MacArthur

[wolfclan]

ORIGINAL: Symon

ORIGINAL: oldman45
I remember listening to old marines when I was a kid, they hated Mac because of Peleliu. That campaign was not needed but he insisted.

My friend, I think your old Marine pals were misinformed. Peleliu (the Palaus, Operation Stalemate) was violently opposed by MacArthur.

I agree that it was Nimitz's decision to go with Peleliu, but what is your source for the "violent" opposition by MacArthur? Peleliu was also part of MacArthur's plan. At the last minute, when Halsey proposed cancellation, MacArthur's staff concurred with Nimitz' decision to go ahead (MacArthur was on a flagship under radio silence). This sounds like MacArthur spin after the results become apparent.

[Capt Cliff]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

ORIGINAL: Capt Cliff

ORIGINAL: JeffK

, in WW2 he fought his New Guinea campaign from Melbourne and Brisbane, thousands of miles from the front line.

I think you are misinformed that the WHOLE New Guinea that he was in the Land of Oz. Because Nimitz wasn't in the first wave a Tarawa he was a coward? In Wiki, if you want to believe it, it says he moved his HQ to Port Moresby in November of 1942. Dude if you don't like Yanks just say so, instead of making up stuff about MacArthur just to look like you know history. [8|]

I dont like some Americans, happy.

Advance HQ doesnt mean that Dougout Doug did more than visit. Not questioning courage, just competence.

When did Macarthur make Port Moresby or Lae Or Hollandia his base of operations. Sometime in 1944 just before he moved to The Phillipines

Exactly what was made up????

I also looked at what he did to win 7 Silver Stars, far less than your average Tommy, Poilu, Landser or Digger. I dont doubt his courage, but it appears that even in WW1 he appears to have got special treatment. As for his Bronze Star for landing on Leyte, thats a joke as is IMHO the Medal of Honour he was awarded.

Bovine Scatology!

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: Capt Cliff

ORIGINAL: JeffK

ORIGINAL: Capt Cliff




I think you are misinformed that the WHOLE New Guinea that he was in the Land of Oz. Because Nimitz wasn't in the first wave a Tarawa he was a coward? In Wiki, if you want to believe it, it says he moved his HQ to Port Moresby in November of 1942. Dude if you don't like Yanks just say so, instead of making up stuff about MacArthur just to look like you know history. [8|]

I dont like some Americans, happy.

Advance HQ doesnt mean that Dougout Doug did more than visit. Not questioning courage, just competence.

When did Macarthur make Port Moresby or Lae Or Hollandia his base of operations. Sometime in 1944 just before he moved to The Phillipines

Exactly what was made up????

I also looked at what he did to win 7 Silver Stars, far less than your average Tommy, Poilu, Landser or Digger. I dont doubt his courage, but it appears that even in WW1 he appears to have got special treatment. As for his Bronze Star for landing on Leyte, thats a joke as is IMHO the Medal of Honour he was awarded.

Bovine Scatology!

Care to back that claim up, with, you know, evidence?

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

What makes a flag officer's career has more to do with their staff than their own brilliance, though picking a good staff does reflect on their wisdom. I once read about Patton's staff. When he set out to put one together, he found staff officers who were too unconventional to get along on other staffs and recruited them. They constantly thought outside the box and enabled his units to do great things.

MacArthur had some brilliant staff officers too. SW Pac was full of unconventional people. His operations in New Guinea and New Britain were outstanding feats of logistics and planning. He was overly obsessed with taking back the Philippines, which strategically wasn't necessary. As occupational governor of Japan, he (or someone on his staff) recognized how Japanese society revolved around the emperor and he decided to work that to his advantage. The occupation of Japan was extremely successful with various functions like policing being handed over to civilian control with few problems on an earlier time schedule than most occupations do.

He did turn around the situation in Korea when the UN troops were crammed into the southern tip of the peninsula. However, Mac's massive ego was his eventual downfall.

Bill

I liked Perry's bio on Mac. comparing to Manchester, Hastings, Frank and Gordon, I think he hit a good middle point. Your comment on Cartwheel highlighted a similar point that the author
made....that it being so successful and incorporating some solid concepts, it gets looked over....in part because of Mac's larger than life personality along with other conceptions and biases in the Pacific)

The author's comments on Southerland and Brereton were very thought provoking.

Ultimately I think Mac was an integral part of the US victory in the Pacific, and useful for AE because......there's no variable for EGO.

[Capt Cliff]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Capt Cliff

ORIGINAL: JeffK


I dont like some Americans, happy.

Advance HQ doesnt mean that Dougout Doug did more than visit. Not questioning courage, just competence.

