MHO Home   Forum Home   Help   Register   Login
 
 
Welcome to MilitaryHistoryOnline.com.
You are not signed in.
The current time is: 9/23/2018 6:57:57 AM
 (1939-1945) WWII Battles
AuthorMessage
Page 2 of 3 (Page: 1  2 3 ) 
George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 7834

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/26/2018 12:09:51 PM

Quote:
It was either Western or US lead influence or Japanese influence and with all due respect US influence was hands down the better choice for the people.



Quote:
US policy had the higher moral ground


Very self righteous statements John. It is the rationale of the powerful who are self confident because of that power.

How often do we in the west including the US have to make the same mistakes, judging that our values and way of life and our systems of government are the best thing for people who may not even want us there?

Tell me please, what possible reason could all of the colonial powers have had to impose their will on Asia in the first place? Why did they not respect the right of self determination? That's another topic but colonialism and imperialism were examples of accepted conduct by powerful nations in the late 1800's and early 1900's.

Why did the US need the territories that were already subjected to rule by the Spanish? Did the US take those places as spoils of war? Why did the US need Cuba and the Philippines and Puerto Rico and Guam?

It was that the US was in danger of missing out on the imperial expansionism going on at the time and part of that was the desire to secure necessary natural resources.

None of that control exerted upon indigenous populations can be construed as having taken the moral high ground. We need only point to the Filipinos who felt betrayed when the independence that they sought from Spain wasn't immediately delivered when the US took over to see that many of them did not feel that they had been saved.

But nations, powerful nations, can convince themselves that control of foreign nations and the people is the right thing to do and that occupation is in their best interest.




Was Japanese militarism a good thing? It was when they were useful as when they defeated the Russians in 1905 (?) just as Russia was hoping to become a more respected world power. It sent the Russians scrambling looking for European allies, like the French.

Japan used that conquest to extend its interests into China. Everyone else was doing it, so why not Japan?

But it ticked off the US and the UK didn't it? Manchuria wasn't supposed to fall to the Japanese. The step too far. This is our sphere of influence, not that of the Japanese. Note, there were several other countries who were involved in China and had secured the right to use ports from the weak Chinese government.

Militarism was a good thing during WW1 when the Japanese navy honoured the Anglo-Japanese Treaty and secured sea lanes from access by the German navy. Japanese ships were even in the Mediterranean and played a large role in escorting troop ships to North Africa and the Middle East.

It was a good thing when they fought German and Austrian subs in the Mediterranean.


Were the Japanese brutal in their approach to war? Undoubtedly. Were they brutal to any opposition in the Asian countries that they occupied. For sure. The Rape of Nanking is a blight on humanity.

But I ask again, would the US have sent troops to China to fight had the Japanese not foolishly attacked Pearl Harbor?



Quote:
If I'm such a asshole that discussion is impossible stop asking me questions


I don't know you well enough to make that assessment.

I do find you prickly in your responses when someone disagrees with you.

And over the years it has become clear that you believe in the righteousness of nearly every initiative that the US has undertaken. That's the American Exceptionalism to which I referred before. Any criticism of America, and the hair on your neck stands up.

Unfortunately, the anonymity of the internet causes us to pass judgement on one another over the use or misuse of a word or phrase.

We may read things and misinterpret them. It is an awkward and sometimes too safe a means of communication.

So I believe your to be a good man and a patriotic man. I just disagree with some of your assessments of situations.

If you disagree with me or think that I am all wet, then weigh in. But give me a little more than sentences that start with, "what you're forgetting is....".

Flesh it out for me. If I have forgotten something, then why is it important. How should it inform my opinion.


Cheers,

George



RiaindeVoy
Geelong, Australia
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major


Posts: 1393

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/26/2018 1:26:54 PM

Quote:
Riain,

Fair enough on Borneo.

Apples to oranges France in WWI and the Philippines in WWII. You are talking 100 divisions with more jobs than you can shake a stuck at and very extended frontage. Did your government try and dictate what part of the line and what assignments the troops were going to get in WWI? Hey maybe if assignment to 8th Army had been acceptable you could have had a Aussie Corps. The point I'm not sure you are getting is that there were very limited options/assignments for a full corps and the truth is IMHO three out of four weren't all that more backwater than Borneo. I mean how much do you know about Wawa or Ippo, the Villa Verde Trail, Highway #5 , Baguio or Mindanao? And all four of them would have required about 20,000 replacements available for a 3 Division Corps to stay combat effective and finish the job assigned.
--John R. Price


We didn't try to dictate what part of the line we were in during WW1, but like Canada we did try to keep our divisions together so they wouldn't be mis-used. Similarly in WW2 when our divisions weren't together in a Corps they were sent to Greece and wasted, lost in Malaya and tried to be diverted to Ceylon and Burma.

