Let History Be The Judge examines leadership styles during the Asia Cold Wars (1945-1975), focusing on the combatant countries of China, Korea (North and South), Vietnam (North and South), the Soviet Union, France, and the United States. These leaders significantly influenced the course of conflicts, frequently making costly mistakes due to their autocratic leadership style, which stifled alternative viewpoints and hampered comprehensive policy evaluation. These mistakes included failing to understand the complexities of conflicts, ignoring diplomacy, and dismissing opposing views. From a historical perspective, this manuscript contends that alternative strategies such as diplomatic negotiations, peaceful coexistence, or regional cooperation could have avoided protracted conflicts and preserved national interests. The analysis also emphasizes the negative consequences of suppressing dissenting voices within government ranks. Open dialogue and respect for different viewpoints would have allowed for a more thorough examination of policy proposals, resulting in more informed decisions. Leaders' decisions during this period significantly impacted their nations and personal legacies. Aggressive leaders faced public criticism and left legacies marred by war's human and financial costs. On the other hand, leaders who sought peaceful solutions left more laudable and lasting legacies. The book concludes that encouraging open dialogue, listening to dissenting voices, and considering alternative strategies can help leaders make better decisions, resolve conflicts, and leave positive, lasting legacies. This understanding is encapsulated in the 1954 dismissed United States State Department Foreign Service Officer John Paton Davies' adage, Let History Be The Judge, when asked about the value of his dissent, which contradicted official U.S. policies on China with proven facts. The maxim suggests that only time can genuinely appraise past decisions.