When did Macarthur make Port Moresby or Lae Or Hollandia his base of operations. Sometime in 1944 just before he moved to The Phillipines

Exactly what was made up????

I also looked at what he did to win 7 Silver Stars, far less than your average Tommy, Poilu, Landser or Digger. I dont doubt his courage, but it appears that even in WW1 he appears to have got special treatment. As for his Bronze Star for landing on Leyte, thats a joke as is IMHO the Medal of Honour he was awarded.

Bovine Scatology!

Care to back that claim up, with, you know, evidence?

I did or can't you read?

[Big B]

Well, as was easily foreseen, and as I said above - here we are in the middle of another (2014 version?) of the Great MacArthur Controversy [;)]

One point I'd like to inject here - How often MacArthur visited Bataan is being inferred to demonstrate his disdain for troops, personal courage, and/or poor command ability.
First of all, a Theater Commander's place is at HQ where he can be effective in overseeing operations - not the front lines (admirable as that may be).
So to criticize MacArthur for not frequently visiting Bataan is meaningless. If it is meant to demonstrate a lack of courage - that is way off the mark as is clearly demonstrated by his military activities doing exactly that - both before and after the Philippines campaign.

Another point is to compare him with Halsey - whom no one suggests lacked leadership or courage ...Halsey also only visited Guadalcanal once during his tenure of chief of that operation.

The only thing that his many detractors are able to demonstrate as a negative was his ego - fair enough...he did have an ego. But his personal courage and command ability to win and minimize casualties speak for themselves. I read that MacArthur lost fewer men's lives fighting the entire Pacific War than Eisenhower lost in the Battle of The Bulge.

ORIGINAL: Capt Cliff

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Capt Cliff




Bovine Scatology!

Care to back that claim up, with, you know, evidence?

I did or can't you read?

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: Big B

Well, as was easily foreseen, and as I said above - here we are in the middle of another (2014 version?) of the Great MacArthur Controversy [;)]

One point I'd like to inject here - How often MacArthur visited Bataan is being inferred to demonstrate his disdain for troops, personal courage, and/or poor command ability.
First of all, a Theater Commander's place is at HQ where he can be effective in overseeing operations - not the front lines (admirable as that may be).
So to criticize MacArthur for not frequently visiting Bataan is meaningless. If it is meant to demonstrate a lack of courage - that is way off the mark as is clearly demonstrated by his military activities doing exactly that - both before and after the Philippines campaign.

Another point is to compare him with Halsey - whom no one suggests lacked leadership or courage ...Halsey also only visited Guadalcanal once during his tenure of chief of that operation.

I suppose it comes down to perspective. Halsey was a naval officer with a wider war to fight, of which Guadalcanal was just one small part of.

MacArthur was a Army officer that was instrumental in creating the Bataan mythos. When the American public is being told about the determined resistance at Bataan, certain behaviours are expected of the commander. Perhaps not fighting in a foxhole or laying a cannon personally, but certainly not keeping safe underground.

The only thing that his many detractors are able to demonstrate as a negative was his ego - fair enough...he did have an ego. But his personal courage and command ability to win and minimize casualties speak for themselves. I read that MacArthur lost fewer men's lives fighting the entire Pacific War than Eisenhower lost in the Battle of The Bulge.

It is impossible and stupid to attempt to compare the Pacific with Europe. The nature of the war was different in almost every respect.

[rsallen64]

My take, which is only worth 2 cents even with inflation, is that MacArthur did some things really good, and others really bad. There is no excuse for an ego that deliberately defies those in higher command (such as the President) in a military unit. War is politics by other means, as we know, and in the US, the military is subordinate to the political. Mac's problem was that he thought he was more a genius than anyone, and that entitled him to do what he wanted even if told not to. Every military member takes an oath to defend the constitution, and that specifically states the Prez is the CinC.

They couldn't confine him to a backwater, or cashier him, after the PI disaster because: 1) the media made a hero out of him and his men (with his help) and the US absolutely needed a hero at that point. You can't raise someone to that pinnacle and then simply throw him away; and 2) The people of the Philippines loved him as well, and we needed them. So he stays, and keeps on staying, until his war with Truman in Korea.

Personally, I can't stand the guy, but I don't deny his achievements for the good of the war effort, but then, I don't excuse the failures either. I also saw the movie, and thought it was pretty good.

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Big B
...The only thing that his many detractors are able to demonstrate as a negative was his ego - fair enough...he did have an ego. But his personal courage and command ability to win and minimize casualties speak for themselves. I read that MacArthur lost fewer men's lives fighting the entire Pacific War than Eisenhower lost in the Battle of The Bulge.

