A Brief History
On June 17, 1932, 17,000 United States military veterans of World War I and 25,000 of their friends and family gathered in Washington, D.C. to demand early payment of their service certificate war bonuses. Although the bonuses were not due to be paid until 1945, the Great Depression had hit the United States and these veterans were floundering financially. General Douglas MacArthur, chief of staff of the Army, personally led US troops to forcibly drive away his fellow veterans, even though future 5 star general and president, Maj. Dwight Eisenhower (serving as an aide to MacArthur) counseled him not to have anything to do with the eviction. Maj. George Patton, future General and World War II hero, personally led a cavalry charge against the protesting veterans, including a man that had saved Patton’s life during World War I. The use of military force against unarmed US war veterans is just one of 10 arguably shameful or stupid things we are listing here to demonstrate why some people think that Douglas MacArthur was a jerk, not a hero.
Digging Deeper
10. Return to Philippines.
Although the Japanese could have been defeated sooner had the US followed a different strategy, MacArthur insisted on retaking the Philippines first to satisfy his own ego and make good on his “I shall return” boast. What an ego! Perhaps “We shall return” would have been more tactful.
9. Acceptance of Payoff from Philippines, 1942.
A dirty little secret kept quiet until 1979 was the fact that MacArthur, already paid as a US general and also as a Philippine Field Marshall at the same time, was paid a $500,000 bonus by the president of the Philippines. By contrast, Dwight Eisenhower was also offered money by Philippine President Quezon but had the class to refuse it.
8. Vanity.
Upon assignment as Chief of Staff of the Army, MacArthur took to calling himself “MacArthur” in some sort of convoluted “royal we” form. He also worked at his desk wearing a fancy Japanese kimono and smoked his cigarettes in a jeweled cigarette holder. Not only did he rashly make the boast about returning to the Philippines, but when he did return he was dropped off the landing craft ramp right onto the beach. That would not do for this publicity hound, so he had the landing restaged and refilmed so that he got off in the water and waded to the beach.
7. Got That One Wrong! 1944.
On December 26, 1944, MacArthur announced that the island of Leyte (an important island of the Philippines) was secure and only “mopping up” was necessary. After that announcement, over the next several months over 27,000 Japanese were killed on Leyte. Around the same time, General Willoughby estimated there were about 134,000 Japanese troops defending the island of Luzon (the largest Philippine Island), the next major target, and MacArthur derisively called that “bunk,” when in fact there actually were 287,000 Japanese troops on Luzon.
6. Immunity for War Criminals, 1945.
MacArthur gave the dreaded Unit 731 members of the Japanese Army immunity from war crimes charges after the war in order to get their research on germ warfare and other human experiment results. These murderous psychopaths escaped justice because of MacArthur’s miscalculation. He also refused advice to force Emperor Hirohito to abdicate even though many members of the royal family asked him to force the abdication. Royal family members were not prosecuted for war crimes even though the Emperor and some of the others certainly deserved to be prosecuted.
5. Miscalculation About Chinese, 1950.
After successfully kicking the North Koreans out of South Korea and moving right up North Korea itself, MacArthur was warned that the CIA estimated about 200,000 Chinese troops were now in North Korea with more to follow. MacArthur scoffed at such information and US forces were surprised and over run when the Chinese masses attacked. MacArthur’s reaction was to contemplate the use of radioactive poisons against the enemy!
4. Fired for Insubordination, 1951.
After running his mouth time and again second guessing the President and national policy, thus undermining the US war effort in Korea, MacArthur was relieved of command, a humiliating end to a long career. President Truman was struggling mightily to avoid World War III springing out of the Korean War and MacArthur was personally baiting the Chinese and advocating widening the conflict.
3. Medal of Honor travesty, 1942.
After being evacuated from the Philippines, leaving his troops to death and misery as prisoners of the Japanese, MacArthur was awarded the Medal of Honor for political reasons, despite the fact that he showed no heroism or particular efficiency in losing the islands. In fact, he was huddled up in an underground bunker and refused to go outside to see the situation or to rally the troops. He was derisively known as “Dugout Doug.” Dwight Eisenhower objected to this award personally to General Marshall, but was over ruled.
2. Loss of Philippines, 1941-42.
Despite warnings from Washington and news of the Pearl Harbor attack, the MacArthur led US and Filipino forces were taken by surprise so thoroughly that the air forces available to MacArthur were destroyed on the ground right off the bat. Though told repeatedly to initiate the war plans, MacArthur did nothing, despite his air officer asking permission to attack Japanese bases in Formosa. Despite outnumbering the Japanese, MacArthur managed to lose the strategically important Philippines anyway. In his haste to escape the attacking Japanese, MacArthur abandoned Manila and declared it an open city without any consultation with the US Naval commander resulting in many tons of US supplies burned to avoid capture by the Japanese.
1. Suppression of Bonus March, 1932.
It is bad enough that a veteran Army officer would order troops to attack war veterans down on their luck, but MacArthur insisted on leading the operation personally, bizarre for an Army Chief of Staff to do so.
Question for students (and subscribers): Do you agree with MacArthur’s critics? Was he a hero or a jerk? Please tell us what you think in the comments section below this article.
If you liked this article and would like to receive notification of new articles, please feel welcome to subscribe to History and Headlines by liking us on Facebook and becoming one of our patrons!
Your readership is much appreciated!
Historical Evidence
For more information, please see…
Perry, Mark. The Most Dangerous Man in America: The Making of Douglas MacArthur. Basic Books, 2014.
The featured image in this article, a photograph of Gen. MacArthur signing the Japanese surrender instrument from http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/ac00001/ac04627.jpg, is a work of a sailor or employee of the U.S. Navy, taken or made as part of that person’s official duties. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the image is in the public domain in the United States.
You can also watch a video version of this article on YouTube:
<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="2617 http://www.crackedhistory.com/?p=2617">105 Comments
Nicely done. Mac was quite the jackass/jerk. Huge ego. Philippines in 1944 could have been bypassed entirely. The only reason it happened was for Macs insistence and ego. 14,000 Americans died for this maniacs ego. To think he actually wanted to use nukes against the Chinese in ’51. What a class act. Thank the stars he never got a chance at the presidency.
Fascinating! A truly interesting and informative list. Keep up the good work!
Thank you for the nice feedback on our article!
Dr. Zarzeczny, I take issue with your article. I have taken your points and have addressed each one. I would appreciate your thoughts.
10. Return to Philippines.
Although the Japanese could have been defeated sooner had
the US followed a different strategy, MacArthur insisted on retaking the
Philippines first to satisfy his own ego and make good on his “I shall return”
boast. What an ego! Perhaps “We shall return” would have been
more tactful.
This statement is factually incorrect. The initial campaign, after leaving the Philippines, was the New Guinea Campaign (Jan 1942 – Aug 1945), the Papuan Campaign (June 1942 – Jan 1943) and Operation Cartwheel (effectively,
Sep 1943 – May 1944). The re-taking of the Philippines Campaign occurred from
1944-45. President Roosevelt actually met with General MacArthur in July of
1944, in Hawaii, to determine the phase of action against Japan. Nimitz and MacArthur agreed that the next step should be to advance on the southern and central Philippines. Both Roosevelt and Leahy were convinced of the soundness of MacArthur’s plan.
9. Acceptance of Payoff from Philippines, 1942.
A dirty little secret kept quiet until 1979 was the fact that MacArthur, already paid as a US general and also as a Philippine Field Marshall at the same time, was paid a $500,000 bonus by the president of the Philippines. By contrast, Dwight
Eisenhower was also offered money by Philippine President Quezon but had the
class to refuse it.
Factually correct however:
When the Commonwealth of the Philippines achieved semi-independent status in 1935, President of the Philippines Manuel Quezon asked MacArthur to supervise the creation of a Philippine Army. With President Roosevelt’s approval, MacArthur accepted the assignment. It was agreed that MacArthur would receive the rank of field marshal, with its salary and allowances, in addition to his major general’s
salary as Military Advisor to the Commonwealth Government of the Philippines.
On 31 December 1937, MacArthur officially retired from the Army. He ceased to
represent the U.S. as military adviser to the government, but remained as
Quezon’s adviser in a civilian capacity. MacArthur accepted $500,000 from
President Quezon of the Philippines as payment for his pre-war service. As
MacArthur was a civilian from 1 January 1938 until being recalled to active
duty 26 July 1941, a period of over three years, this is somewhat mitigated. Should
he have declined the payment? Perhaps. Was it earned? Yes. Was it excessive?
Ask the Philippine people of the time. Most who are still alive, at least those with whom I have spoken, would say no.
8. Vanity.
Upon assignment as Chief of Staff of the Army, MacArthur took to calling himself “MacArthur” in some sort of convoluted “royal we” form. He also worked at his desk wearing a fancy Japanese kimono and smoked his cigarettes in a jeweled cigarette
holder. Not only did he rashly make the boast about returning to the Philippines, but when he did return he was dropped off the landing craft ramp right onto the beach. That would not do for this publicity hound, so he had the landing restaged and re-filmed so that he got off in the water and waded to the beach.
