Why were successful WW2 US generals fired but contemporary unsuccessful generals retained?

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
Relationship between the police and the army seemed to cool in 1977. When I went out there in 76, in Strabane we hot bunked in decrepit caravans in the Strabane police station yard and had our own ops room, although there was a lot of toing and froing with the old bill in the nick who we got on quite well with. That changed and the coppers stopped being so chatty. Their Ch Supt started inviting the locals to complain about the army and things got a bit frosty. Despite all this the police did not resume patrolling the two Catholic estates, and when his name was daubed on a wall in one of them he wanted the army to clean it off. As I recall it was still there in 78 until 'Coldstream Killers' replaced it (in response to the biggest and meanest bitey dog on the Top of the Town estate meeting a mysterious and untimely end.)

*Note the cricket result on the wall at left of pic.... I am sure that is what they meant :rolleyes:
View attachment 622368
I’m sure you’re correct, I’m just stating a historical fact - ‘Police Primacy’ resumed in 1977.
 
Ricks relates the story of an American Colonel (whom he does not name) at Normandy who was not only relieved but escorted out in handcuffs. Said Colonel went on to Command again during, as I recall, the battle for Germany.
Colonel Philip De Witt Ginder, commanding 357th Inf Reg.

"Ginder developed a reputation for subpar performance in combat, with observers and subordinates calling him "obtuse" and "full of boast and posturing." 357th veteran William E. DePuy called Ginder "as close to being incompetent as it is possible to be."

He obviously got his sh1t together as he did command again in Germany, 121st Inf Reg, leading from the front and winning a DSC during The Battle of Hurtgen Forest when he took command of one of his infantry companies during street fighting .
He again commanded in combat as the youngest Division commander in Korea with 45th Inf Div.

Aside from the CIB I am clueless as to the septic ribbons but this is his rack, courtesy of wikipedia*

* sixth row, second from the left, who has a medal ribbon with a blond dog looking over its shoulder????

Philip De Witt Ginder - Wikipedia.jpg
 
I’m sure you’re correct, I’m just stating a historical fact - ‘Police Primacy’ resumed in 1977.
Not questioning that, just posting an example.
 
Colonel Philip De Witt Ginder, commanding 357th Inf Reg.

"Ginder developed a reputation for subpar performance in combat, with observers and subordinates calling him "obtuse" and "full of boast and posturing." 357th veteran William E. DePuy called Ginder "as close to being incompetent as it is possible to be."

He obviously got his sh1t together as he did command again in Germany, 121st Inf Reg, leading from the front and winning a DSC during The Battle of Hurtgen Forest when he took command of one of his infantry companies during street fighting .
He again commanded in combat as the youngest Division commander in Korea with 45th Inf Div.

Aside from the CIB I am clueless as to the septic ribbons but this is his rack, courtesy of wikipedia*

* sixth row, second from the left, who has a medal ribbon with a blond dog looking over its shoulder????

View attachment 622378
The top two rows (which are the “important ones”

Distinguished Service Cross
Distinguished Service Medal (US Army)
Silver Star
Legion of Merit and Oak Leaf (i.e. a re-award)
Bronze Star with two Oak Leafs

Rough (and very rough, because there’s no direct analogy)

CGC
CBE
MC
OBE
MiD/QCVS

But there’s lots of contention about things like Bronze Stars as well as LoM. So take that with a massive pinch of direct salt.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
For anyone interested in the Chosin Reservoir, I can recommend On Desperate Ground, by Hampton Sides. A great read, with Almond's behaviour laid wide open, as well as some truly incredible individual stories.
Seconded. Also read Chesty's biography "Marine".
 

W21A

LE
Book Reviewer
Colonel Philip De Witt Ginder, commanding 357th Inf Reg.

"Ginder developed a reputation for subpar performance in combat, with observers and subordinates calling him "obtuse" and "full of boast and posturing." 357th veteran William E. DePuy called Ginder "as close to being incompetent as it is possible to be."

He obviously got his sh1t together as he did command again in Germany, 121st Inf Reg, leading from the front and winning a DSC during The Battle of Hurtgen Forest when he took command of one of his infantry companies during street fighting .
He again commanded in combat as the youngest Division commander in Korea with 45th Inf Div.

Aside from the CIB I am clueless as to the septic ribbons but this is his rack, courtesy of wikipedia*

* sixth row, second from the left, who has a medal ribbon with a blond dog looking over its shoulder????

