Man Douglas MacArthur was a massive tool. He basically for his own glory kept pushing those men further and further into the trap.

I think that you will find that a close study of damn near every marque super hero military type will uncover a hell of a lot of flaws and unsavory stories. By definition they are YUGE type A ego maniacs with messianic complexes ..etc.. after all their job is sending their own men into battle to be killed and to kill.
Most very successful types in virtually every field have these same characteristics. Sure there are a few Bradleys but they are few and far between.
Dugout Doug might well be the alpha prime example of ego and self aggrandizement but he is by no means the exception.
My dad served under DD and hated him but he also knew he was fighting under a brilliant military leader that will lead , whoever is left standing, to victory.
Fascinating man.
And that PBS feature was GREAT..lots of new stuff, very well done.
God Bless those Marines and US Army troops.

What was your opinion of the 31st RCT?

Fifty years later at family reunion two cousins found out they were at Chosin at the same time!

One, a Marine trapped - the a other Navy pilot dropping napalm on the Chinese !

Original:

The only problem with that is MacArthur did not lead them to victory. I understand that victory has many mistresses but defeat is a lonely *****. Ichon was risky and it worked. But it was a calculated risk. What MacArthur did by trying to push the North Koreans into China and unifying the country was careless and was proven to be insane when China spilled over the border.

A guy in the piece said something poignant. Say China were to land in Tampico (disregarding the Monroe Doctrine for a moment) and attempted to push the Mexicans up past the Rio Grande. We would eventually spill over and try to halt them somewhere. We would not let the Chinese get close to our border. That is what China did and I do not blame them.

The footage of those men that died of exposure was horrifying. Temperatures reaching 30-60 below zero.

ce1994 said:

---

Original:

The only problem with that is MacArthur did not lead them to victory. I understand that victory has many mistresses but defeat is a lonely *****. Ichon was risky and it worked. But it was a calculated risk. What MacArthur did by trying to push the North Koreans into China and unifying the country was careless and was proven to be insane when China spilled over the border.

A guy in the piece said something poignant. Say China were to land in Tampico (disregarding the Monroe Doctrine for a moment) and attempted to push the Mexicans up past the Rio Grande. We would eventually spill over and try to halt them somewhere. We would not let the Chinese get close to our border. That is what China did and I do not blame them.

The footage of those men that died of exposure was horrifying. Temperatures reaching 30-60 below zero.

---

just to clear up. My dad served under DD in WW2 so ,yes, he did lead them to victory.

Re Korea. It is a great tragedy and an everlasting and festering sore in Asia that our intel failed as did Douglas. Best Korea was totally defeated and there should have been a way to finish the job without having to threaten the Yalu.
Would love to hear from our military types as to their opinion and strategy that we COULD have used prior to the yellow hordes crossing the river

Once the bullets start flying the friction of war will dictate many different responses. On one level MacArthur was right to try to cure the problem once and for all so we would never have had to waste time and effort with the lunatics that have run the north for the last few decades or possibly dealing with them in a future war. His mistake was ignoring the intelligence he did not want to hear that impunged his strategy (actually surpressing it and getting his staff to give him the intelligence the way he wanted to hear it). If he had listened to the intel people who knew what was happening, he might have pulled up sooner than the Yalu and ended with a better situation than the present and a lot of US and allied and countless Chinese lives saved. But that is the friction of war you don't know what you will get. If he had stopped at the parallel who's to say we wouldn't have had a second Korean War already, think Bush I stopping in southern Iraq so that Bush 2 had to finish it. In 1991 would the Islamist insurgencies have been as bold as they were in 2003, who knows?

This is a great question regarding the nature of pride. It can work for a general in helping lead them to victory, but it can also cause them to take (or not take) risks.

Yeah....what did y'all think of the ARMY's performance East of Chosin?

The Original AG 76 said:

---

ce1994 said:

---

Original:

The only problem with that is MacArthur did not lead them to victory. I understand that victory has many mistresses but defeat is a lonely *****. Ichon was risky and it worked. But it was a calculated risk. What MacArthur did by trying to push the North Koreans into China and unifying the country was careless and was proven to be insane when China spilled over the border.

A guy in the piece said something poignant. Say China were to land in Tampico (disregarding the Monroe Doctrine for a moment) and attempted to push the Mexicans up past the Rio Grande. We would eventually spill over and try to halt them somewhere. We would not let the Chinese get close to our border. That is what China did and I do not blame them.

