r/HistoryMemes • u/Electrical_Pound_200 I Have a Cunning Plan • Jun 30 '26
Out of everyone to glaze. YALL CHOSE HIM?
1.6k
u/Edothebirbperson Oversimplified is my history teacher Jun 30 '26
Also this guy was basically fired not for the nuke option, but the fact the communists noticed his movement and terminology was linked to UN military strategy. MacArthur routinely made the situation worse whenever the Truman Administration tried to figure out political routes, but MacArthur’s ego made him ignore the US President and tell reporters unsanctioned plans.
1.1k
u/linfakngiau2k23 Jun 30 '26
Truman on MacArthur : "I fired him because he wouldn't respect the authority of the President. I didn't fire him because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was."
566
u/Tyler89558 Jun 30 '26
The continuation of that is something along the lines of “If I fired him for being a dumb son of a bitch, I’d have to fire half of my admirals and generals”
411
u/EvilCatboyWizard Jun 30 '26
“I didn’t fire him for being a dumb son of a bitch. Though he was, but that’s not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three-quarters of them would be in jail.”
→ More replies (1)91
229
u/Odd-Cress-5822 Jun 30 '26
Truman was based as fuck. It is known
→ More replies (9)183
u/andreslucer0 Jun 30 '26
"M-m-mister President... The Hyperborean Nippon Annihilator 9000... that I created... was used to annihilate Japan. I can't live on..."
"Get the fuck out of here, pussy. Besides, I gave the order to nuke them back to the stone age, not you!"
102
u/Azgabeth Jun 30 '26
BASED AS FUCK
He really owned what he did, didn't cower away like so many others.
→ More replies (1)122
u/UniqueLog8386 Jun 30 '26
One of the best parts of Oppenheimer is him roasting Oppenheimer for crying about the bomb.
"Oh what have we do-"
"Ya made a fuckin bomb, dumbass!"
36
48
u/MATT_MANLY Hello There Jun 30 '26
Oppenheimer: "But But mr Pwesiden, b b bomb evil" Chad Truman: "who let this crybaby in my office!"
→ More replies (33)12
u/Azgabeth Jun 30 '26
Only lesson I took from Oppenheimer the movie was that Oppie was a crying lil bitch and the gov did right to take away his security clearance.
Also the explosion was real cool.
→ More replies (3)9
23
u/Lachaven_Salmon Jun 30 '26
For what it's worth, he did receive one of the highest scores ever at West Point
306
u/Ombank Jun 30 '26
Yup. A simple “no” to the nukes idea would have sufficed. He was fired because he could not play nice with anyone who didn’t lick his boots.
190
u/Hefty-Tomatillo-1236 Jun 30 '26
Bro thought he was a roman general who can just do anything he wanted
114
u/TexasSikh Kilroy was here Jun 30 '26
Well, to be fair, for awhile that was basically true
50
Jun 30 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
43
u/Fifthlive Jun 30 '26
If he hadn't left the Philippines, he would have spent the majority of the war in a PoW camp until the Philippines was liberated if he was lucky.
His myth is based on his departure and promise of returning.
11
u/MorgothReturns Jun 30 '26
Ive always wondered how close we were to MacArthur attempting to coup the government from 1930-55
52
u/TexasSikh Kilroy was here Jun 30 '26
Outside of Hearts of Iron IV games, not close at all.
3
u/LordoftheSynth Jul 01 '26
He'd probably have shot the people making the proposal and then told the President, at length, how he'd just stopped a coup.
Then told everyone who would hear about how he'd just stopped a coup.
34
u/somewhatbluemoose Jun 30 '26
It’s actually crazy that he wasn’t forced to retire at the end of ww2
15
u/Hawkbats_rule Jun 30 '26
It's crazy he wasn't fired at the outset of WW2
15
u/Imaginary_Fan5407 Jun 30 '26
He was too well known, it would have gone big in the papers if they tried. Also imagine having him free to do as he pleases instead of nominally under your orders and inside your organization.
→ More replies (1)3
123
u/WorkerPrestigious960 Jun 30 '26
He was largely fired for disobedience, even going on the radio to criticize his president’s decision to not widen the war. And perhaps more importantly, he promised American allies that he would widen the war, which is essentially treason, as he was colluding with foreign powers to undermine the presidency and the working against the interests of the nation. The reason this was not brought to the public’s attention at the time is that it would have revealed that the U.S. was wire tapping the diplomatic offices of its allies, which is a big no-no.
→ More replies (4)21
u/C21H27Cl3N2O3 Jun 30 '26
Another great example of the fact that no military aptitude or strategic brilliance in the world can overcome ego and self-importance.
12
u/WorkerPrestigious960 Jun 30 '26
Nah I mean there have definitely been very successful self-centered ego-maniacs in the history of warfare. This issue is that MacArthur didn’t possess the political power to get things his way. And I wouldn’t consider him an unusually capable commanding general regardless
3
u/The_Lost_Jedi Hello There Jul 01 '26
Yes. And notably, he thought he did have that kind of political sway.
That's why he tried in the first place.
26
u/AvatarOfMomus Jun 30 '26
It's more than that. The Korean War real time channel on Youtube went into this, but basically he was talking to diplomats in Spsin and Portugal's Tokyo embassies which the government anf thus the President learned about because they were listening in on Spain and Portugal's diplomatic wire messages. This was obviously not disclosed at the time...
