Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Bill, a very good post, IMO, and very informative. Mac did seem a little (a lot) foggy in the early going in PI but really did good work later in WW2, after Japan surrendered and in Korea. He was a giant. To me, one can pick any "giant" in history and point out where he blundered. An example is Mac. Another might be R E Lee, in my mind probably the greatest battlefield general in American history. Well, Malvern Hill was a disaster. Probably much worse than the third day at Gettysburg where there were extenuating circumstances, IMO.
Marse Robert is one of several War of Northern Agression giants that I have studied in depth. I would offer Stonewall jackson as Lee's near equal, however.
How about this? Many historians consider that Lincoln was our greatest president. That is what I was taught in school. The only thing my history classes did not focus on was: Lincoln ordered that Fort Sumter be resupplied which precipitated the bombardment. At that time, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky had not seceded. Lincoln then ordered that 75000 of the state militias be called up to put down the insurrection. The states that had not seceded had by far the most men available for war but declared they would not stand still to see their militia used to attack their fellow southerners. The fat was in the fire. Sounds like Lincoln made a big mistake to me and lost any chance for a peaceful resolution of the problem and more than 600000 good men died when the population of the US was only around 30M. Grant made a big mistake at Cold Harbor among several and had around 7000 casualties in a half hour.
Litttle known fact. Attorney General Black, former former Chief (PA or MD??) State Supreme Court, at Lincoln't request, issued an opinion regarding the consequences to the Union if he (Lincoln) ordered Federal troops to invade and supress the rebellion. Black's opinion was that such action would constitute a dissolution of the Union - which is why Lincoln attempted to first order the Stae militia's (which he had no authority to do) to quell the rebellion.
Of course the issue was never tested in Court... thankfully, now.
Placing the blame often depends a lot on one's perspective and how deep one delves into the subject. And sometimes bad stuff just happens.
Ren,
Big well deserved salute to your uncles! I was surprised at learning of the SLC scout plane incident... One of those crazy, inexplicable, heart-stopping events that seem to happen in combat when everything is on the line.
Drgon, what is the title of the Marshall Bio. Stepping up to accept responsibility for the disaster is the mark of a great commander, although of course it may be professional suicide. I wonder whan he did this. Was it well after the event and after the war or before?
"Marshall-Hero For Our Times" by Leonard Mosely - Marshall accepted blame but did not publically discuss it. According to the author Marshall was gravely concerned about a political crisis surrounding Roosevelt at this critical time. I will have to check on any statements he made regarding his observations but they were after he finished up as Secretary of State. He is also my personal WWII leader favorite, second only to Churchill. Marshall was a giant.
"nobody knew about the zero and everybody was confident that the forces in PI were adequate for coastal and air defense" We are probably all aware of the reports by Chennault coming out of his China experience but of course, they were largely ignored. I think a case can be made (or would at least like to see it explored, if it hasn't already come up. I am a newbie so maybe its already been argued to death.) that the forces in the Phillipines might have been up to the task, if The FEAF hadn't been lost on the first day of the war. If not already discussed, it might be a logical progression for this discussion. Asked diffferently: how long could have the FEAF survived if it had been allowed to respond appropriately to the initial Japanese assault. Appropriately meaning, surviving the initial shock of the Zero long enough to read and absorb the Chennault reports and adopt the AVG's tactics. At Pearl, we had two pilots (Welch and Taylor) who in some sense at least were prepared for the attack and enjoyed some success in responding to it. If we inflate that to include a third of the fighters at Clark and out-lying fields employed on rotating CAP, I would expect the results to have been quite different. I mean, the AVG was effective wth about as many aircraft. But I haven't looked at the differences in the Japanese Order of Battle between China and the Phillipines.
Going back I see that the issue of FEAF survival has indeed already been subject to some examination by JoeB, Parsifal and others. Yes, 'the war of Northern aggression,' as I (a native of NJ) have heard so often since coming to live in rebel territory!
the USN was in no position to provide logistics support to PI.
Yes, I was aware that most AVG 'modern' opposition was vs Ki-43 Oscars but had also heard he faced some detachments of IJN zeroes deployed to China.in 1940 Can't remember the source. Found it! in Shultz's Maverick War, paperback page 75.
There is a lot of controversy re: Type I, Type 0, Zero, etc. For sure there are no victory credits of IJN Zero's in USAAF Victory Credits listings. Tex Hill was credited with 2 Type '0' and one Zero in April 28/May 5 1942 at the very end of the AVG experience. Both China, both Army. Questions still remain 'Type 0' vs Oscar in that window. For sure the Jap fighters encountered prior to April 1942 were I-97's. Burghard got only I-97'2, Neale only got I-97s, Little credited with one Type 0 in April 1942, Herbst I-97s, Howard I-97s.