The footage of those men that died of exposure was horrifying. Temperatures reaching 30-60 below zero.

---

just to clear up. My dad served under DD in WW2 so ,yes, he did lead them to victory.

Re Korea. It is a great tragedy and an everlasting and festering sore in Asia that our intel failed as did Douglas. Best Korea was totally defeated and there should have been a way to finish the job without having to threaten the Yalu.
Would love to hear from our military types as to their opinion and strategy that we COULD have used prior to the yellow hordes crossing the river

---

There wasn't one short of withdrawing to a defensive position and digging in. Manpower was stupidly lopsided in favor of the Chinese by that point. The only way to stop the Chinese was a diplomatic solution, and MacArthur wasn't thinking diplomacy.

terata said:

---

Yeah....what did y'all think of the ARMY's performance East of Chosin?

---

Those boys went through hell. If you aren't familiar with LTC Don C. Faith I recommend you look up what he did to get his men out. He paid the ultimate price but a lot of his men (and many others) were saved from certain death or Chinese imprisonment by his actions East of Chosin.

I'll admit a limited knowledge of the Korean War, but I seem to recall that it was Truman, not McArthur, who decided to go to the Yalu instead of stopping at the 38th parallel. Do I recall incorrectly?

AEK, I read Appleman's East of Chosin. Your analysis is correct, a RCT vs 100K was absolute hell.

Canyon:

From what I have read both Truman and MacArthur wanted to push to the border. Truman even hinted they might go atomic if need be. When it went bad Truman wasted to pull back. MacArthur wanted to keep pushing.

An older brother was First Sgt. of Weapons Company in 31stRCT. KIA on 3 December 1950.
Buried in North Korea to this day. The following is a true story, "On morning of 4 December, my mother told my Dad that she had talked with my brother on the front porch of the house late that night and he just wanted to tell her he would not be coming home. My Dad, a WWI AEF veteran, sorta sluffed it off. First week of January the telegram arrived notifying of the death, 3 December 1950" A mother's intuition?

Colonel MacLean's performance is the one I would question. It is evident the LTC Faith did all that he could to try and extract what he could, however it was Maclean that continued an offensive action even in the face of overwhelming evidence that he was being flanked.

The Army holding the right flank of the Marines did help a lot of them get out because Hagaru-ri would have fallen before the Marines could set up a defensive perimeter.

Have read up on this a lot and my perception is that MacArthur's history in the Korean War was two horrible mistakes bookending one genius move. The fact that he didn't catch an inkling of the invasion and reacted slow is unforgiveable. He saved his reputation with Incheon, but he screwed up royally by getting caught by the Chinese.

Quote:

---

The fact that he didn't catch an inkling of the invasion

---

He (or his staff) did catch an inkling, they choose to ignore it as not fitting with the strategy they wanted to execute. The idea that US intelligence was caught with their pants down by the Chinese intervention is a fallacy.

BQ78 said:

---

Quote:

---

The fact that he didn't catch an inkling of the invasion

---

He (or his staff) did catch an inkling, they choose to ignore it as not fitting with the strategy they wanted to execute. The idea that US intelligence was caught with their pants down by the Chinese intervention is a fallacy.

---

This. Dugout Doug had a history of "cultivating" battle staffs that were pliable to his vision, and bought into his cult of personality.

I am a believer in losing lives saves lives. Grant hastened the end of the Civil War by jamming overwhelming force down the south's throat. That ultimately saved lives but cost a great deal in the short term. What MacArthur did in Korea was nowhere equivalent and was perhaps the most reckless thing any commander in the history of our country has ever done. I am no tactician but he had those men penned along that resevior, thus allowing the Chinese the ability to flank them in force and trap them. They had nowhere to go except a full retreat. If the Chinese had been able to cut the retreat off they would have destroyed the entirety of that force.

I mean it is not something specifically we talked about in school. We were told the Chinese did spill over the border but what we were not told was MacArthur was giving them the finger on the other side daring them to do it. And the North Koreans lead them into the trap. All China had to do was spring it. And one of his top guys on the ground was begging MacArthur not to advance so far.

What was MacArthur thinking? Surely he had to give strong consideration that the Chinese would come over to assist the North Koreans so close to the Chinese border? What choice did China have? The Soviets sure as hell would not have let North Korea fall.

Upon closer reflection I change my position to asset Custer was a bigger screw up than MacArthur.

Custer's ego was at least as robust as MacArthur's.