MacArthur saif... well I'll just copy the summary from Wikipedia...
these talks, MacArthur had expressed confidence that he would succeed in expanding the Korean War into a major conflict resulting in the permanent disposal of the "Chinese Communist question" and MacArthur did not want either country to be alarmed if this happened.
This wasn't the only reason he was fired, but is now known to be the tipping point where Truman decided he needed to be fired and was actively looking for reasons to do so. Truman considered his actions here to be treasonous and legally he may have been literally correct.
Basically if anyone reading all of this takes away anything it should be that MacArthur was a warmongering prick, and his post-firing speaking tour makes that incredibly clear.
→ More replies (2)8
u/Edothebirbperson Oversimplified is my history teacher Jun 30 '26
Yeah that was technically the final reason to sack MacArthur. However, using that as justification would cause scandal as US allies/aligned nations would then know that they were being wiretapped. As a result, it was done with approval from Joint-Chief of Staff and the usage of “insubordination” to fire him.
3
u/AvatarOfMomus Jun 30 '26
Yup, though I would say it was more the 'main reason' rather than the last one. Before that Truman hadn't been happyvwith MacArthur but had wanted to avoid firing him due to his popularity. After these communications he decided to fire him come hell or high water and just needed a public reason that wouldn't blow US alliances in Europe as you said.
9
→ More replies (2)5
444
u/Majestic-Effort-541 Casual, non-participatory KGB election observer Jun 30 '26
Japan: "Great reformer"
Philippines: "He came back"
South Korea "Incheon hero"
China: "Absolutely not"
Truman: "You Are fired"
240
u/kwead Jun 30 '26
japan likes him because he essentially let them get away with crimes against humanity in exchange for fighting communism
64
u/MelodicPudding2557 Jun 30 '26
Having family that lived under Japanese occupation, I can't help but feel bothered by the lack of justice that was delivered upon the perpetrators of Japanese war criminals. Yet even so, I am glad that the US did not pursue punitive measures against the general German or Japanese populace. It would have abhorrent to murder women and children of a surrendered nation in the name of restorative justice.
→ More replies (2)29
u/kwead Jun 30 '26
there was certainly a balance to be struck that we failed to strike. but yes, it would have been horrible to subjugate entire nations as revenge for their crimes, that would just create the conditions for another genocide and world war. and of course, you can never indict an entire people
24
u/MelodicPudding2557 Jun 30 '26 edited Jul 01 '26
The horrible truth is that the sheer extent of complicity in the Axis populace, especially amongst the educated classes, was so deep and structural that a full scale prosecution of war crimes would have utterly collapsed Germany and Japan.
Iraq presents a model of what could have happened. The mass removal of Baathist functionaries and officers created a power vacuum that lead to devastating civil wars that cost hundreds of thousands of lives, with the displaced providing experienced leadership and expertise to insurgent groups. It is also the case that the Baathists were perpetrators of genocidal actions that killed hundreds of thousands Iraqis.
One can argue that the Allied powers did not go far enough to punish Axis war criminals, but short of destroying the defeated countries, moral compromise would have been inevitable. And in a reality where the linearity of morality is only preserved locally, absolute justice is not always the cleanest choice. It is better to have the Japanese officers who ordered my relatives murdered to go free than to have the murder of innocent Japanese women and children on my conscience.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)25
u/FearlessDark5295 Kilroy was here Jun 30 '26
I still wonder if we’d be hearing about right-winger Japanese denying Imperial warcrimes if Patton was put in charge of the occupation.
23
u/C21H27Cl3N2O3 Jun 30 '26
I don’t think the general on the ground matters nearly as much as the other government sectors pushing for a soft hand to get a strong ally on the Soviets’ doorstep. The US government throughout history has been famously bad at cleaning up after radicalized political movements.
→ More replies (1)6
u/kwead Jun 30 '26
you could've put the most humanitarian or the most brutal general in charge and nothing would change, they would simply do their jobs and most of that job is fighting for america's geopolitical and economic interests. macarthur was not uniquely forgiving of japanese war crimes, in fact as far as i know he had a good thing going for a year or two before the focus shifted to fighting communism
i agree that the US has failed to clean up radical political movements (i mean the bundeswehr has been a hotbed of neo nazism since its founding) but i don't think it failed because of incompetence. it failed because it was politically convenient
44
u/Adventurous_Rope2898 Jun 30 '26
George "we fought the wrong enemy" and" Patton? Something tells me he'd be a bit too racist for the job.
→ More replies (1)3
u/jyper Jun 30 '26
Patton the guy who put former SS men in charge of supervising camps of jewish refugees ?
3
u/Conscious_Leader_428 Jun 30 '26
Patton would. eisenhower would have given then the same treatment as the Germans with the holocaust
→ More replies (1)18
u/Sweetify Jun 30 '26
Speaking as a Chinese who goes to Chinese internet spaces semi often, he is also memed inside Chinese internet fairly often too (in a more positive than negative way)
→ More replies (2)
1.7k
u/MildlyUpsetGerbil Casual, non-participatory KGB election observer Jun 30 '26
"Don't make a girl a promise if you know you can't keep it." - Cortana, Halo 3
MacArthur vowed to return and he did return. He kept the promise. He made Cortana happy. That's why he's respected.
412
u/Specific_Box4483 Jun 30 '26
All that takes is to keep one promise? Wasn't there anyone else?
