Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Discussions on WW2 in the Pacific and the Sino-Japanese War.
User avatar
R Leonard
Member
Posts: 468
Joined: 16 Oct 2003 02:48
Location: The Old Dominion

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by R Leonard » 12 Feb 2022 20:12

Evidently they do not.

So, really, it boils down to what one wants to believe, circular citing web sites or an official, "Published by order of the Secretary of War in compliance law", publication.
Last edited by R Leonard on 12 Feb 2022 21:22, edited 2 times in total.

paulrward
Member
Posts: 665
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 20:14

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by paulrward » 12 Feb 2022 20:20

Hello All :

And, If you go to the George C. Marshall Foundation Website :

https://www.marshallfoundation.org/

and go to the PDF they have at the site :

https://www.marshallfoundation.org/libr ... gy_opt.pdf

You will find the following page, which I have Screenshotted:
Marhall Rank.jpg

Well, it seems that both the Eisenhower Library and the George C. Marshall Foundation know NOTHING
about the people they were named for.

Or, maybe a historian is placing too much credence in faulty Army records.

Respectfully ;

Paul R. Ward
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Information not shared, is information lost
Voices that are banned, are voices who cannot share information....
Discussions that are silenced, are discussions that will occur elsewhere !

User avatar
R Leonard
Member
Posts: 468
Joined: 16 Oct 2003 02:48
Location: The Old Dominion

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by R Leonard » 12 Feb 2022 20:24

Or maybe people just don't know how to read those things . . . just like calling the initial promotions "brevet." They were noting of the sort if one understands what constitutes a brevet promotion.

daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020 18:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by daveshoup2MD » 12 Feb 2022 21:01

paulrward wrote:
12 Feb 2022 06:16
Hello All ;

Mr. Daveshoup2MD posted:
Please provide any source beyond your say-so regarding
Marshall and MacArthur; Thanks in advance.
OK

Marshall: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_C._Marshall

You can find the dates of his various promotions about halfway down the page. It clearly states
that he was made a temporary General of the Army in the Army of the United States on
December 16, 1944, and a permanent General of the Army in the United States Army on April 11,
1946.

MacArthur: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_s ... _MacArthur

In this article, it clearly states that he was promoted to General of the Army on December 18, 1944,
making him the second highest ranking officer behind Marshall. It goes on to state further down that
he was
23 March 1946: Permanently promoted to General of the Army.
Which was 19 days ahead of Marshall's promotion.

I am attaching a JPEG made from the Wikipedia Article on MacArthur, to help explain some of these
issues. If you study it, you will see that in December, 1915, MacArthur was promoted to the
permanent rank of Major, Engineers, in the Regular Army. Then, a year and a half later, he had
transferred to the National Army, and was breveted to the rank of Colonel, Infantry. Within a year,
he was promoted to Brigadier General in the National Army. However, had the war ended on that
day, he would have reverted to his rank of MAJOR in the Regular Army.

However, after the Great War ended, he returned to the USA, and was promoted to the rank of
Brigadier General in the Regular Army, with promotion date of February 28th, and a Date of Rank
of January 20, 1920. This happened frequently, promotions were backdated to add seniority for
a given officer.

MacArthur became a Major General in the Regular Army in 1925, and, in 1930, upon being appointed
COS of the Army, was given the Temporary Rank of General ( Four Stars ) Upon the end of his term
as COS in 1935, he reverted to Major General in the Regular Army. In 1938, he retired, and when
you retire, your rank is the highest regular or brevet rank you held while in the Army, which in
MacArthur's case, was General ( Four Stars ). Thus, he became a ' Full General ' in retirement.

When, in 1941, he was brought out of retirement by Roosevelt, he was activated at his last
regular Army Rank of Major General, and the following day, was promoted to Lieutenant General
( Three Stars ) in the Army of the United States, a brevet promotion.

He was again promoted to Full General in the Army of the United States in late December, 1941,
with a Date of Rank of 16 September, 1936, which was the date of his previous retirement from
the Regular Army. This was because, under the then existing Army Regulations, he could NOT have
been called back into service by Roosevelt in 1941 as a Major General, but rather, he should have
been recalled to service as a Full General - Which Roosevelt didn't want to do, because that would
have meant that he would have outranked Marshall, who was Roosevelt's ' boy '. When the
Pentagon promoted him back to Four Star, they gave MacArthur the seniority he should have had
assuming that Roosevelt had complied with Army Regulations.

When this happened, suddenly, MacArthur again outranked Marshall, whose appointment as a Full
General was dated September 1, 1939. Marshall wasn't happy about this at all. This meant that
MacArthur's Regular Rank of Major General preceeded Marshall's, and his Temporary Rank of
Full General ALSO preceeded Marshall's.

