Replies

No, I think we are connecting. You and I both see that at least one aspect of MacArthur’s opposition to Wainwrights CMH may have been because he had been jilted on getting one himself in the past. If that is one of his motivations, then I say that is a disgusting example of leadership, but not one I would find unexpected by the likes of MacArthur (hence hubris).

And when we think about it, we haven’t even gotten into Eichelberger’s CMH. He was put in for one as well, and MacArthur blocked it too. Unfortunately for Eichelberger, he couldn’t overcome this MacArthur obstruction and ended up never getting the CMH which I would say he deserved more than MacArthur ever did.

If you really look at the entire scope of things there’s a trend. MacArthur had a tendency to undermine his own subordinates if it may detract from his own glory. This is why you don’t even hear about Wainwright from Philippine dispatches until AFTER MacArthur has left.

Ok. My point which I think you got is that regardless as to whether a medal was awarded or not, a human element in the recommendation and review process always exists.

When most MacArthur detractors point to his recommending against Wainwright's MOH, they do so under an implicit assumption that it was purely for personal reasons.

Personal reasons can play a role but is there any evidence supporting such belief? Because you mentioned having done a paper in this area, I exclude you but I've never seen anyone back up their beliefs by citing an historian that analyzed and published a paper focused on an objective analysis of Wainwright's MOH recommendation.

I never looked for such paper either so, if you are aware of one, I'd be very interested in reading it. Otherwise, I'll just wait for some future date to analyze the full paper trail myself.

If I am not well versed on Wainwright's MOH, I'm even less well versed on Eichelberger's. Again, if you are aware of a paper focused on this, I'd be interested in reading it.

If you really look at the entire scope of things there’s a trend. MacArthur had a tendency to undermine his own subordinates if it may detract from his own glory.

If it could be shown that MacArthur's immediate subordinates received fewer/lesser awards than for comparable commanders, I'd be interested in knowing about it. Because I don't see any such facts and figures advanced by detractors, my assumption is that they don't exist.

This is why you don’t even hear about Wainwright from Philippine dispatches until AFTER MacArthur has left.

Now here's where I have to direct your attention to today's (3/22/1942) P2 report from the Philippines on Homer's thread http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2862250/posts. Notice the successful American/Filipino assaults on Mindanao. No mention of anyone in the dispatch other than General Wainwright. Not one person today complained about Wainwright getting sole name credit for a successful assault on Mindanao.