Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Douglas MacArthur is handling his job as president?

  • Approve

    Votes: 199 72.6%
  • Disapprove

    Votes: 75 27.4%

  • Total voters
    274
Status
Not open for further replies.
Awww. A surviving Beria could've been fun.
Well, yes... but actually no. I think the words you're looking for is 'unspeakably awful' :eek: :p

Oh, okay, it seems I misunderstood what you were saying, my bad!

And yes, although perhaps the butterflies wouldn't be too big if Mac ratchets up spending consistently throughout his term. If he doesn't though, we probably will see long term (as in beyond Mac's term) less of a maintained presence in potential conflict zones globally, and a turn towards more of a strategy of rapid response once a potential conflict zone turns active. That kind of seems like the direction the US is trending in OTL rn, but I could see this having some very negative consequences in the Cold War, when technology isn't as good, response times are going to be slower, and American security guarantees are vital to the Cold War alliance structure
Let's just say there'll be a lot more on Mac's defence policies in the future :)

Made an infobox for the 1952 election
Great work! Just one minor nitpick: Mac's home state should be Wisconsin, not New York. Otherwise it's fantastic :)

With a targeted landing in Bejing?
I don't think he'd be disappointed ;)

I'm feeling a bit iffy on that as I feel like it will still be the bitter(or less one-sided to the communists) civil war as it was otl. President Diem in OTL was opposed by the US and the Vietcong for how competent he was. The US wanted him gone so that they could intervene in the civil war, and the Vietcong wanted him gone due to how competent he was in starving out their supporters and guerillas in South Vietnam. He was working to develop his own ammunition and weapons factories and be self-sufficient before he got assassinated. He was not a corrupt, brutal dictator as most of the people today see him as. These were lies that were propagated by three factions, the Buddhists, the US, and the Vietcong. The Vietcong was due to how effective he was in fighting them, and the Buddhists were due to how he was Catholic. The US unknowingly supported the propaganda they heard against Diem, due to him refusing their aid any more than what they have sent.

ITTL though recently freed through diplomacy, Vietnam would probably have a stronger democracy that would be enforced by the US but would be incredibly hostile to whatever foreign influence or intervention appears. The only reason the soldiers that were cooperating weren't (mostly) fighting back, was due to the puppet president the US installed. Even in this timeline Vietnamese never liked foreigners butting into their affairs, and would unite even if they were just fighting each other, to drive out the foreigners. This happened with Pol Pot, as former South Vietnamese soldiers signed up to the Vietcong due to him invading Vietnam. They weren't appreciated by the communists after the war, but they did their duty.

I am very sorry for going on a rant, I just wanted to make some things clear as to the situation at the time. This is an explanation as to why it wasn't so clearcut as to why the communists would win in Vietnam. There were resistance movements even bigger than the Viet Minh, but they only grew to prominence due to the others being already wiped out by the French, or subverted by Ho Chi Minh. It was a massive struggle that most people don't know, so I just want to put it out there that it wasn't so clear-cut as it looks.
I'd just been making a joke about the peace process with the US, but very interesting nonetheless!

- BNC
 
Should the US get involved in a conflict somewhere under a McArthur presidency how much do you see him giving orders directly to the generals involved i.e. LBJ style micro-management with the caveat that he's a "victorious" general so it's assumed he knows how to win a war.
 
I'm feeling a bit iffy on that as I feel like it will still be the bitter(or less one-sided to the communists) civil war as it was otl. President Diem in OTL was opposed by the US and the Vietcong for how competent he was. The US wanted him gone so that they could intervene in the civil war, and the Vietcong wanted him gone due to how competent he was in starving out their supporters and guerillas in South Vietnam. He was working to develop his own ammunition and weapons factories and be self-sufficient before he got assassinated. He was not a corrupt, brutal dictator as most of the people today see him as. These were lies that were propagated by three factions, the Buddhists, the US, and the Vietcong. The Vietcong was due to how effective he was in fighting them, and the Buddhists were due to how he was Catholic. The US unknowingly supported the propaganda they heard against Diem, due to him refusing their aid any more than what they have sent.

