MacArthur's MOH

it's been a long time since I've read on MacArthur.........
so, Gen. Marshall and the Rossevelt wanted to counter Japanese propaganda by awarding Mac the MOH ..? and Mac opposed giving the award to Gen. Wainwright...?? of course, it would 'look' better if MacArthur got the MOH.....but was it morally/etc correct? not only to give it to Mac, but for Mac to be opposed to Wainwright getting it??


http://www.homeofheroes.com/brotherhood/generals_2.html

Wainwright's troops' food running low, supplies not coming in, bombarded by planes and arty

italics mine
this sounds like Mac's brain was upside down....your thoughts and information appreciated

 

Concur.

 

IMO you are being overly kind.

 

The award was more political than based on actual military merit for the job of defending the PI, which brings no credit to either MacArthur or FDR. Much like another Mac in US military history (Geo. B. McClellan of Civil War fame) He had a overdeveloped opinion of himself. The difference was that MacArthur had both talent and personal courage. I do not doubt that would have done as he expected Wainwright to do, but he came from both a different time and ethos.

MacArthur treated subordinates and allies shamefully on a professional level, yet among the American public of the time he was the most popular and respected US commander until Eisenhower's rise to notoriety. A fact FDR exploited to its fullest extent. The nick-name 'Dugout Doug' was unfair, but understandable considering the harshness of conditions suffered by US-Filipino troops on Bataan. Look closely at the accommodations of high ranking Allied commanders (Monty, Ike, Nimitz etc.) and tell me how many lived in a tunnel complex that suffered repeated air attack's?

He was never the ideal image of a American battle commander, yet in the crucible of war he was more than simply effective. It would have been better had MacArthur accepted the award in the name of his troops than just for himself, and better that shown greater loyalty to those subordinate officers below him, but he wasn't built that way.

He was a SOB at times, but one that did win battles and that is better than a well mannered dud.

 

MacArthur treated subordinates hey considered to be "disloyal" shamefully..."Loyal" subordinates were treated fairly well.

"notoriety"


What bad qualities and/or deeds was Eisenhower notorious for? However, we are reasonably certain of MacArthur's bad qualities and deeds.

The harsh conditions of Malinta Tunnel and repeated air attacks or artillery bombardments began after Dugout Doug left Corregidor. Up until MacArthur left Corregidor, the island had suffered through very few air raids and bombardments.

"Dugout Doug" was hardly unfair, AFAIK, MacArthur made only one visit to Bataan. Instead, he remained safely ensconced on Corregidor and sent his subordinates to do his bidding...Logical, yes - his presence was not militarily needed on Bataan, but from a troop morale standpoint, more visits certainly would have helped. MacArthur may have braved a few Japanese bombs and shells on Corregidor, but those "feats" are lost on the men in Bataan.

I'd say that you are being gracious calling MacArthur "more than simply effective."

 

'''I fired him because he wouldn't respect the authority of the President. I didn't fire him because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that's not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three-quarters of them would be in jail.''

let me add the Korean War debacle where the 8th Army was hit a big blow, with a big retreat, and the X Corps evacuated to sea.......plus his 'dealings' in politics and his removal...these are phenomenal aspects and thread by itself...this tells you a lot about him

''Losing the war on the ground and increasingly divorced from reality, he reverted to living in his fantasies. MacArthur’s public statements became more and more provocative. He began to openly challenge US policy in the Far East''

this is a key point---kind of like some Germans and Japanese wanting to go down in flames and the delusions and dreams in 1945 <>''we can get a negotiated peace''.....
he could not/did not want to grasp the gravity of what was or could be happening in the PI.....I'm thinking it was a huge shock to many that the US could lose in the PI, especially the general in charge of the PI defense !! along with the common 'delusional' hopes that many people have in ''hopeless'' situations...etc...this is not what a general should do
just like many people could never believe OJ Simpson was a murderer, many people cannot believe someone in Mac's position could be a 'jerk'--be 'human' like everyone else

 

I never liked the idea of Wainwright's MOH.....

" I will never surrender while I have the means to resist"

Devereaux didn't get one at Wake.....

 

Neither did MacArthur...

MacArthur's distaste apparently did not extend to his own unearned Medal of Honor.

 

I am with you on that one.....General officers should not be eligible; unless they dive on a grenade

 

Right now I am in the process of reading "American Caesar". I was hoping that it would be an objective view on Mac, but so far it seems to be a glowing worshipfest of the 5 star egotistical asswipe.

