Posted on 01/26/2023 9:56:03 AM PST by Ozguy1945
Its is Douglas MacArthurs 143rd birthday.
Was he the 1950's equivalent of Donald Trump?
The times when he showed great leadership were many.
He modernised Wrest Point, asking when he had recently begun the task post World War One, "Why are we still preparing for the War Of 1812?"
He resisted Australians who wanted to betray their own country in WW2 and surrender half the continent to Japan above the Brisbane line because he knew the all conquering Japanese were over extended and could be beaten.
He did that aged in his 60s with island hopping strategic brilliance.
In his 70's he was again strategically brilliant with calculated risk at Incheon.
He defied Truman and the chain of command by publicly pushing for victory against a North Korean government whose continued existence still bedevils the world.
At his worst he was bombastic and arrogant alienating many but not all of those around and inder him.
My late friend Lt Rob Iskov, from Australia's 2nd 14th battalion in which my dad served in WW2, said of MacArthur's often maligned arrogance, that at that time, "We had to have a figurehead."
In 1952 MacArthur was keynote speaker at the RNC but was annihilated by Ike in going for the presidency.
Was MacArthur at all Trumpian in publicly taking on Truman?
To what extent are Donald Trump's weaknesses (compared with DeSantis) like those of MacArthur compared with Ike?
Must be an opus, because you’re parroting CCP propaganda to the letter. Have a nice day, tongzhi . . .
Many LEFTIST historians believe that MacArthur was suffering from dementia during and after the Korean War.
How?
I never cease to be appalled at the degree to which the Left has brainwashed conservatives about MacArthur.
When will you stop spewing such nonsense?? You know nothing of what you write about MacArthur except what you learned from the Left.
That statement is completely false.
False. The vets had already moved out and been replaced by communists itching for a fight, which they got.
No it’s not. MacArthur did not do anything to prepare and certainly did not alert Clark Field to be ready.
Such as???
Why didn't we need to retake the Philippines??
What realistic option existed to bypassing the Philippines.
Oh please! Hart had something like 25 - 30 submarines that could have been out on patrol. Instead, he had them securely berthed in Manila Bay on Dec 8, 1941.
People just don’t say, “I like Trump,” they always preface it with, “Although he has his faults, I like Trump.”
It just goes to show the brainwashing being done to the American sheeple.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
BINGO! I “lecture” people all the time about that very nasty habit because it’s exactly what our enemies just drool over whenever they catch it. What I advocate is simply common sense, which is to determine which candidate you believe will best protect our country from attacks by our enemies here at home and abroad, and support that candidate 100%. That means resisting the temptation to be critical in any manner. Let the enemy badmouth our candidate and keep our yaps shut about trivial bullsh*t such as “I wish he wouldn’t post those angry tweets” etc. etc. ad nauseam! There’s much I am unhappy about concerning President Trump, but you will NEVER hear me voice those concerns because they pale in importance compared to what our enemies on the Left are constantly doing to undermine our defenses.
If you knew anything about what actually happened on Dec 8, 1941 in Luzon, you would know your statement to be false.
Help us out and explain how?
A nickname that curiously first appeared stateside around time for the 1944 presidential campaign.
Only General in the war who had his wife with him.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I don’t think Ike missed having Mamie with him!
Personally I think that MacArthur was an arrogant horse’s ass.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Which account of him did you find most persuasive when you arrived at that assessment of the General?
> Why didn’t we need to retake the Philippines?? <
There was nothing in the Philippines that was critical to winning the war. It would have made more sense to just blockade and bypass the place. (Just my take. I suppose others might disagree.)
In a way, the Philippines was for the United States what Singapore was to the British. Both were a symbol of influence and power. It hurt national pride when the Japanese occupied those places. But the British had the sense to leave Singapore alone. Urban fighting there would have been a nasty business. The British reoccupied Singapore peacefully after Japan surrendered.
On the other hand, Manila was ruined. To this day the extent of civilian casualties is not known.
Eisenhower was not a strategist or logistics person. Eisenhower never commanded anything is his life. He was a a staff officer. Before the war broke out he was asking Patton for a job under him and Patton was a General by that time and Ike was still a Colonel.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Seriously overrated and almost never criticized for his complicity in the bloodbath at Normandy.
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.