ITTL though recently freed through diplomacy, Vietnam would probably have a stronger democracy that would be enforced by the US but would be incredibly hostile to whatever foreign influence or intervention appears. The only reason the soldiers that were cooperating weren't (mostly) fighting back, was due to the puppet president the US installed. Even in this timeline Vietnamese never liked foreigners butting into their affairs, and would unite even if they were just fighting each other, to drive out the foreigners. This happened with Pol Pot, as former South Vietnamese soldiers signed up to the Vietcong due to him invading Vietnam. They weren't appreciated by the communists after the war, but they did their duty.

I am very sorry for going on a rant, I just wanted to make some things clear as to the situation at the time. This is an explanation as to why it wasn't so clearcut as to why the communists would win in Vietnam. There were resistance movements even bigger than the Viet Minh, but they only grew to prominence due to the others being already wiped out by the French, or subverted by Ho Chi Minh. It was a massive struggle that most people don't know, so I just want to put it out there that it wasn't so clear-cut as it looks.
Wait, there are other large anti colonial movement besides the Vietminh? The only one that I remember is the VNQDĐ, and after the Yên Bái uprising, it was pretty much a downward spiral for them. Most are either small (Vietnam Restoration League) or only relegated to a specific region in the country (the Hòa Hảo)
 
$30 billions is ok for 1953-54 and the remainder of MacArthur's term if Germany is reunified and neutral while the USSR is led by Malenkov. That doesn't completely remove the desire to invade conventionally to destroy NATO's ability to fight on the continent if war happens, but at the moment tensions in Europe are massively reduced. This won't require as big of an army and indeed Greece, Turkey and Norway don't favor major armored battles, but quick reaction forces that are comparatively cheaper.

If MacArthur doesn't involve the US in the likely Vietnamese civil war after the French leave, it's even better in the long term even if greater military expenditures are required against the USSR or China. I'd dare say it might even be preferable to not invest too much in the 50s, as American equipment in this era became outdated really quickly or was produced in such large numbers OTL that it was very difficult to replace (way less M47s with a shorter Korean war and less M48s is nice). Better off spending the money on an improved economy or military research and 60's procurement.

Edit: Interestingly enough the Americans wanted to replace the M48 extremely early on through the Questionmark conferences and only the dire situation made the new batch of tanks (M48A2) enter production in 1955.
 
Last edited:
Should the US get involved in a conflict somewhere under a McArthur presidency how much do you see him giving orders directly to the generals involved i.e. LBJ style micro-management with the caveat that he's a "victorious" general so it's assumed he knows how to win a war.
IOTL he was happy to leave things to his subordinates when things were going well enough. When things went bad (ie Mac was starting to be humiliated by the enemy), or he wanted to do something dramatic, he took over the reins and micromanaged everything. (Ok, that's a bit exaggerated, but you get the picture).

Which sounds like a fun story to read, yes? ;)
For you to read it, I'd have to write it first, and that means researching the bastard. I can do without buying a book about one of the few people in history who can legitimately compete with Hitler for "worst human being to ever live".

A Beria lives TL might be interesting, but only if someone else writes it.

- BNC
 
I wonder how Mac's Africa policy will guide him in the upcoming Suez crisis, assuming it hasn't been butterflied away.

Edit: Mac not Ike, that's what I get for posting at 3AM.
 
Last edited:
So.. question.

In an earlier update you said that MacArthur was going to back Chiang when elected president. We have also been told that the Chinese reluctantly agreed to a ceasefire.

Recent updates suggest the war in Korea is over according to the west. Has Mao accepted the new reality, or will the Chiang recognition by America cause Korean War 2.0? If that happens, will President MacArthur do what General MacArthur wanted to do OTL while the war was still going on?

Will we nuke the Chinese coastline?
 
I'm 50/50 on if President MacArthur will get involved in Vietnam. On one hand look how eager he was to get involved in Korea. Plus he has experience from his time in the Philippines during World War 2. However he could just see the conflict as being the end of colonialism and decide not to help the French and later subsequently not to get the US involved. As much as I hate the Vietnam War I am kinda curious to see how as President MacArthur would handle it compared to Ike, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon did in OTL. Plus he won the Korea War in TTL. So again 50/50 at the moment.
 
