From: Gene McAloon 

On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 21:23:58 -0400, "Steve Ewing"
 wrote:

>I always had the impression that Ike was a politician more than the
>others, which I don't mean to be pejorative; I expect that in handling the
>various factions and Allies a political general was exactly what was
>needed in that position.

That is exactly the case and that was his reputation even when he was a colonel.
None of the other generals mentioned by Bill Lucy was qualified for the job
Eisenhower had, most certainly not the very quirky Patton, an excellent
tactician but a lousy strategist. Bradley wasn't qualified either. At one
point the threatened to resign his commission rather than possibly serve
under Montgomery and said so publicly. Marshall was never a consideration
because he was Roosevelt's choice to run the whole war in both theaters.
His talents would have been wasted in confining himself to the European
theater. The others were excellent troop commanders, but had no particular
talent for doing the job Eisenhower had to shoulder.

Eisenhower was the right man for the job of supreme commander in the
European theater. At that he did a suburb job. And I say that even though
as a President,
I thought he was close to being an utter disaster.

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