Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Douglas MacArthur - A brilliant commander or a pathetic faker?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Douglas MacArthur - A brilliant commander or a pathetic faker?

    Ever since I study US history, I have learned of the name of Douglas MacArthur - the brilliant commander who had led us to victory in the Pacific... But as I have read more on the subject, I discovered that there is a dark history of this man in which not many Americans know about...

    This is a thread in which ask for your opinions of MacArthur, is he the hero who had defeated the Japanese or is he a con artist who was able to gain fame only because of his political connections?

    I'm going to post what I know, and what my opinions are first.

    The following are some of the errors that MacArthur made that I studied:

    1. During his time as the Field Marshal in the Philippines, he had boosted to Washington that his defence were up to speed, with 10 well equipped divisions, as well as a number of forifications. It turns out he has no more than 5 understrength divisions in which were ill-equiped and improper trained for combat.

    2. MacArthur had managed to convince a number of key players in Washington that Japanese would not attempt to invade Philippines as it is worthless for Japan. But it turns out that Philippines was one of the primarily objectivce of the Japanese, as it serve as the springboard for them to invade South Pacific, as Philippines lay right in the middle of everything (ex. Malaysia, Dutch East Indians, Austrialia...).

    3. Error 1 and 2 had led Washington to make a strategic mistake. Philippines was first considered indefenceable, and was planned to be abandoned altogether. However, thanks to MacArthur's analyazation, Philippines was now going to be held till the Allies counterattack. Marshall was going to ship a few American Divisions over to Philippines, but MacArthur refused and maintained that his defence are adaqute.

    4. After the bombing of Pearl Harbour, the entire Pacific was put on alert. MacArthur's air chief (forgot his name, don't have the book with me) had got all his bombers fueled, armed, ready to go, and went to MacArthur for approval to bomb the Japanese airfield in Taiwan (in which was the plan that MacArthur himself drafted). He went to MacArthur 3 times, but didn't even get the permission to see him, MacArthur's chief of staff had turned him around. The result was sad, almost all of the US planes were destroyed on the ground by the Japanese "first strike".

    5. During the Japanese invasion of Philippines, MacArthur had not properly reinforce his front units. The main Japanese landing occurs in Bataan, but Mac thought the Japanese would come from the East. Not only he had kept most of his tanks (one tank BN, he only release 3, I think) in his pocket, he had denied all supplies to Bataan, for some reasons that we still don't know today. The troops in Bataan under general Mainwright (I think that is his name) were starved, out of ammo, out of medical supplies, were even ordered by Mac not to confisiate ANY supplies from the civilian population, including the JAPANESE OWNED WAREHOUSEs that would have fed the army for at least a month. Most of the soldiers in the Bataan, whom, along with Mainwright, had surrendered to the Japanese, and had parpiculate in the infamous Bataan Death Match, were cursing MacArthur. (A song was made about that)

    6. Philippines was the single worst military disaster in the US history. 124 planes destroyed on the ground, 77,000 troops captured by the enemy, the largest surrender of the Americans in history. And for all that, MacArthur, instead of being dismissed like the commanders in Pearl Harbour, he was awarded the "Congressional Medal of Honor" recommended by George Marshall for his "brilliant and couragerous" command in Philippines. (A few soldiers whom survived the Bataan death match had requested Mac to be striped of his MoH)

    7. During his entire campaign in the Pacific, Mac rarely visit the front line. Most of his tactical victories were constributed by his subordinates. But the general had taken a few photos around his home in Austrialia and fake it as they were taken in the front line. This is just pathetic. One account from "The Pacific War, by John Costello" had claimed that MacArthur refused to visit the frontline because he was embrassed that he had let the troops down.

    Okay, I'm going to stop here, I do know have enough knowledge on the matter during the Island Hopping. What I know was that when Nimitz and Tower porposed the plan, MacArthur had argued against it, and wanted his army troops to take a larger part in the operation. He had also stubbornly argue not to bypass Philippines, in order to fulfill his promise earlier, thus setback the Allies strategy in the Pacific.

    Overall, I believe that MacArthur was in fact, a brilliant tactical commander. He had in fact led some of the greatest victory in the battlefield. But his strategic failures, mixing with his short sightness and his ego, had led US into the worst military disaster. He was awarded the highest honor for it.

    Open to all opinions, please post your comments!

    tttcomrader
    Ex-SGT US Army
    03 NOV 05

  • #2
    Are not all commanders not a little of blagard, messiaha and charismatic brute?

    The ones that history remembers, at any rate.
    Where's the bloody gin? An army marches on its liver, not its ruddy stomach.

    Comment


    • #3
      Mac made his mistakes no doubt. But his achievements far outweigh them.

      Could someone tell me why the Americans decry their Generals so much? I have seen much the same being done to US Grant. The Brits honor them, give them titles, build palces named after their victories, name boots after them......
      "Any relations in a social order will endure if there is infused into them some of that spirit of human sympathy, which qualifies life for immortality." ~ George William Russell

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by tttcomrader
        Ever since I study US history, I have learned of the name of Douglas MacArthur - the brilliant commander who had led us to victory in the Pacific... But as I have read more on the subject, I discovered that there is a dark history of this man in which not many Americans know about...
        We've had this discussion on another thread, it's really good reading.
        I've whole-heartedly recommended American Caesar by William Manchester for a good read on MacArthur, though Manchester does make a few annoying historical errors.
        I've also bought MacArthur's own Reminiscences, though it's very "light and fluffy" and obviously complimentary towards himself, with some self-effacing comments peppered throughout. MacArthur was far from honest about himself.

        Several folks on the board have little to nothing good to say about him, which is hardly surprising, given some of the highly controversial decisions and outright blunders he made.

