On April 11, 1951 President Harry Truman made the decision to fire the Army General Douglas McArthur after MacArthur made public statements that had contradicted the policies and positions of his administration. While General MacArthur was a well redound hero of World War Two, his role in the Korean War can be a questionable and controversial topic.
General Douglas Macarthur was one of the most well known military figures in the history of the United States. He gave his farewell speech to congress on 19th April 1951 and went into retirement after 52 years of service in the United States army. He was given the chance to address his final message to the US government. This analysis carefully examines his ethics, goals, strategies, strengths and weaknesses. The speech is very famous and highly popular among the American audience. Therefore, we will take into account all factors to critically evaluate the speech and find out what makes it important.
Have you ever been faced with making decisions that have the likely possibility to affect the world? What about dealing with decisions that put your values and beliefs in question? What if I told you General Arnold faced many of these decisions during his career. Any routine conversation involving General Henry H. “Hap” Arnold usually leans toward events like his famous “Wing Dings”. He was a visionary and ethical leader that transformed the U.S Army Air Force and birthed what is the modern day U.S. Air Force. He was the inventor of the dining in or out but his creative tendencies didn’t stop there. From learning to fly with the Wright brothers to the dropping of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Hap was present and ensured that his voice and leadership were both heard and seen. He left an impression on our Air Force that still stands to this day.
The United States has produced numerous military leaders throughout its history. The plethora of military conflicts and wars that this country has participated in, particularly as an emerging world power, has made these individuals historic figures whose names are often remembered and synonymous with military greatness. The purpose of this paper is to share three of them with you. You will learn what traits make them great leaders and what sets them apart from each other. You will also learn what strategies they used that display the American way of war. While these men may not have been the most traditional Christian role models, you will see principled men putting forth a firm fighting hand to represent their nation, its people, faith, and
Leadership involves providing purpose, direction and motivation to subordinates to accomplish the mission. It is evident with the years of battle that General Robert E. Lee’s engaged in that he possessed the ability to motivate and inspire troops. In the black powder era of warfare, command remained very much personalized. The generalship of Robert E. Lee, an excellent Confederate general during the American Civil War, is arguably the greatest single factor in keeping the Confederacy alive during the years of the Civil War (Lee, Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia). On the contrary, General George Brinton McClellan participated in only one battle for its entirety, The Battle of Antietam. Therefore, this battle must serve as measurement of his leadership capabilities. Throughout this paper, I will compare and contrast the leadership of both of these Generals as it pertains to the
General S. Patton once said, “Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity.” Some may argue that his life was cut short while others may say it was too long. Being a man who fought in World War I and World War II, George S. Patton, Jr. certainly contained a wealth of experience in warfare. Looking at the written history, there were those who seemed to undervalue Patton, as well as those who may have held him much too high. Researchers have many different opinions on Patton’s’ leadership, but the research here will encompass both the positive and the negative aspects of his leadership and surrounding issues while addressing the following questions:
Generals during World War II faced daily innumerable difficult and grave decisions. Critical decisions made during WWII did not have the depth and speed of today’s modern communications infrastructure. Eisenhower quoted, “Making decisions is of the essence in leadership.”1
Michael D. Pearlman’s, Truman & MacArthur Policy, Politics, and the Hunger for Honor and Renown, written in 2008, reflects on the relationship of President Truman and General MacArthur during the Korean War. Pearlman reexamines their public confrontation, discovering the political and military perspectives, and the decisions that were made that impacted the role of the presidential administration. Pearlman provides insight into the different ideologies and methods that were used that determined the outcome of the war. Pearlman gives an objective and comprehensive account of events that occurred with the Korean War. He reflects on the partisan competition in Washington and the political power of military officers. Pearlman makes the point
threats of Chinese intervention. However, the general was confident that the Chinese would enter the Korean war and highly doubted that they would overturn the results. Unfortunately, MacArthur greatly underestimated the strength of the Chinese troops. American forces were pushed back behind the 38th parallel and the chinese intervention prolonged the Korean War. Enraged by the defeats, MacArthur asked America permission to use more weapons and atomic bombs to re secure their victory in the war and combat the chinese troops. Although at first the president promised that he would take “whatever steps necessary to meet the military situation”, he was against the usage of atomic bombs because he thought that it would stray away from the goal of fighting a limited war. The president feared that extending the war
Douglas MacArthur was a US soldier, born in Little Rock, Arkansas, USA. The son of a Union army hero during the Civil War (they are the only father and son to win the Congressional Medal of Honor) and a mother ambitious for his success, he trained at West Point (1903), rose steadily in the army, and demonstrated his bravado on a secret mission to Mexico (1914). In World War 1 he commanded a brigade in combat in France (1918), where he earned a reputation for bravery (wounded three times) as well as foppery - he carried a muffler and a riding crop into the line, but not a helmet or a gas mask. After serving as the superintendent of West Point (1919–22), he completed his second tour of duty in the Philippines.