Vain? Absolutely! General MacArthur was, without a doubt, a very vain individual. The same could be said for many individuals in similar positions. “… rashly make the boast about returning to the Philippines …”? Given General MacArthur’s affinity to the Philippine people and his genuine love for them, I would not see this as a boast but rather as a promise that he would not abandon those people for whom he truly cared.
As to the re-filming of the landing, MacArthur was keenly aware of the value of propaganda and felt that a more “heroic” looking landing would do more to boost morale than just getting off of a landing craft that was already breached. Was it a bit of self-promotion? Probably, but look at General George S. Patton’s ivory handled revolvers and tell me many generals weren’t into a little self-promotion.
7. Got That One Wrong! 1944.
On December 26, 1944, MacArthur announced that the island of Leyte (an important island of the Philippines) was secure and only “mopping up” was necessary. After that announcement, over the next several months over 27,000 Japanese were killed on Leyte. Around the same time, General Willoughby estimated there were about 134,000 Japanese troops defending the island of Luzon (the largest Philippine Island), the next major target, and MacArthur derisively called that “bunk,” when in fact there actually were 287,000 Japanese troops on Luzon.
First regarding Leyte; It is a fact that General MacArthur stated the end of “organized” resistance was accomplished and that just a mop up was necessary. He transferred control of the operations to Eighth Army on the same date. Up north, US
forces made faster progress against more disorganized and dispirited enemy troops.
1st Cavalry Division troops reached the coast on 28 December as 24th Division
units cleared the last enemy positions from the northwest corner of Leyte on
the same day and two days later met patrols of the 32nd Division. But Japanese
defenders continued to fight as units until 31 December, and the ensuing mop-up
of stragglers continued until 8 May 1945. As was evidenced by the exploits of
Lt. Hiroo Onoda who did not surrender until March 1974, the Japanese soldiers
exhibited a tenacity of spirit that was inconceivable to Western minds. So, in
the opinion of many historians, while not a cessation of hostilities, the
organized resistance had been rendered ineffective at that time.
As to Luzon:
Major General Charles Andrew Willoughby was MacArthur’s Chief of Intelligence during this period. As such, he was tasked to provide MacArthur with the best possible information so as to make informed decisions. As any historian or veteran could tell you, reliable intel often isn’t. MacArthur did the best he could with the information he had available.
6. Immunity for War Criminals, 1945.
MacArthur gave the dreaded Unit 731 members of the Japanese Army immunity from war crimes charges after the war in order to get their research on germ warfare and other human experiment results. These murderous psychopaths escaped justice because of MacArthur’s miscalculation. He also refused advice to force Emperor Hirohito to abdicate even though many members of the royal family asked him to force the abdication. Royal family members were not prosecuted for
war crimes even though the Emperor and some of the others certainly deserved to
be prosecuted.
The non-prosecution of the individual’s of Unit 731 is a stain on the history of the United States’ conduct of World War II. I will not try to defend it although, from a dispassionate point of view, I can understand why they did it. The research provided proved valuable. The U.S. believed that the research data was valuable. The U.S. did not want other nations, particularly the Soviet Union, to acquire data on biological weapons. This was similar to the non-prosecution of several Nazi scientists, particularly Werner Von Braun, as they were deemed essential to America’s efforts in both missile and rocket technology. I don’t like it but I understand why they felt it was necessary.
Insofar as not requiring the abdication of the Emperor, it is necessary to understand the Japanese psyche with regards to their ruler. At this time the Emperor was
considered to be semi-divine descending in an unbroken line from the Shinto Sun
Goddess Amaterasu Omikami. MacArthur assumed, rightly so, that the Japanese
people would be easier to govern during the occupation if they maintained at
least their symbol (figurehead). Although the Emperor made a public statement
stating he was not divine but only human, he was seen by the Japanese people as
a symbol of continuity and, as such helped to make the occupation of Japan a
little more palatable to the Japanese people. The view promoted by both the
Japanese Imperial Palace and the American occupation forces immediately after
World War II portrayed Emperor Hirohito as a powerless figurehead behaving
strictly according to protocol, while remaining at a distance from the
decision-making processes. This view was endorsed by Prime Minister Noboru
Takeshita in a speech on the day of Hirohito’s death, in which Takeshita
asserted that the war “had broken out against (Hirohito’s) wishes.”
Takeshita’s statement provoked outrage in nations in East Asia and Commonwealth
nations such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
According to historian Fujiwara “the thesis that the Emperor, as an organ
of responsibility, could not reverse cabinet decision, is a myth fabricated
after the war. However these assertions were made well after the death of the
principals involved.
The Royal family members calling for his abdication can be discounted as the maneuverings of different individuals for post-war power.
5. Miscalculation About Chinese, 1950.
After successfully kicking the North Koreans out of South Korea and moving right up North Korea itself, MacArthur was warned that the CIA estimated about 200,000 Chinese troops were now in North Korea with more to follow. MacArthur scoffed at such information and US forces were surprised and over run when the Chinese masses attacked. MacArthur’s reaction was to contemplate the use of radioactive poisons against the enemy!
This one is factually incorrect.
A declassified CIA memorandum from Jan. 13, 1950, shows that the CIA had not fully understood what was happening in North Korea in the months preceding the invasion. In that memo, the CIA noted the gradual southward movement of the North Korean army but said it was probably “a defensive measure to offset the growing strength of the offensively minded South Korean Army.” That report concluded that an invasion of the South by the North was “unlikely.”
Whether the CIA should be faulted for its failure to predict the invasion, however, is debatable. At the time, the agency was just three years old and lacked resources.
“They didn’t have the human capabilities or the technical collection capabilities to provide that kind of warning,” says CIA historian Clayton Laurie. “That was something expected [by] the Truman administration, to prevent another Pearl Harbor, but nobody in the government had that kind of capability at the time.”
Whatever the explanation, the consequence was costly in U.S. and Korean lives.
The initial intelligence failure was followed four months later by another one. This time the question was whether China would join the fighting on the North Korean side.
Again, the recently declassified documents are revealing.
In a secret report prepared for the White House on Oct. 12, 1950, the CIA said it saw “no convincing indication” that a Chinese intervention in the war was forthcoming. Even after Chinese forces began moving into North Korea a few weeks later, CIA analysts failed to understand what that movement meant.
CIA historian Laurie says the agency was providing strategic guidance but not “tactical” warning, which is far more specific.
“They know there are Chinese troops in Korea, engaging U.N. forces,” Laurie says, “but they do not provide the warning that this is China involved in the war and that this is the precursor of a bigger invasion.”
One explanation for the CIA’s failure to predict neither the North Korean invasion nor the Chinese intervention in the war is that the agency, along with the rest of the U.S. government, was paying attention primarily to Moscow’s actions.
Chief of Staff General Lawton Collins discussed the possible use of nuclear weapons in Korea with MacArthur in December, and later asked him for a list of targets in the Soviet Union in case it entered the war.
MacArthur testified before the Congress in 1951 that he had never recommended
the use of nuclear weapons. He did at one point consider a plan to cut off North Korea with radioactive poisons; he did not recommend it at the time, although he later broached the matter with Eisenhower, then president-elect, in 1952. In 1960, he challenged a statement by Truman that he had advocated using atomic bombs. Truman issued a retraction, stating that he had no evidence of the claim; it was merely his personal opinion
4. Fired for Insubordination, 1951.
After running his mouth time and again second guessing the President and national policy, thus undermining the US war effort in Korea, MacArthur was relieved of command, a humiliating end to a long career. President Truman was struggling mightily to avoid World War III springing out of the Korean War and MacArthur was personally baiting the Chinese and advocating widening the conflict.
Insubordination is a military offense, and MacArthur could, and probably would, have requested a public court martial. The outcome of such a trial was uncertain, and it probably would have found him not guilty and ordered his reinstatement. The Joint Chiefs agreed that there was “little evidence that General MacArthur had ever
failed to carry out a direct order of the Joint Chiefs, or acted in opposition to an order.” “In point of fact,” General Omar Bradley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, insisted, “MacArthur had stretched but not legally violated any JCS directives. He had violated the President’s 6 December directive [not to make public statements on policy matters], relayed to him by the JCS, but this did not constitute violation of a JCS order.”Truman ordered MacArthur’s relief by Ridgway, and the order went out on 10 April with Bradley’s signature.
On 5 April, Representative Joseph William Martin, Jr., the Republican leader in the House of Representatives, read aloud on the floor of the House a letter from MacArthur critical of Truman’s Europe-first policy and limited-war strategy. The letter concluded with:
“It seems strangely difficult for some to realize that here in Asia is where the Communist conspirators have elected to make their play for global conquest, and that we have joined the issue thus raised on the battlefield; that here we fight Europe’s war with arms while the diplomats there still fight it with words; that if we lose the war to communism in Asia the fall of Europe is inevitable, win it and Europe most probably would avoid war and yet preserve freedom. As you pointed out, we must win. There is no substitute for victory.”