Mac knew the influence a full Corps would have and he tried (and succeeded) to limit that influence, just like he tried (and succeeded) to limit the influence of the RAAF by advising Curtin not to bring out a RAF officer above Bostock and Jones. We were wise to this Great Power tactic of splitting up Australian formations to reduce their importance and thus make them more easily used for Great Power tasks, and in this instance we didn't let it happen.

Maybe this was a good thing for the overall war effort, but more likely Mac was a self-aggrandising arsehole and Curtin wasn't much of a PM.
---------------
Fact: The phrase "she'll be right mate" increases an Australian's healing process by 40%.

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/26/2018 6:26:08 PM
Riain I agree completely that Mac was a ass all I'm trying to point out is that because of what happened in 42 the US deserved the right to retake Manila, Bataan and Corregidor and they were the only "main stage" tasks in the Philippines. Do you really think that a Australian Corps was due that assignment?
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/27/2018 2:55:50 AM
Riain if a Australian Corps had taken the level of casualties I quoted the 32nd Division did in capturing the Wawa Dam only to discover after the capture that since 36 0r 37 the Dam no longer provided any of the water for Manila when the whole reason given for the battle was to get the water turned back on in Manila what discussion would we be having today? Because that is exactly what the US unit found out after capturing the objective.

There is a whole school of thought that once the "glory" was achieved MacArthur "checked out" and started all his attention and energy to the next mission to the detriment of the current unfinished mission. "Pacific Hurtgen" all to briefly in my opinion explores that school of thought with example given for new Gunia and the Philippines.
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


RiaindeVoy
Geelong, Australia
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major


Posts: 1393

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/27/2018 4:31:06 PM
To answer a question with a question, after what happened in 42 did Australia deserve to be marginalised and sidelined as an Ally?
---------------
Fact: The phrase "she'll be right mate" increases an Australian's healing process by 40%.

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/27/2018 7:31:27 PM
If it meant handing the recapture of Manila, Bataan and Corregidor over yes and that is basically what you are demanding because everything else is a "great power task" as it played out
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


RiaindeVoy
Geelong, Australia
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major


Posts: 1393

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/27/2018 9:53:20 PM
6th Army was several Corps strong, I doubt having one of them an Australian Corps means that the Australia Corps would do ALL the heavy lifting; but hey, thanks for having such a high opinion of us! ;-)

---------------
Fact: The phrase "she'll be right mate" increases an Australian's healing process by 40%.

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/27/2018 11:37:48 PM
Riain you are the one telling me it was unacceptable to be used in a backwater or as cannon fodder. I'm trying to tell you it was all "heavy lifting" combat wise but only one that could be considered "front page." I'm also telling you the breakdown of assignments for 6th Army on Luzon. You basically had one 3 Division Corps assigned to Manila, Bataan and Corregidor. Another of 2+ Divisions to take the Dams and a third of 3+ Divisions to go after Yamashita's group. There was I other Corps level assignment with 8th Army on Mindinao. Everything else was RCT, Reinforced Bats or single Divisions. The fact that your saying there was only heavy lifting in Manila, Bataan and Corregidor tells me you don't know much of what went on.

The loss in 6th Army after Manila fell and Bataan was cleared was 288 officers and 4,499 enlisted KIA, 868 officers and 16,503 enlisted WIA and 3,361 officer and 70,433 enlisted non battle casualties evacuated. 34% of the non battle casualties didn't make it back to their units.

---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


RiaindeVoy
Geelong, Australia
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major


Posts: 1393

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/28/2018 1:48:25 AM
I'm not telling you anything about cannon fodder, or anything about the campaign itself because I don't know anything about it.

I'm telling you that Australia offered a Corps for the 6th Army and this was rejected, Mac countered with single divisions under US Corps command and this was unacceptable to the Australian government. By 1944 Australia had been in campaigns in Africa, Syria, Greece, Malaya and New Guinea and likely knew about the casualties that would be suffered and weighed these up against the political impact of having a Corps in the main event. It would also appear that the Australian Government knew having single divisions under US Corps command was about as useful to us as having no divisions at all in the Philippines, so that's what we did.