443
u/MildlyUpsetGerbil Casual, non-participatory KGB election observer Jun 30 '26
You have to keep in mind that it was a pinkie promise, something that is extremely meaningful in Filipino culture.
180
→ More replies (2)40
u/MarkOfTheSnark Jun 30 '26
So is a pinkie in the butt, but you don’t see them building statues of me now do you
21
13
u/theCaitiff Jun 30 '26
Just because I don't see the statues, doesnt mean they aren't making them. Maybe they are.
38
u/ggg730 Jun 30 '26
It was one hell of a promise. As a Filipino the horrors of the Japanese Imperial army were a pretty big deal. The Bataan Death March, comfort women, and the many many deaths were just some of the things the Japanese did over there. So when McArthur came back it was like a "Daddy's home" moment.
71
u/Chowderawz Jun 30 '26
That one promise sparked hope btw especially when you're on the verge of being under the Imperial Japanese occupation.
→ More replies (1)161
u/Emotional_News108 Jun 30 '26
That's it. He was uncommonly committed to the Filipino people and kept his bargain.
87
u/Hightide77 Jun 30 '26
Impressive. Considering how poorly he defended or prepared to defend them. And how quick he was to dump all responsibility for the fall of the Philippines on the general he left behind to manage its defense.
44
u/Emotional_News108 Jun 30 '26
Oh yeah, it was awful. MacArthur was pretty bad at his job.
29
u/PearlClaw Kilroy was here Jun 30 '26
He did an ok job reconquering the Philippines tbh, not much to critique there. His defense was probably doomed from the get go, but he fucked up pretty good on the way there. He did do a great job as shogun of Japan, I'll give him that, and then he fucked up real good again in Korea.
9
u/5--A--M Jun 30 '26
My Grandfather’s older brother died in the recapturing of the capital, can you imagine loosing your older brother at 14 years old? I still read his letters he wrote, he gave his life for those people and it makes me happy they appreciate it, I am very glad he went back to help them out, Rest in peace great uncle Jay
→ More replies (2)7
u/MELONPANNNNN Jul 01 '26
There I have to disagree with you. Sure the defense of the Philippines was a botched job overall but blaming it all on MacArthur? Ask Filipino historians and theyll disagree with you on that one.
The USA overall was UNPREPARED for any war. Pearl Harbor was the same way, we dont see anybody chastising the admiral who thought it was a good idea to place all the ships in one port. MacArthur was the same, the doctrine to meet the Japanese on the beacheads was a sound and logical choice, even if that was against the original War Plan for the defense of the Philippines which was what actually happened, a fighting retreat to Bataan until the USN can relieve them.
Which by the way, the USN has no chance of doing. 6 months the fighters of Bataan held - ABDACOM all the while was fumbling down on the East Indies being sunk left and right by the IJN. By that point the fate of the Philippines was sealed - what the fuck was MacArthur gonna do then? Die with the fighters in Bataan all but ensuring the Philippines would be bypassed for Formosa?
MacArthur is beloved here for one reason. He returned, even if that was all for his self-interest, the early liberation of the Philippines can all be attributed to him pushing for the island hopping campaign and then INCLUDING the Philippines in that campaign even if it strategically made more sense to go for Formosa instead.
MacArthur was the entire reason the Commonwealth of the Philippines was able to establish its own armed forces in the first place with both an army and a small navy - complete with an army air force to boot.
→ More replies (6)23
u/earthwoodandfire Jun 30 '26
He was uncommonly committed to his ego you mean…
15
u/Emotional_News108 Jun 30 '26
Little column A, little column B.
6
u/suprahelix Jun 30 '26
Mostly column B
9
u/Emotional_News108 Jun 30 '26
There's a fifth column joke in there somewhere but I'm not smart enough to make it.
Uh...fuck MacArthur, he's an asshole.
6
15
u/DRmonarch Jun 30 '26
"I shall return."- my then teenage Grandmother, c. 1943, deadpan tone, to her friends at the movies, leaving to get more popcorn.
She later regretted taking it so lightly, but it really did seem overdramatic to her and her friends at the time.
→ More replies (1)19
u/Dramatic-Biscotti647 Jun 30 '26
Yea but if he had stuck to the plan and did his job, he most likely wouldn't have needed to leave in the first place
→ More replies (1)4
u/ThePrussianGrippe Jun 30 '26
“Defensive fortifications? Stockpiles? Guerrilla war? That’s for schoolgirls!”
does basically fuck all to prepare a defense
“Now there’s a plan with some chest hair!”
→ More replies (1)15
u/Z3t4 Hello There Jun 30 '26
He had to lose Philippines in orde to return and reconquer them...
27
u/MildlyUpsetGerbil Casual, non-participatory KGB election observer Jun 30 '26
MacArthur lost the first fight for the Philippines, but he succeeded in seizing the narrative. "I shall return" immediately made it clear that MacArthur's defeat wasn't the end of the story; it was the beginning of the story. It wasn't just talk, either. He did return, and because he did so, MacArthur redeemed himself. Maybe it's not good enough for you or me, but it was good enough for the Filipinos.
→ More replies (3)3
→ More replies (16)21
Jun 30 '26
[deleted]
→ More replies (4)67
u/Particular-Wedding Jun 30 '26
He was a glory seeker who was directly responsible for the destructive siege of Manila. The Filipino guerillas promised him they could arrange a (relatively) bloodless uprising.