        I will point out that the man was also incredibly frugal with the lives of his men.
        “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

        Comment


        • #5
          Several folks on the board have little to nothing good to say about him, which is hardly surprising, given some of the highly controversial decisions and outright blunders he made
          Few succesful generals ever did not make blunders;

          Some Americans

          Grant: Cold Harbor (his own admission)
          Lee: Gettysburg
          Jackson: Tardiness outside of Richmond during the seven days battles

          To be fair, Contemporary blunders
          Ike: Market Garden, Hurtgen Forest
          Douglas Haig; Every order he gave
          Rommel: Static Fight at El-Emeain
          Monty: Caen
          "Any relations in a social order will endure if there is infused into them some of that spirit of human sympathy, which qualifies life for immortality." ~ George William Russell

          Comment


          • #6
            Where is that previous thread about Mac? I would love to read it.

            Shouldn't Operation Market Garden's failure to constribute to Monty? And Caen, you can't really say it is a failure, Monty did all he could. He was pinned by the the best of the Germans, 1st and 2nd SS Panzer Korps, Hassuer, Kurt Meyer, Wittman, Steiner... All the big shots were there; meanwhile, Americans had only encounter light opposition (at least during the time of battle Caen).

            Rommel's greatest mistake is not El Alemine. His decisions to push so far in North Africa, opposed to the capture of Malta, and his reaction to D-Day had placed him in my shitlist.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by tttcomrader
              Where is that previous thread about Mac? I would love to read it.

              It's right here :)
              “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

              Comment


              • #8
                I think that he was nuts.

                considering that he recommended nuking Korea.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by sparten
                  Mac made his mistakes no doubt. But his achievements far outweigh them.

                  Could someone tell me why the Americans decry their Generals so much? I have seen much the same being done to US Grant. The Brits honor them, give them titles, build palces named after their victories, name boots after them......
                  Well, it's because we're slavering imperial conquerors who value militarism above all else, are ignorant of our own history and who can't stand any introspection, of course.

                  My god, sparten, can't you see?

                  -dale

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by SovietHonor
                    I think that he was nuts.

                    considering that he recommended nuking Korea.
                    Nuts? Not hardly. Egomaniac without peer? Nah, he was in good company, but definitely near the top of the list.

                    His plan to "nuke" Korea involved spreading a field of radioactive material across the Korean-Chinese border. Considering what he and his troops were going through ("Don't you dare attack anything north of the Yalu even though hundreds of thousands of PLA troops are pouring in across the border") at the moment, I can't say I blame him for such an outlandish scheme, at least in the abstract.
                    “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by tttcomrader
                      Shouldn't Operation Market Garden's failure to constribute to Monty?
                      Ike said "yes" when he should have said "no".

                      And Caen, you can't really say it is a failure, Monty did all he could. He was pinned by the the best of the Germans, 1st and 2nd SS Panzer Korps, Hassuer, Kurt Meyer, Wittman, Steiner... All the big shots were there; meanwhile, Americans had only encounter light opposition (at least during the time of battle Caen).
                      Actually, the failure of Monty's Caen campaign is directly attributable to Monty's failure to advance aggressively on or around Caen on D-Day, and his choice to put his old unit, the 3rd Division (which hadn't seen combat since Dunkirk) as the spearpoint for Caen.

                      Monty's worst failure was what he wanted to do when he weasled control of the U.S. First Army from Bradley during the Bulge battles. He was given command only because of communications difficulties with between Hodges and Bradley, and with the understanding that First Army and the British XXX Corps were to advance aggressively against the Northern shoulder of the German advance, eventually to link up with Patton's Third Army which was moving North against the Southern shoulder of the Bulge. Instead Montgomery - ever fearful of the Germans - gave orders for everyone to abandon the ground and strategic road junctions that the Germans needed and get ready to pull back across the Meuse. Only the creativity of American commanders prevented that eventuality from becoming a reality.

                      And afterwards Monty stepped up to the microphone and claimed credit for saving the whole American army.

                      With Generals like Montgomery on your side you hardly need an enemy.

                      -dale
                      Last edited by dalem; 05 Nov 05,, 22:27.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by TopHatter
                        Nuts? Not hardly. Egomaniac without peer? Nah, he was in good company, but definitely near the top of the list.

                        His plan to "nuke" Korea involved spreading a field of radioactive material across the Korean-Chinese border. Considering what he and his troops were going through ("Don't you dare attack anything north of the Yalu even though hundreds of thousands of PLA troops are pouring in across the border") at the moment, I can't say I blame him for such an outlandish scheme, at least in the abstract.
                        Lots of people, quite sane people, believed that nuking North Korea and/or China was a very valid option in 1950. Dismissing them as "nuts", as apparently SovietHonor does, ignores the context of the times in which the decisions were made.

                        -dale

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by dalem
                          ...directly attributable to Monty's failure to advance aggressively....
                          Doesn't that kinda sum up Monty's entire military record? ;)
                          “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by dalem
                            ignores the context of the times in which the decisions were made.
                            Agreed. It's the pitfall that far too many Monday morning quarterbacks fall into when they are critiqueing decisions made decades ago.
                            “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TopHatter
                              Doesn't that kinda sum up Monty's entire military record? ;)
                              Well, yeah, pretty much.

                              Read a great little blurb a few years ago, I think in some miniature wargaming rules I was using. Gave a very candid and unflattering summary of General George McLellan, explaining his success at building a good army and his reluctance to use it aggressively, and ended with something like "...and reincarnated in the next century as Bernard Law Montgomery."

                              Ouch. ;)

                              -dale

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X