Posted on 03/21/2012 4:24:27 AM PDT by Homer_J_Simpson
And the Germans had Erwin Rommel, “the Desert Fox.” How much of his mystique was played up by Goebbels, and how much the Field Marshal played it up himself, is open to conjecture.
Had Rommel stayed at 7th Panzer Division and been sent to the Eastern Front, he would have been just another competent panzer commander swallowed up in the vast expanses of the East.
Which is fine but in your original post, you said he always used third person. I merely pointed out that multiple subordinates mention his manner of breaking the conflict down to a first person singular struggle between himself and the "Jap" in a manner similar to "If the Jap attacks me here, I shall..."
[2] First, Patton was a subordinate himself. Bradley and Monty commanded the Army Groups.
True and I dare say Ike with no combat experience period saw himself as something akin to a Gen. Marshall. A chief of staff sitting far to the rear administering operations. Therefore, Ike had no choice but to give operational credit to individual army commanders.
And quite a lot of people knew who Hodges, Gerow, Collin, and Creighton Abrams were.
Quiz the average college graduate who took American History and I'm confident the overwhelming majority could not answer a fill in the blank quiz requiring use of such names.
[3] Compared to the December 7th-8th f*uck up,
What was it that you consider to be the big Dec 8th f*uck up?
the screw ups at Bataan,
Well, the Bataan forces are still holding out at this point. Can the Brit's or Dutch say the same about theirs? Furthermore, for how much longer do you believe the Bataan forces will need to hold out before re-enforcements from the U.S. arrive?
the New Guinea campaign, Leyte [invaded for airfields that couldn’t be built because of the soil], and the almost wholely unneeded Southern Pacific campaign,
I dare say the proportionally greater number of men in MacArthur's forces who lived to return home, go to college, marry, start careers and live normal lives might disagree with your assessment but I'm sure that there will be ample opportunity starting later this year to discuss the campaigns you mention in detail.
As for the Battle of the Bulge, blame for that rests principally on Ike [unfamiliar with the sector, not convinced by junior G-2s and his J-2 that something was up]. Compare it to the run up to Kasserine.
Yet Ike is considered by so many to have been such a great general.
So, you believe MacArthur was as inept of a commander as JFK was at the helm of PT-109?
This is one of the more bothersome things about MacArthur. I don't understand why he went through such efforts to block Wainwright's CMH. Ironically, if you read MacArthur's own CMH citation it looks like the only thing wrong with it is the name it is attributed to. It should read Wainwright instead of MacArthur. I actually wrote an entire paper on just that odd bit for one of my masters degree classes.
This is a topic I haven't given a great deal of attention to but I suspect MacArthur being denied the MOH in the Veracruz expedition and again in WWI may have had some role to play.
Hard to say. If that is the reason though, it is a real poor excuse.
I wouldn't say it's the sole reason but I don't believe it could be dismissed.
As the recipient in WWI of 2 DSCs, 1 DSM, 6 Silver Stars and 2 wound stripes, completing the war as the most decorated U.S. soldier yet being denied an MOH had to be significant to MacArthur.
Fast forward to 1942. Without getting into what Wainwright may or may not have done, MacArthur didn't ask to leave Corregidor, he was ordered to do so. Less than a month after he left and was replaced by Wainwright, Bataan fell and a month later Corregidor fell.
I can see where in coveting his own MOH, MacArthur felt that had he not been ordered off Corregidor, his name should have been the one nominated for that MOH. It's simple human nature.
But he did get one for his effort on Bataan. He got it before Wainwright was even nominated for his. I think it was more hubris than human nature. There was no logical reason to block the citation for his subordinate.
Well, I did get the date wrong - corrected above. I'm at GMT + 8 hrs.
Because he was an arrogant prima donna who surrounded himself with toadies. The antithesis of Omar Bradley in a general officer.
For some odd reason I had it in my head that MacArthur was awarded the MOH in 1943. Thanks for the clarification.
