Patton in Korea/MacArthur in the White House

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

  • Approve

    Votes: 91 87.5%
  • Disapprove

    Votes: 13 12.5%

  • Total voters
    104
  • Poll closed .
Returning to NATO, well i think that's her end will come soon, honestly Mac obsession for Asia/Pacific, extremely low interest for Europe and the reunification of Germany just a decade after WWII...a move that will have caused a series of hearth attack all over the continent and now this diplomatic 'faux pass' (in addition to propose Spain as a member of NATO) will cause everyone in western europe to start thinking alternative and have serious doubts about american commitment or even if they are really their ally.
As said earlier, the EDC project will be bring back and in general collaboration between the two side of the Atlantic will be much more limited than OTL and frankly i see the British and the French increasing their links due to a budget issue.

Churchill can still be there in 1956 if we butterfly away the stroke, but is a very difficult thing to do as the man hardly took care of his health and already in 51 it was suggested that he retired. Basically if it by some miracle, after the defeat in the 45 election someone convince Winston to try a more healthier style of life, it can be done, otherwise it's difficult to see how he can still capable of be prime minister unless he is basically kept only nominally in power as it's the cabinet that hold real control due to his health.
 
Returning to NATO, well i think that's her end will come soon, honestly Mac obsession for Asia/Pacific, extremely low interest for Europe and the reunification of Germany just a decade after WWII...a move that will have caused a series of hearth attack all over the continent and now this diplomatic 'faux pass' (in addition to propose Spain as a member of NATO) will cause everyone in western europe to start thinking alternative and have serious doubts about american commitment or even if they are really their ally.
It also depends on how bellicose Malankov is and if the WP even really exists. Maybe the Iron Curtain is made of foil in TTL.
 
It also depends on how bellicose Malankov is and if the WP even really exists. Maybe the Iron Curtain is made of foil in TTL.

The existence of the Pact is very irrelevant, everybody knows that easter europe were pup...ehm allies of the URSS that will immediately join her in any crisis; and if the Iron Curtain is made of foil...there is also less reason for the americans to stay here and to play ball with them to keep Europe security.
 
What will the Armenians do? They may get their independence 35 years earlier.
Honestly, nothing. How would they even get their independence? Neither Turkey nor the Soviets are going to willingly grant them land, and I doubt Mac could even force them to.

Churchill can still be there in 1956 if we butterfly away the stroke, but is a very difficult thing to do as the man hardly took care of his health and already in 51 it was suggested that he retired. Basically if it by some miracle, after the defeat in the 45 election someone convince Winston to try a more healthier style of life, it can be done, otherwise it's difficult to see how he can still capable of be prime minister unless he is basically kept only nominally in power as it's the cabinet that hold real control due to his health.
Nothing wrong with him letting his cabinet handle domestic affairs and then him just keeping the PM title and taking an active role for a few months at the end when the excitement starts :)

It also depends on how bellicose Malankov is and if the WP even really exists. Maybe the Iron Curtain is made of foil in TTL.
The Warsaw Pact doesn't formally exist. 'Fraternal socialist brothers' and other Pravda-speak definitely do.

***

Was hoping to get the rest of the updates out over this weekend, had a bad case of writers block instead (like seriously, why now?!), so I'm afraid I'll have to keep you waiting a bit longer :( Sorry about that.

- BNC
 
Re: The Armenians: Honestly, nothing. How would they even get their independence? Neither Turkey nor the Soviets are going to willingly grant them land, and I doubt Mac could even force them to.


- BNC
Appreciate they will not recover their homelands but pressure on Soviets and Turkey (also from UN, NATO and CENTO) might alleviate a little of the persecution and ethnic cleansing.
 
Appreciate they will not recover their homelands but pressure on Soviets and Turkey (also from UN, NATO and CENTO) might alleviate a little of the persecution and ethnic cleansing.
It was my hope that the world be made more aware. Because of their being a part of the Soviet Russia Turkey has bren able to spin the narrative iotl.
 