---------------
Fact: The phrase "she'll be right mate" increases an Australian's healing process by 40%.

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 7834

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/28/2018 8:04:29 AM
Riain, the RAN and RAAF did provide support in the battles to liberate the Philippines. Why was that decision made?

Good on Australia for not sending a couple of divisions to be attached to US Corps.

Is it not true that MacArthur had promised PM Curtin and General Blamey that they would be full partners in the liberation of the Philippines? Did he not make this promise in 1942 when he escaped to Australia?

According to Australian accounts, Mac met with Curtin for the first time in Sept. of 1944 and told him that AIF would accompany American forces "in the advance against the Japanese."

One week later, MacArthur's Chief of Staff met with Blamey and told him that, " it was not politically expedient for the AIF to be amongst the rst troops
into the Philippines”.

If true and Australian accounts say it is, it seems pretty clear that MacArthur's decision had more to do with assuring that he and the US would be the liberators.

Shades of Rome in the Italian campaign when British and Canadian forces were ordered to stand to while Mark Clark made his grand entry into Rome.

Lieutenant Gen. Frank Berryman was the Australian officer leading the small Australian attachment to GHQ and he wrote in his diary after Australia had been excluded from the liberation of the Philippines.


Quote:
I have not even hinted that we should be represented as our dignity & pride is proof against inclusion in a flamboyant Hollywood spectacle ... In his [MacArthur’s] hour [of] victory his ego allows him to forget his former dependence on the AMF & is in keeping with GHQ policy to minimise the efforts of Australia in SWPA.






Cheers,

George

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 7834

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/28/2018 8:09:24 AM
What was the personal relationship between Lieutenant General Blamey and MacArthur?

Must point out that Blamey was a significant figure with the Australian Army during the Great War. Later appointed to the rank of Field Marshall.


Cheers,

George

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/28/2018 8:43:30 AM
Riain the main event in the Philippines was the Naval battle as far as strategic impact on the war.

What are the political advantages to Australia to having a Corps?

If the Philippines were bypassed you making the same demands for Formosa?
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3913

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 2/28/2018 10:19:59 AM
It seems MacArthur was rated among the worst commander in US history??

[Read More]

some of you seem to agree?
MD

If so, some sad company for Mac?
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

RiaindeVoy
Geelong, Australia
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major


Posts: 1393

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/1/2018 2:16:04 AM
I think he was quite good tactically and operationally, the campaigns in PNG were pretty well done, but strategically and politically he was found wanting.
---------------
Fact: The phrase "she'll be right mate" increases an Australian's healing process by 40%.

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/1/2018 2:16:35 PM
Riain,

Please forgive me I'm not trying to be offensive or a idiot but other than national pride and I can without doubt understand that I just don't see the political capital or influence a Corps is going to bring.
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 7834

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/1/2018 7:39:34 PM
I have read the Australian people were wondering why their ground forces were not more fully engaged.

Australia had been a major contributor to the defeat of Germany in WW1. One of the top Corps of the British army.

The Aussies were considered to be British storm troopers and they were top notch. Battle honours are too extensive to list here.

If we want to see just how important a Corps can be to a war, we just have to look at the Dominion Corps of the British Army in WW1. Key players.

PM Billy Hughes was adamant that Australia had earned the right to have an independent seat at the negotiations for the Treaty of Versailles.
Despite butting heads with David Lloyd George and Woodrow Wilson, he and Australia received the recognition that was so deserved.
And he signed the Treaty as an independent entity from Great Britain. Rightly so.

Given that history, is it any wonder that the Australians wanted to be part of the major battles in the second world war and were angry at being passed over for an assignment that they were willing to accept.

As well, if a country wants a voice at the peace table in discussions about the future after the battles are over, it is necessary to have made significant contributions. Otherwise you are ignored.

If any allied country had legitimate concerns in this area of the world, it is Australia. It was their back yard even if the Philippines is 4400 km away.


Quote:
Over 993,000 Australians served in the armed forces during World War II. Of those on active service, 27,073 were killed in action or died, 23,477 were wounded, and 30,560 were taken prisoner of war. Of those taken prisoner, 8296 died in captivity.
. (source: national archives of Aus.)

And they were willing to contribute in the Philippines.