As we found out during the Viet Nam conflict, MacArthur was right, there is no substitute for victory.
3. Medal of Honor travesty, 1942.
After being evacuated from the Philippines, leaving his troops to death and misery as prisoners of the Japanese, MacArthur was awarded the Medal of Honor for political reasons, despite the fact that he showed no heroism or particular efficiency in losing the islands. In fact, he was huddled up in an underground bunker and
refused to go outside to see the situation or to rally the troops. He was derisively known as “Dugout Doug.” Dwight Eisenhower objected to this award personally to General Marshall, but was over ruled.
To begin, I totally agree with the author as to General MacArthur not “earning” the Medal of Honor for the Philippines Defense. General MacArthur had been twice nominated for the Medal of Honor and was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross (the Army’s second highest award for bravery) three times. This is not to say that the Medal of Honor was given as a compensation medal after all, Marine Corps Lt. Gen “Chesty” Puller was awarded the Navy Cross (the Navy’s equivalent to the Distinguished Service Cross) five times. It is merely to state that his courage should not come into question.
General Eisenhower pointed out that MacArthur had not actually performed any acts of valor as required by law, but General Marshall cited the 1927 award of the medal to Charles Lindbergh as a precedent. Special legislation had been passed to authorize Lindbergh’s medal, but while similar legislation was introduced authorizing the medal for MacArthur by Congressmen J. Parnell Thomas and James E. Van Zandt, General Marshall felt strongly that a serving general should receive the medal from the President and the War Department. General MacArthur chose to accept it on the basis that “this award was intended not so much for me personally, as it is a recognition of the indomitable courage of the gallant army which it was my
honor to command.”
The “Dugout Doug” appellation was a pejorative given to the general by those in his command who were not aware of his personal courage but heard “stories”, common enough in a combat situation, of the lack of persons in leadership positions to put
themselves on the line.
While the Asst. Division Commander of the 42nd “Rainbow” Division during WWI, he often led his men from the front often not bothering to wear a helmet.
2. Loss of Philippines, 1941-42.
Despite warnings from Washington and news of the Pearl Harbor attack, the MacArthur led US and Filipino forces were taken by surprise so thoroughly that the air forces available to MacArthur were destroyed on the ground right off the bat. Though told repeatedly to initiate the war plans, MacArthur did nothing, despite his air officer asking permission to attack Japanese bases in Formosa. Despite
outnumbering the Japanese, Mac Daddy managed to lose the strategically
important Philippines anyway. In his haste to escape the attacking Japanese, MacArthur abandoned Manila and declared it an open city without any consultation with the US Naval commander resulting in many tons of US supplies burned to avoid capture by the Japanese.
It is easy to relegate the entire fault with the Philippines’ defense to General MacArthur. He was, after all the Commanding General. Having said that, there are more extenuating factors that come into play with this situation. MacArthur had
retired from the U.S. Army in 1937 and became the Military Advisor to the
Commonwealth Government of the Philippines, subsequently being named Field Marshal of the Philippine Army. Equipment and weapons were “more or less
obsolete” American cast offs, and the budget of $6 million was completely inadequate.
MacArthur’s requests for equipment fell on deaf ears. In July 1941, President
Roosevelt federalized the Philippine Army and reinforcements were sent.
However, by November of 1941 1.1 million tons of equipment intended for the
Philippines was still at US ports awaiting vessels.
Orange Plan, which was the US military’s plan for the defense of the Philippines, was contingent upon abandoning Manila and falling back to Bataan. Philippine
president Manuel Quezon was not in favor of this and ultimately MacArthur
acquiesced and determined to deny the beaches to the enemy. It was a plan not without risks as its success hinged upon General Marshall sending the promised
reinforcements. As we all know, this did not happen. MacArthur did the best he
could with what he had.
1. Suppression of Bonus March, 1932.
It is bad enough that a veteran Army officer would order troops to attack war veterans down on their luck, but MacArthur insisted on leading the operation personally; bizarre for an Army Chief of Staff to do so.
When the “Bonus Army” of veterans converged on Washington, General MacArthur sent tents and camp equipment to the demonstrators, along with mobile kitchens, until an outburst in Congress caused the kitchens to be withdrawn. MacArthur was concerned that the demonstration had been taken over by communists and pacifists but the General Staff’s intelligence division reported that only three of the march’s 26 key leaders were communists. MacArthur went over contingency plans for civil disorder in the capital. Mechanized equipment was brought to Fort Myer, where anti-riot training was conducted.
On 28 July 1932, a clash between the District police and demonstrators resulted in two men being shot. President Hoover ordered MacArthur to “surround the affected area and clear it without delay.” MacArthur brought up troops and tanks and, against the advice of Major Dwight D. Eisenhower, decided to accompany the troops, although he was not in charge of the operation. The troops advanced with bayonets and sabers drawn under a shower of bricks and rocks, but no shots were fired. In less than four hours, they cleared the Bonus Army’s campground using tear gas. The gas canisters started a number of fires, causing the only death during the riots. While not as violent as other anti-riot operations, it was nevertheless a public relations disaster.
So, what do we conclude from all of this? General of the Army Douglas MacArthur was a complicated man. Vain, arrogant, brilliant, egotistical, courageous. All of these adjectives apply to him. He was, and to a great many, still remains a polarizing figure. To the people of Korea, he is a hero, the savior of a nation. A statue of the general is there in Inchoen commemorating his brilliant invasion plan. It remains the only statue of an American General outside the United States. To the people of the Philippines he is the beloved adopted son who saved their nation in one of its darkest hours.
Even though the Japanese referred to him as Gaijin Shogun (Foreign Military Ruler)
they still respect him as a worthy adversary and a just Military Governor. Thanks
to him, in 1946, a new constitution that renounced war and stripped the Emperor
of his military authority was drafted by his staff. The constitution—which
became effective on 3 May 1947—instituted a parliamentary system of government,
under which the Emperor acted only on the advice of his ministers. It included
the famous Article 9, which outlawed belligerency as an instrument of state policy and the maintenance of a standing army. The constitution also enfranchised women, guaranteed fundamental human rights, outlawed racial discrimination, strengthened the powers of Parliament and the Cabinet, and decentralized
the police and local government. Seldom has the victor been so lauded by the
vanquished.
Jerk?
Given the preponderance of the data I don’t think this is an adjective which would apply.
Dear Retired Army Officer,
Thank you for your detailed reply. My dad, Daniel Zarzeczny, a retired Marine major, wrote this article, so I will allow him to reply to you.
By the way, when did you serve and at what rank did you retire at? In addition to my father serving in the Marines, one of my grandfathers served in the Army and the other in the Navy. Both of my grandfathers are veterans of the Korean War. My grand-uncle fought in World War II and received the Bronze Star. My girlfriend’s father is a retired Lieutenant Colonel in the Army. He served for a few decades, including during Gulf War 1.
Sincerely,
Matthew
“Many people and historians are on both sides of the issue, which is why I invite hearing the contrary side of things. Many of these points are worth considering.”
You father gave a respectful and thoughtful answer while maintaining his position – you did not. Too bad the son is a fraction of a person than his old man is.
WTF?! Chris, are you some kind of an idiot? I see nothing disrespectful in Matthew’s reply. If anything, you’re the one acting the fool! Lol!
Uh, oh, someone’s on her period…
The article is purposely provocative and presents an alternate view to commonly accepted heroic versions of MacArthur. It is meant to stimulate discussion that achieves a higher understanding of a complex situation and a complex man. We appreciate contrary analysis supported by facts and logic. Please note that many contemporary historians paint MacArthur as an egotistical dilettante. BTW, although the author is certainly knowledgeable about military history and many other subjects, he does not claim to be an expert. Just a guy with a certain background and certain opinion, an opinion subject to change in light of persuasive arguments. Name calling is not persuasive in the grown up world.
Purposely provocative instead of factually accurate. I’m glad you had a slip there with some honesty. Also a confirmation of the point I made about your Marxist critical theory based bullshit. This article is based on speculative conclusions and false relativism, nice try though douche. My name calling is simply shorthand to attribute deserving titles, I followed up with valid points. Perhaps you shouldn’t focus so much on that aspect as a cop out.
I’m not trying to be persuasive, I’m being “provocative”. Actually, I’m just showing the same respect towards a man capable of defending himself that the author showed towards a man who can’t, because he’s dead. Much easier to attack a dead man’s overall character when they can’t fight back you coward. Being egotistical is one thing, but undermining actual accomplishments as if some personality characteristic is more relevant than the actual actions of the man is dishonest at best, but closer to destructive and vile behavior.
How old are you? If the answer is any number higher than 14, you should be embarrassed.
History is open to interpretation, as any historian will attest. Given the same set of reference documents different historians will come up with different interpretations. Any historical figure that is generally treated as “great” has traits or skeletons in his closet that could lead some to believe that person is not so great. News flash: Not everyone thinks Reagan was a great president. Not everyone thinks FDR was so great. MLK and JFK have their fans and their detractors. Who is right and who is wrong? Why get upset about disagreements? Billions of people around the world are sure to disagree with you on some very important topics (such as religion). By the way, we are not Marxists by any stretch (see our many articles about the fallacy of gun control), although the “douche” part is debatable!
See https://www.historyandheadlines.com/headlines-march-7-2016-gun-control-rhetoric-gets-silly/ and https://www.historyandheadlines.com/headlines-june-26-2016-common-sense-gun-control/
Too bad you’re just another troll… 🙁
All irrelevant, nice try twat. Simply serving and acquiring a specific rank doesn’t automatically make you an expert on all things military. Someone with a different rank isn’t less knowledgeable either.
I could already tell by this BS article riddled with baseless assertions and subjective qualifiers that critical thinking or logical intellectual honesty wasn’t your old man’s strong suit, and I see that seems to be a genetic trait.
This post reads like something written by a fan of the new Ghostbusters movie. Lol! 🙂
Jeez, calling names and insults doesn’t seem to be horribly intellectual…
Exactly the issue I took with this ENTIRE article. At least I’m not proposing my comments as intellectual by posting an article about it. What a fail at false moral posturing! LMMFAO!
It’s not the first ignorant and moronic comment the idiot oneinchterror made on this article.
Hello!
Thank you for taking the time reading my article and composing such a lengthy response! Anyway, here are my responses to your remarks:
10. Return to Philippines.
They were talked into it by a persuasive MacArthur and were intimidated by his bluster. Later analysts concluded it was the wrong policy, decided on to assuage Big Mac’s ego.
9. Acceptance of Payoff from Philippines, 1942.
Taking the mega bucks was unseemly and kept from the public.
8. Vanity.
In a lot of ways, Patton was a jerk, too. MacArthur was just about the most egotistical goof ever to be a US general.
7. Got That One Wrong! 1944.
He was flat out wrong, very wrong.
MacArthur had a habit of believing only the intel he wanted to believe. He did it at Luzon and again in Korea.
6. Immunity for War Criminals, 1945.
Discount whatever you want, the fact is that war criminals got away with war crimes and morally should have been prosecuted. The fact that some Nazi scientists also got off easy does not make it right. Rationalizing the moral inconsistencies does not make it right.
5. Miscalculation About Chinese, 1950.
MacArthur was in favor of using radioactive dirty bomb stuff, not atom bombs. That is what I said. He also discounted reports of Chinese massing for an invasion. As to the first part of this rebuttal to the article, I did not say he missed the North Korean invasion plans, just the Chinese massive intervention, which he was warned about. Again, General Ego believed what he wanted to believe.
4. Fired for Insubordination, 1951.
As we found out in Viet Nam, it was enormous waste of time, effort, money and lives, the 2 are not comparable. There would never be a victory in Viet Nam because the South did not want to fight for their government. In Korea, the South definitely wanted to NOT get taken over by the North. In the real world of the Cold War, the substitute for victory was stalemate. If you feel otherwise, that is ok, it is your right; however, the President calls the shots and it is wrong of the general to publicly question those orders. That is our system. It is true he was not court martialed and convicted of insubordination, but that is what he got fired for.
3. Medal of Honor travesty, 1942.
He may well have been courageous in prior campaigns, but the fact is he stayed in the bunker in some sort of woe is me funk and did not tour the front lines, earning the enmity of his troops and officers.The issue is Corregidor, not World War I.
2. Loss of Philippines, 1941-42.
He did not do the best he could with what he had. His preparations and readiness were pathetic. That being said, he did not lose the Philippines all by himself, but he sure lost them faster and with less damage to the Japanese than he should have.
1. Suppression of Bonus March, 1932.
He did a good job governing Japan, certainly that is to his credit.
Leading the troops against the veterans was a massive blunder on his part that he regretted later in life. Jerk is what I define him as, but of course that is subjective and compared to jerks like Hitler or OJ Simpson I can see how someone would object. The article is meant to be provocative and showing the other side of the coin instead of the standard hero mythology. Certainly many officers have been worse. Too many.
Sincerely,
Major Daniel Zarzeczny, USMC (Retired)
Round Two Major,
10. Return to Philippines.
They were talked into it by a persuasive MacArthur and were intimidated by his bluster. Later analysts concluded it was the wrong policy, decided on to assuage Big Mac’s ego.
However, your initial statement was that, “…MacArthur insisted on retaking the Philippines first to satisfy his own ego and make good on his ‘I shall return’ boast.” My response was correct in saying this statement was factually incorrect as this was not the strategy and I outlined the information to back up my response. Additionally, this flies in the face of Admiral Halsey’s recommendation. The Combined Chiefs of Staff, meeting in Canada approved a decision to not only move up the date for the first landing in the Philippines, but also to move it north from the southernmost island of Mindanao to the central island of Leyte, Philippines. The new date set for the landing on Leyte, October 20, 1944, was two months before the previous target date to land on Mindanao. MacArthur was not at that meeting and could not have “intimidated” anyone.
9. Acceptance of Payoff from Philippines, 1942.
Taking the mega bucks was unseemly and kept from the public.
Again, I would remind you that MacArthur was a CIVILIAN from 1 January 1938 until his recall to active duty 26 July 1941. I have worked as both a civilian contractor for the Army and as a Government civilian supporting our troops and I honestly feel I have earned what I have been paid. Additionally, as I have no insight as to General MacArthur’s finances during that period, he may have needed the money. I will not, however, use this as justification. I will simply re-state my earlier position that those Philippine people, to whom I have spoken, feel the money was justly deserved and have no issue with it.
8. Vanity.
In a lot of ways, Patton was a jerk, too. MacArthur was just about the most
egotistical goof ever to be a US general.
It is easy to make a blanket statement such as this with no backup. When we look at US military history it is replete with general officers with substantial egos; Generals Marshall, Patton, Burnside, Sherman (I could go on) and, lest we forget our allies, Field Marshall Montgomery. A side note, the American five star rank (non-naval) is called a General of the Army (Air Force after 1947 Key West Agreement) because George Catlett Marshall did not want to be known as “Field Marshall Marshall”.
7. Got That One Wrong! 1944.
He was flat out wrong, very wrong. MacArthur had a habit of believing only the intel he wanted to believe. He did it at Luzon and again in Korea.
As a former Staff Officer you are surely aware that a commander is inundated with a huge amount of intelligence through which he must sort. All commanders rely heavily on their staffs to provide them with the best information available then they must, as the ultimate responsibility is theirs, decide which bits of information are the most credible. Every commander does this from Platoon Commander to Army Commander to Commander-in-Chief.
6. Immunity for War Criminals, 1945.
Discount whatever you want, the fact is that war criminals got away with war
crimes and morally should have been prosecuted. The fact that some Nazi
scientists also got off easy does not make it right. Rationalizing the moral
inconsistencies does not make it right.
Nor did I claim it did. The ultimate responsibility for the prosecution or non-prosecution of war criminals fell upon the Allies, not the Theater Commander. As President Harry Truman famously displayed on his desk, “The Buck Stops Here”. MacArthur and Eisenhower would both have made recommendations but the final decision came from “above”.
5. Miscalculation About Chinese, 1950.
MacArthur was in favor of using radioactive dirty bomb stuff, not atom bombs. That is what I said. He also discounted reports of Chinese massing for an invasion. As to the first part of this rebuttal to the article, I did not say
he missed the North Korean invasion plans, just the Chinese massive
intervention, which he was warned about. Again, General Ego believed what he wanted to believe.
As I stated before; In a secret report prepared for the White House on Oct.
12, 1950, the CIA said it saw “no convincing indication” that a Chinese intervention in the war was forthcoming. Even after Chinese forces began moving into North Korea a few weeks later, CIA analysts failed to understand what that movement meant. This is the intelligence upon which
MacArthur was acting. Perhaps this fell in line with what MacArthur already
assumed but at this remove; we have no way of knowing for certain. The use of radioactive poisons was an option MacArthur was considering. The operative word there is “considering” not advocating. As a Commander, all options should be considered. Upon further evaluation of the consequences, decisions are then made. In this case, it never went beyond the realm of a consideration.
4. Fired for Insubordination, 1951.
As we found out in Viet Nam, it was enormous waste of time, effort, money and lives, the 2 are not comparable. There would never be a victory in Viet Nam because the South did not want to fight for their government. In Korea, the South definitely wanted to NOT get taken over by the North. In the real world of the Cold War, the substitute for victory was stalemate. If you feel
otherwise, that is ok, it is your right; however, the President calls the shots
and it is wrong of the general to publicly question those orders. That is our
system. It is true he was not court-martialed and convicted of insubordination, but that is what he got fired for.
Any commander, especially a general officer, walks a fine line between blindly following policy and speaking up for what he/she believes. He/she must accept the consequences for their actions, which MacArthur did. In sending a private letter to a member of the House of Representatives, MacArthur blurred/bent the line of the chain of command which all military men and women must adhere. On April 14, 1944, Miller, without consulting the general, released MacArthur’s letters to the press. As a citizen, he was well within his right to question the policies of his government, as a General Officer in a Theater of war, especially one with his seniority and experience, he should have been more circumspect. President Truman was upset that MacArthur had the temerity to question his policies whereas MacArthur felt that Truman’s inexperience in war (Truman saw combat in WWI as a Battery Commander in the Missouri National Guard) led him to incorrectly assess the current situation in Korea. Truman’s ego would brook no second-guessing of his orders. Macarthur’s ego would not allow him to be silent in the face of what he felt was “bad policy”. Should he have remained silent? Again, perhaps. As we saw here recently with the recall and relief of GEN McChrystal, generals say things they perhaps should not and, ultimately have to accept responsibility for those actions.
3. Medal of Honor travesty, 1942.
He may well have been courageous in prior campaigns, but the fact is he stayed in the bunker in some sort of woe is me funk and did not tour the front lines, earning the enmity of his troops and officers. The issue is Corregidor, not World War I. Herein lies a very good point, how many Theater commanders during WWII, or any subsequent war, toured the front lines while their men were actively engaged with the enemy? I’ll save you the trouble of research, the answer is: none. Eisenhower never did it, nor did MacArthur. The reason is simple. As George Orwell stated in Animal Farm, “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”. A Theater Commander’s scope of responsibilities is such that risking his life in this manner would be folly. To his credit, MacArthur, upon first receiving the order to evacuate the Philippines, refused and stated he would resign and fight for the Philippines as a private soldier. It took a Presidential order to get MacArthur to leave the Philippines. These are not the actions of an individual who, as you initially stated, “… was huddled up in an underground bunker”. MacArthur knew where his primary responsibilities were and endeavored to carry them out to the best of his abilities. The pejorative upset him throughout the campaign as he, and many others, felt it was not deserved.
2. Loss of Philippines, 1941-42.
He did not do the best he could with what he had. His preparations and readiness were pathetic. That being said, he did not lose the Philippines all by himself, but he sure lost them faster and with less damage to the Japanese than he should have.
Again, we have to look at the entire picture: I have already painted a picture of the state of the Army in the Philippines at the outset of the war. Miserable. Much is made of the fact that the Air Forces were caught on the ground during the actual attack. The reason is as simple as it is convoluted. Shortly after word of the attack on Pearl Harbor reached the Philippines on December 8, 1941, Major General Brereton urged immediate air attacks against Japanese bases on Formosa in accordance with the Rainbow 5 war
plan and Brereton’s own aggressive nature. However, Brereton was twice thwarted from seeing General Douglas MacArthur about bombing Formosa by MacArthur’s chief of staff Major General Richard Sutherland, and sent his bombers and P-40 pursuit planes aloft to prevent them from being destroyed by air attack. Hours later, MacArthur initially denied permission for the attack, but then reversed himself minutes afterwards. Brereton ordered his bombers to return to base to prepare for the mission, and by then all fighters aloft had become short on fuel. While they were being fueled and armed for the afternoon mission, the bombers and many of the pursuit planes were caught on the ground when Japanese air units, whose takeoff from Formosa had been delayed for six hours by fog, attacked shortly after noon. Consequently, FEAF was largely destroyed on the first day of the war. Had he awaited permission, perhaps the Air Forces would have been able to inflict damage on the Japanese attackers or perhaps not. As we are aware, the status of US Air Forces as compared to the Japanese pilots was, to put it mildly, poor. At this point the Japanese were much better pilots and had superior equipment. So, had Major General Sutherland allowed Major General Brereton to see MacArthur or had Brereton not sent his planes aloft in contradiction to his orders, the outcome might have been different.
1. Suppression of Bonus March, 1932.
He did a good job governing Japan, certainly that is to his credit. Leading the troops against the veterans was a massive blunder on his part that he regretted later in life. Jerk is what I define him as, but of course that is subjective and compared to jerks like Hitler or OJ Simpson I can see how someone would object. The article is meant to be provocative and showing the other side of the coin instead of the standard hero mythology. Certainly many officers have been worse. Too many.
Once more, the march against the Bonus Army was ordered by the President. MacArthur did not LEAD the troops but did accompany them. His
reasoning for this has been debated. Some thinking he wanted to ensure the job was done correctly with others pointing out his sending out tents, camp
equipment and mobile kitchens as proof that he accompanied the soldiers to
ensure the most peaceful solution possible. The truth may never be known
absolutely but it is relevant to point out that no shots were fired at the Bonus Army marchers and the only casualty resulted from a tear gas canister which started a fire.
In conclusion, we as members of the officers’ corps of the United States have duties to which we are called and which we try to accomplish to the best of our abilities. The heroes of our shared history were men, not gods, and as such were all flawed individuals. But we focus on the positive while not forgetting the negative. We don’t need to mythologize the but I feel, for the most part, they deserve our respect. The motto of the U.S. Military
Academy stands as our bywords, “Duty, Honor, Country”. May we always live up to them.
I have enjoyed this “back and forth” and always look forward to discussions such as this with individuals of respected service. General MacArthur may not have had a soft spot for the Marines but I have always held them In High esteem and I personally thank you for your service.
F.M. LTC, FA, U.S. Army (Ret)
I respect the retired officer’s opinions and interpretation of the facts. Obviously he believes MacArthur is an American hero, and I don’t. Many people and historians are on both sides of the issue, which is why I invite hearing the contrary side of things. Many of these points are worth considering. As far as being at or near the front lines, German generals regularly took a look for themselves, and suffered a much higher casualty rate than Allied generals. So did the Japanese. Even Napoleon Bonaparte knew the value of seeing things close up and was wounded in battle. I saw Patton under enemy fire in a movie so it must be true… (LOL). Please see the Cracked History article of 24 MAR 2014, Top Ten Reasons Why Field Marshall Montgomery is Not So Great at http://www.crackedhistory.com/top-ten-reasons-field-marshall-montgomery-great/ for example. We all have our favorite generals/warriors and our favorite targets. Some of my heroes include Jimmy Doolittle, Chesty Puller, Audie Murphy, Lee, Grant and Gabby Gabreski. Obviously, Montgomery & MacArthur rank up with the not favorites. I kind of have reservations about Pershing because of his pushing World War I right to the last minute, getting GI’s killed to make a point. Just about all the WWI generals on both sides seem kind of creepy and incompetent to me, and the politicians especially so.
I’m enjoying this back and forth with reservations as to who’s right and who’s wrong.
As for this latest volley, one thing stands out to me regarding the MOH award. You state “…how many Theater commanders during WWII, or any subsequent war, toured the front lines while their men were actively engaged with the enemy? I’ll save you the trouble of research, the answer is: none. Eisenhower never did it, nor did MacArthur…”. My question to that is, of the group of none, how many were awarded the MOH? How many took personal action Above and Beyond the call of duty, or showed courage in direct confrontation with the enemy?
With regard to the non prosecution of Japanese “Scientists”, arguments that we had to have the results of their experiments to further our own aims has nothing to do with their pardons. We had their papers; we didn’t need them, nor did we use them for any further “research.” This is in contrast to the German scientists who we pardoned and used for their continued expertise.
Your article is an amateurish POS.
Have you ever written a paper for a college thesis?
Trump 2020!
Do not eat squirrel brains! My cousin in law did and he died of something like Mad Cow disease. No, the author has a BA and never wrote a thesis, and is an amateur historian as well. On a page to page and half article, it is hard to be extremely detailed. I hope you find the articles entertaining with enough interesting points to look into more in depth information on the subject. In any case, thanks for reading.
