Historical Video of interview with two living 5 star generals - FMWRC PAO 05032011

[@davidtvedt7597]

Class, leadership, integrity, these gentlemen exude an aura sorely missed today. Two great proven patriots!

[@garymorris1856]

Yes, well stated.

[@ronnestman4696]

@@garymorris1856I couldn’t agree more!

[@garymorris1856]

@@ronnestman4696 Yes, sir, thanks

[@xxCCBBxx]

So cool. My dad had the privilege to go pheasant hunting with Omar Bradley when he was a kid, Bradley was a family friend of ours'. Everyone has told me how much of a humble man he was. A true soldier's general.

[@planetkc]

Source: trust me bro

[@BigChunko]

@@planetkc Source: trust me bro

[@chuckmartin935]

Damn- if we only had these men back today!

[@KLUJICS]

I’ll take Patton every day of the week and twice on Sunday. You can have Bradley.

[@Blahblahblah69097]

do you think the people that know you would say you are like these men?

[@wallaceb9120]

we do but...politicians with the exception of President Trump

[@RedtideFla]

AND PATTON AND NIMITZ

[@gangoffour6690]

Even men like them would do. I don't like wars but we certainly need a strong military which is nonexistent today.

[@Chigger118]

I was so blessed and honored to have had lunch with him at Ft. Bliss, TX in 1978 and march in his funeral parade in 1981.

[@Liphted]

Such great and honorable men.

[@rxdntpto]

@Brad Watson shut the fuck up you spamming conspiracy lunatic

[@DavidBrown-cs1tq]

@Brad Watson Get back Satan for you are a stumbling block of the truth.

[@garymorris1856]

@Brad Watson I am "open minded, " I just don't believe it. So, anyone who doesn't think the way that you do is automatically close minded. How arrogant you are.

[@thebestlayahead7331]

And so few great and honorable men in our world today.

[@robertnymand9889]

They were great men! They carried us through ww2.

[@herondelatorre4023]

Two great US Army Generals : Dwight D. Eisenhower : October 14, 1890 - March 28, 1969 and Omar N. Bradley : February 12, 1893 - April 8, 1981

[@KLUJICS]

The fact that Bradley died and you give the dates makes him a great general? There were many other generals that were greater than Gen Bradley. Bradley was safe and Ike’s lap dog.

[@herondelatorre4023]

@Danny Baker So what you are saying is that Bradley should not have been safe and should have been very critical of Eisenhower in order to be considered great ????

[@harley909]

@@herondelatorre4023read Pattons book for perspective on both.

[@papamarty6480]

@@harley909Patton lived to fight in war and died when he was no longer able to fight in a war

[@edoardopesce9226]

What a tremendous personality Ike had! And those magnetic dark blue eyes! Great document.

[@CarlyleMoberly]

General of the Army Bradley's hometown library in Moberly, Missouri, will dedicate a museum to him on February 12, 2018--his 125th birthday. Bradley frequented the 1903 Carnegie Foundation building during his youth and later in life on his visits to his hometown. --Sam Richardson, curator.

[@normal_media]

Bradley needs to be on a coin. Two absolute military geniuses and great men.

[@KLUJICS]

Please tell me why Gen Bradley should be on a coin? What did Bradley do in WW2?

[@BigChunko]

@@KLUJICS its omar bradley

[@jimdellavecchia4594]

He goes on a coin after Patton

[@Malibucompany]

Agree

[@lyndoncmp5751]

Eisenhower and Bradley prolonged the war with the decisions for the campaigns in the Hurtgen Forest, Lorraine and then falling back into a retreat in the Ardennes. 200,000 American casualties were the result, for very little gains.

[@Kent-qo6xp]

Dwight, one of the best Presidents.

[@wolftone6]

Eisenhower is incredibly sharp for someone who was 77 at the time. A great man second only to FDR in the 20 century.

[@markdony1770]

@Chet Carson shut up Chet. They had nothing to do with it and Patton was not murdered. Take your conspiracy theories elsewhere.

