Greatest military blunder of WWII

timshatz · 08-09-2007, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcel

Agreed, but I think on a board like this you must be able to analyse things and talk about what could have done differently. That's the whole purpose of these treads, isn't it. I don't mean burning a general to the ground, but just analysing if his descision was right or wrong given the information we have now.

Marcel, you are right. I was thinking the same thing last night before I went to sleep. The board is where these things are tossed around, analysed and generally considered. It's a good thing to take a decision apart, ramifications considered. We all post here because we like doing it and......snnnnoooooorrrrrreeeeeee

Well, I had a good thread going in my head before I fell asleep.

timshatz · 08-09-2007, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael

Ignorant. Wow. I thought everyone was entilted to an OPINION. The fact that you do not agree does not neccessary make me ignorant. How is it that a whole nation followed a man that wanted to exterminate an entire religious faith (apparently got 6 million)? Ignorance? Arrogance? Fear? Self-righteous Indignation? Blind obedience?
Maybe they just didn't see letting any other OPINION have a chance or give it a germ of credence. After all majority rules and might makes right.
BTW Marshall was the plan man after Japans defeat.
Question. Why was McArthur considered a hero when he lost a whole US territory when Kimmel and Short were ostracized for losing the fleet at Hawaii?

I don't believe the call of ignorance is based on your having an opinion but the caliber of the opinion. If you were to go on to an astronomy board and declare the moon was made of cheese, the same thing would happen.

As for your question, it is a good one. My guess would be the loss of the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor negated War Plan Orange's early design. There was no fleet to come across the Pacific and relieve or resupply McArthur. Hence, his loss was less unexpected.

Further, the McArthur publicity machine was running at full tilt. The US was running into defeat after defeat (Java Sea, Wake Island, Guam, ect) and the last thing we needed was another, relatively famous, General turning out to be a loser. Especially one that ran Public Relations as well as he did. If he had been a dud, he would've been eased out like Ghormley was during the Guadalcanal Campaign. But he turned out to be pretty good, if vain, in running the War in he SW Pacific.

timshatz · 08-09-2007, 08:32 AM

Adler, just for fun and games...

The above poll has settled down to three major responses. Barbarossa, Pearl Harbor and Hitler Declaring war on the US. Is it possible to break down the responses based on Nation? Not on name, but where a person is from. It might be interesting.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 08-09-2007, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aussie1001

I must post a hypothetical post....
If hitler hadn't broken the treaty he had with starlin he would have made it easier for him although at that stage he had already made some screw ups....
it is all very easy for us to comment though at the time the decisions might have seemed a good idea although some would argue that hitler was a bit coo coo.......

Hitler and Stalin hated each other. It was only a matter of time before Stalin invaded Germany so it really did not matter.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 08-09-2007, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timshatz

Adler, just for fun and games...

The above poll has settled down to three major responses. Barbarossa, Pearl Harbor and Hitler Declaring war on the US. Is it possible to break down the responses based on Nation? Not on name, but where a person is from. It might be interesting.

You would have to start the poll all over again or go through each one and see what country they came from. Sorry but I dont want to take the time for that.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 08-09-2007, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael

Ignorant. Wow. I thought everyone was entilted to an OPINION. The fact that you do not agree does not neccessary make me ignorant. How is it that a whole nation followed a man that wanted to exterminate an entire religious faith (apparently got 6 million)? Ignorance? Arrogance? Fear? Self-righteous Indignation? Blind obedience?
Maybe they just didn't see letting any other OPINION have a chance or give it a germ of credence. After all majority rules and might makes right.
BTW Marshall was the plan man after Japans defeat.
Question. Why was McArthur considered a hero when he lost a whole US territory when Kimmel and Short were ostracized for losing the fleet at Hawaii?

No you are correct, you are entitled to an opinion.

Would you like to hear my opinion?

Your opinion was pretty ignorant...