1¡¢http://www.recordsupplies.net/css/whembh7l.html – ボッテガ 人気-http://www.leonidas-fanou.com/css-js/styles.htm – クリスチャンルブタン 靴 通販-http://www.patisseriemetivier.com/css-js/styles.html – マークバイマークジェイコブス通販;
2¡¢http://www.promethee-conseil.com/css-js/styles.htm – ブルガリ バッグ 激安-http://www.guidonsaintmartin.be/img/link.html – アシックス 靴;
3¡¢http://www.renovgroles.com/css-js/styles.htm – バレンシアガ キーケース-http://www.patisseriemetivier.com/css-js/styles.html – マークバイマークジェイコブス-http://www.swissvision.fr/entreprise/ – フェンディ アウトレット-http://www.restaurantlatabledhippolyte.com/css-js/styles.htm – ロエベ 激安;
4¡¢http://www.patisseriemetivier.com/css-js/styles.html – マークバイマークジェイコブス アウトレット 通販.
http://www.lune-de-miel29.com/css-js/ – マイケルコース 激安彼らはモデルがさまざまである場合には、ニーズの範囲に適したハンドバッグがあります。彼らは手頃な価格であり、それらのスタイリッシュなワードローブを完全に補完すること、様々なスタイルで来るので、何人かの女性のために、シャネルの財布は良い選択です。彼女は特別な日を持っています。あなたはファッショニスタである場合、それは優秀な投資になります、あなただけのグッチの長財布と間違って行く傾ける。それはあなたがそれを余裕が高価な材料を使用している場合、それは素晴らしいことだ。コットンバッグは、より良いバッグの形状を維持するために、いくつかのソフトトイレットペーパーを詰めされるであろう。品質とクラフトマンシップは、彼らが純粋な美しさと魅力を輝かせる非の打ちどころのないです。グッチの財布は、時代を超越し、エレガントです。人々はあなたが長い期間、外にあるときにそれらの時のために、フォーマルな場所では、カジュアルな散歩に香りを使用して、新鮮な香りを維持し、枯れずに感じることがあります。アイウェアカタログはあまりにも、 FSC認証紙で作られます。だから、人々のほとんどに精通している。
http://www.paysagiste35-lamainverte.com/css-js/styles.html – マークバイマークジェイコブス バッグ 通販ハンドバッグは、女性の人格を反映することができます。シャネルのバッグは、それが昼と夜の両方のあらゆる機会のために着用することができますように、非常に汎用性のあるキルティング。その後、あなたの記述とフレームの寸法を提出してください。彼女はそれを見たとき、彼女は単純に良い取引を知っている。それはあなたのポケットからお金や銀行のカードを使用しています。これらの靴は、主に富裕層や著名人が着用されています。レディースバッグオートクチュールが原因なファッションの速度、これはまた、これらのポイントに行くことができない顧客満足度の高いです。これらは女性の間で高い需要を持っているとして、彼らは非常に高価で来る。衣類は、まだファッションの世界で主要な影響の一つである。一度に、イベントは、女性のシャネルの懸念を指すことがあります。すべてのあなたのオンライン購入のためにあなたはPayPal、主要クレジットスコアカード、あるいは金融機関の移転によりを採用支払うことができます。これらの有名なブランドのバッグの中で、私は、その高い品質、ファッショナブル＆クリエイティブなデザイン、そして多様な様々なグッチが一番好き。ミュウミュウの財布をこれは、卸売ハンドバッグをコピーミュウミュウハンドバッグプラダインターネットのアフィリエイトシャネルのラップトップバッグは、速やかインストラクター、バレンシアガに影響を与える治療を含む、オーランド、フロリダディオール、プラダ、マークジェイコブス、ヴェルサーチ、シャネル、マルベリー、ミュウミュウは、ドルチェ、さまざまな多くのはもちろんのこと
http://www.rta02.com/graphs/ – ジミーチュウ 通販私たちは、プロ意識と短納期に定評のあるグッチのバッグのような著名なgucci アウトレットを浮上している。それは、国籍や国境を越えて、切削、ファッションに敏感な女性の間で、私たちは人気が。あなたは、グッチの靴、グッチ長財布の企図新しい結果についての編集者が2010年グッチの靴は成人特権のみんなグッチブーツ2009が受け入れ、ユニークさを策定揺れ降りかかること
贅沢は同様にそれはグッチ数1上のすべての時間でした、最も優れたクライアントエクスペリエンスに出くわすと言われていた調査を実施し始めます。あなたもオンライン市場のかなり多くのグッチ長財布を得ることができます。服装は、ヴィンテージコスチュームジュエリーを着用することです。身に着けている度付きメガネがオタクと時代遅れの考えられていた時期がありました。グレートグッチバッグオーストラリアの最初のブティックは、1920年にローマ、イタリアの偉大な文化の街にオープンし、現在はバッグは、世界中の多くのブティックを所有しています。バッグはその色を失い始めると、それはそれらを交換する時代が来た。このバッグは、それが中にストラップを挟み込むことでクラッチとして着用することができますように、あらゆる機会のために汎用性があり、ショルダーバッグとしてそれを与えること当日ルックやカジュアルスマート外観。しかし多数の個人は、デザイナーハンドバッグをピックアップする余裕カントので、彼らは賢明な彼らはコストがはるかに低いデザイナーハンドバッグが、価格と比較して、賢http://www.pharmacie-lamenitre.fr/css-js/styles.htm – マークバイマークジェイコブス バッグ 通販
誰もがユニークなすることができ、彼らが実際にある特定の希望はいつでもシングル。ビジネスマン、仕事、学生との個人的な電子メールで茶色の革のショルダーバッグのための仲間であることに加え、安全に保管されている必要があり、その場合には、必要なサービスのスタイル、耐久性、機能性だけでなく、非常に効率的に提供するだけでなく、そのライナーその水のためのそれを困難にする。これらの有名なブランドのバッグの中で、私は、その高い品質、ファッショナブル＆クリエイティブなデザイン、そして多様な様々なグッチが一番好き。http://www.guidonsaintmartin.be/img/link.html – アシックス 靴
http://androidhuman.tistory.com/279 – http://androidhuman.tistory.com/279
http://wiki.trust300.net/index.php?title=Talk:Thoughts_On_Indispensable_Details_For_Racing_Rivals_Cheats#778182_ – http://wiki.trust300.net/index.php?title=Talk:Thoughts_On_Indispensable_Details_For_Racing_Rivals_Cheats#778182_
http://wiki.bhondehighschool.in/Talk:Uncovering_Convenient_pharmacy_Systems – http://wiki.bhondehighschool.in/Talk:Uncovering_Convenient_pharmacy_Systems
http://forums.camillacastro.net/viewtopic.php?pid=54#p54 – http://forums.camillacastro.net/viewtopic.php?pid=54#p54
http://bookerslab.tistory.com/guestbook – http://bookerslab.tistory.com/guestbook
That God damn coward left his army to be killed or captured. My father was one and he died young from the torture inflicted by the Nips.
#11 – That stupid, stupid corncob pipe he smoked, which projected something like eight feet ahead of him and made him look like the pompous narcissistic fool he actually was under all the BS propaganda.
Well he definitely dropped the ball in Japan – as we see now, the sons and grandsons of the maniac fascist imperialists are STILL ruling the country with no real opposition. Japan with the help of the US did a nice magic trick: Just paint a nice friendly veneer of the evil abysses of Japanese culture, but leave everything beyond what meets the eye unchanged.
I hope this won’t bite us in the back some day.
The nuclear bomb was used partially due to the fact so many allies had already died as a result of the egotistical maniac Macarthur. Nimmitz wanted to just bypass the Philippines etc and set a naval blockade but Mac bullshitted Truman into letting him proceed with the land war. Without it, Nimmitz would have gotten all the credit.
Looks like we got us a typical cowardly Hillary supporter!
It’s interesting, as an Australian, to read the article and the commentary thread on the subject of General Douglas MacArthur. If one is to take a wholly objective look at his entire career, it is difficult to see how he attained the standing he did, based purely upon his military exploits. Non-US military historians treat him with little of the adoration, awe and lionisation he receives from his fellow Americans. The Australian War Correspondents attached to his HQ in Australia, New Guinea and Papua regarded him with patent disdain and contempt – as did most Australian military figures. The extent of his self-promotion and grandstanding was regarded as ridiculous, especially in light of his modest achievements. But, in the final analysis, he was an American and Americans need heroes to be feted by politicians, media and, the public. The pantheon of American military geniuses and heroes is full to bursting – headed by the Greatest General Himself. Perhaps more credit should be given to the citizen-soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen in all of the Western Allied Forces engaged in all of the Wars of the 20th Century.
As an American, I sure get a lot of guff for daring to say Big Mac had feet of clay! The guy does have his fans, especially for his administration of Japan after the war. Here’s one for you: Who has the bigger ego, Monty or Mac?
Montgomery achieved more militarily. He had more to crow about and was a monumental egotist but a mere boy compared to The Greatest General when it came to self-promotion and grandstanding. They both lied about some of their exploits but most non-Americans I suspect, have more time for Montgomery than MacArthur. Many of MacArthur’s dispatches were works of fiction.He was an American and could only ever have achieved his “fame” in the US, according to the culture of the US where bullshit commonly baffles brains.
I would be insulted by the America bashing, except the idiocy cited in the post is pretty much true. It is, however, also true in virtually all other countries as well. US idiocy is often bigger and flashier, not necessarily better!
“… idiocy … pretty much true.” Rather oxymoronic. To say , “US idiocy is often bigger and flashier, not necessarily better!” makes me wonder what you mean by idiocy. Can one have “better” idiocy? As it happens, I am a Yankee-phile, having more ground to respect and admire the US than otherwise. However, recent political events in the US have some of us wondering about the national sanity! In warfare terms, the US Navy and Marine Corps in WWII consistently produced outstanding results in the Pacific. Better, in my view, than the US Army there and in other theatres. In the way of Navies, they did it without fanfare and grandstanding. Far more Americans have heard of Patton and The Greatest General than Nimitz and, say Spruance. They were the quiet achievers. Halsey was latched onto by the US media and lionised (and much admired by TGG as a consequence) – even after Halsey’s actions at Leyte Gulf where Halsey may have fallen for believing his publicity.
