NSC-68 led to a rapid build-up of defense resources in the U.S. The goal was to prevent war with the Soviet Union by building up
weapons. If you were a political leader at the time, would you have argued in favor of this strategy, more aggressive tactics, or more peaceful tactics? Explain.
(This is an opinionated question so there actually is no right or wrong answer. I will put what <em>I </em>would have answered, and you can change it up it's not what you would put :] )
Explanation:
I would have chosen more peaceful tactics. Though it's true that the Soviet Union may have went against any peace treaties as they have plenty of times, it's ultimately a better option than spending all our time and money, that could be better spent on other things within our country, on stockpiling weapons. It has been useful in being a reminder to other countries not to test the U.S., but it's also cost a lot of money that could be put towards better causes.