I am sure just about everyone here will agree with me.

drgondog · 08-09-2007, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael

Question. Why was McArthur considered a hero when he lost a whole US territory when Kimmel and Short were ostracized for losing the fleet at Hawaii?

It might have something to do with the defense at Bataan when the US Navy had no option but to let the Marines and Army fight and die. Usually when you have lost complete control of the Sea and Air and subject to overwhelming odds on the ground and ponded from sea with zero hope of rescue or re-supply - folks will forgive.

I could be wrong.

He did conduct a masterful strategy in recapturing lost ground and the Phillipines with losses less than Normandy campaign - in contrast with the horrific losses the USMC took under Nimitz (and NO I am not taking a shot at Nimitz - just different approaches in isolating and destroying the Japanese.

It is sometimes hard to imagine that 8th AF, and USA (each) at the Bulge, had about the same number of casualties as entire USMC during WWII... and all three a lot more than McArthur's losses.

William Manchester, as a Marine, expressed his contempt and disdain for McArthur prior to researching American Ceasar but came away with enormous respect for him after he wrote his book.

Regards,

Bill

timshatz · 08-09-2007, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

You would have to start the poll all over again or go through each one and see what country they came from. Sorry but I dont want to take the time for that.

Cool. Just curious about it. If there were an easy way...but there ain't.

Thanks for the response.

syscom3 · 08-09-2007, 11:18 AM

Say what you want about MacArthur, but his success's after his defeat in the PI negated all his short comings and vanities.

You might say that in May 1942, he knew exactly what needed to be done to defeat the Japanese and implimented it with astounding efficiency.

drgondog · 08-13-2007, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by syscom3

Say what you want about MacArthur, but his success's after his defeat in the PI negated all his short comings and vanities.

You might say that in May 1942, he knew exactly what needed to be done to defeat the Japanese and implimented it with astounding efficiency.

He`was the one I voted for..

FLYBOYJ · 08-13-2007, 01:08 PM

Aside from what could be said about MacArthur, my wife's grandfather Capt. Frank Grady was on his staff. Grady spoke very favorably about MacArthur even though he spent 4 years as a POW.

Amazon.com: Surviving the Day: An American Pow in Japan: Books: Frank J. Grady,Rebecca Dickson

Michael · 08-17-2007, 08:38 PM

Thanks for the well thought out answers. On the same note, What did Wainwright think of MacArthur? (after) I remember seeing old news reels that showed Mac had him on the Missouri for the signing, didn't he?

Aussie1001 · 08-17-2007, 11:07 PM

I know adler note though that i did say hypothetical

lucanus · 08-18-2007, 05:28 AM

Before Dec 7th, '41, General Macarthur was a Field Marshal in the pay
of the Phillipino Government...Having already retired from the US Army.
Hence the fancy Cover (Jarhead for 'hat') he is always seen in.

Has anybody in here ever heard of the of the Morgenthau Plan? Makes
an interesting counterpoint to the Marshall Plan...

Quote:

The Morgenthau Plan was a plan for the occupation of Germany after the Second World War that advocated harsh measures intended to remove Germany's ability to wage war ever again.

In the original proposal this was to be achieved in three main steps.

Germany was to be partitioned into two independent states.
Germany's main centers of mining and industry, including the Saar area, the Ruhr area and Upper Silesia were to be Internationalized or annexed by neighboring nations.
All heavy industry was to be dismantled or otherwise destroyed...

Morgenthau Plan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

timshatz · 08-18-2007, 09:24 AM

Yeah, heard of the Morgenthau plan. Something cooked up by a guy name Henry Morgenthau, Head of the Treasury (I think, going on memory). Pretty much neutered the German state. It was one of a bunch of ideas floated that had no real chance of realization.

On the down side, Goebbels got hold of the outline and used it as a propaganda tool. Bummer, it was a dud idea that was more useful to the Nazis than anyone else.