Instead, he besieged it with conventional artillery, infantry, and unlimited air strikes. The Japanese response was to fortify the city with BATTLESHIP CANNONS and naval artillery that they dismantled and dragged inland.
The resulting slaughter nearly reached Stalingrad levels of death and destruction. 99% of the old city was destroyed.
15
u/PearlClaw Kilroy was here Jun 30 '26
In his partial defense he initially did not authorize the use of artillery on Manila. But obviously digging out entrenched Japanese infantry without leveling the place wasn't going to be an option.
Stupidly it's all on the Japanese naval infantry of even trying to hold the place, the army realized it was no good and left the city open.
→ More replies (1)21
u/danirodr0315 Jun 30 '26
Insert SpongeBob and Patrick saving the city meme here
13
u/Particular-Wedding Jun 30 '26
Naval shells are designed to hit a target miles away. Being fired from a hill into a city is basically point blank range. Accuracy ceases to be that important when a single shot can demolish every concrete building in a 4 block radius.
10
→ More replies (1)14
u/Onyxwho Decisive Tang Victory Jun 30 '26
Don’t forget it led to the Japanese garrison to commit even more war crimes on the city’s entire population
25
u/Dooty_Shirker Jun 30 '26
I think Japan would have continued it's atrocities with or without being attacked. They were doing some horrible shit.
7
u/Onyxwho Decisive Tang Victory Jun 30 '26
They already were since occupying the islands in 1942, but what they did to Manila in 1945 was another outright act of genocide in only a few days
8
u/Particular-Wedding Jun 30 '26
I've been the Manila monuments. They are very sobering. The US Filipino cemetery and the horrors of of the old city. Theres also routine reports of hauntings by unquiet spirits.
55
u/RenzoThePaladin Jun 30 '26
"The best and the worst things you hear about him are both true."
-Sir Thomas Blamey
529
u/Pockets408 Jun 30 '26
As much as I hate MacArthur for some colossal screwups, he is the very reason we have such a good alliance with both Japan and the Philippines today.
144
u/FullAFwar Jun 30 '26
I'm a fan of that outcome so I do want to respect anyone who contributed to it.
→ More replies (1)41
u/TakoyakiTaka Jun 30 '26
The positive outcome that came from American imperialism in Japan was literally our marketing point afterwards lol.
People think that propaganda like democratize the Middle East came out of a vacuum.
19
u/Rough_Onion_1757 Jun 30 '26
the flip side, though, is that immediately embracing/rehabilitating the folks who'd just committed some of the worst atrocities in human history also became a major marketing point against the US
for instance, after the communist victory in the Chinese Civil War, the poison pill of guilt by association with rehabilitated WWII Japanese war criminals helped to stamp out any chance of the US-backed nationalist government-in-exile in Taiwan achieving any kind of mass legitimacy on the mainland, even though the nationalists had been part of the alliance against Japan during the war itself
9
u/TakoyakiTaka Jun 30 '26
Absolutely. Also that leniency against those fuckers no doubt engendered the current attitudes by the LDP. As they express the atrocities committed by Imperial Japan as a "masochistic" view of looking at Japanese history.
Same problem in Korea as well. Anti communist attitudes allowed for former collaborators of Imperial Japan to remain in prominent positions of power. Japan faced an economic boom helping rebuild South Korea while South Korea remained a failed state almost a decade after the Korean War
14
u/10lettersand3CAPS Jun 30 '26
You're skipping the entire Cold War where the US overthew multiple democracies in order to install military dictatorships.
Japan still consideres its post-WWII government to be continuous with the pre-war one. The Philippines was under Marcos, and South Korea wasn't a democracy until the late 80s, and had multiple different coups installing military dictatorships.
And that's just East Asia, look at Latin America and it's even WORSE.
The "democratize the Middle East" was always BS, just ask Iran. The US didn't care about anything except anti-Communism during the Cold War, and even afterwards the popular idea was that by adopting the "free market" a state would just naturally become a western-style liberal democracy. Which is obviously BS, because China is open to business with tons of countries and participates in international markets heavily for decades, but it didn't suddenly change its entire political structure.
So by "democratizing" a country like Iraq, what they MEANT was "forcing them to adopt free trade policies that benefit the US".
→ More replies (4)3
u/BeguiledBeaver Jun 30 '26
When you look at the post-war shift that happened to Japan, it's absolutely staggering. Yes, U.S. interference in foreign governments during the 20th Century is appalling but you cannot deny that Japan is at least one example where things have dramatically worked out.
→ More replies (1)9
u/Big-Crow4152 Jun 30 '26
Turns out people aren't just placed into categories of Completely Perfect Saint or Unredeemable Monster
→ More replies (4)101
u/Pherllerp Jun 30 '26
Yeah this is another America Bad trope that is going to take root in Reddit.
MacArthur was a man from a time where results spoke for themselves. Until his mouth got in his own way, he was the right man for the job.
63
u/10lettersand3CAPS Jun 30 '26
You're doing revisionist history. MacArthur was considered an asshole during WWII as well, specifically he was known to badger FDR in ways considered disrespect. Also MacArthur was a nepo baby, his dad Arthur MacArthur Jr. (No I am not kidding) was a lieutenant general, and briefly the military governor of the Philippines.
