmy Carter could not provide it. Rather than respond to Soviet aggression, Carter refused to stand up to the Soviets and allowed them to globally expand. Furthermore, inflation from the Great Society and Vietnam had devastated the economy and Carter's approval ratings fell to 20%. When the Soviet backed Khomeini took U.S. hostages at the Iranian Embassy, Carter approved a failed rescue operation that stunned the nation and led to his malaise speech, in which he claimed that the U.S. was in a state of crisis and he did not know what to do.

Although a former President, Nixon put his prolific grasp of foreign policy and his understanding of the Soviets into action. Having fought the Cold War for 40 years, Nixon knew and understood the Soviets and his analogy, that the Soviets pick 'soft' targets, was amazingly accurate. These soft, or easy targets, were picked due to the fact that the Soviets knew that the U.S. would not respond. Thus, the Soviets expanded in the 1970s because they knew that Carter would not respond and, after the divisions of Vietnam, the Soviets and many U.S. citizens did not believe that the U.S. could respond. Essentially, it was widely held that the U.S. was no longer a world power and that it could not compete globally with the Soviets.

Nixon's experience taught him that if the U.S. responded with decisive force and determination that the Soviets would back off because they knew that they could not compete economically and militarily with the U.S. Nixon also spells out the dangers of the expanding Soviet Union, declaring that if the U.S.S.R. was able acquire oil from the Middle East, the natural resources in Africa and Latin America, than it would have a decisive advantage against the free world. After all, at the time, 100% of Japan's oil, 75% of Europe's oil, and 50% of the U.S.'s oil was from the Middle East and if the Soviets were able to cut off that resource from the Western World, than the Soviets could subject the West to its bidding.

Although the "wars of Liberation" that the communists claimed to be fighting often sounded ideal, these wars always resulted in totalitarianism. For instance, Nixon cites the people of Vietnam who discovered that communist liberation usually resulted in death, re-education camps, flawed economic systems, poverty, and most importantly, the loss of civil liberties. Thus, the only way to avoid this totalitarianism was for the United States to lead and use deterence against Soviet expansion.

Historically, the concept of responding with decisive force is almost a blueprint for Reagan's foreign policy. Reagan was able to reunite the country and slowly rebuild confidence in the military and in the U.S.'s national will. In the 1980s, Reagan met the expansion of communism with force: he liberated Grenada in less than a day, aided anti-communists in Latin America, and took a strong stand with Israel against Soviet financed and armed terrorist groups. And, just as Nixon predicted, if the Soviets were stood up to at 'soft targets,' they would stop expanding. And this is exactly what happened.

In the Real War, history will concur that Mr. Nixon's revelations were indeed correct and were integral in the U.S.'s defeat of Communism. After all, if not for Nixon's ideas embraced by Reagan, the Soviets may have expanded and have been able to funnel the economic resources of Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East into its own economy and we might still be fighting the Cold War today. The Real War is highly reccomended to any reader but should be a mandatory book for all students of history and political science!