From Library Journal
Did President Kennedy, as military historian Newman convincingly but not conclusively writes, plan to withdraw from Vietnam once safely reelected? Making use of thousands of recently reclassified documents, Newman reveals that by the spring of 1963, Kennedy had not only planned to pull out, but had discussed this with two vociferous opponents of American commitment--Senators Mike Mansfield and Wayne Morse. Notably, Newman portrays two competing factors in the military, State and Defense Departments, operating in a politically charged atmosphere, generated a false, overly optimistic spin about the strength of the South Vietnamese army, which jeopardized attempts at rational policy development. This perceptive, challenging book contributes to the ongoing debate of Kennedy as cold warrior or visionary, and is a worthy addition for most public libraries. Conversely, Ball's study of group communications among key Kennedy and Johnson advisors views Kennedy as the chief architect of escalation. Both administrations suffered from poor communications and policy caused by conflict, confusion, and vacillation and by a perceived social reality of a "male-dominated war divided into heroes and villains." Ball fails to establish credible positive correlations between the words and actions of these policymakers. By removing communication from its political context and idiomatic usage, she at times arrives at obvious assumptions such as Johnson's conjuring up Wild West images to apply to communist leaders, or that loyalty to the assassinated Kennedy extended into the Johnson administration. While this study may be of possible use to specialized academic communications collections, all other libraries can pass.
- Karl Helicher, Upper Merion Twp . Lib., King of Prussia, Pa.Copyright 1992 Reed Business Information, Inc.
Review
“Did President Kennedy, as military historian Newman convincingly but not conclusively writes, plan to withdraw from Vietnam once safely reelected? Making use of thousands of recently reclassified documents, Newman reveals that by the spring of 1963, Kennedy had not only planned to pull out, but had discussed this with two vociferous opponents of American commitment--Senators Mike Mansfield and Wayne Morse. Notably, Newman portrays two competing factors in the military, State and Defense Departments, operating in a politically charged atmosphere, generated a false, overly optimistic spin about the strength of the South Vietnamese army, which jeopardized attempts at rational policy development. This perceptive, challenging book contributes to the ongoing debate of Kennedy as cold warrior or visionary, and is a worthy addition for most public libraries. Conversely, Ball's study of group communications among key Kennedy and Johnson advisors views Kennedy as the chief architect of escalation. Both administrations suffered from poor communications and policy caused by conflict, confusion, and vacillation and by a perceived social reality of a "male-dominated war divided into heroes and villains." Ball fails to establish credible positive correlations between the words and actions of these policymakers. By removing communication from its political context and idiomatic usage, she at times arrives at obvious assumptions such as Johnson's conjuring up Wild West images to apply to communist leaders, or that loyalty to the assassinated Kennedy extended into the Johnson administration. While this study may be of possible use to specialized academic communications collections, all other libraries can pass.”–
Library Journal“. . . Vietnam-on-the-Potomac is worthwhile reading for military leaders at all levels. It provides a microcosm of group behavioral processes that can ultimately influence leader behavior and determine leader decisions, either good or bad. Her presentation is clear, concise and well documented. The group behaviors she discusses occur at all organizational levels and can affect leader behavior no matter what the rank or level of experience--no one is immune.”–
Military Review“Vietnam-on-the-Potomac is well written, informative, and an unparalleled, well-researched source for what went on ``inside the Beltway.'' The discussion of the White House debates over the Diem coup in 1963, for example, is exceptional, superbly documented, and clearly explained. Perhaps the book's most valuable contribution, however, is made in confronting the ``conventional wisdom'' that President Kennedy tried everything to keep American troops out of Vietnam, while President Johnson did everything possible to get them there.”–
ARMOR