Here are my $0.02

Vietnam - Macarthur would have seen that Vietnam would be a larger version of the Philippines of his youth, an insurgency that he could not quell. He would also know that traditionally, the Vietnamese did not want to have nothing to do with the Chinese. Macarthur could talk and convince the press on this. And with Vietnam question solved early, USA can concentrate on other things such as perhaps the Great Society of Johnson in the 60's if LBJ is there.

Interstate system - is this still a go? Both Democrats and Republicans should be able to see this as a good thing

NATO - NATO will still continue as the aim was to "Keep the Americans in, The Russians out, and the Germans down". Yes, I think that Spain will eventually want to come in as Franco was very anti-communist.

Space Race - Is their room for joint USSR-USA cooperation in space exploration ???? Probably not in the 1950's and 1960's, but perhaps in the 1970's

Middle East - How does the Iranian people see the USA? Operation Ajax was a bust. Do the Iranian people see the USA as meddlers in their country?

I am interested in seeing how the Arab-Israeli conflicts go ITTL
 
Macarthur would have seen that Vietnam would be a larger version of the Philippines of his youth, an insurgency that he could not quell.
eh?

From the Wiki
On March 23, 1901, General Frederick Funston and his troops captured Aguinaldo in Palanan, Isabela, with the help of some Filipinos (called the Macabebe Scouts after their home locale[92][93]) who had joined the Americans' side. The Americans pretended to be captives of the Scouts, who were dressed in Philippine Army uniforms. Once Funston and his "captors" entered Aguinaldo's camp, they immediately fell upon the guards and quickly overwhelmed them and the weary Aguinaldo.[94]

On April 1, 1901, at the Malacañan Palace in Manila, Aguinaldo swore an oath accepting the authority of the United States over the Philippines and pledging his allegiance to the American government. On April 19, he issued a Proclamation of Formal Surrender to the United States, telling his followers to lay down their weapons and give up the fight.

"Let the stream of blood cease to flow; let there be an end to tears and desolation," Aguinaldo said. "The lesson which the war holds out and the significance of which I realized only recently, leads me to the firm conviction that the complete termination of hostilities and a lasting peace are not only desirable but also absolutely essential for the well-being of the Philippines."[95][96]

The capture of Aguinaldo dealt a severe blow to the Filipino cause, but not as much as the Americans had hoped. General Miguel Malvar took over the leadership of the Filipino government, or what remained of it.[97] He originally had taken a defensive stance against the Americans, but now launched all-out offensive against the American-held towns in the Batangas region.[21] General Vicente Lukbán in Samar, and other army officers, continued the war in their respective areas.[21]

General Bell relentlessly pursued Malvar and his men, forcing the surrender of many of the Filipino soldiers. Finally, Malvar surrendered, along with his sick wife and children and some of his officers, on April 16, 1902.[98][99] By the end of the month nearly 3,000 of Malvar's men had also surrendered. With the surrender of Malvar, the Filipino war effort began to dwindle even further.[100]

Enraged by a guerrilla massacre of U.S. troops on the Island of Samar, General Jacob H. Smith retaliated by carrying out an indiscriminate attack upon its inhabitants.[101] His order "KILL EVERY ONE OVER TEN" became a caption in the New York Journal cartoon on May 5, 1902. The Old Glory draped an American shield on which a vulture replaced the bald eagle. The bottom caption exclaimed, "Criminals Because They Were Born Ten Years Before We Took the Philippines". This was published in the New York Journal-American, May 5, 1902. Smith was eventually court-martialed by the American military and forced to retire.[101]

The Philippine Organic Act—approved on July 1, 1902—codified President McKinley's previous executive order which had established the Second Philippine Commission. The act also stipulated that a legislature would be established composed of a popularly elected lower house, the Philippine Assembly, and an upper house consisting of the Philippine Commission. The act also provided for extending the United States Bill of Rights to Filipinos.[102][103] On July 2, the United States Secretary of War telegraphed that since the insurrection against the United States had ended and provincial civil governments had been established throughout most of the Philippine archipelago, the office of military governor was terminated.[1] On July 4, Theodore Roosevelt, who had succeeded to the U.S. presidency after the assassination of President McKinley, proclaimed an amnesty to those who had participated in the conflict.[1][104]

On April 9, 2002, Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo proclaimed that the Philippine–American War had ended on April 16, 1902, with the surrender of General Miguel Malvar.[105] She declared the centennial anniversary of that date as a national working holiday and as a special non-working holiday in the province of Batangas and in the cities of Batangas, Lipa and Tanauan.
 