It seems that the decision to exclude them was ego driven on the part of MacArthur.

Cheers,

George

Mike Johnson
Stafford, VA, USA
top 20
E-7 Sgt First Class


Posts: 505

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/1/2018 9:13:12 PM

Quote:
This came up in another thread ('health care'). I have replied to Wazza below and given this topic its own thread in the appropriate forum.


Quote:
We are thankful for the assistance of American forces (as well as the UK and Dutch) in the New Guinea campaign, but it was MacArthur's choice to backseat us for the rest of the Pacific campaign. -wazza


Wazza,

 Does it really matter in the end? Japs killed on Borneo or Japs killed in the Philippines? If MacArthur had put the Australians in the front of operations in the Philippines, today we would hear that 'MacArthur killed good Australian boys so the USA could reassert control over the Philippines'. Just pointing out that hindsight is only worth so much . . . and that I don't feel like hindsight does a good job of weighing how alternative courses of action might have played out.

Cheers,

BW
--BWilson


Why should Aussies die to return the Philippines to the US?

What gets me with this discussion is that MacArthur originally planned for two corps of four divisions to land on Leyte, with one of the divisions being Australian. Years ago, I read the messages back and forth between MacArthur, Blamey, and Curtin on this. Curtin objected to 1 AUS division and 3 US and insisted on one of the corps being Australian and it was Curtain who stated that if it couldn't be 1 AUS corps than no Australians would participate.

RiaindeVoy
Geelong, Australia
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major


Posts: 1393

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/1/2018 10:59:45 PM

Quote:
Riain,

Please forgive me I'm not trying to be offensive or a idiot but other than national pride and I can without doubt understand that I just don't see the political capital or influence a Corps is going to bring.
--John R. Price


Countries that don't fight in the war don't get to shape the peace.

Another example would be the creation of the British Pacific Fleet, it wasn't much compared to the USN but went anyway to give the British a stake in the post war Pacific that they wouldn't get if they didn't go and fight.

A more recent version would the the establishment of 1ATF in its own AO in Vietnam.

---------------
Fact: The phrase "she'll be right mate" increases an Australian's healing process by 40%.

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/1/2018 11:01:02 PM
Just wondering but exactly were was Canada's Zone of Occupation in Germany or exactly what the Free Poles service in Italy and elsewhere bought them other than a Monument at Casino? Or how about what did Italy and Japan get in Paris for being on the winning side and doing all asked in 1919?
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/1/2018 11:07:51 PM
Riain,

Your forgetting British troops engaged in Malaya throughout the war and India being the supply hub for China.

Apples to oranges with Vietnam the US was begging for Allies in Vietnam and were willing to give away the kitchen sink to get them.

Do you really think a Corps in the Philippines was going to give you major influence in shaping the peace? What did Tobruk give you?

EDIT Brain fart that should be Burma. Chindits, Imphail amd Kohema, Chinese troops being trained in India, the Hump, Burma Road and Slim and I know my spelling is off but I don't feel like checking.
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


RiaindeVoy
Geelong, Australia
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major


Posts: 1393

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 12:28:25 AM
Firstly, Vietnam is exactly the correct analogy, Australia wanted to conduct its own war in Vietnam, not get subsumed into the US way of doing things.

Secondly, if the British thought the CBI theatre was enough they wouldn't have bothered with the BPF or the plans to re-capture Malaya.

Thridly, a Corps in the Philippines would have given us something whereas a Corps in Borneo gave us nothing. Tobruk, or more accurately our contribution to Imperial Defence, gave us;
Force Z of 2 capital ships
various naval units which fought at Java Sea including the 8" cruiser Exeter
the 50 Hurricanes and the 18th Division which arrived during the Malaya Campaign
Somerville's Far Eastern Fleet which arrived with 3 aircraft carriers and several battleships within 4 months of the Japanese attack.

---------------
Fact: The phrase "she'll be right mate" increases an Australian's healing process by 40%.

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 12:41:15 AM
Riain,

No you had political leverage in Vietnam not so much with the Philippines.

The idea of Malaya was to keep Japanese troops from reinforcing the Home Islands. No all that many knew about the Atomic Bomb and nobody knew it was going to work or work as well as it did.

