Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

Discussions on WW2 in the Pacific and the Sino-Japanese War.
Post Reply
rcocean
Member
Posts: 686
Joined: 30 Mar 2008, 01:48

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar (MG Grunert's assessment of the PCA in November, 1940)

#136

Post by rcocean » 21 Feb 2022, 18:28

Currently the Regular Filipino Army had 468 officers and 3,697 enlisted men, so scattered that the largest single unit was the incipient 1st Infantry Regiment, with 286 enlisted men. The Reserve force had, nominally, 6,416 officers and 120,000 enlisted men, it was true, but, of the officers, 50 percent had received no training whatever and an additional 15 percent no field training: none had commanded a unit larger than a company.

The enlisted men's training was limited, groups totaling 17,000 having had 5½ months individual and company training during the previous 3 years, and 24,174 having received 10 days' field training in May 1939, but no unit as large as a battalion having yet been assembled for training. Shortages in clothing and equipment were large. There was no ammunition and only small amounts could be provided from local US Army stores, themselves restricted.
Thanks for quoting this. It simply proves that FDR made an incredible mistake in not calling the Filipino Army into Federal Service at the same time as the National Guard was called up. As the General Grunert pointed out, the Filipino could be called up and armed at a much smaller cost than shipping US troops the Philippines. Had the 10 divisions been mobilized in December 1940, and given their required equipment, they would've been much more effective in December 1941.

But the real tragedy is the idiotic Strategy followed by Marshall, Stimson and FDR. They would neither withdraw from/neutralize the Philippines nor properly reinforce it. They spent almost 2 years from Sept 1939-July 1941 regarding the Philippine Garrison as "Expendable" and then suddenly flipped in July 1941 to massive reinforcement. Even worse they deluded themselves into thinking 250 B-17s on Luzon would deter the Japanese. Its sad that 30,000 US army troops would pay the price for their bad descisions.

As shown by Eisenhower Diaries, Ord and Eisenhower were the ones responsible for the Organization of the Filipino army. They did the best they could on $8 million a year. Eisenhower was often upset at MacArthur for trying to do too much with too little, and exaggerating what could be done with such a pittance. But had MacArthur listened to Ike's all that would've happened is that you would''ve had a slighly better trained army with 50,000 men instead of 100,000.
Last edited by rcocean on 21 Feb 2022, 19:10, edited 1 time in total.

rcocean
Member
Posts: 686
Joined: 30 Mar 2008, 01:48

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#137

Post by rcocean » 21 Feb 2022, 19:06

How incredibly "Tight" the Philippine Defense budget was in shown by Eisenhower Diary Entry for Oct 15 1937. The small regular army cost $4 million a year. construction and other costs burned up almost $500,000, and the small Air Corps another $500,000. Training was $2 million, and $1,500,000 for equipment and weapons. Total was $8.5 million By comparison the US War Department Expenditure in GFY 1937 was $380 million.

THe Philppine defense budget was approximately 2.5% of the US War department expediture. The costs also show why MacArthur/Eisenhowere went with a Swiss Model for the army. 20,000 men could be trained every year at the price of $2million. But that $2 million would only "bought" another 2,500 men for the regular army. The trainees were paid almost nothing, but the regular army troops had to be paid a decent salary


daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020, 19:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar (MG Grunert's assessment of the PCA in November, 1940)

#138

Post by daveshoup2MD » 21 Feb 2022, 19:07

rcocean wrote:
21 Feb 2022, 18:28
Currently the Regular Filipino Army had 468 officers and 3,697 enlisted men, so scattered that the largest single unit was the incipient 1st Infantry Regiment, with 286 enlisted men. The Reserve force had, nominally, 6,416 officers and 120,000 enlisted men, it was true, but, of the officers, 50 percent had received no training whatever and an additional 15 percent no field training: none had commanded a unit larger than a company.

The enlisted men's training was limited, groups totaling 17,000 having had 5½ months individual and company training during the previous 3 years, and 24,174 having received 10 days' field training in May 1939, but no unit as large as a battalion having yet been assembled for training. Shortages in clothing and equipment were large. There was no ammunition and only small amounts could be provided from local US Army stores, themselves restricted.
Thanks for quoting this. It simply proves that FDR made an incredible mistake in not calling the Filipino Army into Federal Service at the same time as the National Guard was called up. As the General Grunert pointed out, the Filipino could be called up and armed at a much smaller cost than shipping US troops the Philippines. Had the 10 divisions been mobilized in December 1940, and given their required equipment, they would've been much more effective in December 1941.