Vietnam - Macarthur would have seen that Vietnam would be a larger version of the Philippines of his youth, an insurgency that he could not quell. He would also know that traditionally, the Vietnamese did not want to have nothing to do with the Chinese. Macarthur could talk and convince the press on this. And with Vietnam question solved early, USA can concentrate on other things such as perhaps the Great Society of Johnson in the 60's if LBJ is there.
The "Philippines of his youth" was exactly the sort of insurgency that he thought he could quell - his father had quelled it (sure, there was more nuance to the matter, but that's how he saw it). Vietnam was much more a case of "don't get in a land war with Asia" (which is the exact argument he used when advising JFK against intervening there).
More focus on the Great Society is a possibility, although that would be dependent on LBJ actually becoming president, which is hardly guaranteed.

Interstate system - is this still a go? Both Democrats and Republicans should be able to see this as a good thing
I've been thinking about this one for months now, TBH I'm not sure. All the arguments in favour of it still apply (and would still exist even if Ike isn't there pushing it along). The main problem is that Mac was anti-taxes to the point of obsession (he goes on a seriously impressive rant about them towards the end of his book), and while he wasn't anti-public works as such, my guess is he'd take one look at the cost and say "the states can figure that one out". Though if Congress pushed through a proposal I imagine he'd sign it.
:confused:

Space Race - Is their room for joint USSR-USA cooperation in space exploration ???? Probably not in the 1950's and 1960's, but perhaps in the 1970's
Could be? Really depends on if Mac's successors continue his detente policies, and the Soviet leadership is willing to do the same. Not really something I can predict (I mean, Carter was followed by Reagan after all....). If Malenkov sticks around long enough, wouldn't rule it out completely.

Middle East - How does the Iranian people see the USA? Operation Ajax was a bust. Do the Iranian people see the USA as meddlers in their country?
This might be a question better saved for after the next update is posted ;)

Too low IMO, South Korea is richer than both right now and the Korea in TTL went through a far shorter war. I would expect a PCI at least as high as OTL.
I really don't think it is too low. There's no guarantee that united Korea would experience the same "miracle" growth it had OTL... for one, there's a lot more people it has to raise the living standards of TTL, and one of the biggest drivers of that growth (war in Vietnam) has been almost definitely butterflied.
The "far shorter war" thing is also a double-edged sword. When a country gets all its infrastructure destroyed in a war, when it rebuilds everything the new equipment is going to be all new and the latest technology, and will thus have an inherent advantage over the existing industrial powers who are using older equipment (an example that comes to mind is Japanese car manufacturers surpassing their American counterparts in the 70s and 80s). Korea TTL is much more (not entirely) in the camp of "older equipment", with all the negatives that brings.

- BNC
 
I've been thinking about this one for months now, TBH I'm not sure. All the arguments in favour of it still apply (and would still exist even if Ike isn't there pushing it along). The main problem is that Mac was anti-taxes to the point of obsession (he goes on a seriously impressive rant about them towards the end of his book), and while he wasn't anti-public works as such, my guess is he'd take one look at the cost and say "the states can figure that one out". Though if Congress pushed through a proposal I imagine he'd sign it.
:confused:
If it was really something that Congress was interested in then it seems like something Knowland would push for both in the name of bipartisanship, economic stimulus, and to get his name on a big piece of legislation.
 
What I was trying to get at, was that with Macarthur's experience, knowledge of Asian culture, and his popularity and prestige, he would have been ideal to stop US involvement in Vietnam and not take as much damaging flak for SE Asia falling to communism.

