PDA

View Full Version : Macaurther and Eisenhauer



nte70
08-26-2011, 07:01 PM
This is a lot off topic and i apoligise if im doing wrong here.
I got talking to a mate who says that before ww2 macarther and eisenhauer (excuse my spelling) were in charge of home guard (or the american equivelnt)and ordered their men to open fire on ww1 vets,who were protesting their war pension getting cut off.
Is this true?
I hope not.

berg417448
08-26-2011, 07:14 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army

nte70
08-26-2011, 08:27 PM
Supported by 6 battle tanks.....
Thats not real neighbor like.

Newflyer
08-26-2011, 10:35 PM
Wow kill by their own country. Disgraceful Government.

horseback
08-28-2011, 11:14 AM
I think you've misstated a few things here, although the link to Wiki is useful. MacArthur was the Army Chief of Staff, or the highest ranking officer in the Army. At that time, we did not have the Joint Chiefs of Staff, which is a board made up of the senior officers of each branch of the services headed by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, so for all intents and purposes, MacArthur answered to the Secretary of War and the President.

MacArthur was in charge of the Regular Army (which at the time, was very small even compared to countries like Italy). He considered himself to have gone as high as he could go (once the Chief of Staff ends his tour in that office, he usually retired) and having been ordered to clear the Bonus Marchers from the capital, he took the responsiblity for the job instead of handing it off to a junior officer whose career might well have been destroyed in the aftermath.

Considering the numbers of people involved and the fact that the Bonus Army were semi organized along military lines, there was surprisingly little injury much less loss of life. A similar march on Washington today might be expected to be much worse in terms of deaths, injuries and property damage.

It was ugly, but it had the potential for something far worse.

cheers

horseback

WTE_Galway
08-28-2011, 07:33 PM
By all accounts MacArthur was a bit of a glory hound who liked his name in the press as much as possible, even if it may have been negative.

I suspect that also may have had a bit to do with him taking personal responsibility at the time.

nte70
08-28-2011, 08:25 PM
Its the tanks that get me.What was he thinking?

horseback
08-29-2011, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by nte70:
Its the tanks that get me.What was he thinking? Find a picture of these "Battle Tanks"; AFAIK, the US Army at that time had a few leftovers from WWI, probably similar to the one in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.

Of course, it may have been something more analogous to an armored car, if we are working from press reports. Journalists seem to have no concept of the difference between an armored personnel carrier and a main battle tank today, so I cannot imagine that they knew the difference between an armored car and a 'battle tank' in 1932.

As for 'what was he thinking?', the main consideration may have een who and what he could get to Washington DC in order to accomplish his orders. As I pointed out, the US Army was not a big organization in the midst of the Great Depression, and most of its firepower was located overseas or in the midwestern states a thousand miles away.

MacArthur had to work with what he had immediately available to him, and the Aberdeen proving Grounds were just down the road.

Also, it was in America, which as you know was chock full of armed citizens with a cowboy mentality. He might have needed that armor.

cheers

horseback

Frequent_Flyer
09-02-2011, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by horseback:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nte70:
Its the tanks that get me.What was he thinking? Find a picture of these "Battle Tanks"; AFAIK, the US Army at that time had a few leftovers from WWI, probably similar to the one in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.

Of course, it may have been something more analogous to an armored car, if we are working from press reports. Journalists seem to have no concept of the difference between an armored personnel carrier and a main battle tank today, so I cannot imagine that they knew the difference between an armored car and a 'battle tank' in 1932.

As for 'what was he thinking?', the main consideration may have een who and what he could get to Washington DC in order to accomplish his orders. As I pointed out, the US Army was not a big organization in the midst of the Great Depression, and most of its firepower was located overseas or in the midwestern states a thousand miles away.

MacArthur had to work with what he had immediately available to him, and the Aberdeen proving Grounds were just down the road.

Also, it was in America, which as you know was chock full of armed citizens with a cowboy mentality. He might have needed that armor.

cheers

horseback </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank God soccer was'nt big at the time imagine the calamity, oh wait soccer still is'nt big never mind http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif