General Kenney commanded the Air Force in MacArthur’s Pacific campaigns, and from their first conversation in Australia he discovered that he was a MacArthur admirer, and he never had cause to change his opinion.
If, however, we can profit from such post mortem exchanges of military opinion, the arguments that such criticism evokes will be worth the storm.” My assertions are statements of opinion, they can be challenged and they undoubtedly will be challenged. General Bradley, however, admired Montgomery as a soldier and he writes of this incident: “I am quite certain he never knew just how exasperated we had become, for our persona! association continued cordially throughout the war with never a mention of the fracas.” “Military science,” he says elsewhere, “is not an absolute science it is incapable of absolute judgment on what may be right or wrong. There was a clear difference of opinion between them, and General Bradley, particularly at the time of t he Battle of the Bulge, thought that Montgomery had been unfair in his allusions to the American troops, had exaggerated his own part in the battle, and had snaffled an American Army into his command which was withheld from Bradley’s group longer than necessity demanded.
In the case of his celebrated controversy with Field Marshal the Viscount Montgomery of Alamein, he states his case with no personal animosity but with a proper warmth. So he did it and the result-after much recrimination- was successful and, in a military sense, satisfactory. On such controversial subjects as his relieving Generals Terry Allen and Theodore Roosevelt of their respective commands, he gives full credit to the abilities of these fighting generals, but he explains that I heir Division had gol out of hand, that il had come to feel that the ordinary rules and disciplines did not apply to it, that it was, in short, too big for its breeches and something - no matter how unpopular - had to be done about it. lie writes about his fellow soldiers with frankness, stating his opinions with candor and giving the reasons for them with a calm impersonality which shows no rancor but withholds no suitable comment or necessary clarification. If so, there is ample material in General Bradley’s book for much pro-and-conning.
It is probable that to most lay readers the discussion of personalities and human relations under the pressures of war will be more interesting than the technical matters of logistics or calculated risks.
0 kommentar(er)