That and what opportunities does the USA have to spend the money that was spent on Vietnam, elsewhere? Greater space exploration? War on poverty ?????

What would be ironic if ITTL, the USA avoids the quagmire of Vietnam, just to be sucked into another one somewhere else in the world in the '60's and '70's. But I do not see that happening. Perhaps the USA will become more involved in Cuba for counter insurgency activity. Even if the USA is more active in Cuba, I do not see the level of involvement that Vietnam became in our time.
 
What would be ironic if ITTL, the USA avoids the quagmire of Vietnam, just to be sucked into another one somewhere else in the world in the '60's and '70's. But I do not see that happening. Perhaps the USA will become more involved in Cuba for counter insurgency activity. Even if the USA is more active in Cuba, I do not see the level of involvement that Vietnam became in our time.
The Tactics that succeeded with the British in Malaya were in part from not being supplied by one Superpower,(USSR) and one rising power(Red China) on untouchable supply routes by rail and by Ports.
Letting North Vietnam free resupply doomed any effor in keeping them from supplying insurgents in Laos, Cambodia, and South Vietnam

Those conditions are unlikely to exist anywhere else on Earth, except North Vietnam
China and USSR would have a far more difficult doing that level of supply to Africa or the Americas
 
What I was trying to get at, was that with Macarthur's experience, knowledge of Asian culture, and his popularity and prestige, he would have been ideal to stop US involvement in Vietnam and not take as much damaging flak for SE Asia falling to communism.

That and what opportunities does the USA have to spend the money that was spent on Vietnam, elsewhere? Greater space exploration? War on poverty ?????

What would be ironic if ITTL, the USA avoids the quagmire of Vietnam, just to be sucked into another one somewhere else in the world in the '60's and '70's. But I do not see that happening. Perhaps the USA will become more involved in Cuba for counter insurgency activity. Even if the USA is more active in Cuba, I do not see the level of involvement that Vietnam became in our time.
The difference with Cuba is that the US can entirely cut off the rest of the world from supplying Cuba relatively easily if they wanted to. Its a much different situation, and one the US could probably win far easier imo.

On the topic of where the money saved could go, I find it extremely unlikely for the US to invest heavily (as heavily as OTL and especially unlikely to invest more heavily) into space if theres not the dynamic of the space race against the Soviet Union. With a less intense Cold War I have to say that I think there would be less interest in space exploration. Of the options you listed that leaves the war on poverty. Would extra money really make it successful? I don't see very much evidence that a lack of money was the problem. Many of the government programs back then were simply FAR less efficient than they are today, and more money would not fix that problem. Take housing for example, the rent control approach wasn't going to work regardless of how much money got thrown into public housing projects. Then on top of that, it was fairly common during that period for those housing projects to actually tear down more housing units than they built. Sometimes more money can help, but throwing more money at a problem doesn't fix a fundamentally flawed approach to things.

If there isn't an interstate system built under Mac, then I would have to assume that the money saved because of no Vietnam would most likely go towards a highway system and perhaps some other infrastructure projects such as expanded passenger rail. I don't know how much that would change things from OTL, but if thats the case I find it likely that rail projects are focused around the northeast and the rust belt cities that were at their peaks during this time. Unlike some, I'm not a believer that rail all of a sudden makes people want to move to/stay in connected cities for no other reason, so Id think that these cities still largely see declines over the next decades. Which means the biggest effects of passenger rail in these cities could be that some of the historic neighborhoods in downtowns get preserved instead of interstates being built through them. I think some version of the interstate system would get built regardless of course, but if its happening at the same time as an investment into rail and public transport then maybe the downtowns get saved.
 
As soon as the railroads lose the mail contracts for moving mail to the airlines, the fuze is lit for passenger rail collapse in the USA.
Moving mail was the most profitable thing they moved, followed by express freight, then regular freight, and then bulk commodities, with passenger operations losing money except in a few areas, like the NE Corridor.
Mac in place of Ike won't change this.
 
Top