View attachment 622378

I presume you get a dog to eat. And the dog is looking out for the person who is going to eat it.
 
Tell me which country as won a war in Afghanistan, it doesn't matter how long they stay they get kicked out in the end, they always leave in a hurry,

Hmm....The Brits won the Second Anglo-Afghan War 1878-80 after phase two.
Bobs Bahadur and all that.
 
Colonel Philip De Witt Ginder, commanding 357th Inf Reg.

"Ginder developed a reputation for subpar performance in combat, with observers and subordinates calling him "obtuse" and "full of boast and posturing." 357th veteran William E. DePuy called Ginder "as close to being incompetent as it is possible to be."
TBF to Ginder the entire 90th division was considered sub par t Normandy. 2 of it's division OC's were relieved and 2 regimental OC's . Ginders replacement was KIA 13 June

MG McKelvie relieved at Normandy relieved 13 June
MG Landrum lasted 2 months at Normandy relieved 30 July
MG McLain commanded it the longest in the ETO leaving on 15 October
 
Tell me which country as won a war in Afghanistan, it doesn't matter how long they stay they get kicked out in the end, they always leave in a hurry,

Google not working? Or do you just want to believe the myth that Afghanistan was never conquered?


So back to your bullshit about leaving with their tails between their legs, why did you say that? Especially as neither the British or the American military were beaten?

The basic idea was for Afghanis to control their own country and to take care of the taliban themselves. How exactly is that the fault of the coalition soldiers?
 
Iraq was won within months unless Saddam has risen from the dead.
In Afghanistan the Taliban had their arse handed to them within a year.
All the rebuilding shit and running a country is not the job of the Army.

And yet the Americans send their officer class over to the LSE and a couple of other UK institutions of higher learning to study such things at post-grad level.
 
And yet the Americans send their officer class over to the LSE and a couple of other UK institutions of higher learning to study such things at post-grad level.

So?
 
They obviously nowadays see rebuilding shit and the running of a country as their job.

Some people in the army have legal degrees, medical degrees etc, is the armys primary role to deal legal or medical matters?
 

lextalionis

War Hero
Iraq was won within months unless Saddam has risen from the dead.
In Afghanistan the Taliban had their arse handed to them within a year.
All the rebuilding shit and running a country is not the job of the Army.
The point could be made that the battle was won but the war was lost (as Ricks makes repeatedly in his works). In both 1990/1991 and 2003, the initial (apparent) defeat of Iraqi forces did not lead to dominion over territory and people (which is a traditional form of "victory"). This reflects a simple lack of strategy by American and Allied generali.

It's worth mentioning that the word "strategy" comes from the Greek word στρατηγός ("strategos"), the title for General, referring to the Clausewitzian notion that the first duty of such an officer is to think in such terms. It may not be an army's job to rebuild shit and run a country, but it is its job to make that possible for the civilian authorities. Or are soldiers now just rambo narcissists?
 
The point could be made that the battle was won but the war was lost (as Ricks makes repeatedly in his works). In both 1990/1991 and 2003, the initial (apparent) defeat of Iraqi forces did not lead to dominion over territory and people (which is a traditional form of "victory"). This reflects a simple lack of strategy by American and Allied generali.

It's worth mentioning that the word "strategy" comes from the Greek word στρατηγός ("strategos"), the title for General, referring to the Clausewitzian notion that the first duty of such an officer is to think in such terms. It may not be an army's job to rebuild shit and run a country, but it is its job to make that possible for the civilian authorities. Or are soldiers now just rambo narcissists?

What "war"? The war ended a few months into 2003.

It's up to the politicians to come up with a plan for the countries to run themselves. Is the army now supposed to dictate politics?
 
I mean it never has been the Army primary role to deal with terrorists and run a country.

You better tell the army then, as the army as been used in that capacity many times, well
the "to deal with terrorists" bit anyway
as in
Malaya emergency
Northern Ireland
and many more,

I would argue that in neither case was it the Armys primary role and in the case of NI it probably should never have been the armys role at all.

Malaya was a foreign sponsered insurgency a guerilla army rather than terrorism - That probably is a job for the army at least so far as defeating the insurgency.


Shockingly enough, after nearly 2 decades, it was the people of Afghanistan who should have been dealing with the Taliban, not foreign militaries.

I agree with you there.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top