Halsey, I believe, was grossly over rated. He was aggressive, but overly so, to the point of imprudence and he could be baited by an enemy that knew his hubris. Recent political events have us here in the states reeling, believe me…
Many of the contrary arguments have merit, but I believe you misunderstand the difference between MacArthur missing the Chinese
invasion with the original North Korean invasion. Thank you for acknowledging those things I got “right.” I leave it up to the readers to decide if Mac was a jerk, and of course having input from readers like yourself certainly help balance that thought process. Thanks for the information and opinions, and feel free to examine our many other military articles.
“If Mac was a jerk”. LOL, what? You can’t be serious here….. This is my point, right here. Jerk is such a subjective BS qualifier that is entirely subjective, and irrelevant to the accomplishments of this man. Did he do what he did based on a degree of egotism? There’s a good chance. Many great people in history were egotistical and you know what? They hyad good reason to be! Does that make them “jerks” or justify framing them in a shitty light as bad people? Only cowards and insecure assholes think so, especially slandering dead men. This shows your character more than any words you try to manipulate persuasively or with false moral superiority. Actions speak louder than words, and this article is just downright shameful. You should feel like a piece of shit, especially for pretending like it has any real merit.
Is thizh Gregory Stevensh?
Erh, jusht becaushe John read the resheipt wrong to you….you’re gonna…you’re gonna act this way? Is thish your way of…getting out of your responsibilitiesh? Is thish the way you act?!
People, people, people! Can’t we all just get along??? Yours truly, Rodney K.
“Jerk” doesn’t even begin to cover it. MacArthur’s actions border on treason at many points in his career.
Believe me, “jerk” was bad enough to have some people livid at us!
He was also on the court martial board of Billy Mitchell .
I’ve never like Mcarthur, I didn’t like his primadonna attitude or the way he abandoned his men I don’t give a crap that is was a Presidential order. Then to get the CMA for getting his men killed WTF, He reminds me of Montgomery where Patton reminds me of Roumel (Neither would survive the war) Both Mac and Montgomery used their military careers as stepping stones (made of dead soldiers.)
Patton died shortly after the war because of injuries from an automobile crash (December 21, 1945). I absolutely like Patton and Rommel more than Mac and Monty!
Yes he did die as did Rommel which is what I was saying, although re-reading my post I can see where it could be misunderstood just who I was referring to. I personally believe as does his many in his family that Patton was assassinated, read up on his medical records in regards to his final few days.
Monty was just plain incompetent. The only success he had in Africa was primarily due to a “pill” to keep up with the meth the Germans were taking. Patton had to bail out Africa ultimately. Monty was a complete failure D + 35 as he attempted multiple times to take Caen. Like the failure he was, what do you do when you can’t get the job done? You flatten it [ultimately killing thousands of innocent civilians in the process}. What Monty fails [once again] to realize is that ruins make ideal sniping locations. And lets not forget one of his biggest failures in a bridge too far. I have NO IDEA how he got that one past Gen Dwight but he did…that plan was one for the books.
Monty and Mac are two of the most controversial generals of WWII, and you’ll find vehement critics of you if you dare criticize one of those holy of holies. I get creamed anytime I talk about either of them!
Indeed Major Dan, as my chosen field is history with an emphasis on WW2, I have had many heated discussion with my colleagues regarding both Mac and Monty. Patton and Rommel were made of the same material. Rommel being implicated in an assassination attempt on Hitler helps solidify my opinion of him.
Great information on MacArthur. I found another video that proves he was not just a jerk but a traitor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-dHzM6qcGU&t=13s
What a POS shit this article is. It’s like it was written by a freshman at a shitty JuCo.
Trump 2020!
I’m sorry, your credentials are? I happened to study this topic at the university level and did a dissertation on this topic and find the facts presented to not only be accurate, but very interesting and informative. I am sorry, you studied where again?
JuCo’s have dissertations? I have real degrees in econ and finance. You?
Why don’t you try reading “American Caesar”, sociology boy?
I have REAL degrees in History (BA) and Sociology (BA)…boy. Did my post-Grad work on modern world history with an emphasis on the Second World War…boy. My post Grad work was done at a Big Ten College. That’s right boy, college has two e’s.
“American Caesar” is so one sided, I suspect it was written by Dugout Doug himself. An extremely one-sided tale that just glosses over the Philippine affair and certainly doesn’t dwell on the HALF MILLION lives lost so Dugout could keep a silly promise. The book itself is a repetitive glorious look at the likes and accomplishments of the man but conveniently leaves out the many (and I mean MANY) examples of an egomaniac who has completely come off the rails [i.e. Bombing China to LIMIT the war, LOL]. I won’t even go into the use of nukes topic. Talk to the men that served under him; I have (the ones he left behind only to be captured/killed and sent on the Bataan Death March). ‘Ol Dugout was enjoying a nice cold beer by then in Aussieland. He couldn’t run fast enough (oh I know…the President ordered him to leave…right right.). Dugout was so good at following orders…right? I am sure Patton would have run like a chicken too (Patton wouldn’t run nor would he accept a Medal of Honor for running like a little girl).
You stare at amazement at all the pretty, wrapped Christmas gifts under the tree, but the truth is found once the wrapping is torn off and you can see what you really have, an egomaniac who loves attention and power. You have fallen (like many have) for Dugout’s masterful PR stunt. Dugout is rivaled only by the master of Propaganda himself; Paul Joseph Goebbels. I suspect that Dugout followed Goebbels very closely; especially when he needed something to pull him out of the Philippine debacle…(DING! Give me the Medal of Honor). Then Americans will think I went down fighting! I had to be pried from my Browning M1917 by a private and knocked unconscious to be whisked away against my will….perfect.
And apparently, the Big 10 isn’t big on second grade level punctuation, Bob…
I knew Faubian Bowers quite well who was MacArthur’s aide in the occupation of Japan. He admired the hell out of MacArthur. MacArthur is the reason Japan is a stable democracy and a stalwart U.S. ally.
BTW, you know that Roosevelt ordered MacArthur to leave the Philippines, right?
Apparently your reading comprehension leaves much to be desired. Simple minds are so easy to read. Try reading my response one more time and this time really focus on what you are reading. You will see that I answered your statements before you even thought to write them down [literally laughing out loud].
Bye Fried Brains
P.S. You really need to work on your “made up” facts, kinda embarrassing really. One more thing, when people hack on others “typo’s” on a forum, they generally have nothing to bring to the table…case and point. Buh bye.
Typical Prog dodge. Talk about someone’s reading comprehension to deflect from your inability to write intelligibly, then proclaim victory.
And history and sociology (really?) aren’t real degrees. Real degrees require calculus.
Major Dan has a BA in Sociology and had 4 quarters of Calculus (all passed, but not enjoyed).
Great.
Now explain how you would have held the Philippines if you had been in MacArthur’s shoes.
Skip the Philippines altogether. Even after we had control of the country, it failed to serve any useful forward operating post. The island hopping campaign being conducted under Nimitz was working perfectly and the Philippines would have been liberated in August ’45 with 400 million lives spared.
Try reading the post, Bob.
How would you have held the Philippines?
That’s not a typo, Bob. It’s a manifestation of your inability to use punctuation.
What do they teach in sociology school?
MacArthur did a good job administering Japan, that is undeniable. FDR ordered Mac out of the Philippines only after it was clear that Mac had lost any chance of holding them.
Considering that the U.S. forces had no way of being resupplied and had WWI weapons to start with, was there ever any doubt that the Philippines would be taken by the Japanese?
How them could MacArthur had “lost any chance of holding them”?
Mac was specifically warned about not getting his air force destroyed on the ground after the debacle at Pearl Harbor, and he did exactly what he was told not to. He failed to maintain aerial recon patrols to monitor when, where, and in what strength the Japanese were attacking, and if he had done so he could have used airplane interdiction and better deployed his troops. He provided no morale raising rallying of troops and had a defeatist attitude. There was absolutely nothing inevitable about the fall of the Philippines, except Mac’s poor leadership. Better preparation and planning could have met the invasion with force and as at Wake Island, determined resistance was not something the Japanese were used to at this point, totally befuddling them. Or you can believe whatever you want.
Cheerleading, er morale raising, doesn’t matter when you have no hope of resupply and you’re using equipment from the WWI era, including ammo belts so old they disintegrated when removed from storage.
At Wake, we had a navy. There was no navy to resupply the Phippines. Take a look at Wainwright when he surrendered. Skin and bones.
I don’t need to know when, where and how hard Anthony Joshua is going to hit me to know he’s going to cream me.
Let’s be honest- this whole “article” is nothing more than a rationalization for the Marines’ jealousy of MacArthur.
Ever hear of Veracruz, Bobby? The Rainbow Division?
I didn’t think so.
Ever heard of Veracruz, Bob? Or the Rainbow Division?
MacArthur could have won the MofH for either of those actions. Painting him as a coward is idiotic and plain bullshit.
