My gut reaction is that Trump is more like Patton than MacArthur, but I can see the connections.
On the one hand we would never have saved Korea without his brilliant strategy and willingness to risk. On the other hand, we would have saved many lives if we had followed Nimitz’s plan to bypass the Philippines and strangled the main Japanese islands, without having to try to take over the Philippines, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa before forcing Japan’s surrender in August 1945 via the bomb and the Russian invasion of Manchuria.
My feelings exactly. Trump was more like Patton in my estimation.
> My gut reaction is that Trump is more like Patton than MacArthur... <
Agreed. What saved Patton was that he (Patton) had someone to run interference for him, that someone being Eisenhower. Trump however does not have an Ike.
Moral of the story: Trump has to be more careful and more diplomatic than Patton had to be. I don’t think Trump has quite realized that yet.
And defeating Japan quicker would have slowed the Soviets advance in Manchuria and likely would have impeded Mao. MacArthur’s incompetence likely was a cause of the Korean war by dragging it out long enough for the USSR to grab half of Korea!
Maybe so, but the single Battle of the Bulge lost more men, then was lost in the entire island-hopping campaign of the Pacific Theater.
Wrong.
Invading Formosa would have cost casualties on the order of invading Japan. Formosa was essentially Japan proper having committed several hundred thousand troops to the Emperor. Formosa is also significantly larger than Okinawa.