But the real tragedy is the idiotic Strategy followed by Marshall, Stimson and FDR. They would neither withdraw/neutralize the Philippines nor properly reinforce it. They spent almost 2 years from Sept 1939-July 1941 regarding the Philippine Garrison as "Expendable" and then suddenly flipped in July 1941 to massive reinforcement. Even worse they deluded themselves into thinking 250 B-17s on Luzon would deter the Japanese. Its sad that 30,000 US army troops would pay the price for their bad descisions.

As shown by Eisenhower Diaries, Ord and Eisenhower were the ones responsible for the Organization of the Filipino army. They did the best they could on $8 million a year. Eisenhower was often upset at MacArthur for trying to do too much with too little, and exaggerating what could be done with such a pittance. But had MacArthur listened to Ike's all that would've happened is that you would''ve had a slighly better trained army with 50,000 men instead of 100,000.
Or, you could read the very next next paragraph:
The fact that the mobilization General Grunert recommended in this persuasive argument did not take place for many months, and that he was provided not with 500 American training officers, but with 75, is best explained by examination of the memorandum recording the judgment at which WPD arrived, working under the policy then prescribed. Mobilization of the Commonwealth Army had already been considered and the draft of an emergency proclamation by the President for that purpose was already approved by the War and Navy Departments and ready for Presidential signature at a time not determined: this preparatory step had been taken in October. The physical difficulty of providing 500 qualified Reservists was much greater. G-1 reported that such a number could not be provided and G-3 pointed out that the service schools already were under pressure to provide officers for the training of the new draft army. General Gerow, speaking for WPD, held that under existing conditions ammunition in quantity could not be provided for additional Philippine forces in less than eighteen months. Beyond these physical difficulties WPD pointed to certain large strategic obstacles. Notably, the mobilization might convince the Japanese that the United States was building up its own Far East forces, and thus encourage Japan to steps designed to prevent or forestall such an organization, which itself could not be consummated for a year. Even the Philippine force thus envisaged would not itself suffice in an unlimited war; it would necessarily require American aid, and WPD (speaking for the Chief of Staff and the Joint Board as well) was opposed to committing the United States to a two-ocean war. General Grunert's proposal, if carried out, would undoubtedly help Philippine morale but "it would contribute little to the defensive strength . . . in the immediate future, and might result in involving us in action in that theater which we are not prepared to sustain." Record copies of the letter note concurrence of G-1, G2, and G3 and, while General Marshall's view is not specifically stated on the document, he must have approved the action taken. This was substantially as recommended by WPD, namely, the postponement of the summoning of the Philippine Army to U. S. service, but the assignment of seventy-five U. S. Reserve officers to assist in training that army as such.
The US defense effort and its planners had much more important things to worry about in 1940-41 than 10 colonial infantry regiments in a territory west of the Dateline the US hoped to be rid of as rapidly as possible; the US movement to reinforce the PI late in 1941 drew upon the fact that a) MacArthur, (who was the officer in command, as much as his adherents appear to want to shift that responsibility to others) kept misrepresenting the capabilities of the PCA militia; and b) since the US had extended the 1940, one-year-long mobilization for the duration in 1941, there were actually (a few) troops to spare.

But good luck arguing the "MacArthur was less the sinner and more sinned against" case... even the GOP didn't buy that one in 1952. ;)
Last edited by daveshoup2MD on 21 Feb 2022, 20:27, edited 2 times in total.

daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020, 19:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#139

Post by daveshoup2MD » 21 Feb 2022, 19:08

rcocean wrote:
21 Feb 2022, 19:06
How incredibly "Tight" the Philippine Defense budget was in shown by Eisenhower Diary Entry for Oct 15 1937. The small regular army cost $4 million a year. construction and other costs burned up almost $500,000, and the small Air Corps another $500,000. Training was $2 million, and $1,500,000 for equipment and weapons. Total was $8.5 million By comparison the US War Department Expenditure in GFY 1937 was $380 million.

THe Philppine defense budget was approximately 2.5% of the US War department expediture. The costs also show why MacArthur/Eisenhowere went with a Swiss Model for the army. 20,000 men could be trained every year at the price of $2million. But that $2 million would only "bought" another 2,500 men for the regular army. The trainees were paid almost nothing, but the regular army troops had to be paid a decent salary
So, the obvious inference is the PI could not defend itself, absent a great power patron.

