Was General McArthur just a military bloke or a great thinker?

Question

I personally think current US politicos could learn so much from him, he sought to understand the people he was dealing with, doesn't seem to be much evidence of that now.

Answer 1

While he was most certainly a pompous a--, he also was an excellent soldier who thought not only of his mission or his men, but the civilians who were involved in whatever his duty was at the time.

He treated the Filipinos with dignity and respect and greatly valued their military contribution, particularly their guerilla skills which kept the Island from disintigrating while under Japanese control and greatly assisted his efforts to defeat the Japanese when he "returned."

His political skill is most evident in his success in Post-War Japan when he might have well have been crowned King. He insisted that the Japanese also be treated with dignity and respect and was highly influential in the revitalization of that nation. (This did not make him popular with his own troops or the "Kingmakers" in Washington!)

MacArthur lived through the War that the Treaty of Versailles had wrought and was determined not to have a "do over," which could have happened had the Occupation Force under his command abused the Japanese. This was VERY difficult for the men AND MacArthur to swallow having just survived an horrific ordeal at the hands of the Japanese, yet he was forward thinking enough to do the "right" thing as has been borne out by the state of Japan today and our relations with her.

To coin a popular phrase seen here often: Compare and contrast how both German and Japanese Officers were treated by Allied forces. Some (i.e. Patton) threatened to shoot any soldier seen saluting ANY German. MacArthur almost went so far as to require it. Note that Japanese officers were allowed to keep their swords - some which had been in their families for centuries. Technically this was a big no-no.

He was NOT popular with President Truman, especially because there were rumblings about MacArthur running against him for President and MacArthur was certainly more popular with the American people than Truman. MacArthur was a terrific P.R. man and always knew how to present himself in the best light to the American people.

The "Powers" Stateside eventually did their best to discredit him, to prevent him doing so. Hence: "Old Soldiers never die, they simply fade away...".

Answer 2

Douglas MacArthur was a thinker. He thought through every action he would have to take and worked out the worst case scenario and would do everything possible to avoid unnecessary death and destruction.



In the surrender of the Japanese, he knew how difficult this would be for the Japanese Emperor and the Japanese aristocracy. He therefore ensured from the outset that no blame for the war was ever to be allowed to be put upon the Emperor.



MacArthur had studied well and knew the Japanese very well indeed. He knew that with their Emperor the Japanese people would go down the road to a democracy and end their culture of war.



In some ways it was the Korean war which was MacArthur's undoing. It was an unwinable war from the outset. People should understand that when taking on the Chinese People's Liberation Army, they can afford to lose a million soldiers every week and still keep coming. This almost literally happened.



If politicians and generals spent time learning about an enemy and how best to deal with that enemy psychologically, then there would be less loss of life and at the end of a campaign there would be a sensible end-game and a sensible exit strategy.



None of the above seems to have happened re-Iraq etc.

We're now bogged down in a no-win situation from which we will have to drag ourselves out backwards. It does not look good.



It is a serious mistake to under estimate people, just because they have brown skin. The people we are dealing with are from the first ever civilization. We must never forget this. They have pride and they're gonna show you what war means and send us to hell in the process.



The Whitehouse should damn well wake up!

Answer 3

Neither. McArthur was a showman, loudmouth and bigot. Suprisingly then only good thing about him is he did try to avoid the ordeer to evacuate himself and his staff and fight with the troops in the Phillipines conflict. However, he was a lack lustre genral as was proved later in the War and during the Korean Conflict. If he had obeyed his orders then the Korean Conflict would have ended in its first year because the Chinese would have never got involved, the only reason they did is because McArthur decided to go hell for leather to the Border between North Korea and China and publicly announced his intentions to continue if need into Manchuria.

As for his pre WW2 commands, yes he did try to work with the natives of the Phillapines and raise a defence force for those islands, the trouble was, he wanted it as a support service much like the coloured troops under his command. He classed anyone who was not american as a lower form, refused to co operate with the dutch, australian, new zealand and british forces in the south east pacific theatre and point blankly refused to support any of Nimitz desires in the Central pacific.

The American forces would have bi passed the costly battles of retaking the phillapines if McArthur did not have the ear of The American Genral Staff and the President and gone straight for Okinawa and the Japanese Main Islands in 1944 instead of 1945.

As for the surrender ceremony in Tokyo bay, it was a huge photo oportunity and PR stunt to have the Japs surrender to him personally, he was so put out when the American Goverment agreed the Emperor was not to sign the documents.