Right now where I am at in the book, he is still a 1st Lt, and just finished his tour of the Orient with his dad (and his mumsey-Mac was a total momma's boy), who had been observing the Russo-Japanese War. Mac might be a total douche who has an extremely high opinion of himself, but the man is no coward. One instance is when he was leading a detail in the jungles of Luzon, his detachment was ambushed by two Philippine insurgents. Mac stood fast while the rest of his men sought cover to return fire. He drew his service revolver and dropped both of the insurgents in two shots.

And to address the notion that he was free with throwing his men into meat grinders, that simply isn't true. One excerpt in the book pointed out that there were more US casualties in the Battle of the Bulge (the entire campaign, not just the part covered in the movie) than in the entire campaign of the Southwest Pacific Theater of Operations.

But right now in the book he is a young and budding douche, establishing his style and demeanor. I hate him more than I did before, and I'm only 3 chapters into the book.

 

Depends on how you define the campaign...because it can be fairly argued that the campaign began with MacArthur getting his butt thrown out of the Philippines, and he then spent the rest of the war struggling to get back. Which would mean far more US casualties in the SoWestPac than the Battle of the Bulge.

 

my CO gave me that book around 1987 IIRC....wish I could say for certain I got the same feeling from the book, but it's been so long since I've read it........my 'gut' memory agrees with you.........a lot of books are one-sided and/or leave out details or exaggerate others to sell....I just read Wolf's Lair and it seems to do the same for hitler!

but Mac was able to hit the enemy where he wasn't therefore minimal casualties ........whereas in the Bulge, there was no way for amphibious/air end arounds ...?? Mac had to learn that at Buna, no? that isn't rocket scientist strategy....

yes, exactly.....many unsung heroes that really deserve the MOH died in battle, forgotten and/or never even heard of.......

 

first sentence says it all.....did he not totally change his plans at the 'last minute', losing mucho supplies??

 

Remember MacArthur was responsible for both the largest surrender of US troops in our history (the Philippines) and the longest retreat (8th Army in Korea). Neither campaign was pre-ordained to be the debacles they became, though the Philippines was a bad situation from the get-go. MacArthur, had he fought a better campaign there, we could have resisted longer, seriously upset the Japanese timetable for conquest, and tied up more Japanese forces. The situation in Korea was of his own making, in fact he had to ignore the orders of the President and the JCS in order to get himself into that predicament.
As for Wainwright, he did a credible job with the situation as it stood when MacArthur dumped it in his lap. He displayed courage, and was liked and respected by the troops. He shared the dangers and hardships with them. It's hard to bullsh*it the troops, Wainwright was known by them as a fighting general and we all know the sobriquet they attached to MacArthur, "Dugout Doug".

As a general rule I agree, but I do think Vandegrift's for Guadalcanal was deserved as was Admiral Callaghan's. I used to question Callaghan's because he didn't really fight a particularly good fight from a tactical perspective, and I thought why give him a Medal for getting himself killed. Then I read an account where it explained he knew he was overmatched, he even stated he doubted they would survive the coming fight, but the Marines needed to be protected. So he orders his ships into battle knowing he, and probably most of his sailors wouldn't be coming back out (1,439 sailors were killed).

 

the Korean War debacle was classic Mac self aggrandisement/etc !
1 there were numerous and varied warnings that the Chinese would get involved--Mac said air would ''slaughter them''---!
some of these warnings were indirect Chinese quotes -from foreign countries --printed in newspapers !! [ IIRC ]
2 stringing out your forces is bad strategy, --good thing USMC Gen. Smith did not listen to Mac and Almond
3 weather and terrain were definitely not--super not--conducive to moving US forces up to the Yalu [one intel Marine said a bunch of boy scouts could hold off the Marines in that weather and terrain...another said it would be tough just taking a picnic basket through that terrain
I was going to put out a thread on this same topic....in fact I started it with mucho information, but didn't think it would be popular..
.Mac totally caused the debacle....he didn't care about weather, terrain or the Chinese...he just said [ more or less ] '''get to the Yalu", don't worry about the Chinese, etc'' '..... I will put out his quotes, etc if you want.....

Mac totally shrugged off the Chinese being able to interfere [ this is undeniable ]----then look what happened ! total neagtive turn around in the war--retreat/evacuation, etc....Mac was out of reality

''2 November an American cavalry regiment was mauled by Chinese troops in northwestern Korea. In his office in Tokyo, MacArthur did not believe that the Chinese would cross the Yalu in force. If they did, he was sure that they would be slaughtered by air attack'' italics/bold mine ..... Mac did say this

the Chinese gave the US Army and ROK units a very bloody nose before their much larger Nov 26-Dec attack....and still Mac shrugged off the Chinese