Ask the Scholar
Page 3 of 17
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
10/10/53 - Reel 2, track 2 - Page 3
MR. NITZE: interested in was the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the military
viewpoint. The Secretary of Defense's office could contribute
only. really, a civilian and a political vievpoint on certain
of these issues, and the escential thing from our standpoint was
what were the military realities of the question, and that w
e
could only get from the military fellows. What we really wanted
was a military viewpoint. As far as the Joint Chiefs of Staff
were concerned, what they wanted, really, was a responsible
TRUMANE ADMIN. ECORDS For
political viewpoint, and that they could get from the Secretary
Es
of State and the State Department, and they could not get from
the Department of Defense. So that there was a natural tendency
for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff and the
military boys to work together, because they had something to
contribute to each other, which short-circuited the Secretary
of Defense's office. It impinged upon his difficulties of
control over the military establishment, and I think it was in
reaction to this that Louis Johnson put down this order that
nobody in the State Department was to talk to anybody in the
military services without his permission, because he felt that
if the military and the State Department got together, maybe
they would come up with something which was right, but his
jurisdictional position was definitely undermined thereby.
MR. JOHNSON: This is Johnson again. I wonder if this isn't a problem then
of the civilian control of the military as much as it is a
problem of the organization of the Defense Department, because
Page data
- Page
- 3
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- photo
- Media ID
- d3c43a09d0db3141
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 75850569
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "75850569",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75850569",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Transcript of Princeton Seminars Discussion, Reel 2, Track 2",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75850569",
"collections": [
"Dean Acheson Papers",
"Princeton Seminars Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722161-04-01.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722161-04-01.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722161-04-01.jpg",
"imageCount": 17,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "75850569",
"label": "Transcript of Princeton Seminars Discussion, Reel 2, Track 2",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75850569"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "75850569",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75850569",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Transcript of Princeton Seminars Discussion, Reel 2, Track 2",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75850569",
"collections": [
"Dean Acheson Papers",
"Princeton Seminars Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722161-04-01.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722161-04-01.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722161-04-01.jpg",
"imageCount": 17,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75850569",
"naId": 75850569,
"levelOfDescription": "item",
"productionDates": [
{
"day": 10,
"logicalDate": "1953-10-10",
"month": 10,
"year": 1953
}
],
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 3,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "photo",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722161-04-03.jpg",
"mediaId": "d3c43a09d0db3141",
"ocrText": "10/10/53 - Reel 2, track 2 - Page 3\nMR. NITZE: interested in was the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the military\nviewpoint. The Secretary of Defense's office could contribute\nonly. really, a civilian and a political vievpoint on certain\nof these issues, and the escential thing from our standpoint was\nwhat were the military realities of the question, and that w\ne\ncould only get from the military fellows. What we really wanted\nwas a military viewpoint. As far as the Joint Chiefs of Staff\nwere concerned, what they wanted, really, was a responsible\nTRUMANE ADMIN. ECORDS For\npolitical viewpoint, and that they could get from the Secretary\nEs\nof State and the State Department, and they could not get from\nthe Department of Defense. So that there was a natural tendency\nfor the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff and the\nmilitary boys to work together, because they had something to\ncontribute to each other, which short-circuited the Secretary\nof Defense's office. It impinged upon his difficulties of\ncontrol over the military establishment, and I think it was in\nreaction to this that Louis Johnson put down this order that\nnobody in the State Department was to talk to anybody in the\nmilitary services without his permission, because he felt that\nif the military and the State Department got together, maybe\nthey would come up with something which was right, but his\njurisdictional position was definitely undermined thereby.\nMR. JOHNSON: This is Johnson again. I wonder if this isn't a problem then\nof the civilian control of the military as much as it is a\nproblem of the organization of the Defense Department, because"
}