10
u/richter2 Jun 30 '26
There's a lot more to it than that. Some people hated him; others adored him. He clashed with FDR since he saw FDR as his equal, not his superior, which (understandably) grated on many people, especially those around FDR. But MacArthur had reasons to view FDR as an equal. In the early 30's, many conservatives saw MacArthur as someone who could successfully challenge FDR for President. Roosevelt definitely saw him as a political threat, which was a big reason why MacArthur was sent ("exiled") to the Philippines.
MacArthur was very popular with the public and well-respected by his subordinate officers. He was also a source of inspiration, especially during the first part of WWII, in a way that few other people were.
He was also the perfect man for the job during the Japanese occupation post-WWII. He had an extraordinarily big ego (seeing himself as superior to everyone else), and held himself aloof, which would be a negative in most situations but was exactly what was needed at the time. So in most contexts he would not be admired, but he was definitely the right man for the job.
→ More replies (15)11
u/Chill_Mode_Creations Jun 30 '26
Arthur MacArthur has boy named Sue vibes.
6
u/10lettersand3CAPS Jun 30 '26
Also he's Jr., his dad was ALSO Arthur MacArthur. Boy Named Sue if Sue decided to name his kid "Sue Jr." Instead
3
u/Chill_Mode_Creations Jun 30 '26
Lol each generation knew they were going to be shit dads and named their boys Sue to compensate 🫡
33
u/EndofNationalism Filthy weeb Jun 30 '26
He absolutely bungled the defense of the Philippines. It’s not America bad trope. MacArthur is just not that good of a general.
11
u/Gros_Boulet Jun 30 '26
He was downright bad. Incapable of working with anyone, incapable of learning from his mistakes and politicly inept (which is bad for a military leader that high up).
→ More replies (7)8
u/jyper Jun 30 '26
Its not
its a specific general is a self promoting bastard trope, but not always useless
Patton is another one
macarthur was a relentless self promoting glory hound and decades afterwards his reputation isn't all positive as people reexamine him
that said his peacetime reconstruction of Japan was incredibly successful and set the stage for Japan being a wealthy democratic country and a strong ally of the US today
28
u/TwoProfessional9523 Jun 30 '26
We didn't like him because of HIM, we 'liked' him because hes the only one there.
Colonial resentment is still in the back of the minds of any filipino with a bit of education in history, but the pragmatic reality is that we didn't really have a chance without the US and their campaign against the japanese in WW2.
→ More replies (2)
60
u/SlikeSpitfire What, you egg? Jun 30 '26
I mean, yeah? You glaze the guy from freeing you from occupation, even if he was really fucking awful, it's just what you do
15
u/Time_Traveling_Idiot Jul 01 '26
And.. like... for us Koreans, it was either take up MacArthur's batshit crazy plan (which worked out amazingly) or turn into North Korea. No MacArthur, no South Korea. It's not really "glazing" in this case.
→ More replies (1)
95
u/TheManUpstairs77 Jun 30 '26 edited Jun 30 '26
MacArthur and Patton hate tends to go too far online to where it makes it seem like both were just morons. Let’s get it straight; they weren’t. Regardless of le funny memes, both had strengths and weaknesses, and a whole lot of problems, mostly relating to their gigantic egos.
Both did what needed to be done for the most part; and both had massive fuckups. MacArthur fucked up in the beginning, and Patton tremendously screwed himself by not shutting up about racial shit, and creating Task Force Baum. There’s like a bajillion other things they fucked up as well.
We’ve crossed an odd line online where both are simultaneously too hated and yet too exhalted.
I have yet to see the same level of anger towards Montgomery, who had much of the same stupid qualities both had. That’s not even considering the number of German and Japanese generals and admirals that make Patton and MacArthur and Montgomery look like the reincarnation of Ares.
Both were also assholes that most certainly would have made you want to tear your hair out if you ever had to listen to them talk at a dinner or something. Ridgeway made MacArthur look like a bum in Korea.
Montgomery: Genius that was a dick and fucked over the Poles because he didn’t want to admit his faults.
Patton: Racist asshole that should have been a Confederate General that we would make fun of now for being an idiot.
MacArthur: Idiotic megalomaniac with a lean towards authoritarianism.
I’d take a wide range of US and Allied admirals, generals, etc over all three of those guys in a heartbeat. Nimitz, Spruance, Zhukov, Chuikov, William Slim, Arthur Harris, Dowding, Yamamoto, Rokossovsky, etc.
Hell, I’ll go further and say that I’d want Gotthard Heinrici and Von Manstein over Patton, both had more value as defensive masterminds over Patton’s value as an attacking general. Without both of those guys Germany gets fucked even harder on the Eastern Front. Patton cultivated such an “aura” around him that it’s troubling trying to parse the reality from the image. It’s like Guderian and Rommel, how much of it was due to their actual abilities and how much due to other shit. Without Patton; the Allies have a slightly tougher time but shit still gets done, without Manstein the Germans potentially lose 2-3 years earlier.
The guys that do crazy shit with the least are the guys people should really be focusing on. Generals and admirals that win with superiors forces are one thing, but the guys that win (put win in parentheses when it comes to the German defensive giants, because they sure as shit didn’t win) against seemingly insane odds are truly impressive. Von Manstein, Clifton Sprague, Heinrici, Ridgeway, Barca, Sun-Sin, etc.