As we have been discussing, the Promotions of Marshall and MacArthur to Generals of the Army
in the Army of the United States ( Temporary, or Brevet Promotions ) were done between 16
and 18 December, 1944. So, at this time, Marshall finally was ahead of MacArthur, by two
days. ( Actually, it was only one day, because MacArthur was on the other side of the Date Line ! )
But, MacArthur got a twist on Marshall, because his staff quickly made up some Five Star Shoulder
and Collar Insignia, using silver dimes cut into stars and soldered to rings made from silver Quarter
Dollars, and MacArthur's photo of him in his five star insignia got in the papers a few days ahead of
Marshall's who had waited until a Washington DC jeweller could make him the proper insignia.

Now we come to 1946. The Second World War is over ( Game called on account of A-Bomb ) and
The Army of the United States is being rolled up, with officers returning to the Regular Army, and
their Regular Army Ranks. This can be traumatic, because, with reductions in rank back to
Regular Army Rank, an Officer often found that an Ass he Kicked last year was an Ass he now had
to Kiss today !

In the case of the Brevet Five Stars of 1944, the Congress had a solution. They pass an Act,
which regularized their Five Star Rank. The Date the Act went into effect was 23 March, 1946,
and that was the date that MacArthur became a General of the Army in the Regular Army.

However, Roosevelt was dead, and for some reason, Marshall's and Eisenhower's promotion
dates were set at April 11, 1946.

Now, it must be noted: Had the Congress not acted as they had, MacArthur would have had
a choice: Either revert to Major General ( Two Star ) or again Retire as a Full General ( Four
Star ). Fortunately for MacArthur, the Congress had come through for him, and he was a
General of the Army in the Regular United States Army with a full 18 days seniority over both
Marshall, who he had downgraded for promotion while he was COS, and Eisenhower, who was,
admittedly, the best clerk he ever had....

Hopefully the attached JPEG will make this all a bit more clear.

Respectfully ;

Paul R. Ward


MacArthur Rank.jpg
You do know that wikipedia can be edited by anyone, at any time? And that citing it as a source in - for example - academia, journalism, the law, etc. - pretty much results in the recipient automatically setting such aside, right?
Last edited by daveshoup2MD on 12 Feb 2022 21:17, edited 1 time in total.

daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020 18:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by daveshoup2MD » 12 Feb 2022 21:05

R Leonard wrote:
12 Feb 2022 20:12
Evidently they do not.

So, really, it boils down to what one wants to believe, circular citing web sites or an official, "Published by order of the Secretary of War in compliance law , publication.
R Leonard wrote:
12 Feb 2022 17:30
U.S. Army Register 1947, page 709 (Active Duty). Note last date.
Marshall Register Info.jpg
U.S. Army Register 1947, page 330 (Active Duty). Note last date.
Eisenhower Register.jpg
U.S. Army Register 1947, page 1502 (Retired Officers on Active Duty). Note last date.
MacArthur Register Info.jpg
Seems the U S Army likes the 23 March 1946 permanent date for all three. In truth, the 1946 date simply served to make permanent the original 1944 appointments dates, which, if one looks closely, the precedence dates are based on original commissions as 2LTs; Marshall 1901, MacArthur 1903, and Eisenhower 1915.
Richard Anderson wrote:
12 Feb 2022 08:35
daveshoup2MD wrote:
12 Feb 2022 04:39
Please provide any source beyond your say-so regarding Marshall and MacArthur; Thanks in advance.
In case you haven't noticed, the stupid is very strong with some. The language of the Acts is remarkably easy to find and to follow. The entries in the Official Register are easy to find and easy to follow. However, magical thinking is pervasive in the world. I blame Marvel and DC comics.
Richard Anderson wrote:
12 Feb 2022 08:33
Damn, I guess Wikipedia outweighs the actual language of the Acts creating the ranks. And the entries in the Official Register. Good to know.
Thanks for the above cites and sources.

daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020 18:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by daveshoup2MD » 12 Feb 2022 21:08

R Leonard wrote:
12 Feb 2022 20:24
Or maybe people just don't know how to read those things . . . just like calling the initial promotions "brevet." They were noting of the sort if one understands what constitutes a brevet promotion.
True. Both today:

https://talent.army.mil/brevet/

https://www.army.mil/standto/archive/2020/02/14/

and in the past:

https://ahec.armywarcollege.edu/documen ... ficers.pdf

Of course, the above sources all are official, so maybe Wikipedia knows better.... :roll:

User avatar
R Leonard
Member
Posts: 468
Joined: 16 Oct 2003 02:48
Location: The Old Dominion

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by R Leonard » 12 Feb 2022 22:28

And one might note right in the middle of a discussion regarding five star rank in the George Marshall Foundation web site, here, https://www.marshallfoundation.org/blog ... star-rank/, it says "President Harry Truman signed a law on March 23, 1946, making the promotions permanent. Each five-star officer was permitted to keep an office in the Pentagon until his death, as theoretically he was on permanent active duty."

