Current research, which, as camille said, is how the u. S. Army as an institution was trying to manage a crisis that its leaders perceived during the war in vietnam, a crisis around race. As i imagined almost all of you know, the u. S. War in vietnam was the first major conflict that the United States thoughts from the beginning was a a racially integrated armed force. Through much of the war, the process was treated as a great success. In combat, it almost without exception was. But by the end of the 1960s, army leaders were talking about the war within the war and trying to figure out how to manage a racial crisis that they saw as starting to tear the army apart. My research right now is trying to think about how this massive institution tried to manage a racial crisis. I look at the theories of series of actions the army took, a whole variety of actions that range from the predictable actions of education and training, to an emphasis on cultural sensitivity, to visible leadership an
York Historical Society and has traveled here. It was a real pleasure to work on that, and i hope that you will get a chance to see it. Its an interesting exhibit. Today im going to talk about my current research, which, as camille said, is how the u. S. Army as an institution was trying to manage a crisis that its leaders perceived during the war in vietnam, a crisis around race. As i imagined almost all of you know, the u. S. War in vietnam was the first major conflict that the United States thoughts from the beginning was a racially integrated armed force. Through much of the war, the process was treated as a great success. In combat, it almost without exception was. But by 1960, army leaders were talking about the war within the war and trying to figure out how to manage a racial crisis that they saw as starting to tear the army apart. My research right now is trying to think about how this massive institution tried to manage a racial crisis. I look at the theories of actions the a