View Full Version : WW2:- MacArthur (vs) Nimitz
Feb 04, 2002, 04:40 AM
What do you think!
I have not got opinion on this but want to see what other think about which was better for the USA and ALLIES war effort in the Pacific! Who had the better tactics and other things wanting to be discussed!
Feb 04, 2002, 07:14 AM
Apples and oranges.
Nimitz is Nimitz. Tough to say really anything too bad about Nimitz. The strategy for the prosecution of the Pacific war was flawless, but it was also not Nimitz alone who developed it.
MacArthur on the other hand... :)
Much could be said about the state of preparedness of the Phillipines when the war began.
Ask yourself how the war would have played out had MacArthur died in the Phillipines or been sacked as a result. I don't think it would have negatively impacted the outcome of the war at all. In fact, the Allies might a bypassed the Phillipines altogether, resulting in fewer casualties.
MacArthur handled the governing of post-war Japan very well. But again, the command was woefully unprepared for the Korean war.
Inchon does a lot for MacArthur's rep but it's not really a stroke of genius to come up with an end run when you're stuck at the tip of a peninsula.
My biases are obviously showing at this point. I think MacArthur was very overrated, militarily. The fact that he appears to have been a petty megalomaniac as well simply ices the cake, for me.
Feb 04, 2002, 10:13 AM
There's that "overrated" word again. Only this time, I think it's too nice. In the Patton v. Monty thing, I think it captured the fact that Monty overrated, but both were good generals with fine war service under certain conditions.
This one is different.
Nimitz - brilliant. "You must be governed by the principle of calculated risk..." Superb use of the navy, tactically and strategically. A genuine hero of civilization.
MacArthur - one big arrogant press release. Campaign in New Guinea was a fine show, but other than that, what's the big deal? The "American Caesar" thing was criminal; if anyone deserves the title, it's anyone but MacArthur.
Feb 04, 2002, 08:21 PM
MacArthur's greatest weapon in the war was his PR service. Too bad he coudln't have used it on Japan instead of America, heck, the war would have been over in a week with the whole of Japan convinced MacArthur was actually the emperor and HiroHito some weird dummy.
Yes, I'm kidding. Actually, exxagerating, but by not much of a margin.
Feb 05, 2002, 06:50 AM
Oda, I'm :lol:
Feb 05, 2002, 06:51 AM
Yeah, Macarthur was definately overrated. He even invaded some Phillipine islands that didn't need invading, just to get the glory. He had his talents to be sure, but Nimitz was much more solid and admirable IMO.
Feb 05, 2002, 11:34 PM
Well, I guess it's (unsurprisingly) unanimous for Nimitz at this point. I'll add my vote.
MacArthur was a vainglorious ass. He was totally unprepared (as others have said), and should have been crucified for bailing out at Bataan while his under-Generals and troops were taken as POWs. He was tactically unremarkable (except for Inchon), and in fact made some grave post-Inchon blunders in Korea. He even advocated using nuclear weapons to create a miles-wide barrier of radioactive wasteland between North Korea and China to prevent the Chinese from intervening on behalf of North Korea. After he was relieved of command by Truman, the US forces rallied, managed to extricate themselves from a very bad position, and were able to retake the territory south of the 38th parallel.
After WWII, he had a famous Japanese General, the "Tiger of Malaysia" (I forgot his real name) executed at war tribunal, falsely accusing him of being responsible for the rape of Manila, when in fact it was members of the Japanese Royal Family that were responsible. Although MacArthur knew the truth, he needed to execute the Tiger because (A) he embarrassed MacArthur by being a significantly superior tactician--beating him at Bataan and then later holding out for months against an overwhelming force under MacArthur, and (B) by scapegoating the Tiger, he could avoid blaming Hirohito, and thus have greater success putting over his constitutional reforms with cooperation from the Emperor.
His best skill was at political infighting within the military and putting forth a shiny image of himself. He signed letters to his wife "--Gen. Douglas A. MacArthur".
In short, he was a lousy general and a despicable human being.
Feb 06, 2002, 07:51 AM
Name a battle or major egagement that Nimitz's command lost? There is not one, All Us & US/Allied losing sirnificant actions in the Pacific while Nimitz had the Pacific Command in the Pacific were under Macarthur in his theater or the temporary south Pacific theater around the Soloman Islands under Ghormley then Halsey.
Nimitz also command (operational command) the largest number of USA forces in history (SHAEF in Europe had more personnel, but less USA personnel).