[@cpegg5840]

@Chet Patton died in a car accident; there was no plot, it was an unfortunate accident. Shut up and stop disrespecting his memory

[@johnburns4017]

@Chet Carson What a dork!

[@marcosmelendez09]

@Chet Carson just read Target Patton, a well documented well sourced book. He was most certainly murdered

[@marcosmelendez09]

@Chet Carson Patton was completely right about the soviets. He was murdered because he voiced out his opinions and that bothered the Soviets. Patton knew the danger and the countless wars and lives that would be lost in letting communism spread throughout europe asia and latin america

[@catherinefloydlewis5465]

I am the great grand son of general Omar Bradley one of the greatest American historical figures.

[@anotherpluss1adventure905]

Sure you are

[@BrianPress-f9o]

​@@anotherpluss1adventure905 Like, the A Relative of Gen. Omar Bradley would would actually,,,,Ohhh, This is Just Redicules 👍

[@shaunsteele4968]

You mean. Eisenhowers spy.

[@shaunsteele4968]

I would get adopted by the Patton family. That's just me though

[@shaunsteele4968]

God I liked your great grandpa in his diary. Too bad he never dropped a pair and let ike know that.

[@matrox]

Ike one of America's most under rated presidents. A republican president ended segregation of the school systems in the south when he sent in the troops to kick in the school house doors as democRAT segregationist like Orval Faubus and Geo. Wallace stood at the doorways blocking negros. Ike did this even though it was an unpopular thing to do at the time.

[@seanburns4168]

My step grandfather was a full bird Colonel; that served on General Eisenhower staff in London during WWII. I got one of the swords he owned.

[@seanburns4168]

@Brad Watson it does sound a bit far fetched lol. Oliver Cromwell did not introduce democracy to England. He did successfully overthrow the Monarchy. However he acted much like an oppressive Tyrannical dictator. In 1660 England restored the Monarchy. Oliver Cromwell was not interested in reform. my step grandfather was a hero, I was in an aunt and uncle's house once and found in closet medals the Silver Star, the Congressional.medal of honor, that step grandfather was full bird Colonel Ralph Gezelman.

[@seanburns4168]

@Brad Watson if Oliver Cromwell had gone to the Americas.History as we know it ? Would have been very different. He was prevented from going. The United States Constitution, and the Baron Von Montesquieu philosophy of Government that it was based on.. was partially designed to prevent someone like Oliver Cromwell from gaining power.

[@seanburns4168]

In the past I had compared Donald Trump to Oliver Cromwell. To qoute Henry David Thereau, " The Best Government is one that governs least.". " Government is best when it governs not at all. Leave it to Donald Trump FOR WE WOULD HAVE NO GOVERNMENT OR A NATION FOR IT TO GOVERN IN.

[@seanburns4168]

@Brad Watson I did not know I had offended anyone. I never told any to lies about your family. I don't even know your family. So why would I be lying about people I don't know?

[@kevincody8391]

​@BradWatsonMiamithe first time my father flew into Bucharest Romania he peed in a Roman trench. the next year there was a urinal bolted to the wall that drained into the Roman trench. My Dad was a man of many amazing accomplishments

[@irrationalmale]

Ike had more brains than the last 5 presidents combined

[@sasmac1829]

The interviewer in those days had sense to not interrupt in the middle of an answer

[@cm01]

His job was to show up, ask these men questions, record their responses, and present that to the American public. That is so far removed from the modern "journalism" landscape where the only objective is to editorialize narratives.

[@Ms2blackcats]

I was common sense and a thing called class . not in use today

[@FrankIsAlwaysRight]

This reporter, Harry Reasoner, is a complete pro.

[@Moose46316]

Two great Americans

[@Moose46316]

Eisenhower was a great general and president

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

They were absolutely correct about Vietnam.

