Given his resume (Bonus Army crackdown, Pacific theater in WW2, Korea, open hostility vs. Truman, etc.), what's your take on this American Legend?

Was he a hero, villain, or both?

Guess alot of people either aren't familiar with DM or they don't really care.

How unfortunate. He was one of this country's most notable generals ever, if not [i]the[/i]  most notable.

Just curious, how do you figure he helped win WWII?  From all accounts I've read he was pretty much a worthless prick.

He had some really good ideas, he was a vain bastard and Ike despised him.  Ike worked as his aid so I'd go with him on that one.  

He was important in making the USMA(West Point) what it is today, he was important in the Pacific but did not win WWII.  He was good in Korea.  He did not understand politics and forgot that the military in America, works for civilians.  He went to far and got the boot as he should have gotten.

He served more than 50 years, thru three major wars and was a legend.  He is a hero, who fell occasionally.

Almost everything is named after him in the P.I.

He was one of the biggest egos of the last century. He also got a lot of GIs killed by not bypassing Japanese-held islands and going straight to Japan in 1944 after Nimitz destroyed the Japanese fleet and air.

My father, who served in the Pacific in WWII, says MacArthur was not well-liked because he played fast and loose with the men's lives.

His Medal of Honor citation:

[b]MacARTHUR, DOUGLAS

Rank and organization: General, U.S. Army, commanding U.S. Army Forces in the Far East. Place and date: Bataan Peninsula, Philippine Islands. Entered service at: Ashland, Wis. Birth: Little Rock, Ark. G.O. No.: 16, 1 April 1942. Citation: For conspicuous leadership in preparing the Philippine Islands to resist conquest, for gallantry and intrepidity above and beyond the call of duty in action against invading Japanese forces, and for the heroic conduct of defensive and offensive operations on the Bataan Peninsula. He mobilized, trained, and led an army which has received world acclaim for its gallant defense against a tremendous superiority of enemy forces in men and arms. His utter disregard of personal danger under heavy fire and aerial bombardment, his calm judgment in each crisis, inspired his troops, galvanized the spirit of resistance of the Filipino people, and confirmed the faith of the American people in their Armed Forces. [/b]

My opinion is that one reason for the large number of Marine deaths and casualties during the Pacific campaign was due to the 'shared' command of McArthur and Nimitz. McArthur reportedly withheld Army support and refused to allow Nimitz some Air and Ship resources so that they could be saved for use in freeing the Philippines. Nimitz's view was the Philippines were not as critical to winning in the Pacific as some of the other island chains, that the Philippines could be bypassed.

McArthur had only one goal and it seemed to be all consuming...retaking the Philippines.

During Korea, he refused direct orders from the President. You can agree or disagree with his plan for Korea, but refusing direct, legal orders from the President is against all that the military stands for.

MacArthur was a complex person.  He rightly felt the US was obligated to free the Philippines.  They were a US posession and the Pilippinos were equivalent to US citizens to him.  Not unlike the drive by Thatcher to liberate the Falklands.

Overall his island hopping campaign was extremely sparing of his troops lives.  Once committed he felt troops should be used as best as possible in pursuit of the overall mission.

Anybody who thinks he was wasteful of lives would be well served by comparing casualty figures in the total campaign against say the battle of Anzio.  As far as attacking the home islands in 1944, that shows an abyssmal lack of knowledge of sealift, force projection capability, logistics available, the ability of the Japanese to defend the islands at the time, the willingness of the Japanese leadership to sacrifice to the last Japanese civilian and troop.  

There is a lot to be learned from the life & times of General Douglas A. MacArthur, both good and bad. All in all, I think America was lucky to have a man like him during that time in our history.

[url]http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/[/url]

I think he was a delusional meglomaniac. He refused to believe the attack on Pearl harbor was an act of war by the japanese government. As a result his air force was caught on the ground and destroyed.
He was forced to be frugal with resources, because his campaign was not essential to winning the Pacific war, and was lower on the priority list the Pacific Fleet and Nimitz.
The only time he got major resources was when the Pacific campaigns met in the Phillipines.
Actually Fillipinos were saved by "Bull" Halsey. His air strikes proved the Phillipines were an easier objective than Formosa(Taiwan). Taiwan was Admiral king`s preferred objective. But Halsey`s reports swayed the allied Chiefs of Staff and FDR.

my grandfather served as an infantryman ( BAR gunner ) under MacArthur in the Pacific theater....he wouldn't speak the man's name if he could avoid it.  I never knew my grandfather to hate anyone ( despite being a very gruff man ) but I am very sure he despised MacArthur.

These are the types of posts that I had envisioned. Thanks, everybody, for sharing your opinions. Good stuff.

Any opinions concerning his role in the "attack" against the Bonus Army in Washingtion?

I certainly hope you don't believe everything you read.  They must have enlisted someone from the National Enquirer to write that one.

The truth was, MacArthur seldom left his headquarters, very badly bungled preparations for a possible Japanese invasion, and lived the life of Riley in Australia while his men were being starved and tortured on the Bataan Death March.

His men sang the following, to the tune of "The Battle Hymn of the Republic":

[i]Dugout Doug MacArthur lies ashaking on the Rock
Safe from all the bombers and from any sudden shock
Dugout Doug is eating of the best food on Bataan
And his troops go starving on.

Dugout Doug's not timid, he's just cautious, not afraid
He's protecting carefully the stars that Franklin made
Four-star generals are rare as good food on Bataan
And his troops go starving on.

Dugout Doug is ready for his Krus Craft for the flee
Over bounding billows and the wildly raging sea
For the Japs are pounding on the gates of Old Bataan
And his troops go starving on...[/i]

For a bit of the truth, read "Prisoners of the Japanese" by Gavan Daws and "Ghost Soldiers" by Hampton Sides.

Whoops! I forgot to add my own commentary to my post:

[i]Then he abandoned them.[/i]

I agree with you about the book [b]Ghost Soldiers[/b], its a great book.

Not too familiar with Macarthur history in detail, but my understanding is, had Truman "slipped the leash", there would be no North Korean problem today, and possibly no chicom problem either.

True? Untrue?



Discuss.

Korea was one of the first times we fought a war with one hand tied behind our back. MacArthur wanted to untie that hand.

No one knows what would have happened by invading Chinatown and/or dropping the bomb.

Military brass always want to "take it to the bad guys": Patton in WWII wanted to invade Russia, MacArthur in Korea, the Joint Chiefs wanted to invade Cuba during the Cuban missle crisis.  It is hard to speculate what MIGHT have happened, good or bad.  

Frankly, I don't think MacArthur was smart enough to conduct a major war in Korea.  Everybody calls the Inchon amphibious assault a "brilliant stroke,"  but that's because it worked.  It could have equally turned out a disaster, and MacArthur would have looked like the ass he was.  Just my 2 cents.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but because of the international date line, wasn't Dec. 8th in the Phillipines, and Dec. 7th in Hawaii actually the same day? I've always believed the initial attacks occured at the same time. ==Bob