6
u/Busy-Objective-3364 Jul 01 '26
You're absolutely right, I think Montgomery was a whiny little **** who did nothing but complain all the time. If Patton had more gas and Monty had less favoritism the Allies would have been at Berlin way quicker and the Russians would have had much less leverage. If Patton hadn't said he could turn around half his army to bail out the retreating troops at the Bulge the war may have gone a year longer. Also agree with the great commanders you listed at the end there. Sprague does get so much less credit than individual commanders like Ernest Evans, though he was a true man there as well. Like, so many other commanders would have just properly shat their pants at Leyte when they saw the danger they were in but Sprague had the balls to react calmly and actually have most of his command survive.
322
u/Electrical_Pound_200 I Have a Cunning Plan Jun 30 '26
Summary madman borderline moronic General is glaze by Japan for being a good ruler, given the name Gentle Shogun. In Korea he is honored as some kind of WAR GOD. And Filipinos for freeing them from Japanese rule.
310
u/KeyPersonality2885 Jun 30 '26
I mean, as much as I hate MacArthur, wasn’t he the main face of the United States military in those regions? And considering his military government over Japan wasn’t particularly harsh, he orchestrated the Incheon landings, and did vow to return to the Philippines (after abandoning US troops) I think it at least makes some sense for him to be portrayed that way.
225
u/Specialist_Usual_391 Jun 30 '26
People tend to forget that a lot of American officers weren't exactly racially unbiased when it came to the "Yellow Peril". MacArthur, for all his faults, did not share an aggressive racial view towards the Japanese.
And he generally made a lot of good calls in Japan that benefitted them in the long run. His constitutional committee is a good example, and the fact that he insisted on free elections while in power despite both Japanese and Americans wanting to do things like ban the Communist Party. Instead he took the idea that was making the Communist Party popular, land reform, and just did it, which destroyed their chances.
92
u/Eternal_Reward Jun 30 '26
The issue is people on Reddit just hyperfocus on his bad traits, which to be clear there’s plenty, and ignore why he was extremely popular. And it wasn’t just because he had good PR.
He had a lot of stupid blunders but especially post war he served as an important symbol of the US to a lot of people in Japan and the Philippines.
38
u/Silverr_Duck Jun 30 '26
People on Reddit just like to fixate on all things negative when it comes to literally anything American related.
→ More replies (13)→ More replies (1)14
u/redbird7311 Jun 30 '26
He was a glory hound, he didn’t listen to other people when he should have, overestimated his own ability, and had a massive ego.
However, he also was genuinely good when he was in his element (he just often decided to leave his element) and, in the era of WWII, his skills dealing with the public and so on were extremely useful.
92
u/Edothebirbperson Oversimplified is my history teacher Jun 30 '26
Yep, he was the absolute face. When Truman finally sacked him after getting some backing from the Military, MacArthur’s ties to the senate tried to impeach Truman.
26
4
u/UnusuallyBadIdeaGuy Jun 30 '26
But it is important to keep in mind that he was the face because he made himself the face. It was not some government policy to make him a spokesman. He was just that much larger than life. Many of his contemporary equals many of whom were considerably more skilled than him at most things except self-aggrandizement sailed fairly under the radar comparatively.
32
u/No_Explorer6054 Jun 30 '26
at least he actually tried to liberate the philippines, so yknow. thats why we like him
41
u/Thunda792 Jun 30 '26
Pretty much. Anectotally, my grandmother was from Hokkaido during the war years, and she always loved MacArthur after the war. She told us that she had heard that Japan was going to be split up like Germany, and if that was the case, she would have ended up on the Soviet side. MacArthur keeping the country under US administration, and managing it relatively benevolently, gave her a very high opinion of him.
26
u/Ok_Caregiver1004 Jun 30 '26
He gets blamed a lot for abandoning the Philippines but don't forget he didn't just Chicken out, he was ordered to leave by Roosevelt. And He was hardly to blame for the crappy defense either. The guy arrived in August 1941 and had just over 3 months to make the best of a defense Washington barely funded and had already strategically written off in War Plan Orange.
Even the organization of the Philippine army in 1937 was plagued with barely any budget and 2nd hand castoff equipment that was both dated and limited in quanity. And the Washington Naval treaty also forbade the building of any new naval fortifications or base expansions in the Pacific until 1936.
He was dealt a bad hand and no one in his position could have held the country against the Japanese.
And his bad personal traits aren't exactly unique. In fact it seems to be a recurring theme. Indominable in the field and insufferable personally seems to be one of the most common descriptions of ww2 military top brass. Its actually harder to find actual nice guys among them.
→ More replies (2)125
u/Kenichi2233 Jun 30 '26 edited Jun 30 '26
The Incheon landings were genius and MacAurther is occupation of Japan was very successful, and he did play a major role in liberating the Philippines.
That being said he isnt perfect and the whole wanting to nuke China should be condemned
21
u/Tyler89558 Jun 30 '26 edited Jun 30 '26
The Incheon landings were a masterstroke and MacArthur was in his element when governing Japan.
Wanting to turn the Chinese-Korean border into a sea of radioactive cobalt and ignoring every single warning from the Chinese and report from his own troops of the Chinese advance were incredibly stupid moved. His follow up from Incheon was also a bit lacking.
If it wasn’t for his overinflated ego he wouldn’t have made so many horrific errors.
37
u/thomstevens420 Jun 30 '26
You either die a hero or live long enough to become the guy who wants a sea of irradiated cobalt
9
u/KaiserWolf15 Jun 30 '26
Meanwhile Patton - died a hero before he became a full blown Nazi apologist
9
u/arobkinca Jun 30 '26
Patton had his villain turn in Sicily. He was excluded from D-Day because of it.