It is impossible and stupid to attempt to compare the Pacific with Europe. The nature of the war was different in almost every respect.

Impossible and stupid to compare?

Let's see; here is a comparison for you same 90 day space of time too:

Tarawa - Nov 20-23 1943: Of the roughly 12,000 2nd Marine Division marines on Tarawa, the 2nd Marine Division suffered 978 killed in action, and 2101 wounded.
Nearly all of these casualties were suffered in the 76 hours between the landing at 0910 20 November and the island of Betio being declared secure at 1330 23 November.

Rapido River - Jan 20-22 1944: Of the roughly 6000 men of the 36th Infantry Division who participated in the two-day assault, 2128 became casualties, including 550 dead.

So here we have the same casualty rate for the same type of activity (opposed water landing on a hostile shore), over the same time period - within 90 days of each other - half a world away.

So why is it stupid to compare and draw conclusions?

EDIT: One last bit of food for thought -
I said it before and I'll say it again - MacArthur certainly had an ego. As for his bucking the President, he got fired for that. But we DID hang German and Japanese officers for not following their conscience and bucking their gov didn't we?

[geofflambert]

ORIGINAL: jbdenney

Let me apologize. I am writing this while on pain meds so I an having issues trying to put together words. So bear that in mind if I fail to make sense.

jbdenney

works like a charm every time. [:'(]

[mind_messing]

So why is it stupid to compare and draw conclusions?

22 Divisions were deployed to the Pacific. 61 went to Europe, and that's not including the other Allied nations. The scale of combat was vastly bigger in Europe than in the Pacific. On top of that, you've the fact that during the fighting in Europe, both sides were constantly in contact with each other, whereas in the Pacific fighting occured in short, sharp bursts.

If MacArthur lost fewer men than Eisenhower over a set period, it's because Eisenhower had far more men under his command.

I also find your attempt to draw comparisons between a opposed river crossing at Monte Cassino and the landings at Tarawa. A river crossing does not equal an amphibious operation, plain and simple. The fact that you even attempted to make a comparison between the two only highlights your ignorance.

I could go on and on in to even more minuite detail, but I think my point is firmly made.

I said it before and I'll say it again - MacArthur certainly had an ego. As for his bucking the President, he got fired for that. But we DID hang German and Japanese officers for not following their conscience and bucking their gov didn't we?

Do you think that MacArthur's conduct in the Philippines in 1941-42 was such that he deserved another command after his evacuation?

[Big B]

I won't continue this - after reading your several points and logic - Yes, you have told me all I need to know.

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

So why is it stupid to compare and draw conclusions?

22 Divisions were deployed to the Pacific. 61 went to Europe, and that's not including the other Allied nations. The scale of combat was vastly bigger in Europe than in the Pacific. On top of that, you've the fact that during the fighting in Europe, both sides were constantly in contact with each other, whereas in the Pacific fighting occured in short, sharp bursts.

If MacArthur lost fewer men than Eisenhower over a set period, it's because Eisenhower had far more men under his command.

I also find your attempt to draw comparisons between a opposed river crossing at Monte Cassino and the landings at Tarawa. A river crossing does not equal an amphibious operation, plain and simple. The fact that you even attempted to make a comparison between the two only highlights your ignorance.

I could go on and on in to even more minuite detail, but I think my point is firmly made.

I said it before and I'll say it again - MacArthur certainly had an ego. As for his bucking the President, he got fired for that. But we DID hang German and Japanese officers for not following their conscience and bucking their gov didn't we?

Do you think that MacArthur's conduct in the Philippines in 1941-42 was such that he deserved another command after his evacuation?

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

ORIGINAL: jbdenney

Let me apologize. I am writing this while on pain meds so I an having issues trying to put together words. So bear that in mind if I fail to make sense.

jbdenney

works like a charm every time. [:'(]

[:D] "MacArthur - the missing photographs!"

[Footslogger]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

ORIGINAL: jbdenney

Let me apologize. I am writing this while on pain meds so I an having issues trying to put together words. So bear that in mind if I fail to make sense.

jbdenney

works like a charm every time. [:'(]

Geofflambert!... Pardon Me... General Geofflambert.. are you a Gorn Secret Agent here to help the Japanese win?[:-][:-]

In Addition, since you are a coinsure of Italian wine, how about these tips on opening a bottle: http://msnvideo.msn.com/?channelindex=2 ... 1b8997f880

[geofflambert]

I'm not sure how much coin you want for that, but I am a connoisseur of ethanol products. I let my personal assistant open the containers, though.

edit: I spelled connoisseur wrong the first time too.

or should I say "the first time two" ?