Maybe the real historians are aware, I was not....but Custer won a battle (or massacre, depending on your perspective) on the Wa****a River in Oklahoma, back in 1868. One of his tactics was to divide his command into four parts, and attack from many directions at once. Hmmm, sounds like what he did at the Little Big Horn.

It worked well on the Wa****a when he was carrying two to one superiority. Not so much when he was outnumbered on the Little Big Horn by 1.5-3x.

Custer knew he was outnumbered. He made a last ditch effort to invade a camp in order to kidnap women and children to save his skin. Once they fought off that effort Custer knew his goose was cooked.

http://www.historynet.com/ten-myths-of-the-little-bighorn.htm

Trying to determine who's ego was bigger George or Doug is a forlorn task, they were both cut from the same cloth that's for sure. As brains go, I think Doug would win.

The "so called" Custer massacre at the Wa****a against Black Kettle (Cheyenne) was more of a lesser engagement. Custer reported about 100 Indian casualties, the Indian reported about 40, more women and children than warriors. Custer departed quickly back to Fort Supply before the main Indian encampment arrived. Custer lost 2officers and 19 enlisted. Custer did capture and kill the horse herd of about 800. Black Kettle and his wife were both killed.
Nothing wrong with splitting up your forces, but control and communications becomes tough, even tougher in those days.

I saw a documentary some time ago that said MacArthur wrote letters to FDR and the press making himself out to be indispensable in the war effort. Basically he propagandized himself off Corregidor to save his own ass. I was very disappointed to hear this. If it's accurate, he was not a leader at all. Does anyone know if it's true?

Latigo said:

---

I saw a documentary some time ago that said MacArthur wrote letters to FDR and the press making himself out to be indispensable in the war effort. Basically he propagandized himself off Corregidor to save his own ass. I was very disappointed to hear this. If it's accurate, he was not a leader at all. Does anyone know if it's true?

---

No idea, but I wouldn't put it past him. Considering he got the CMH for his "defense" of the Philippines and vehemently opposed the idea that Wainwright should be considered for a CMH for the actual defense and aftermath says it all in my mind. The dude was a self centered ego maniac.

JJMt said:

---

Didn't Custer abandon a company on or around the Wa****a, a company that was never seen again?

---

He abandoned a Major Elliot and around 20 men. To be technically fair, and according to the article I read, Elliot's last words were to the effect of "Here's to a brevet or a coffin" and pursued fleeing women and children..... right into another larger village. Custer did leave the field with out trying to really determine his status or whereabouts.

In regards to Korea, while stationed there I trekked through some of the hills and mountains and was sucking just carrying water. Not to mention winter time. Holy hell I have never been so cold in my life as when I did my first Field problem in February. -15 was no joke and I could spend most my day in my track. Truly remarkable what they endured and fought through

Edit because I have to check that it censored out part of Wa****a. That's stupid.

This has become of recent interest to me because I knew so little about the war.

Imagine being a GI who had been trained for modern warfare and outside of the Japanese banzai attacks you hadn't seen a "human wave" of any sort and all of a sudden your machine gun is nearly fried because the Chinese seem to just keep coming.

Latigo said:

---

I saw a documentary some time ago that said MacArthur wrote letters to FDR and the press making himself out to be indispensable in the war effort. Basically he propagandized himself off Corregidor to save his own ass. I was very disappointed to hear this. If it's accurate, he was not a leader at all. Does anyone know if it's true?

---

BS

Not to sidetrack the very interesting discussion of the strategy and tactics of the Generals and leadership at Chosin, I had strong feelings after watching the excellent documentary. I couldn't help but sit almost stunned after it was finished.

The thoughts that passed through me were of the sacrifices, and hardships those poor soldiers had to endure in that horrible event--houghts of men who died, men who froze, men who fought to their last breath and men who endured agonies most of us cannot imagine.

What really bothered me however, is how so many of our citizenry today have no understanding of such bravery and who have never had to sacrifice in their lives, and people who have little understanding of what this country was built on.

To those men who died and suffered, and to any veteran who does battle for this country, the American flag encompasses and represents that valor and sacrifice. It's more than just a pretty piece of cloth.

I can hardly stand the idea of a entitled football player taking a knee, or anybody who takes our flag for granted. It just about is more than I can stand.

Sorry for the emotion, but having been a veteran of Vietnam, I hold up every fighting man who served our country a hero. Especially those guys at Chosin, they went through hell for us all. They were heroes.