Answer 4

McArthur,

I feel that McArthur was a great general. But he strayed from the course when he thought we should fight the battle in Korea.



What happened with that war? (What is it the 50th or 51st parallel?) No land was lost or gained and now we have a crazy dictator in North Korea (You've gotta watch Team America if you haven't done so yet for a laugh).



You may think I'm nuts but I can't support a war monger, a man who was trained for battle as a hero. My heros are Ghandi, Mandella, Martin Luther King, Mother Theresa, you know... Peaceful loving people. They fought wars but there were no casulties.

Answer 5

By seeking to understand your own men (and women) as a military leader as well as the needs of your enemy and their goals and issues, you would create a win, win situation. General McArthur was different from other leaders, both military and otherwise because he had the ability to see conflict from sides in an unbiased view, thus creating a soloution for all sides.

Answer 6

Hi,

I was looking for a free download World War II Pacific Heroes I found it here: http://bitly.com/1qXE45P



Finally the full version is avaiable!

With very realistic imposing scenery and with great quality 3D graphics, this is the ideal option for combining fun, action and adrenaline.

It's amazing.

Answer 7

MacArthur is over-rated.



Perhaps one thing politicians would LOVE to learn from him is how he manipulates or use media or propaganda to make him larger than life...or enlarge whatever small wins or victory he achieves...or cover-up all those foolish military and administrative (when he "governed" Manila and Japan) bloopers...



MacArthur was well known to have kept a team of army photographers and filmers...who'd jump off the (what do you call that sea transport that opens up front to unload troops during beach landings?) ahead of him so they can set up cameras...and MacArthur always insist that they shoot from a low angle making his images larger than life.



MacArthur is an egomaniac...and perhaps during his time (1930s-1950s)...his mind and his view of soldiery and generalship was still full of concepts of the ancient world's stories of Julius Ceasar, etc., etc. Perhaps he must've thought of himself as a modern world (20th century) Julius Ceasar...and there were instances when his skewed concept of democracy and perhaps lack of appreciation for civilian supremacy over the military was displayed; e.g. he arrived late than his commander in chief, then President Truman, for an important meeting (hope my history is correct)...deliberately upstaging his boss in public....acting like a pompous primadonna.

Answer 8

I'm sorry I totally disagree with you. MacArthur was very average and over-rated, an egomania mommy's boy.



As Chief of Staff in the early 1930s he resisted efforts to motorise the US army, resulting in a severe lack of tank development and, more importantly, armoured warfare doctrine in the US military. This led to US tanks being hugely out-gunned by their German counterparts a decade later. in his defence, the military was bing run on a shoestring at the time.



In 1941-2 he was utterly defeated by a far smaller Japanese force in the Philippines, despite having plenty of knowledge they were coming. he shipped out to Australia where he harassed Australian commanders who were winning the first landf battlesd against the Japanese at Milne Bay, constantly attacking them for being 'too slow' when in fact their methodical approach worked very well. At this time he was prone at accepting the word of US reconaissance pilots over and above Australian commanders on the spot. He later forced the removal of successful Australian commanders in New Guinea. He made very poor use of intelligence generally.



He was obsessed with recaptuing the Philippines and avenging his defeat, to the detriment of the overall US campaign against Japan. He had the man (General Homma) who defeated him in 1942 executed on trumped up charges after a kangaroo court. He ensured the Japanese emperor never faced up to what he did, producing Japan's 'we did nothing wrong' attitude to the war that we see today.



In Korea he totally misunderstood the nature of his 'limited war' task, needlessly and foolishly provoking China into the war and precipitating a huge UN defeat and prolonged war. He tried to subvert the president ignoring the important democractic principle of the military being subordinate to the government- all out of ego.



He never defeated an enemy without massive air and naval superiority and overwhelmingly superior forces. He was a bit dumb.



His actions in New Guinea and Korea show he had only limited understanding of other people. His supposed insight into 'the asian mind' was based on his living like an emperor on 1930s Philippines, and was a bit of a fraud.

Answer 9

Mac was both. He came from a different school. He understood Alexander who not only understood his men but his enemies as well.

Answer 10

He was a General who knew when to attack and when not to.

Answer 11

he used his great military expertise and thoughts to fuel and power his military actions.

Answer 12

both, and believe it or not, he definately had minimizing casualties in the front of his mind

Answer 13

how right you are.