Two historical military situations, same type of treatment by involved leaders?

Question

1. Khe San, Vietnam War: 1966, General Westmoreland replaced a battalion with Bravo Company to administer the defense of the airstrip after shouting down the Marines that it needed to be defended.

2. Yalu River on the Korea/China border, Korean War: MacArthur fails to use full force to wipe out the Communist opposition in this battle, though he is adamant that full-scale attack is the way to go.

I know I've presented these circumstances rather simplistically, but the point is that these avenues of advantage were not pursued, though they were presented, each at its time, as the best courses of action. Why did both these battles not end in success for the US military?

Answer 1

Politics and Ego can sometimes get in the way of Logic and Facts.

You can see it all through history.

Waterloo was the worst possible place for Napoleon to fight, he knew it but he let his ego get in the way of logic.

Market Garden was to ambitious and relied to heavily on time tables, but Montgomery wanted to beat Patton and make a name in history.

plus you have to remember hind sight is 20/20, at the moment, on paper, and with current facts, the course of action may seem appropriate. or at least may make a modicum of sense.

Answer 2

Unfortunately, Generals also take their orders from somebody else. Even when evidence points to the right solution often times there are politicians at home who are thinking politically instead of strategically.