I'm 50/50 on if President MacArthur will get involved in Vietnam. On one hand look how eager he was to get involved in Korea. Plus he has experience from his time in the Philippines during World War 2. However he could just see the conflict as being the end of colonialism and decide not to help the French and later subsequently not to get the US involved. As much as I hate the Vietnam War I am kinda curious to see how as President MacArthur would handle it compared to Ike, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon did in OTL. Plus he won the Korea War in TTL. So again 50/50 at the moment.
IOTL MacArthur advised Kennedy not to escalate Vietnam on the basis that you can't win land wars in Asia. However I wonder how his thinking would be changed after successfully winning a land war in Korea, and beating back the Chinese intervention on top of that
 
Wait, there are other large anti colonial movement besides the Vietminh? The only one that I remember is the VNQDĐ, and after the Yên Bái uprising, it was pretty much a downward spiral for them. Most are either small (Vietnam Restoration League) or only relegated to a specific region in the country (the Hòa Hảo)
Yeah, you're right. I was mistaken as to the nature of the uprising, I thought there was another large anti-colonial movement besides the Vietminh, but I probably meant VNQDĐ. Thank you for correcting me, I had to get some more info just in case, but yeah you're right.

Additional information as to why the Vietminh was able to pull off this uprising. They hid the fact that they were communists, and tried to unify all other movements behind them. They succeeded in unifying the movements to push France out, but then they showed their true colors after the war. That is when the split happened, I think.
 
I wonder how Mac's Africa policy will guide him in the upcoming Suez crisis, assuming it hasn't been butterflied away.
I think I mentioned it earlier in the thread: Suez will be the final act of the timeline (and one I'd like to do in quite a bit of detail). I wouldn't want to spoil that now :)

Edit: Mac not Ike, that's what I get for posting at 3AM
I can safely tell you what Ike would do about Suez without spoiling anything ;)

So.. question.

In an earlier update you said that MacArthur was going to back Chiang when elected president. We have also been told that the Chinese reluctantly agreed to a ceasefire.

Recent updates suggest the war in Korea is over according to the west. Has Mao accepted the new reality, or will the Chiang recognition by America cause Korean War 2.0? If that happens, will President MacArthur do what General MacArthur wanted to do OTL while the war was still going on?

Will we nuke the Chinese coastline?
1/ Backing Chiang was basic US policy at the time - FDR, Truman, Ike, Kennedy all did that. Mac's a bit more overt than Truman was and will want a stronger agreement/alliance set up than Truman did, that doesn't necessarily mean he'd launch Operation Reclaim the Mainland at the drop of a hat.

2/ The Korean War has been over since about May 1951 (I don't think I ever gave a specific date). There's no fighting along the Yalu and there isn't going to be. Mao was pretty much the only senior CCP official who wanted to intervene (IOTL and ITTL), here he intervened, promptly got his butt handed to him by Patton, and then dragged the fighting out so it wouldn't look so bad as "we jumped in, got whipped, and quit inside of two months". Then the rest of the CCP more or less told him "give it up, or we'll give you up".

3/ What MacArthur wanted to do IOTL was 'win the Korean War', not glass Korea and/or China with nukes*. He's done that already. He knows invading China directly would be stupid. Nothing more to be done there.
*= I've discussed this particular misconception a number of times in the thread, most recently on page 62, post 1236.

4/ No nukes will be dropped on China ITTL.

On one hand look how eager he was to get involved in Korea.
He wasn't? In his memoirs, he describes the first couple of months' action much more in the tone of "I had to do something to save this from going bad" than "oh yay yes another war!". I really don't think he was 'eager' so much as knowing what he had to do as a commanding general. Indeed, of the pages in his memoirs he devoted to the period between June 1950 and when he started thinking about Inchon, a full third of them are about meeting Chiang in August and a statement he issued on VJ day (and if Mac isn't talking about something in his memoirs, it's quite obvious he doesn't want you to know about it!). Inchon was an opportunity for glory for one particular five star general, so he cared about that a lot, the rest of the war he's much less enthusiastic about.