I think it was more hubris than human nature.
I think hubris is a part of human nature but I'm not a psychologist/sociologist/clergyman and therefore may not be best qualified to make such determination.
There was no logical reason to block the citation for his subordinate.
As I previously mentioned, I'm not up on Wainwright's MOH recommendation nor reasons MacArthur had for opposing it. Having said that, because MacArthur had awarded Wainwright a DSC in Jan '42 for his actions in Luzon and Bataan, My inclination is to suspect MacArthur viewed Wainwright's holding out for 2 months and then surrendering the entire archipelago as not rising to the MOH level but again, I'm not up on this.
I will however, look into it deeper at some future date.
Kennedy just had one major screw up. MacArthur had at least three major league screwups.
Because he was an arrogant prima donna who surrounded himself with toadies. The antithesis of Omar Bradley in a general officer.
On Dec 7, 1941, how many valor awards did Bradley have versus MacArthur?
Wasn't Bradley known for sacking his generals?
Wrong. Kennedy’s first major screw up was an affair with a female Danish reporter believed to be an Axis agent [she denied this] while JFK was assigned toDC- in Naval Intelligence. His old man gothim transferred to PT school in South Carolina to stop that. She followed, the affair resumed.
When Kennedy got to the Pacific, his second screw up was hitting a dock with the PT boat he was in command of. Damaged the dock. Damaged the boat.
And if any lesser mortal had screwed up the mission that got PT 109 sunk as badly as Kennedy, he would have been courtmartialled.
Concededly, those faux pas don’t rank with Dougie’s, but they were still ordering the bricks for Camelot back then, while MacArthur was already [to his own mind] a historical impulse of the first order.
Bradley sacked Terry Allen and Theodore Roosevelt Junior from the Big Red One, in Sicily. He sacked others. He was also Ike’s stoolie in II Corps when Patton was the CG.
And good old Brad honed his “Infantryman’s General” persona with as much of a vengeance as Pistol Packin’ Georgie did with his. But at least his mother never lobbied for him [including pushing for medals in WW I] like Dougie’s did.
Another great post, as usual, Homer. Thank you for all of the effort you put into this series; I have learned so much from the material and the discussions in the threads.
I will concede that Bradley lacked MacArthur’s self-promotional skills and had only a fraction of his ego.
MacArthur got his on Arpil Fool’s Day, 1942. (Here in about 10 days). I bet his pants aren’t even dry yet from leaving the Philippines.
I can’t remember when Wainwright was recommended, I think it was June or July of this year, but MacArthur would doggedly block the recommendation until Truman stepped in (September 1945ish) and saw to it that Wainwright got the CMH.
I would certainly hope that there is more to his opposition than MacArthur’s patented arrogance but, like you, I haven’t looked at this any further than an analysis I did on the details of his citation itself over two years ago.
The one Bradley should have sacked was Courtney Hodges. When the Germans broke through the Ardennes starting the Battle of the Bulge, Hodges was so confused and upset over the surprise assault on his weakest point of the line that he took to his bed. General Kean, fortunately his able CoS, issued the initial orders that kept that situation from turning into a complete rout.
It still amazes me that the front at the Ardennes was manned the way it was. No one learned the lesson from the initial push into France in 1940....or 1870 for that matter. You’d think one of them would have remembered the “Miracle of Sedan”.
Similar questions were being asked in Germany at the time. Some time ago, I looked into this. In light of the situation in the east, Germans were asking why wasn't Rommel being given a larger command?
Had Rommel stayed at 7th Panzer Division and been sent to the Eastern Front, he would have been just another competent panzer commander swallowed up in the vast expanses of the East.
As I recall, the consensus of the German high command was that Rommel was a good tactician best suited for a corps command rather than say command of a fully equipped army, or army group.
I neither agree nor disagree but that was essentially the conclusion I arrived at when I looked into this quite some ago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.