Quite adequate history of the Eisenhower Presidency and post-Presidency. Its strength is that it is not a hagiography. Far from it.

I would not, based on this book at least, rank Eisenhower as a great or near-great President. At best he was a good manager. His failings, which Ambrose did acknowledge, included failing to approach the civil rights movement from a place of morality and integrity, and failing to take a stand on McCarthyism.

I feel that Ambrose was too sympathetic to Eisenhower's ditching long-term allies such as Britain, France and Israel relating to the Suez Crisis of 1956. There was no reason to surrender to history, or presume that Nasser spoke for the Third World. Nasser spoke for himself.

I felt the book was somewhat disorganized. ( )

I like Ike.

Ambrose did an excellent job of discussing the positive contributions of Ike as president and also talking about his failings. Chief of those failings is probably not taking a stronger stand on civil rights issues. When asked his opinion of school segregation being struck down by the Supreme Court he said his job was to enforce the law and he would do so to the best of his ability but that he recognized that you could not pass a law to make people feel a certain way about a subject. His preference was to gradually change the south. At the same time however, he desegregated Washington DC and all of the military so no once can say he did nothing to make things better, only that he did not take a strong public stand on the issues of the day as many wanted to see.

One of the best gifts of the Eisenhower presidency was his military experience. He was asked, nay, begged by his advisors on many occaisions to use nukes. I want to say it there were 5 occasions in one year where DOD and his advisors recommended their use and he said no. I think a man without a military background would have eventually given in to the pressure and followed the military experts' advice at some point. But Ike had seen war himself. He had engaged in a lot of diplomacy with world leaders as the supreme commander in Europe and he was confident in making his own decisions on these matters even when he was practically standing alone against his advisors.

Ike identified himself as a progressive Republican. He did not feel many of the social programs of the New Deal (Social Security) could be repealed. This dismay some of the old guard Republican party. He was very serious about a balanced budget and wary of tax cuts unless they were accompanied by less spending. The only area where he wanted to spend more than many in Congress was foreign aid. He felt communism could be beaten with foreign aid better than with military might and he would rather spend dollars than soldiers.

Ike never really warmed to Nixon. He never felt like matured and grew as a person. He supported his bid for president but it's clear that he would liked to have seen someone better but couldn't find anyone.

Overall a good read though a bit dry.
( )

2089 Eisenhower Volume Two: The President, by Stephen E. Ambrose (read 11 Jul 1987) I really enjoyed this book, which brings back to mind so much that has been significant in my times. The book is carefully researched, and I am surprised how often people, like the Joint Chiefs, recommended military and atomic force. Eisenhower always said no. Furthermore, Eisenhower was trying to cut down on military spending: not like the president we have now who is always trying to spend more on the military. ( )