As much as I hate the Vietnam War I am kinda curious to see how as President MacArthur would handle it compared to Ike, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon did in OTL.
I'll leave out the Ike phase for now, because spoilers.
If I was to ISOT him into say LBJ's spot (or better yet, Westmoreland), there's a few sides of this (besides "stay out" ala what he told Kennedy). First, he'd probably invade NV and he'd definitely do something like Linebacker as soon as he possibly could. Whether this is good or bad depends on your interpretation of what the Chinese would do. Second, he'd probably push to do something about the HCM trail... I think first he'd try to get the Cambodian or Lao govts to shut it down themselves (in the Philippines 44, he was quite big on not looking like a military governor, so he'd want to respect their neutrality if he could). Third, within SV I honestly think he'd do a fairly good job of winning over hearts and minds and making the ARVN effective (assuming the US soldiers don't just frag him for making them work), and he could even be one of America's best candidates for actually "winning" the war under the constraints it was fought under - and I say that having a very mixed opinion about his generalship more broadly. He actually had experience in COIN, he was in the Philippines when the remnant insurgencies from the Philippine-American War were still going on (I believe that was the first time he got shot at, too), and his father had been one of the COIN experts. Plus he had experience building up a "native" army with the Philippines in the 30s.
I don't think Vietnam could have been won by anyone without invading NV or using nukes (at least not after ~1955), but Mac would have a better chance than most.

- BNC
 
Sounds really good. I like your reasons for the actions Mac may or may not take in Vietnam. Also curious do you MacArthur as President will support Operation Ajax and the coup in Iran? That's one of the things I'm really interested in seeing especially given the consequences from the coup later on.
 
Sounds really good. I like your reasons for the actions Mac may or may not take in Vietnam. Also curious do you MacArthur as President will support Operation Ajax and the coup in Iran? That's one of the things I'm really interested in seeing especially given the consequences from the coup later on.
Been doing a lot of thinking on that one... it'll either be next chapter or the following one.

- BNC
 
Part V, Chapter 36
CHAPTER 36

The Glasgow Conference of 1953 would be only the first of four major international meetings MacArthur attended that year. Long before becoming president, he had resolved to conduct all important foreign policy personally, unlike Truman who had let the State Department handle it. MacArthur’s relationship with State had been frosty for years, and aside from a weekly report from Henry Luce, he paid them little attention. His subordinates in Washington could handle routine matters of governing the country. He would use his own time on things that were much more important.
Winston Churchill had been keen on having a conference between the leaders of Great Britain, France and the United States ever since Stalin’s death to determine how the great powers would handle the change in Soviet leadership. For one reason or another, past attempts had been postponed, and only in the last few months had Malenkov’s grip on the Soviet government become strong enough that he wouldn’t be soon replaced. Now, with changes in leadership unlikely in the immediate future, Churchill thought the time was ripe. He proposed a meeting in Bermuda, MacArthur suggested somewhere in Scotland instead. “The MacArthurs are of Scottish descent, and I’ve never seen the place” was the explanation he gave to the press.

MacArthur’s chief aim at Glasgow was to convince Churchill and French Prime Minister Rene Mayer to support his efforts to reunify and neutralise Germany in line with the Stalin Note. As he had with his Defence team in Washington, he gave a grand speech about the danger that a divided Germany posed to world peace.
“As long as Germany remains divided, the only outcome we can expect is for the country to remain a flashpoint of continual tension. No people will long tolerate the division imposed by an arbitrary line on a map. Just as the people of Korea sought unification by force, the people of Germany too will insist upon the end of their separation, using the force of arms if no other option is left for them. This is a situation the communists too will exploit, a way to export their destructive ideology into the minds of the German people.
“The solution that we must take is to put the cork in the bottle, to keep apart the arms of the East and the West. The communist offer is for a free Germany, one that will be far more inclined to share our values than theirs. Instead of representing a dagger pointing at the heart of Europe, the German people would become your shield. Let us grant them peace, rather than watch the flames of unity turn Europe ablaze.”