On the other hand, just to show what goes around comes around, still another web site which clearly shows dear Douglas’ permanent promotion as 11 April 1946 . . . “(Gen of the Army (Permanent) 11 Apr 46)”, near the bottom of the page here
https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/ ... 4122*.html
This is from George W. Cullum's Biographical Register of the Officers and Graduates of the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, since its establishment in 1802, see here,
https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/ ... _Register/

Cullum’s, as it is known, is not to be confused with the periodically published Register of Graduates and Former Cadets – United States Military Academy, West Point, New York, produced by the Association of Graduates, USMA. I have two of those, 1980 and 1993. The 1993 edition starts with the Class of 1916, so it is of no help. The 1980 edition does not address the permanent promotion date in the entry for #4122 MacArthur, Douglas (page 292).

Oh, and "Penelope" is not a person, that's the name of the server upon which the information resides at the University of Chicago.

daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020 18:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by daveshoup2MD » 12 Feb 2022 23:21

R Leonard wrote:
12 Feb 2022 22:28
And one might note right in the middle of a discussion regarding five star rank in the George Marshall Foundation web site, here, https://www.marshallfoundation.org/blog ... star-rank/, it says "President Harry Truman signed a law on March 23, 1946, making the promotions permanent. Each five-star officer was permitted to keep an office in the Pentagon until his death, as theoretically he was on permanent active duty."

On the other hand, just to show what goes around comes around, still another web site which clearly shows dear Douglas’ permanent promotion as 11 April 1946 . . . “(Gen of the Army (Permanent) 11 Apr 46)”, near the bottom of the page here
https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/ ... 4122*.html
This is from George W. Cullum's Biographical Register of the Officers and Graduates of the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, since its establishment in 1802, see here,
https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/ ... _Register/

Cullum’s, as it is known, is not to be confused with the periodically published Register of Graduates and Former Cadets – United States Military Academy, West Point, New York, produced by the Association of Graduates, USMA. I have two of those, 1980 and 1993. The 1993 edition starts with the Class of 1916, so it is of no help. The 1980 edition does not address the permanent promotion date in the entry for #4122 MacArthur, Douglas (page 292).

Oh, and "Penelope" is not a person, that's the name of the server upon which the information resides at the University of Chicago.
And as useful - and certainly as informed - as Cullum was, back in the day, his work was/is no more "official" than Livermore's.

But both are a hell of a lot more reliable than wikipedia. :roll:

I'll go by the Army. ;)

User avatar
R Leonard
Member
Posts: 468
Joined: 16 Oct 2003 02:48
Location: The Old Dominion

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by R Leonard » 12 Feb 2022 23:36

And just to be thorough, the one copy I have, the 1984 edition, of the Virginia Military Institute Register of Former Cadets (last time they sent one out as a freebie to grads) does not show promotion dates in full, only years, so page 120 under Marshall, George Catlett it says ". . . 39-45 General - Chief of Staff; 44 General of the Army; . . .".

daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020 18:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by daveshoup2MD » 13 Feb 2022 01:12

R Leonard wrote:
12 Feb 2022 23:36
And just to be thorough, the one copy I have, the 1984 edition, of the Virginia Military Institute Register of Former Cadets (last time they sent one out as a freebie to grads) does not show promotion dates in full, only years, so page 120 under Marshall, George Catlett it says ". . . 39-45 General - Chief of Staff; 44 General of the Army; . . .".
The thoroughness is appreciated. The obvious question - if GCM had accepted the PCA Militia organization contract that MacArthur did, would he (GCM, that is) indeed have been Field Marshal Marshall? ;)

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6233
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by Richard Anderson » 13 Feb 2022 02:28

R Leonard wrote:
12 Feb 2022 20:24
Or maybe people just don't know how to read those things . . . just like calling the initial promotions "brevet." They were noting of the sort if one understands what constitutes a brevet promotion.
Yep, or noticing that the "A.U.S." commissions as Generals of the Army was an ex post facto construct. The real interesting questions to dig into are just why...