You forgot to mention that he was implicated in a failed
In a failed what? Perhaps the post/video by PTAblues a couple below yours is what you refer to?
MacArthur got infinitely more American troops killed through his incompetence than should have died. He not only Re-took the Philippines because of ego, & the fact he was double dipping on salaries… but I have read he refused to let our Air Force Bomb certain parts of the Philippines where the Japanese were entrenched, & insisted on hand to hand combat because he had orchard/farms there. MacArthur was an ingrate human being, that was an absolutely terrible General. He got so many of his men slaughtered where a first year West Point Graduate could have done a better job of winning the battles he lost inexplicably for no good reason…
You are ABSOLUTELY correct on the Philippines. A half of a million people had to die to placate his ego. The island hopping campaign under Nimitz was working and the results would have been the same. MacArthur does not belong in our history books as a hero. He should be in the books as an embarrassment [which he was] and I apologize to the rest of the world on behalf of a sorrowful United States for his actions. /sigh…all of those lives for NOTHING, nothing.
Hey Bob! What do you suppose the Japanese were doing to the Filipinos before the Americans returned? Did you happen to ask any Filipinos what they thought about MacArthur returning to liberate their country, oh Will Durant wanna be?
I would loved to have had the opportunity to ask the Filipinos how they felt about MacArthur but 2.5 million of them died in the “liberation.”
Have you got a source for that, Bob? Or is it another product of your febrile imagination?
My source says 100,000 civilian dead during the liberation http://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/philippines-liberation
as opposed to 1,000,000 killed during the occupation.
No wonder you’re a sociologist.
Of course, you have sources, right?
Dugout Doug was such a POS. This from Wiki, “In July 1942, as a brigadier general—he had been promoted by two grades on the day after the Tokyo attack, by-passing the rank of full colonel—Doolittle was assigned to the nascent Eighth Air Force. This followed the rejection of his name by General Douglas MacArthur as commander of the Southwest Pacific Area to replace Major General George Brett. Major General Frank Andrews first turned down the position, and, offered a choice between George Kenney and Doolittle, MacArthur chose Kenney.”
Dugout knew he received his Medal of Honor for being a coward whereas Doolittle was the real deal. Not to mention that ‘ol Dugout couldn’t have anyone stealing any of his attention. What a loser. Oh well, it was the European theatres’ gain.
Doolittle was indeed the real deal, courageous in peace time flying exploits as well as wartime combat. He even (against orders) flew combat bombing missions while a general, risking his life.
Absolutely right Major Dan and thank you for this article and an opportunity to vent about one of the most embarrassing and misunderstood figures of the Second World War. Thank you also for your service sir.
A “historian” citing Wikipedia? Seriously? Why don’t you just cite your book, Bob?
As far as MacArthur being a coward, have you heard of Veracruz? The Rainbow Division?
Are you aware that Roosevelt ORDERED MacArthur to leave the Philippines?
What a loser.
Is this Gregory Stevens?
You should also read http://www.pacificwar.org.au/Philippines/Macescapes.html for more on MacArthur.
I’m also surprised you haven’t waded into https://www.historyandheadlines.com/top-ten-reasons-field-marshall-montgomery-great/ yet…
Sorry. I don’t give much weight to blogs with HTML from 1998.
You should show that to Bob and Major Dan. For some reason, they think MacArthur had open supply lines and was going to be reinforced.
If Mac had not blundered so severely and so early, he WOULD have been reinforced. Blowing the battle right off the bat by getting his air force destroyed and not contesting landings made getting to him problematic. Even well later, he was evacuated by PT boat, thus, surface boats could have brought at least some supplies.
Kinda like the way Goering supplied the Sixth Army? Something like that?
At least Von Paulus did not run away…
Speaking of running away, isn’t that what the Marines did at Chosin?
Paulus was ordered to stay in Stalingrad, just like MacArthur was ordered to leave the Philippines.
In hindsight, Hitler probably could have used those 300,000 experienced soldiers he left stranded in Stalingrad.
You pick the wrong battle, mon ami! Chosin was a magnificent fighting retreat where the Marines picked up all sorts of Army supplies along the way and caused massive casualties to the numerically superior Chinese that MacArthur said were not coming, eh?
In other words, they ran away. Why didn’t they stay and fight like the Army in the Philippines?
Where was the Marine recon?
Only citing was already well known fact. The sources are listed if you dispute any of what is quoted. You are really a petty person. Even what someone states facts, you have to find something wrong with it. Living with you must be quite the chore. One more thing, resorting to calling people names just shows that you don’t have any real point or facts left to bring to the discussion and you have been defeated. I truly feel sorry for you.
And how does MacArthur’s selection of Kenney over Doolittle support your tired-assed argument that he was a POS?
And why don’t you explain why Veracruz and the Rainbow Division don’t wholly refute your claim that MacArthur was a coward?
Uh, you ARE familiar with those events in MacArthur’s military career, right Bob?
Without doubt one of the greatest actors of the century. No one has done a better job of playing a general. Along with Montgomery and Rommel, also very over rated. Slim was probably the best Allied general but has been largely forgotten. You have to be on film to be remembered.
great read, very informative, more importantly it confirms my opinion of MacArthur. I had read about this flawed self-anointed, military genius; however, I had to read between the lines to separate myth from reality. Many of the myth spinners beatified this ostensibly average warrior, as though MacArthur’s specter was snooping over their shoulders.
This was an excellent and informative read, devoid of superfluous mythology one reads on some sites.
Thank you and please read our many other military related articles!
Your all idiots! Let’s see MacArthur was ordered by the president to suppress the veterans march, he was also ordered to leave the Philippines by President Roosevelt. And MacArthur gave his word the he would return to the Philippines to free the island. If any General was a jackass it was Eisenhower, he was nothing but a glorified clerk who never saw combat a day in his life.
So what happened to Doug Junior?
There was no Doug Junior.
So who was that living in the Village in the 60s?
What was the name of the Filipina that he kept as a Mistress in the Manila of the 30s?
Actress and singer Elizabeth Cooper, 1914-1960. Wacky Mac brought her to Washington with him when he became Army Chief of Staff, and when the scandal was reported in the news, Mac threatened to sue, but backed off when the truth was obviously going to come out. Mac then bribed Cooper to go back to the Philippines with a $15,000 bribe, allegedly delivered by Dwight Eisenhower, then MacArthur’s aide. Cooper refused to leave the US, and tried to land roles in Hollywood, unsuccessfully, and committed suicide in 1960. I guess this makes 11 reasons MacArthur is a jerk!
I can only imagine what would have occurred had we not had the atomic bomb and had to invade Japan. We probably would have had Patton sent to the Pacific, now THAT would have been an interesting clash of egos!
I am in total agreement with Major Dan. Most of what I have read has been similar to the response countering Major Dan’s article and I could never rationalize the adoration and respect heaped on MacArthur. I have felt that the only positive thing he accomplished was his handling of Japan after their defeat. I feel MacArthur is on an even level with Montgomery; the entire World War II allied effort would have benefited with the exclusion of both of them.
Monty and Mac have their die hard fans that will accept no criticism. Trust me!
Navy Marine propaganda machine never ceases to amaze. Yes the fighting in the Pacific would have ended up to 18 months earlier if Navy actually supported MacArthur with appropriate naval support and shipping. Please note the plan was for the navy to fight their way back to the Philippines and relieve the Bataan siege. Whether you cutoff Japanese access to vital raw materials by retaking the Philippines with a friendly population or taking Taiwan with a hostile Japanese population(think Okinawa). Additionally, taking Taiwan did not remove threat of having 400,000 Japanese soldiers in the possession of millions of Americans-Filipinos Again the original US war plan for defeat of Japan was to hold/use the Philippines to block her access to southern resources. Just as important today to block the Chinese from taking Taiwan. Only 80 miles away. Both lack the requirement for a massive navy to conduct frontal assaults on islands we don’t need. Keep in mind out of the 78 major amphibious landings the Navy/Marines were only led in 15. Army involved in every one.
The Navy CDR in Philippines with 27 submarines sank zero Japanese invasion ships in five months. This is damning when you consider that Germany started the war with 40 and almost brought Britain to her knees. The Navy blew up a an estimated six month supply of torpedos before the Japanese even landed hundreds of miles away. The Air commander blaming a land commander for not having appropriate air defense of airfields is rich really rich. Gets funnier with age. Telling you not to fly unescorted untrained B17 crews into the face of a prepared Japanese defense did not mean to leave yourself undefended.
The central pacific campaign required the US Navy to build a navy four to six times the size of the navy actually required to win the war before they were even ready to start the central pacific drive. But couldn’t spare even a half a dozen baby flattops when the navy had 135 carriers in the Pacific. Overkill much! MacArthur had a 112 to 1 casualty rate in his fights with the Japanese vs 12-1 for everyone else. Which included 63 amphibious landings mostly without carrier support. Yes he was a Jackass but he got results.