A Corps or 2 in the Invasion of Japan would have gotten you something but either way you weren't going to be a major mover in the peace process. And Singapore, Malaya, Hong Kong and Burma have no part in the transfers after Japan attacked? If not for the stand of the Desert Rats they aren't going to happen?
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


BWilson

top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 4545

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 12:55:43 AM

Quote:

Why should Aussies die to return the Philippines to the US?

What gets me with this discussion is that MacArthur originally planned for two corps of four divisions to land on Leyte, with one of the divisions being Australian. Years ago, I read the messages back and forth between MacArthur, Blamey, and Curtin on this. Curtin objected to 1 AUS division and 3 US and insisted on one of the corps being Australian and it was Curtain who stated that if it couldn't be 1 AUS corps than no Australians would participate.
--Mike Johnson


Hi Mike,

 That's my point. In -hindsight-, the critical operations were those that seized the islands from which the B-29's ultimately flew to drop A-bombs on Japan (but in 1944 the Allied field military personnel could not have foreseen such a stunning development). Seen in hindsight, while all of the operations were important, only one series of operations ultimately proved critical to forcing a surrender of Japan.

 What about the plans to invade Japan proper with ground forces (OLYMPIC, CORONET, etc.)? Did those include any Australian formations?

Cheers,

BW
---------------
With occasional, fatigued glances at life's rear-view mirror from the other side of time.

RiaindeVoy
Geelong, Australia
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major


Posts: 1393

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 2:19:58 AM
Yep, and again Mac was trying to reduce the size of the contribution and delay its employment.

[Read More]
---------------
Fact: The phrase "she'll be right mate" increases an Australian's healing process by 40%.

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 2:25:39 AM
BW,

I just did a quick search of Army and Marine centric sites online and they both say that "Olympic" and "Coronet" would both have been a all American show with the exception of a contingent of Royal Navy ships. 11 Army and 3 Marine Divisions for "Olympic" and 19 Army and 3 Marine for "Coronet." With "Olympic" there was a 1 Division landing on a island of the southern coast that I'm not sure if it was counted in the total given.
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


BWilson

top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 4545

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 4:00:16 AM
 Thanks John. No doubt some politics there. I believe the Soviets wanted to invade Hokkaido so they could install a Japanese communist regime, but events moved too fast versus their capability to launch such an operation.

Cheers,

BW
---------------
With occasional, fatigued glances at life's rear-view mirror from the other side of time.

BWilson

top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 4545

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 4:03:10 AM

Quote:
Yep, and again Mac was trying to reduce the size of the contribution and delay its employment.

[Read More]
--RiaindeVoy


 That article mentions a British division . . . interesting considering how Churchill squeezed 21st Army Group for infantry reinforcements to the point that two divisions and several brigades had to be DISBANDED. Montgomery would have probably appreciated that division!

Cheers,

BW
---------------
With occasional, fatigued glances at life's rear-view mirror from the other side of time.

anemone
DONCASTER S. YORKS, UK
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 6851
http:// 82.44.47.99
Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 5:45:21 AM
Yes Btll 59th Infantry was broken up and the 50th T&T Infantry in 1944--the latter had been in action from 1940 andwas placed in Home Reserve .

Regards

Jim
---------------
Pro Patria Saepe Pro Rege Semper

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 7:37:26 AM
BW,

The Soviets kept attacking for at least 2 weeks after the surrender.

My Army source for "Downfall"

https://history.army.mil/books/wwii/MacArthur%20Reports/MacArthur%20V1/ch13.htm
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 7834

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 7:43:47 AM
The Canadians who had volunteered for Europe were asked to re-volunteer for the Japanese theatre.

My Dad was one of them. He had finished the war in Europe and they were in Wilhelmshaven, Germany and anxious to get home.

Officers were asking men to volunteer for Japan and if you did you got 30 days leave at home before going to the states for jungle training.

That's what Dad called it. Not sure how much jungle is left on the home islands of Japan. Anyway, he had been told that he would be headed to Georgia, after his leave was over.

Languishing on the base and bored, he noted that those who had volunteered were permitted to leave base and go into town. Dad and the rest stayed on base waiting for new assignments or repatriation.

So he asked an officer about the Japanese situation and the officer whipped out papers and said "sign here". And off he went to town to get a hamburger. There were rumours that an American kitchen was in Wilhelmshaven and it was serving hamburgers.

And then it was home. One day out of Halifax and the first bomb was dropped. So he was an earlier arrival back to Canada.


