http://www.armchairgeneral.com/commentary-on-the-truman-macarthur-controversy.htm All things military history! Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:05:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 http://www.armchairgeneral.com/commentary-on-the-truman-macarthur-controversy.htm/comment-page-1#comment-8437 JC Sat, 22 Aug 2009 11:26:22 +0000 http://www.armchairgeneral.com/?p=2161#comment-8437 Mac is a good example of a recurring theme among so many military men: that they don't understand, or even perceive, that the military part is only one small part of a multifacetted situation. This is OK as long as 1. the person in question is quite clear that he is completely subject to the orders of the US *civil* leadership, and 2. that civil leadership is competent. Mac is certainly not a singular case; military grumbling has occurred plenty of times. However it would be so much better if we educated the people who become our officers in ALL of these fields (e.g. diplomacy, econoics, sociology etc. etc.). The lamentable way Iraq has gone is a good example, where several high officers did NOT understand this, and the result was the use, exclusively in some cases (Odierno....) of heavy handed tactics and alienation of the population. Mac is a good example of a recurring theme among so many military men: that they don’t understand, or even perceive, that the military part is only one small part of a multifacetted situation. This is OK as long as 1. the person in question is quite clear that he is completely subject to the orders of the US *civil* leadership, and 2. that civil leadership is competent. Mac is certainly not a singular case; military grumbling has occurred plenty of times. However it would be so much better if we educated the people who become our officers in ALL of these fields (e.g. diplomacy, econoics, sociology etc. etc.). The lamentable way Iraq has gone is a good example, where several high officers did NOT understand this, and the result was the use, exclusively in some cases (Odierno….) of heavy handed tactics and alienation of the population.

]]> http://www.armchairgeneral.com/commentary-on-the-truman-macarthur-controversy.htm/comment-page-1#comment-8335 Jim Tue, 28 Jul 2009 06:54:28 +0000 http://www.armchairgeneral.com/?p=2161#comment-8335 It's hard to take you seriously when you: 1. Compare casualty rates of the bug out of the 8th Army with the attack of Okinawa. How do you compare a retreat with an attack against an entrenched Japanese enemy defending their home territory. Of course an attacking force against a well prepared enemy will incur higher casualties. 2. Describe the retreat of the 8th Army as a withdrawal made with “consummate skill”. History are you reading. You need to read Donald Knox’s The Korean War: Pusan to Chosin to read actual recollections of men who were there to understand that this was an disorganized bug out. 3. Give credit to MacArthur for the ’51 counteroffensive, when any student of the war knows that Gen. Ridgeway was responsible for and directed this offensive 4. In you discussion of MacArthur's sacking, you leave out crucial and significant actions. MacArthur's letter to his congressman was a full discourse of disagreement with his commander. Sorry, but field commanders are not afforded this luxury. He was directed not to issue communiqués to the press. He constantly ignored this and continued to publically push for his views for the course of the war. If anything Truman took too long to pull the plug on MacArthur. It’s hard to take you seriously when you:
1. Compare casualty rates of the bug out of the 8th Army with the attack of Okinawa. How do you compare a retreat with an attack against an entrenched Japanese enemy defending their home territory. Of course an attacking force against a well prepared enemy will incur higher casualties.
2. Describe the retreat of the 8th Army as a withdrawal made with “consummate skill”. History are you reading. You need to read Donald Knox’s The Korean War: Pusan to Chosin to read actual recollections of men who were there to understand that this was an disorganized bug out.
3. Give credit to MacArthur for the ’51 counteroffensive, when any student of the war knows that Gen. Ridgeway was responsible for and directed this offensive
4. In you discussion of MacArthur’s sacking, you leave out crucial and significant actions. MacArthur’s letter to his congressman was a full discourse of disagreement with his commander. Sorry, but field commanders are not afforded this luxury. He was directed not to issue communiqués to the press. He constantly ignored this and continued to publically push for his views for the course of the war. If anything Truman took too long to pull the plug on MacArthur.

]]>