[@SenorZorrozzz]

They didn’t have insight into the bizarre manner in which Johnson was handling the war, nor did they know that he had no exit strategy, or definition of what victory meant!

[@mtc4him201]

I recall seeing an interview with Ike where he advised Kennedy to stay away from Viet Nam.

[@davidtrindle6473]

I think they did.

[@williameberhart3505]

LBJ was a maniac

[@CliffBronson1212]

Eisenhower = chilled leader ...all he saw, still relaxed, even keeled, chill 😎 😅

[@lyndoncmp5751]

Great Supreme Commander, but poor C-in-C of all ground forces. Prolonged the war with his broad front folly.

[@Yogi-Megan]

Man, President Ike sure does look sharp as he does when he was 21.

[@MJFisher76]

Harry Reasoner should have known then that Eisenhower preferred to be addressed as "General," not Mr. President.

[@garymorris1856]

Yes, you are correct. I heard a telephone conversation between Eisenhower and JFK, and Kennedy addressed him as "General,', and as you know, he preferred this.

[@MrTigre6]

In this video Harry Reasoner looks exactly like what he was, a naïve schoolboy, and GENS Eisenhower and Bradley politely treated him as such......

[@callenbeehn1867]

FullMetalJacket

[@willielittle9301]

I love both these great men and generals. However, I am now convinced that JFK lived and still was president at the time of this interview, he would have given the South Vietnamese military equipment and strategy much like the way president Eisenhower gave the French but JFK would not have committed nearly 300,000 American troops in Vietnam like president Johnson felt compelled to do which resulted in 58,000 plus casualties, domestic violence and unrest, and the loss of the war and the wounding of our reputation and standing in the world.

[@lebeautymarq8834]

JFK wanted to withdraw American troops from Vietnam. That's the reason they had him killed.

[@user-qg2uf8jp3h]

The Eisenhower of this interview (1967) is vigorously a gung-ho war machine hawk , different from his 1960 farewell speech abount his serious concerns with the then growing absolute power of the Military Industrial Complex. Why changed ?

[@08jag81]

Nothing. Listen to the whole speech he made in 1960. Also he said he did not use the term "hawk" or "dove" because it really takes away from the reason for intervening.

[@carpetfarmer]

I like how they're both "in step" at the begining

[@jahblessin3996]

Wish Ike was still president

[@huntingthekaiser6490]

I surprised that these two sages are voicing the party line. Over a half century later we have the perspective of nitpicking their cliches.

[@johndavila9190]

It's nice to hear Ike speak so well and answer the questions so intelligently! Unlike Palin 'In what respect Charlie" "All of them"

[@paulevans3674]

Good examples of leadership......

[@richardmiranda640]

First thing that struck me was, those generals are living

[@kathrynpustka3539]

My son is best friends with Bradley’s great great great grandson. He was named after him also. Very cool. They met at BCT and at AIT.

[@kevincody8391]

and that makes you Bat shit crazy to even post. I went to Ft Benning school for boys and didn't flunk. I jumped out of a perfectly fine airplane and didn't make a grease stain. Aim higher and get back to us later. Launch, don't parachute

[@paulaharrington4325]

It would’ve been really interesting to hear President Eisenhower and general Bradley open up and tell them how they truthful .

[@RuleofFive]

It's very odd to hear Bradley talk about the "good things" of the Vietnam War not being mentioned in the press. For context this interview was conducted 2 months before the Tet Offensive in Vietnam. Things were not going well at this time. We just didn't realize it until Tet.

[@08jag81]

Tet Offensive was a US/South Vietnam victory, it was a last atempt by the Viet Cong to gain ground after that the VC were no longer a force at all and the North Vietnamese army moved in. The media did not show it for what it was.