Still can't, of course.

rcocean
Member
Posts: 686
Joined: 30 Mar 2008, 01:48

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#140

Post by rcocean » 21 Feb 2022, 21:29

So, the obvious inference is the PI could not defend itself, absent a great power patron.
The War Department expediture for Fiscal year ended 30 June 1941 was $3,400 million. So, we easily could've spent $50 or $100 million mobilizing the Philippine army. And provided them with a couple hundred 75mm guns and a few thousand stokes mortars and BARs. Since the Army was there, it should have been mobilized and adquately equpped.

Or we should have struck a deal with the Japanese to neturalize the Philippines in return for some concession from the Japanese. One or the other. Trying to do a half-measure resulted in the disaster that befell the Philippines. Athough, there's no evidence that FDR was bothered by it. When Quezon asked FDR on Feb 8th 1942, that the Philppines be given complete Independence and that an offer to neautralize the islands be made to the Japanese, FDR Refused. FDR then stated that "American troops will fight to the last" Eisenhower remarked to Marshall "There are times when men must die".

Brave words and tough talk from the Men in DC.

daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020, 19:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#141

Post by daveshoup2MD » 21 Feb 2022, 23:07

rcocean wrote:
21 Feb 2022, 21:29
So, the obvious inference is the PI could not defend itself, absent a great power patron.
The War Department expediture for Fiscal year ended 30 June 1941 was $3,400 million. So, we easily could've spent $50 or $100 million mobilizing the Philippine army. And provided them with a couple hundred 75mm guns and a few thousand stokes mortars and BARs. Since the Army was there, it should have been mobilized and adquately equpped.

Or we should have struck a deal with the Japanese to neturalize the Philippines in return for some concession from the Japanese. One or the other. Trying to do a half-measure resulted in the disaster that befell the Philippines. Athough, there's no evidence that FDR was bothered by it. When Quezon asked FDR on Feb 8th 1942, that the Philppines be given complete Independence and that an offer to neautralize the islands be made to the Japanese, FDR Refused. FDR then stated that "American troops will fight to the last" Eisenhower remarked to Marshall "There are times when men must die".
Except the PCA "army" was not "there," as evidenced by the communications from Grunert in 1940; the "trained" elements, even by the low standards of peacetime, amounted to "
groups totaling 17,000 having had 5½ months individual and company training during the previous 3 years, and 24,174 having received 10 days' field training in May 1939, but no unit as large as a battalion having yet been assembled for training.
"

So, between 1937-40, a grand total of 17,000 enlisted had 22 weeks of training at the company level or below; another 7,000 had 10 days fielding training in 1939. Even going by the larger figure, that's 24,000 - or, at best, what was mobilized in 1941 and netted out, yet again, to about 10 understrength infantry RCTs, which were - for whatever it's worth - adequately equipped with small arms, heavy weapons, and field artillery.

Quezon's plea for neutralization in February, 1942, demonstrates more about Quezon than anything else; at that point, the Japanese were already occupying Manila and most of Luzon ...

Given the world situation in 1939-42, however, the suggestion the PI could be "neutralized" and left unmolested by Japan is rather like imagining the Germans respecting the neutrality of the Netherlands in 1940... naive, at best.

rcocean
Member
Posts: 686
Joined: 30 Mar 2008, 01:48

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#142

Post by rcocean » 24 Feb 2022, 01:17

As I've stated before. If MacArthur was motivated by money, he simply would've gone to work on Wall Street in 1935, As Dr. James states in his 3 volume autobiograhy, Big Mac was offered any number of lucrative offers. And I'm not even talking about the $100,000 he turned down from Doubleday to write his memoirs in the late 30s. BTWm Eisenhower remarked that MacArthur could've succeeded in any field he chose. Which explains the the wall street offers.

In any cae, the only way FDR could get MacArthur to go to the Philppines in 1935, was to lie to him and promise the High commissioner slot, and then lie to him again about not being subject to the usual 2 year rotation. AND allow him to get money from the Philippine Government. That's why when Quezon gave Sutherland and MacArthur $$$ in 1942 both FDR and Ickes approved it. You can be damn sure a MacArthur hater like ickes (who LOVED to destroy anyone he disliked) would've only approved payment if he absolutely had to under US law or agreement.