Churchill, long impressed with MacArthur and seeking to revive the “special relationship” that had somewhat soured under Truman, was quick to agree. He, like MacArthur, sought to reduce the threat of a devastating atomic war as much as possible, and believed that could be best done with some sort of agreement with Malenkov. The Stalin Note proposal was generous too, with unified Germany to be a democratic state whose elections would be supervised by the four powers. Freedoms of speech and the press would be guaranteed, and the only requirement Stalin had made was that Germany play no part in any military alliances, which would include NATO and the European Defence Community. Churchill believed the EDC would prove an unsuccessful effort with or without Germany, and the Red Army would be required to leave East German soil, so he had little reason to object.
One concession Churchill did seek from MacArthur was America’s support for Britain’s position in the long-running Abadan Crisis in Iran. Two years earlier, the Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh had nationalised the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company’s assets within his country, worth millions of pounds and a considerable amount of prestige to the British. The British had retaliated with a blockade of the country, forbidding other countries from buying the seized Iranian oil. Mossadegh had been elected democratically, but in recent months was ruling more often than not by decree, and the British believed he was acting under Soviet influence. MI6 had been considering a coup d’etat to remove Mossadegh from power, but Churchill believed it would be best if America gave the operation its support.
MacArthur had not paid much attention to Iran since becoming President, and he had never visited the country the way he had Indochina. Willoughby had mentioned the CIA’s (so far quite limited) involvement in Iran, but America didn’t have much influence in the country. What America did have was a 50/50 stake in the oil fields of Saudi Arabia, and any move he made in Iran could have effects there. The threat of Soviet influence was also too great to ignore: if Iran fell to the communists, what could that be but the first step in their effort to control Africa and the Middle East?
Normally, he would have been opposed to launching a coup. Not only did it go against the principle of self-determination, but he knew that as soon as the new regime’s financial and especially military backing was taken away, some native movement would quickly rise up to replace it. He had seen first-hand the reaction most people had to a foreign occupation, his first combat action was against a pair of Filipino bandits in 1903. His democratisation of Japan had only worked because the Japanese themselves had led the majority of the effort. In Iran, none of that applied. Mossadegh was unpopular, and a pathetic excuse for a democratic leader besides. Moreover, the plan Churchill described consisted mostly of bribing Iranian officials to overthrow their own government. Finally, if he supported Churchill here, he could be sure Churchill would help him get Germany reunified.

Prime Minister Mayer, who could only listen to MacArthur’s dramatics with the help of Charles Willoughby acting as translator, was not so easily convinced. France, he protested, had been attempting to bring West Germany into the broader economy of Western Europe, efforts that would be undone if a deal was made with Malenkov. Nor could France afford the danger posed by a resurgent Germany in a future war: three times in the past eighty years Germany had invaded, and three times France had lost a generation of men. MacArthur would privately wonder whether the French would rather lose a generation of men to the communists, but hoping to bring the French to his side, he offered Prime Minister Mayer the construction of additional air bases in France that could be used to host B-52s, and promised that French interests would not be ignored in the meeting with Malenkov.

Nor would NATO be weakened if Germany, or even West Germany, was left out of the organisation. Whatever place France proposed to give them, MacArthur suggested be given to Spain instead.

MacArthur had had little to do with Spain in the past: he had been studying to enter West Point when his father travelled to the Philippines in 1898, and as Spain had been neutral in both world wars, they had factored little in his subsequent military career. Truman’s distrust of Franco, stemming from Franco’s tacit support for the Axis, had similarly cut them out of most discussions about the Cold War: even now, the Spanish had been barred from the UN, NATO and a range of other organisations. Relations had improved somewhat during Truman’s second term - Franco was a staunch anti-communist after all, but they were hardly what one might consider good. MacArthur sought to change that.
Most of MacArthur’s Spanish policy came from the German-born Willoughby, who had met Franco in the 1920s and considered him the “second greatest general in the world”. Willoughby had been passionately pushing for Franco to be included in the western alliance, and soon convinced the President to travel to Madrid. Before MacArthur left Washington, he instructed Eisenhower to begin facilitating Spain’s membership into the UN: with Stalin dead and Malenkov less hostile than his predecessor, the Soviet veto had ceased to be an obstacle.
Franco, too, was keen to meet MacArthur and end Spain’s isolation in the world. The two men, both former generals, quickly established a strong relationship. MacArthur expressed his desire to bring Spain into NATO and to use the country as a site for more air bases, while Franco sought American loans and economic aid. NATO membership would depend on the other member states, and Belgium in particular expressed hesitation about Spanish entry due to Franco’s undemocratic government, but an agreement concerning just Spain and the United States was easily reached. Congress would have to approve the deal, of course, but MacArthur doubted they would offer much opposition. Most of them had been complaining that Truman didn’t do enough to bring Spain on side.