So the original promotions and order of precedence were a FDR construct, a product of one of the most accomplished party politicians in US history. Was the order of precedence chosen to reflect their appointments as 2d Lieutenants? Or to ensure that Marshall had precedence over MacArthur? Was the 1946 legislation intended to take control of the ranks out of the hand of the President? That did not work, as JFK demonstrated when he restored Ike's rank by fiat. :D Did it have anything to do with the Republican postwar resurgence that saw them take control of the 80th Congress? And why I wonder did the Army feel it necessary to change the entries in 1947 to reflect a mythical A.U.S. and R.A. appointment, while emphasizing a temporariness that doesn't actually appear in the legislation?
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

rcocean
Member
Posts: 685
Joined: 30 Mar 2008 00:48

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by rcocean » 13 Feb 2022 03:07

Or maybe people just don't know how to read those things . . . just like calling the initial promotions "brevet." They were noting of the sort if one understands what constitutes a brevet promotion.
I'm not too sure why any of this matters. MacArthur was Chief of Staff for 5 years when Marshall was Colonel. And Marshall was the one who pushed for MacArthur being promoted in December 1941, and giving him him the MOH, and getting him out of the Philippines.

If it'd been up to FDR - MacArthur would've Died on Corrigedor in May 1942, since Big Mac had zero intention of being taken POW. Fun fact: Per Carols D'Este's "Eisenhower", FDR wanted to give Ike a MOH in December 1942 for his flying to Algeries and signing the Armistice with Darlan. Reason: FDR wanted to provide political cover for the "Darlan Deal" and reward Ike was taking a lot of political Flak.
Last edited by rcocean on 13 Feb 2022 04:20, edited 1 time in total.

daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020 18:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by daveshoup2MD » 13 Feb 2022 03:33

rcocean wrote:
13 Feb 2022 03:07
If it'd been up to FDR - MacArthur would've Died on Corrigedor in May 1942
Probably the same if it had been up to the GIs of the Bataan Defense Force, as well; how often did "Big Mac" make it to the front lines, again? When the CG's nickname is "Dugout," one can only imagine...

daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020 18:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by daveshoup2MD » 13 Feb 2022 03:36

rcocean wrote:
13 Feb 2022 03:07
Richard Anderson wrote:
13 Feb 2022 02:28
R Leonard wrote:
12 Feb 2022 20:24
Or maybe people just don't know how to read those things . . . just like calling the initial promotions "brevet." They were noting of the sort if one understands what constitutes a brevet promotion.
I'm not too sure why any of this matters. MacArthur was Chief of Staff for 5 years when Marshall was Colonel. And Marshall was the one who pushed for MacArthur being promoted in December 1941, and giving him him the MOH, and getting him out of the Philippines.

If it'd been up to FDR - MacArthur would've Died on Corrigedor in May 1942, since Big Mac had zero intention of being taken POW. Fun fact: Per Carols D'Este's "Eisenhower", FDR wanted to give Ike a MOH in December 1942 for his flying to Algeries and signing the Armistice with Darlan. Reason: FDR wanted to provide political cover for the "Darlan Deal" and reward Ike was taking a lot of political Flak.
Because truth and historical accuracy is a thing, you know?

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6233
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Why Was Britain Defeated in Malaya?

Post by Richard Anderson » 13 Feb 2022 03:49

rcocean wrote:
13 Feb 2022 03:07
I'm not too sure why any of this matters.
It doesn't especially to those that like to make up their history from Wikipedia.
MacArthur was Chief of Staff for 5 years when Marshall was Colonel.
Why does that matter?
And Marshall was the one who pushed for MacArthur being promoted in December 1941, and giving him him the MOH, and getting him out of the Philippines.
Um, MacArthur was not technically "promoted", but was restored to his grade as General, which was limited by law to one active officer, the Chief of Staff, during peacetime. Marshall did indeed push for a MOH for MacArthur, deeming it justified for the same reason it was given Charles Lindbergh in 1927. Yes, indeed, Marshall also was adamant that MacArthur leave the Philippines.

Why does that matter though?
If it'd been up to FDR - MacArthur would've Died on Corrigedor in May 1942, since Big Mac had zero intention of being taken POW. Fun fact: Per Carols D'Este's "Eisenhower", FDR wanted to give Ike a MOH in December 1942 for his flying to Algeries and signing the Armistice with Darlan. Reason: FDR wanted to provide political cover for the "Darlan Deal" and reward Ike was taking a lot of political Flak.
I do not recall that in D'Este's Eisenhower, but it has been some years since I read it. Do you have a page cite for that? Again though, why does it matter?
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

Return to “WW2 in the Pacific & Asia”