But this has been known forever. The real question is why do the informed Macarthur haters keep repeating something that isn't true? Curious - could there be another motive then historical truth? I wonder.
[/quote]

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6350
Joined: 01 Jan 2016, 22:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#143

Post by Richard Anderson » 24 Feb 2022, 02:56

Since this "reply" of yours is simply a repost of something you posted four days ago, I guess you won't mind if I simply repost my reply from four days ago too, rather than do any more thinking about it, since you certainly haven't.
rcocean wrote:
24 Feb 2022, 01:17
As I've stated before. If MacArthur was motivated by money, he simply would've gone to work on Wall Street in 1935, As Dr. James states in his 3 volume autobiograhy, Big Mac was offered any number of lucrative offers. And I'm not even talking about the $100,000 he turned down from Doubleday to write his memoirs in the late 30s. BTWm Eisenhower remarked that MacArthur could've succeeded in any field he chose. Which explains the the wall street offers.
That's nice, why not argue it with someone that has said something different? In any case, MacArthur did not take a job on Wall Street, which would have been difficult for him to do while a serving officer, instead he took a job in the Philippines, where he was able to take the pay of both an Army major general and a Philippine field marshal. Whatever anyone's opinion of what he could have done was, what he actually did was something different.

BTW, how did James manage to write an "autobiography" of MacArthur?
In any cae, the only way FDR could get MacArthur to go to the Philppines in 1935, was to lie to him and promise the High commissioner slot, and then lie to him again about not being subject to the usual 2 year rotation. AND allow him to get money from the Philippine Government. That's why when Quezon gave Sutherland and MacArthur $$$ in 1942 both FDR and Ickes approved it. You can be damn sure a MacArthur hater like ickes (who LOVED to destroy anyone he disliked) would've only approved payment if he absolutely had to under US law or agreement.
So Quezon had nothing to do with it. Good to know.
But this has been known forever. The real question is why do the informed Macarthur haters keep repeating something that isn't true? Curious - could there be another motive then historical truth? I wonder.
Which MacArthur "haters" are those? What isn't true that they keep repeating? Or is it only the informed ones who do that?
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: 686
Joined: 30 Mar 2008, 01:48

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#144

Post by rcocean » 24 Feb 2022, 03:21

No problem. I reposted because if in the future, if I want to revisit what I wrote, its easy to find.

Delta Tank
Member
Posts: 2512
Joined: 16 Aug 2004, 02:51
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#145

Post by Delta Tank » 15 Mar 2022, 17:01

Richard Anderson wrote:
24 Feb 2022, 02:56
Since this "reply" of yours is simply a repost of something you posted four days ago, I guess you won't mind if I simply repost my reply from four days ago too, rather than do any more thinking about it, since you certainly haven't.
rcocean wrote:
24 Feb 2022, 01:17
As I've stated before. If MacArthur was motivated by money, he simply would've gone to work on Wall Street in 1935, As Dr. James states in his 3 volume autobiograhy, Big Mac was offered any number of lucrative offers. And I'm not even talking about the $100,000 he turned down from Doubleday to write his memoirs in the late 30s. BTWm Eisenhower remarked that MacArthur could've succeeded in any field he chose. Which explains the the wall street offers.
That's nice, why not argue it with someone that has said something different? In any case, MacArthur did not take a job on Wall Street, which would have been difficult for him to do while a serving officer, instead he took a job in the Philippines, where he was able to take the pay of both an Army major general and a Philippine field marshal. Whatever anyone's opinion of what he could have done was, what he actually did was something different.

BTW, how did James manage to write an "autobiography" of MacArthur?
In any cae, the only way FDR could get MacArthur to go to the Philppines in 1935, was to lie to him and promise the High commissioner slot, and then lie to him again about not being subject to the usual 2 year rotation. AND allow him to get money from the Philippine Government. That's why when Quezon gave Sutherland and MacArthur $$$ in 1942 both FDR and Ickes approved it. You can be damn sure a MacArthur hater like ickes (who LOVED to destroy anyone he disliked) would've only approved payment if he absolutely had to under US law or agreement.
So Quezon had nothing to do with it. Good to know.
But this has been known forever. The real question is why do the informed Macarthur haters keep repeating something that isn't true? Curious - could there be another motive then historical truth? I wonder.
Which MacArthur "haters" are those? What isn't true that they keep repeating? Or is it only the informed ones who do that?
Rich,

MacArthur could of taken the job on Wall Street or any other civilian job, soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines do it all the time. I will retire from the US Army on 30 June, take a month vacation and report to my new civilian job on 1 August. Not hard to understand that option. Now just because MacArthur didn’t do that doesn’t mean that option was not available. I retired from the Army, I was looking for work when I was on terminal leave.