Where MacArthur was perfectly willing to ignore French interests was in Indochina. In a move that nearly derailed the entire Glasgow Conference (and ensured Mayer would only give the resulting agreement to meet with Malenkov begrudging approval), MacArthur declared that he would be cutting all aid to the French war effort almost immediately, a sum that had come to around a billion dollars a year. The only concession he was willing to commit on this matter was to give American assistance to any French efforts to evacuate their troops, and to offer to mediate the peace conference with the rebel groups.
As he did so, MacArthur claimed that Congress was forcing his hand by cutting the foreign aid budget (while neglecting to mention the tax cuts that had made that budget cut a priority). Mayer would soon explain to the French press his own interpretation: “President MacArthur is under the impression that, because he travelled to that part of the world once almost fifty years ago, he now knows what the people there want, and I’m not even sure if he ever set foot in Indochina itself.”
Once MacArthur decided that the French would have to leave, there was little Mayer could do but accept the President’s paltry concessions. American aid was paying for just about all of the war effort, and using the French treasury to make up the difference would quickly bankrupt a country that was still recovering from World War II. As he agreed to MacArthur’s offer to mediate the agreement, Mayer knew he had very likely committed political suicide: the Fourth Republic had already gone through ten different prime ministers, and they would not need long to find an eleventh.

The Geneva Conference, which began on July 13th, would soon prove to be far from the honourable withdrawal that MacArthur had envisioned it become. Mayer’s government had survived long enough for him to send an ambassador to represent France, although the prime minister refused to attend himself. The French-backed State of Vietnam led by Emperor Bao Dai also sent a representative, as did the UK. On the communist side, the Vietminh sent a delegation to represent the armies that occupied most of the colony, while both the USSR and Communist China also ensured their voices were heard.
The Vietminh offered no objections to MacArthur’s proposal that French forces, including POWs and any French civilians who wished to return to France, be permitted to withdraw undisturbed, and all powers believed that the end of September would be sufficient time for this to be achieved. The creation of the neutral states of Laos and Cambodia was similarly uncontroversial, and having secured these agreements, MacArthur flew back to Washington. He had accomplished what he sought out to do.

The Vietminh had not. French withdrawal, to them, meant total withdrawal from all of Vietnam, including the disbanding of what they considered to be a puppet government. That ‘puppet government’s representatives, who had over 100,000 Vietnamese fighting on their behalf for a non-communist Vietnamese State, fervently disagreed and demanded that France be allowed to turn over its weapons to its forces instead.
In an effort to prevent a civil war breaking out in the former colony, the Chinese proposed a partition of the country into North and South, divided at the 17th parallel, with French weapons being handed to whichever government would control the local area. Henry Luce, who had taken over from MacArthur as America’s representative, expressed his government’s opposition to a partition: MacArthur was working to end the partition of divided countries, not create new ones, and Korea was proof that partition just meant a delayed war.
The alternative to delayed war soon proved to be immediate war, as negotiations broke down following the French decision to surrender their weapons to the non-communist armies. The Vietminh were the first to walk out of the conference, with one ambassador saying “let them go, we can win without those guns.” The borders with Laos and Cambodia had been (mostly) agreed upon, those between the two Vietnamese governments would be wherever the armies stood.
MacArthur remained unwilling to intervene militarily in the Vietnamese affair, knowing that if he gave his support to one side and then they lost anyway, future negotiations would become much more complicated. “We shall wait for a winner” was the policy he gave his State Department.

- BNC
 
Great update really enjoyed the Glasgow Confidence. I didn't know MacArthur was Scottish hahah. I think sooner or later MacArthur is going to have to pick a side in Vietnam to back whether he likes it or not. Again really great update. This has quickly become one of my favourite Cold War stories on here :)
 
Lol for the Spanish suggestion.
"Hey guys, you can't get Germany because I've decided to make it neutral but look there's a fascist that want to be your friend ! "
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top