A dynamic duo. \u00a0<\/p>\n
Blogfriend Crispin “starbuck”\u00a0Burke<\/strong> of Wings over Iraq<\/strong> <\/a>scored a high-profile guest post at Thomas Rick’s<\/strong> The<\/strong> Best Defense<\/strong> <\/a>blog at Foreign Policy.com<\/a>:<\/strong><\/p>\n A few words in defense of MacArthur<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Those that have been following along at this blog are aware that its Pulitzer Prize-winning author, after extensive research into U.S. generalship, has deemed General Douglas MacArthur the <\/strong>worst<\/strong><\/a> general <\/strong>ever<\/strong><\/a>, edging out George McClellan and even Benedict Arnold. Certainly, MacArthur was responsible for some colossal military blunders. His botched defense of the Philippines in 1941-2 and his irresponsible, headlong rush to the Yalu River during the Korean War are among the most epic failures in U.S. military history. Additionally, as Tom notes, MacArthur was openly defiant towards Presidents Hoover, Roosevelt, and Truman….<\/strong><\/p>\n ….Nevertheless, MacArthur is not without his redeeming qualities. In particular, MacArthur’s term as the superintendent of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point should serve as a source of inspiration for those attempting to grow the next batch of military leaders.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n I concur with Burke. MacArthur’s historical reputation\u00a0as a general\u00a0in my view is\u00a0much like how\u00a0Richard Nixon or LBJ could be categorized as president – both great and terrible, brilliant and self-deluding. Like him or hate him, MacArthur is a towering, contradictory,historical figure because he was not simply “just a general” in the way that, for example, Omar Bradley<\/strong> was or that any serving officer would be permitted to behave today. MacArthur’s weird preeminence was a political throwback to an earlier America and an “Old Army”\u00a0that no longer exists. Or even existed when MacArthur accepted Japan’s surrender in 1945.<\/p>\n