Quote:
Just wondering but exactly were was Canada's Zone of Occupation in Germany or exactly what the Free Poles service in Italy and elsewhere bought them other than a Monument at Casino? Or how about what did Italy and Japan get in Paris for being on the winning side and doing all asked in 1919?


The quote is a recent post from John Price. John, please explain what you are getting at and what exactly is Canada's Zone of Occupation. I'm confused.

I think that you are suggesting that small to middle powers are ignored anyway when the wars are over. I disagree.

Once the blood is spilled and battle honours received, countries may stand up and demand a seat at the table. With commitment comes gravitas.

When Bill Clinton was preparing a speech to be delivered at the 50th anniversary of D-day, he asked historian John Keegan to come to the oval office to advise him. Keegan's third piece of advice was, "Don't forget the Canadians". And he didn't.

But it is necessary to keep reminding the larger powers that you were there too and played a part in the defeat of the enemy.



Back to the topic though, I think that it was pretty clear that the Pacific operations were to be an American show.

Hell the Canadian volunteers were to be issued US kit for upcoming operations, to blend in.

Note that the 1st Special Service Force (CAN/Am) all wore US uniforms.
The Canadians who joined in the attack on Kiska all wore some US equipment worn over Canadian battle dress.

In the latter situation, the involvement came about through casual discussion between Canadian and US authorities with the US acknowledging that they would be "delighted" to have Canadians involved in the expulsion of the Japanese from the Aleutian chain.

These were among the first signs of Canada's shift toward the US and away from the UK in co-operation in the protection of North America.


Smaller countries whose soldiers give their lives in the same operations as the larger countries ask that they be permitted as middle powers, to have some say in how the peace is formed and what policies will guide the world after it is all over.

To some extent, that is why countries volunteer to be a part of operations, to make sure that they are not ignored when the world is reshaping.

There are political motivations to sending one's troops into harm's way. In the case of my country, Canada evolved as a middle power but also an honest broker in world affairs, often acting as a go between for US interests with the UK. Efforts in WW2 led to Canada's important work at the UN and peacekeeping. Note the influence of this small country during the Suez Crisis to diffuse the situation.

That all comes about because the commitment to winning in WW2 by Canada simply could not be ignored.


And I would suggest that the Australians were thinking along those lines. They had good reason to want to get back at the Japanese too.

But more than that, it was necessary to establish that Australia was a significant player in the defeat of the Japanese.

From their perspective I gather that they felt that they were being prevented from showing what they could do and were willing to do.

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 8:46:07 AM
"To some extent, that is why countries volunteer to be a part of operations, to make sure that they are not ignored when the world is reshaping."

Or they are bored on base and hungry for a hamburger.

Oh and I guess Russia and the USA had absolutely nothing to do with the British and French backing off at the Suez Canal?

And the use of US equipment makes resupply easier it really has nothing to do with national identity nor is it a slight in any way. What is that saying, logistics is what seperates the pros from the cons.

Bill Clinton was as big an ass as MacArthur and his including Canada in his speech has nothing to do with that statement.

I'm not saying Australians were thinking along that train of thought just that it is a rather naïve train of thought.
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3913

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 8:58:13 AM
But John, & others,

Douglas MacArthur, was a nice man! Check out all the good he did! Don't call him names, like Dugout Doug!?

[Read More]

Go Mac!
MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 7834

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 9:19:09 AM

Quote:
Or they are bored on base and hungry for a hamburger.


If this was an attempt at humour, then please attach the appropriate emoticon.

If not, it is most disrespectful of my father and the average soldier who only does as he is ordered.

It is, and I expect that you cannot see it, extremely dismissive of people that you like to call allies. I would like to say that it is beneath you but unfortunately it is not.

John, other than your dislike for me, was there any reason to make such snide and sarcastic comments? I should be used to it now by now. The normal pattern plays out. You only have so many, "respectfully's" in you before you start to splutter nonsense.


You again are being deliberately obtuse. My comment about Canada's involvement in the Suez Crisis, which I suspect you know little about given your US-centric perspective on most things, was to indicate that Canada had emerged from WW2 as a significantly more influential entity than when it entered the war in Sept. of 1939. Full participation in the war effort contributed to self confidence within Canada and recognition by other countries that its efforts were appreciated.

My comment about Clinton's speech was to indicate that he perhaps needed a reminder to separate Canada from the UK when talking about Normandy and the war in Europe. Whether he is an ass or not is irrelevant just as that comment was.