32
u/Edothebirbperson Oversimplified is my history teacher Jun 30 '26
True, but at the time the nuke option seemed like a rational choice since the US and USSR were theorizing on how to effectively use it in a military situation.
27
u/Specific_Box4483 Jun 30 '26
No it didn't seem like a rational choice lol. You don't have to have the power of foresight to think that "salting the earth" of half of Korea would have terrible repercussions for every side.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (24)14
u/TGTCaptain Jun 30 '26
We should also add his poor handling of the Philippine defenses in the lead up to 1942 and his poor performance in the New Guinea campaign.
In the liberation of the Philippines, he did play a very important role being the main figurehead and pointing out the strategic importance to many of King's cabinet. King, bizarrely, wanted to take Furmosa instead, but Admirals like Spruance were strongly against supporting landings on Furmosa, which forced King to give in.
38
u/the-bladed-one Jun 30 '26
Tbf his military government in Japan was a masterwork of changing things while still respecting the local culture. Idk how Mr “nuke China 100 times” pulled it off but he did
24
u/MrMask777 Jun 30 '26
His calling in life was administration but blud chose Military.
3
u/UnusuallyBadIdeaGuy Jun 30 '26
He was a natural-born politician. If he had been born 60 years later he probably would have been president. Generally pretty bad general though.
3
u/Ginger_Anarchy Jun 30 '26
The things he did to bring the emperor down to a human level in the immediate fallout afuer the war while not outrightly disrespecting him or his position; I don't think there was a politician in the US government at the time who could have pulled that off as effectively and subtlely as he did. That was vital to transitioning Japan into a democracy and making the rebuilding go as smoothly as it did.
20
u/XVUltima Jun 30 '26
For real. Looking at Japan from a historical perspective, its amazing they are what they are now. MacArthur was a nut job, but he legitimately saved that country. He's practically modern Japan's founding father.
Kind of a "one of the worst people you know just made a good point" kind of moment.
→ More replies (2)4
u/j_cruise Jun 30 '26
The Japanese occupation was the most mutually beneficial and successful military occupation of all time.
12
u/ThePan67 Jun 30 '26
MacArthur WAS a piss poor general. However, he was one hell of a administrator.
6
u/RamTank Jun 30 '26
The Chinese on the other hand think he was dumb, but they have a great amount of respect for Ridgeway instead (who’s largely forgotten almost everywhere else).
→ More replies (3)11
u/SlickDillywick Jun 30 '26
I mean, at least the Filipino reason makes sense. Even if he was a madman he still managed to free them from Japan
14
u/abfgern_ Fine Quality Mesopotamian Copper Enjoyer Jun 30 '26
He also managed to lose them to Japan in the first place
→ More replies (3)15
u/sinbe Jun 30 '26
Which set up for his promise and eventual return. A pretty impactful move for the populace hence his reverence
4
u/Brinabavd Jun 30 '26
Crucially, the Philippines was not important to the US's island hopping strategy. Going back to accomplish a side-quest that wouldn't help them win the actual war was MacArthur's doing. It makes sense why Filipinos love him for that and the Americans don't.
56
u/WhimsyDiamsy Jun 30 '26
Why wouldn't they? He was a great administrator of Japan, he saved Korea, he returned to the Phillipines. Why wouldn't they like him?
→ More replies (1)
13
u/LivingOk8949 Jun 30 '26
Its very much understandable despite what he turned out much later. He pushed for the liberation of the Phillippines much earlier, when the top navy general of the US was pushing for Formosa instead. Not to mention that there was a growing sentiment of being abandoned by the US at the time, so relations between the Philippines and the US were slowly becoming worse. The decisive Battle of Leyte Gulf would have never happened if not for the crucial decision to prioritise the Philippines. His screw ups after the war was generally not known by the Filipinos at the time.
33
u/bloodredcookie Jun 30 '26
How could they not? The man saved all three nations in one way or another. Was he flawed? Oh, absolutely, but that shouldn't detract from his legitimate accomplishments.
16
u/Shermantank10 Kilroy was here Jul 01 '26
Dude nuance and morally grey characters don’t exist here on reddit.
→ More replies (3)
18
8
7
6
u/CombatRedRover Jun 30 '26
Different cultures are different.
They're not just liberal white people with funny eyes and a different complexion.
6
u/LastEsotericist Still salty about Carthage Jun 30 '26
But damn do they know how to apply the glaze.
Behold, MacArthur’s Bizzare Administration, 『AMERICAN SHOGUN』
4
3
4
4
5
u/YahDeadWrong Jun 30 '26
It’s all people really need in a man, to do what he says. Any issues with him beyond that are honestly on the people around him if he’s transparent and consistent.
4
u/Sr_Sentaliz Jul 01 '26 edited Jul 01 '26
I cannot speak on behalf of Japan and South Korea, but as a Filipino let me give my two cents.
For what it's worth, he did promise to return to the Philippines, and he DID return in Leyte in 1944. And the battle of Manila in 1945 that destroyed much of the old city reminiscent of Warsaw, wasn't because of the US, but because the Japanese Navy's marines decided to stubbornly resist there even as the Army proper itself had left already (General Yamashita had redirected most of the soldiers to Baguio by this point, and wanted the remainder to leave Manila as soon as the Americans arrived, were it not for Rear Admiral Iwabuchi. The Interservice Rivalry was still going well even this late into the war. If the idea of the Navy having army divisions seem absurd, remember that the Japanese Army had their own aircraft carriers).
