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?
Gen Marshall had the ability to identify the right people for the right jobs. If you want to know who really “won the war” it was George Marshall.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
True without a shadow of doubt.
MacArthur and Patton, two of the greatest leaders this country has ever seen. Coincidentally, they didn’t get along with the media or presidents.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Well and truly said!
During the 45-minute attack, the FEAF lost nearly half the planes at the base, and the remaining aircraft in the Philippines were captured by Japanese forces. This failure did not undergo any formal investigation, as troops were still shocked by the occurrences in Pearl Harbor. Major General Emmitt O’Donnell said it was not anyone’s fault, but the U.S. forces failed to assess the efficiency and speed of the Japanese Air Force.
The reality is that General Douglas MacArthur, commander in charge of the U.S. forces in the Philippines, should have placed American military forces in the Philippines on a proper war footing immediately following news of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
His failure to do so compromised the defense of the Philippines and resulted in the effective elimination of American air power in the western Pacific, forced the complete withdrawal of the United States Asiatic Fleet from Philippine waters, and paved the way for the successful Japanese invasion that followed. -- The American Spectator
Some blame General Brereton, but MacArthur was in overall command, and must bear much of the responsibility.
That would have been Oct 20, 1944. MacArthur went in on the 3rd wave Oct 20.
Oct 17-19 were spent taking minor outlying islands.
Just to the left of this picture there was a quay. Where all of the ships docked up to unload. MacArthur thought it would be more impressive IF he and the rest of them waded ashore. Then he said “I have returned”.
You know for a fact that MacArthur landed on the beach for reason you just stated??
Any chance that them being in a landing barge and the uncertainty as the whether any quay might be mined and booby trapped had a role in using a landing barge in the manner it was designed to be used?
When my father came ashore earlier in the day they had to walk on the bodies of the dead Australian and US Marines that covered the beachhead.
Leyte was a US army operation. No Australians. No US Marine fighting force.
Many LEFTIST historians believe that MacArthur was suffering from dementia during and after the Korean War.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Thank you!
The British (and the French and the Dutch) weren’t in any position to take back their possessions in the Pacific. We were, and perhaps fighting there diverted Japanese troops from other sectors. Perhaps, too, MacArthur’s returning to the Philippines made the Filipinos more favorably disposed to the US and more inclined to let us keep our bases and investments there.
Give a realistic alternative.
Yessir!
And Stalin would have said “okay”?
Who cares about Stalin? What could Stalin have done? Yeah the American Left gave him the atomic bomb technology but how would he deliver it, in a freighter?
Furthermore, the USSR hadn't recovered from being bled white in WW-II and was in no position to get into a major conflict.
Just what the world needed in 1952. An Atomic War
An atomic war in 1952 would have been minor compared against the millions Mao murdered in the subsequent years.
> The British (and the French and the Dutch) weren’t in any position to take back their possessions in the Pacific. <
Not at first. But by 1945 the British could have mounted an assault on Singapore. They wisely chose not to.
> perhaps fighting there [the Philippines] diverted Japanese troops from other sectors <
Not really. By the fall of 1944 the United States had almost complete control of the seas around the the Philippines. No Japanese troops were going there, and none were leaving.
> Perhaps, too, MacArthur’s returning to the Philippines made the Filipinos more favorably disposed to the US <
That is a good point. MacArthur’s return showed the world that the United States would not abandon an old ally. I don’t think it was worth the cost. But yes, you do have a point there.
You need to do more research. I could cite authoritative sources but you wouldn’t accept them and I’m busy.
Truman is responsible for China going communist and for the Korean War by declaring Korea outside the zone of US interest.
US forces were on high alert and combat air patrols were up at dawn to intercept the expected Japanese attack... which never happened... until noon due to bad weather on Formosa... and when the Japanese attack finally came, the American fighters were on the ground refueling.
The gods of war just happened to favor the Japanese that morning.
I see the two as much different, in fact, exactly different for the reasons you mention.
LeMay was willing to be flexible, adopt a radical new use of the B-29 to win the war. MacArthur was wedded to his “save the Philippines” strategy from the get go. LeMay, that I know of, was never known for protecting and harboring officers who were defying the rules just because he liked them. The new multi-volume history of the U.S. Army in WWII Pacific by McManus is quite negative on Mac. And I have no problem with dropping the bombs.
Wait, I’ll give you one. Fifteen. Fifteen volumes of Sam Morison’s history of WW2 naval operations. Start there. Great reading.
Or wiki Sam Morison, I’m sure you can find that. :)
There was a planned invasion of Japan. Manila had the finest harbor in the Far East which could be used as a staging center for the invasion.
It would have made more sense to just blockade and bypass the place. (Just my take. I suppose others might disagree.)
Without the Philippines, how would you stop the flow of raw materials up the South China Sea to Japan?
On the other hand, Manila was ruined. To this day the extent of civilian casualties is not known.
The Japanese were acting like Japanese.
They were on high alert. US combat patrols were in the air at dawn but the Japanese attack never came due to bad weather on Formosa. By the time the weather on Formosa had cleared and the Japanese force took to the skies, the US fighters were out of gas and had to return to base for refueling and that is when the Japanese planes just happened to appear.
The gods of war just happened to favor the Japanese in Luzon on morning on Dec 8, 1941
You are too busy to respond to my post but not too busy to post Leftist propaganda.
Which Leftist historians would you cite?
Your immediate response is to deflect, redirect and hope not too many realize that your knowledge of MacArthur came from not much more than one or two television programs.
Nonsense. Nobody knew in 1944 if the atomic bomb would work.
What does MacArthur and the army on Dec 8, 1941 have to do with naval operations??
Further evidence that you know nothing of what you write concerning MacArthur other than what you learned on television.
> Manila had the finest harbor in the Far East which could be used as a staging center for the invasion. <
Fair point.
> Without the Philippines, how would you stop the flow of raw materials up the South China Sea to Japan? <
By the fall of 1944 American submarines pretty much had that route completely cut off. The Philippines weren’t needed. However...if I recall correctly, most US subs operated out of Pearl Harbor or western Australia. As you noted, Manila would have been a better base had the war continued. It was so much closer to Japan.
I guess the Philippines campaign boils down to a cost-benefit study, one that will be debated for years to come.
Oh, and one more thing. Thanks for being civil. I have tried to be the same. Too often discussions here on FR get a little, shall we say, childish.
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.