Quote:
Oh and I guess Russia and the USA had absolutely nothing to do with the British and French backing off at the Suez Canal?
.

Where was that implied John? But when you just assume that the rift between the US and GB over the canal was handled by the US alone with Russia (who was supplying weapons to Nasser), you discredit others who played an important role.

So why don't you look up Lester B. Pearson and the Suez Canal Crisis or the UNEF (UN Emergency Task Force) and perhaps you won't be so dismissive.

I offered it up to indicate that a country may punch above its weight and thus have the ear of the major powers that would have us tap dance to the tunes that they play. In that way, smaller countries may have influence on world affairs. BTW, Lester Pearson won a Nobel peace prize for his work during the Suez Canal crisis.

I must admit that it is interesting to see that you view the Australian point of view as naive. It is indicative of the importance of standing up to be counted among the nations of the world and to assert oneself lest one be dismissed as irrelevant as it appears that you have done with Australia.







John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 9:22:45 AM
Dave yep and Bill Clinton didn't have sex with that woman! Oh and I didn't call Mac that once in this thread.
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 7834

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 10:53:01 AM

Quote:
Dave yep and Bill Clinton didn't have sex with that woman! Oh and I didn't call Mac that once in this thread.

--John R. Price


what does this mean?



RiaindeVoy
Geelong, Australia
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major


Posts: 1393

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 3:52:32 PM
I think there is a simple difference of perspective between great powers and minor powers that likely won't be bridged.

I don't care other than the whole 'we saved your ass' attitude, which is inaccurate given Dugout Doug came running to Australia with his tail between his legs looking for help.
---------------
Fact: The phrase "she'll be right mate" increases an Australian's healing process by 40%.

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 5:34:37 PM
I so wanted to stop but I just can't help myself. Riain now if you mean MacArthur saved your ass I agree its inaccurate but without the US at Coral Sea and the two other attempts to reinforce New Guinea and the reinforcement of the 41st Division do you really think you can hold New Guinea? And if for some reason the US makes peace and there is no Lend Lease Japan and Germany can be defeated? Now do I call that savin your ass no because it was in the best interests of the US to do so.
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


RiaindeVoy
Geelong, Australia
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major


Posts: 1393

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 7:22:58 PM
If Japan wasn't going to invade Australia, and it wasn't because it couldn't, and even if it did would have been defeated by some 10 infantry and 3 armoured divisions Australia had by mid 1942 how can Australia's ass be saved?

Even if the US had made peace with Japan Australia would have survived as an independent country.

I'm not going to knock what the US DID do in the war, and it was a hell of a lot, but there is no need to blow that up into even more than it was and run down the contribution of allies and THEN expect a pat on the back. The US deserves a pat on the back for what it did do, not what it imagines it did.
---------------
Fact: The phrase "she'll be right mate" increases an Australian's healing process by 40%.

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 7834

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 7:33:11 PM
"Saving your ass" is a hot button expression reviled by all the allies who gave their all to defeat Germany.

Implicit is that the action of saving was one of generosity or altruism.

But if that was the case then why did the US not recognize the moral imperative and to mobilize in 1939?

One wonders what the response of Hitler would have been had a division or two of Americans as starters had been sent over in 1939 or early 1940 with promises of more to come.

I am aware that the US was unprepared for war in 1939 but neither were the countries that did respond.

So why did the US enter the fray fully and would they have done so had Hitler not been so stupid to have declared war on the US?


John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 813

Re: MacArthur, Australia, and the Pacific War
Posted on: 3/2/2018 9:54:11 PM
Riain,

No US and no Lend Lease when are the Aussie troops in Europe getting back? Does GB have enough shipping and escorts? Does Australia have enough Navy to keep the shipping lanes open from a possible Japanese blockade? Does Australia have the planes to keep air superiority over the shipping lanes? Without Lend Lease how much arms and equipment can GB ship to you or can you arm, equip and supply your forces indefenetly without any help? How about replace the shipping lost? Oil and refineries?

I also have to add this whole discussion starts with you running down the contributions of one of your allies even if I really don't have a problem with running down MacArthur he was an ally and expecting a pat on the back for offering troops to serve under specific terms and conditions that were unacceptable to an alliance you had already agreed to be a part of and with a commander you already agreed to serve under.
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


Page 2 of 3 (Page: 1  2 3 ) 
 Forum Ads from Google