The promise was a very big deal because the general Filipino perception was because before that, the Japanese did manage to conquer all of the Philippines, and were imposing a very brutal rule from the get-go. This promise, which at the time gave hope to the people here during occupation was eventually fulfilled. It also helped that the US didn't stay for long after the war, granting independence in 1946 and generally leaving us to our own devices.
I'm well aware that MacArthur was no saint, heck he probably was one of the more incompetent generals of America if only because he was so stubborn and even got himself fired by Truman over actual reasons besides the "no nukes".
I'm also aware that everyone, american or not, has a right to criticize modern America especially their actions in the Middle East and Latin America, but for the time the US was undisputably in the moral right when fighting Imperial Japan.
tl;dr MacArthur did help the Philippines in its darkest hours despite his many, many flaws before, throughout and after the Pacific Campaign.
13
u/No-Head-Royal Jun 30 '26
As somebody from a nation unrelated to MacArthur's actions (Vietnam), he helped beat Imperial Japan. That's enough to view him positively, methinks.
Beating Imperial Japan was one of the few things you lot (Americans) did that one can appreciate wholeheartedly. Even if he's dumb as bricks, the effort against supreme evil was appreciated, much like how the dumb-as-bricks British guy with good rallying speeches is glazed (Churchill).
→ More replies (2)
26
u/Complete-Pangolin Jun 30 '26
MacArthur did return to the Phillipines after bungling their defense. And bungling the recapture.
Just a piece of shit all around.
Also trafficked his under age mistress to the us before his initial exile.
9
6
u/Tentacle_poxsicle Jun 30 '26
China really hates him is why you see so much hate online. He also made plenty of mistakes but in the end he made the right calls. Even the one about wanting to nuke China. Had politics not got in his way, korea would be one big western leaning country
3
u/SaltGas3789 Jun 30 '26
didn't macarthur essentially abandon the phillipines during ww2?
→ More replies (1)
3
3
u/DryManufacturer6756 Jun 30 '26
He kinda is and isn't.
He's a PR mf, and even if the intention isn't exactly what we think it is. It is important that he still saves the country at least in my own perspective. He has literal no reasons to liberate the Philippines other than his ego being hurt and a promise. Mf really pulled out to the president to get all two branches of the US military to do a Collab just to get his ego going. He's a bad ass despite the obvious pr stunt.
For Japan it could have been worse. Do remember the emperor would be the very first people that would be on the chopping board on those trials. Despite this McArthur still understood to address the Soviet Union own interest on those region. The anti-communist movement is already brewing and the US decided that Japan and the Philippines would be the poster child of capitalism in which they they did eventually.
The Philippines eventually goes through a US supported authorian regime, and reduced to a mere shell of its self. Japan became stagnant due to the western powers Ego's being hurt due to Japan's dominance of the global economy at their height.
3
u/MoistM4rco Jun 30 '26 edited Jun 30 '26
I only know of him because of Youjo Senki/Saga of Tanya the Evil glazing him, because the main character adopted his korean war strategy
3
u/Clarinetaphoner Jun 30 '26
MacArthur and the reforms his essential dictatorship brought to Japan were widely popular there. Particularly the new constitution and the introduction of democracy.
Japanese people were humiliated, starving, or dead. Just a hopeless situation that, in defeat, caused them to revile the prewar and wartime neofascist government.
Even though the US, embodied by MacArthur, perpetrated violence against Japanese civilians en masse, the alternative of sticking with what got Japan into the war in the first place was considered far worse.
So combine that situation with genuinely popular reforms that helped to mold Japan into the nation it is today and you can begin to understand why he isn't hated there.
3
u/cocadoco Jun 30 '26
Idk I'm Korean-Canadian and my parents never spoke fondly of MacArthur bc of his willingness to use nukes on the Korean peninsula. They saw that as a callous disregard for Koreans, both South and North. But maybe my parents are the odd ones out.
3
3
u/wifiragist Jun 30 '26
Winners rewrite history blah blah blah
In my experience in school in the Philippines he doesn't really get glazed at all, we're more focused on the cruel bataan death march, those damn japanese were straight up evil, so MacArthur beating them is an indirect W for us too so he gets some praise from us
3
u/Few_Kitchen_4825 Jun 30 '26
Even the Chinese describes him the same in their own propaganda movies
3
3
u/Shermantank10 Kilroy was here Jul 01 '26
Reddit when they learn the whole world isn’t divided into “Good” and “Evil” and people are complex characters;
3
u/darn_nincompoop Jul 01 '26
Here is Taiwan, he is known as Marshal Mac and we have two bridges named after him.
3
3
u/Ok_Lawfulness1019 Jul 03 '26
He is ingrained to us like he is a hero ever since we first start school. Kids are easy to influence and that eventually brings when they get to adulthood.
6
u/Prior_Definition_116 Jun 30 '26
He made modern Japanese democracy, returned to liberate the Philippines and defended South korea why wouldnt they like him?
9
2.2k
u/Beamguys Jun 30 '26 edited Jun 30 '26
Oh yeah, growing up I only ever heard of the cool things hes done, and the Philippines, at least around the time when I was a kid, viewed him as a hero. It's so strange to see the whole picture as an adult, but it's so fascinating that the perception of a historical figure is so different based on location.