Douglass MacArthur was born in 1880 at the Little Rock Barracks in Arkansas to his father Arthur MacArthur and his Mother Mary Pinkney Hardy MacArthur. His father Arthur MacArthur was a United States Army captain. Being born in a Barracks, Douglas MacArthur said that “it was here I learned to ride and shoot even before I could read or write—indeed, almost before I could walk or talk”. Being raised there was the first of many times Douglas MacArthur would ride and shoot a gun. In the year 1893, his family moved to San Antonio and at 13 years old, Douglas MacArthur attended West Texas military academy and there “he began to show academic promise” After he graduated from the Military Academy, MacArthur enrolled at West Point and in the year 1903 MacArthur graduated from West Point at the top of his class. As soon as he graduated from West Point, Douglass became a Junior Officer. Soon after, World War I began.
Douglas MacArthur was an American general who commanded the Southwest Pacific in World War II and was responsible for the successful Allied occupation of Japan and led United Nations forces in the Korean War. Through great leadership and much controversy, MacArthur changed the course of history for the U.S. and many other countries. He is considered one of the most important generals in the history of the U.S. because his way of being influenced generations of generals to come. From birth until death he was devoted to the U.S. army and lived a life devoted to helping our nation.
His autobiography reveals that he followed all army regulations and abided by the code of ethics (Davis, 2009). One of the codes of ethics is that Americans have entrusted the Army Air Corps with their lives. Therefore, it is their duty and responsibility to protect the lives of the American Citizens thus leading a combat into enemy territory proved that he is an ethical leader. He was able to up hold his ethics by intellectual perseverance (BCEE, 2014d). He sought truth through all the difficulties and obstacles during his time at the West Point Academy. As a cadet, he showed respect to the officials by saluting to them and even when he received his rank as GENERAL, he still maintained ethics by respecting those above him (Lerner,
Throughout military history, there have been many leaders that can be considered either visionary or ethical. This paper will discuss how BG Robin Olds was a visionary leader, but not a very ethical leader. From the beginning of his career, he was a visionary in aerial combat tactics and a true believer of leading from the front. His vision of aerial combat was beyond his years, but often fell upon deaf ears due to his flamboyant nature. He never hesitated to say exactly what was on his mind, which is why his actions could be considered unethical. But, his men loved him, and would follow him to hell and back. First, this paper will discuss BG Olds’ visionary leadership abilities he displayed the Viet Nam
Born November 11, 1885 in San Gabriel, California, General George Smith Patton, Jr. was one of the most complicated, yet greatest leaders in military history. On June 11, 1909, he attended the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) for a year and then to the United States Military Academy at West Point where he commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the 15th cavalry Regiment. Growing up, Patton’s ultimate life goal was to become a hero and a successful leader. In Robert B. Williamson’s book, “General Patton’s Principles for Life & Leadership”, the author takes a personal account of Patton’s principles which he lived and fought for. These main principles consisted of the following: Leadership,