From: Adam Flinton 

Gene McAloon wrote:

> On Wed, 2 Jun 2004 18:04:52 -0500, Bill Lucy  wrote:
>
>
>>In article , gauszka{at}hotmail.com says...
>>
>>>While many events and
>>>people of WWII have always interested me, for some reason
anything related
>>>with Eisenhower never did. Some of the articles I've read on Ike made me
>>>think of him as the utimate bureaucrat and I  thus I never had
any desire to
>>>do any additional research.
>>
>>We're in some agreement here. I read quite a few biographies when I was
>>in school (probably more than sci-fi). The bio on Ike was not very
>>critical, but I always found it odd that he was only a colonel until the
>>United States got into the war.
>>
>>There were a number of US generals who, IMO, were better: Marshall,
>>MacArthur, Bradley, Patton, Collins, and Ridgway. I might include
>>Middleton and McLain, but I'm not as familiar with them.
>
>
> Nothing at all odd about it. Once in the war, seniority was pretty much
ignored,
> sometimes justifiably and sometimes not. With so many generals being dumped
> because they were not considered fit for a war time command, many colonels
got
> sudden promotions to general.
>
> Eisenhower was one of them, not in his case because he was thought a superior
> tactician, let alone a strategist, but because he had a reputation for being
a
> team player who could and did get along with just about everybody. It was an
> excellent choice, because not the least of the problems in that war was
keeping
> the Brit/US coalition together. The Brits wanted to run everything with the
US
> as a junior partner. But the US had the men, material and wealth required to
win
> the war and were determined to run things. Churchill recognized the reality
and
> went along with it to a remarkable degree, but some of his general staff did
not
> and the Brit press, particularly the Beaverbrook press, never acquiesced to
US
> domination.
>
> It was Beaverbrook who created Montgomery's hero status both during and after
> the N. African campaign and later constantly pushed the fool into challenging
> Eisenhower at every turn. That almost got Montgomery dumped. On one occasion,
> only an abject letter of apology to Eisenhower saved him.
>

I can't think of a single good & well known US general in the European
theatre. Those who had the threads of competance were glory hounds &
the rest were incompetant.

The lower level basically now forgotten generals held the US forces
together in the teeth of the utter fools the US placed in charge.
Eisenhower is a great example of the US mil where the most mediocre rises
fastest.

Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5