Your favourite army general actually sucks

Discussion in 'Staff College and Staff Officers' started by msr, Nov 4, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. msr

    msr LE

  2. Interesting article but the examples don't all work. Fredendall was indeed sacked in North Africa but was promoted to
    Lt Gen and made an Army Commander, within three months.
  3. msr

    msr LE

    Isn't that the whole point? That being relieved of one command doesn't blackball your career?
  4. Maybe not, but I'm sure my old XO's career is as my ship was the second he'd been booted of!
  5. Trans-sane

    Trans-sane LE Book Reviewer

    Fairly sure that a different article discussing the same book was linked in the Int Cell a few days ago. One of the best lines in THAT one was a quote from a Major General along the lines of "The quality of the men under our command allowed us to dither for longer than was sensible".
  6. Army General as opposed to what, a Navy General?
  7. seaweed

    seaweed LE Book Reviewer

    In the septic case, perhaps a USAF or USMC general. Get hot.
  8. Auld-Yin

    Auld-Yin LE Reviewer Book Reviewer Reviews Editor


    Damn, beaten by seaweed :blank:
  9. Have just re-read the article. I think his point was that the Army was a lot more "Darwinian" back in the olden days than it is now. And no doubt there were plenty of senior officers who were sacked and disappeared without trace. I am not sure that the Fredendall example is the right one to back up the argument, that's all. Fredendall was instead promoted on return to the US, and presumably thereby viewed publicly as a successful commander in war, whereas he had in fact been just the opposite.