Mike

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6350
Joined: 01 Jan 2016, 22:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#146

Post by Richard Anderson » 15 Mar 2022, 17:34

Delta Tank wrote:
15 Mar 2022, 17:01
MacArthur could of taken the job on Wall Street or any other civilian job, soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines do it all the time. I will retire from the US Army on 30 June, take a month vacation and report to my new civilian job on 1 August. Not hard to understand that option. Now just because MacArthur didn’t do that doesn’t mean that option was not available. I retired from the Army, I was looking for work when I was on terminal leave.
You may have misunderstood. Of course he could have worked on Wall Street in retirement. Instead he chose to become generalissimo in the Philippines and draw his full pay as a serving major general in his role of Military Advisor to the Commonwealth Government. I do not imagine he could have worked for a Wall Street firm while simultaneously drawing his full pay as Military Advisor to Wall Street. :lol:
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

Delta Tank
Member
Posts: 2512
Joined: 16 Aug 2004, 02:51
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#147

Post by Delta Tank » 15 Mar 2022, 18:15

Rich,

You wrote this:

“MacArthur did not take a job on Wall Street, which would have been difficult for him to do while a serving officer”.

I took what you wrote literally. He could of accepted the job while in the Army, hell I know a guy that worked for a corporation for 90 days while on terminal leave, drawing his Army pay, Housing allowance and substance allowance and also drawing a corporate pay check!😂

Mike

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6350
Joined: 01 Jan 2016, 22:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#148

Post by Richard Anderson » 15 Mar 2022, 18:36

Delta Tank wrote:
15 Mar 2022, 18:15
Rich,

You wrote this:

“MacArthur did not take a job on Wall Street, which would have been difficult for him to do while a serving officer”.

I took what you wrote literally. He could of accepted the job while in the Army, hell I know a guy that worked for a corporation for 90 days while on terminal leave, drawing his Army pay, Housing allowance and substance allowance and also drawing a corporate pay check!😂

Mike
Indeed, but I am not even sure that "terminal leave" was a thing in 1935. Most of the current pay and allowance structure is postwar. However, yes, he could have "worked" both Wall Street and drawn full pay, for 90 days, and then would have had to "get by" on retired pay, which I believe (still haven't tracked down the legislation) was "half pay" in 1935. Instead, he "worked" as a generalissimo for six years while still drawing full pay.
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

Delta Tank
Member
Posts: 2512
Joined: 16 Aug 2004, 02:51
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#149

Post by Delta Tank » 15 Mar 2022, 19:16

Richard Anderson wrote:
15 Mar 2022, 18:36
Delta Tank wrote:
15 Mar 2022, 18:15
Rich,

You wrote this:

“MacArthur did not take a job on Wall Street, which would have been difficult for him to do while a serving officer”.

I took what you wrote literally. He could of accepted the job while in the Army, hell I know a guy that worked for a corporation for 90 days while on terminal leave, drawing his Army pay, Housing allowance and substance allowance and also drawing a corporate pay check!😂

Mike
Indeed, but I am not even sure that "terminal leave" was a thing in 1935. Most of the current pay and allowance structure is postwar. However, yes, he could have "worked" both Wall Street and drawn full pay, for 90 days, and then would have had to "get by" on retired pay, which I believe (still haven't tracked down the legislation) was "half pay" in 1935. Instead, he "worked" as a generalissimo for six years while still drawing full pay.
Rich,

When did MacArthur retire? 1937?? He was not ordered back to active duty until July 1941?? So, why was he drawing active duty pay while retired? I need to get that deal!😁

Mike

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6350
Joined: 01 Jan 2016, 22:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Douglas MacArthur was no Caesar

#150

Post by Richard Anderson » 15 Mar 2022, 20:13

Delta Tank wrote:
15 Mar 2022, 19:16
When did MacArthur retire? 1937?? He was not ordered back to active duty until July 1941?? So, why was he drawing active duty pay while retired? I need to get that deal!😁

Mike
Interesting and slightly different than what I thought and what has been published.

He left the post of CoS 1 October 1935 and thus reverted to his permanent rank of major general, remaining on active duty with the special post of Military Advisor to the Commonwealth Government. He retired with rank of General as of 31 December 1937. So the first two years of his stint as generalissimo was while he was on active duty he also drew the pay of a Major General, then until 26 July 1941 when he was recalled to active duty, he was both generalissimo and retired General. The interesting thing is the pay scales of the time recognized just two pay scales for general officers, the 7th and 8th "pay periods" and length of service made no difference. It was $500/month for the 7th and $666.67/month for the 8th pay period. General and flag officers were also granted rental and subsistence allowances not given to lower ranking officers. Interestingly, general officers did not receive a pay raise until 1946.
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

Post Reply

Return to “WW2 in the Pacific & Asia”