None, they're all Dead.
However, probably Patton or Mac A
Both had relatively few Casualties among their troops. Mac A's Island Hopping after Buna was imaginative. Pattons Aggressive Posture towards the Enemy kept them off kilter
Marshall? Unknown quantity when it comes to field leadership
Ike? too much placating the British, Crapauds. Too much Washerwoman, not enough Killer instinct
Bradley? Not after what I read about his Normandy Huertgen, Ardennes handling
Not Mentioned:
Clarke, God Forbid! Prima Donna
Terry de la Mesa Allen- Without Hesitation Yes
Theodore Roosevelt Jr.- Again, without Hesitation Yes
Ernie Harmon-Anytime
Bob Eichelberger- sure thing
2007-12-26 22:25:03
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Probably MacArthur as he was lauded for his leadership ability. I love the story behind Patton and do admire him but he was known as "Old Blood & Guts" and could be pretty hard on his troops. So I'm not sure I would have "enjoyed" serving under him as much, but it would have been an honor and I would have done so for my country.
I don't know enough about Marshall or Bradley to make an informed response there.
2007-12-26 20:26:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by John S. 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's not a fair question since you would never be able to choose. That aside, Patton was called "Blood and Guts" for a reason. Bradley had to try to keep him in Check. MacArthur was a "Grand-stander" and I don't know too much about Marshall. I'd have to say Bradley.
2007-12-26 20:31:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by Rev TL 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
General Frederick C. Weyand, because he knew when to get out!
In an editorial in the New York Times on December 11, 2006, Murray Fromson, a reporter for CBS during the Vietnam War, stated that General Weyand had agreed to reveal himself as the confidential source for New York Times reporter R.W. Apple's August 7, 1967 story "Vietnam: The Signs of Stalemate." General Weyand, then commander of III Corps in Vietnam, told Apple and Fromson (who reported the same story for CBS) that "'I’ve destroyed a single division three times . . . I’ve chased main-force units all over the country and the impact was zilch. It meant nothing to the people. Unless a more positive and more stirring theme than simple anti-[terrorism]communism can be found, the war appears likely to go on until someone gets tired and quits, which could take generations.'" This story was the first intimation that war was reaching a stalemate, and contributed to changing sentiment about the war.
2007-12-26 20:28:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by perchorin 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
All besides MacArthur. No one else especially Patton left a man behind!
2007-12-26 20:41:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Michael R 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
I would have liked to have served under General George Smith Patton. I'm an old Cav man and a tanker and scout. I retired from the Army 7 years ago.
2007-12-26 23:04:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Patton - "One of the bravest men that I ever saw was a fellow on top of a telegraph pole in the midst of a furious firefight in Tunisia. I stopped and asked what the hell he was doing up there at a time like that. He answered, 'Fixing the wire, Sir.' I asked, 'Isn't that a little unhealthy right about now?' He answered, 'Yes Sir, but the Goddamned wire has to be fixed.' I asked, 'Don't those planes strafing the road bother you?' And he answered, 'No, Sir, but you sure as hell do!' Now, there was a real man. A real soldier. There was a man who devoted all he had to his duty, no matter how seemingly insignificant his duty might appear at the time, no matter how great the odds."
“It’s the unconquerable soul of man, not the nature of the weapon he uses, that insures victory.”
"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity."
I could go on and on and on. Patton knew when to inspire, he knew when to let a compitent soldier do his job. And he loved to let it be known he led from the front.
2007-12-26 21:19:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
MacArthur. The guy threw down against the Japanese hardcore, but even despite that, he was hugely instrumental in rebuilding Japan... a humanitarian general It's not common that a general ends up being a national hero to the people he was ordered to lead an attack against.
2007-12-26 20:29:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by Mysterious Racer P 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Patton, he had the respect of his enemy , and at least one serving under him wouldn't have died with one hand tide behind his back, waiting for Britts tea time or Russians to catch up
2015-01-11 13:25:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by daivd 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
MacArthur, the guy was a genius and he hated the Chinese.
2007-12-26 20:31:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