[@RuleofFive]

@@08jag81 We were supporting a corrupt South Vietnamese government. There were: 1. 2 million Vietnamese civilians killed 2. 1.1 million North Vietnamese soldiers killed. 3. 250,000 South Vietnamese soldiers were killed 4. 58,000 US servicemen and women were killed. 5. Vietnam was the most heavily bombed country in history. 6. More than 6.1 million tons of bombs were dropped 7. 20 million gallons of herbicides were dumped to defoliate and wiped out 5 million acres of forest and 500,000 acres of farmland 8. We spent about $1 trillion dollars (adjusted for inflation) Vietnam was a war that was ill conceived brutal and tragic. What Tet exposed was the lies that Westmoreland was telling Johnson and Johnson was telling the American public about the success of the war effort. It was after Tet that Westmoreland asked for an addition 206,000 troops for the war. That doesn't look like a "victory" to me.

[@08jag81]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/n5KodKSjgr6nrq8

[@johnburns4017]

@@08jag81 It scythed right though US lines all over the South, even getting into Saigon. A rag tag people's army.

[@johnburns4017]

Tet: kzbin.info/www/bejne/oaC9f593fJKMiqM

[@tbarn9]

Imagine a president speaking this intelligently today

[@aland7236]

General Eisenhower delivers the real meat and potatoes right in the middle of this interview. In short, Hindsight is always 20/20.

[@kinghenryxl1747]

Eisenhower would've been a very successful lawyer. LOL. RIP General

[@retroguy9494]

What gentlemen! Overcoats, hats and suits. And in 1967 at that! Today if they interviewed retired 4 star generals (there have been no 5 stars since Bradley) most likely it would be jeans and a hoodie! Bradley was the man! Married a woman almost 30 years younger than him!

[@paratrooper629]

His 2d wife. His 1st died 6 months or so earlier.

[@joeswanson733]

well that's not true if you see interviews with 4 star generals today you typically see them in suits.

[@Mike-01234]

I'm sure they had a public opinion and a private one about Vietnam.

[@spydude38]

I'm sure both wished they had been able to turn George Patton loose on the Russians at the end of WWII. Much of what Eisenhower dealt with as President and afterward is the result of the Soviet Union being able to control all of Eastern Europe. Those countries would have to endure half a century of Communist domination before they became free.

[@Mike-01234]

@@spydude38 I don't agree while the Soviets were always going to be a problem there was no justification to attack them. America would have been no different than Nazi Germany would not have been supported by the American people.

[@jimdellavecchia4594]

Harry was correct in the beginning when he said Sicily, not Italy. Two distinctly different places

[@kevincody8391]

You are parsing hairs here, and you know it; inviting trolls that you enjoy toying with, they tire out and you feel victorious. I would be happy to be educated and learn. when you lead, Not Lead, the way you do; not possible. You are wasting your energy and I suspect me also.

[@何志强-b7y]

Bradley was close ally of LBJ who never asked the advice of Eisenhower.

[@michaelsherman6492]

I remember Regan’s first inauguration. Omar Bradley was there, being pushed in a wheel chair after it was over. To me it was a poignant moment and picture.

[@allencollins6031]

Is that the set of All in the Family? Where's Archie?

[@peequod]

Compare these men to General Thoroughly Modern Milley of today.

[@exsappermadman25055]

"The doctor said I had bone spurs, I asked him to cut them off with a wood saw"......

[@billisaac326]

I thought he told you only comment when you've got something interesting/relevant otherwise zip it.

[@exsappermadman25055]

@@billisaac326 By those rules you should delete your account, dung beetle.....

[@billisaac326]

@@exsappermadman25055 Zip it.

[@exsappermadman25055]

@@billisaac326 Yes Dad....

[@exsappermadman25055]

@@billisaac326 Fuck off kid.....

[@babyboomer9560]

1968 fort Lewis Washington . During ROTC boot camp I saw graffiti on sides of many of the post building against the war. FTA was on many of them.

[@shawnprivate5322]

Greatest general evr possibly Brad was

[@lyndoncmp5751]

You must be joking. Montgomery had to come down and sort his Ardennes mess out for him when Bradley dithered and failed to get a grip of the situation. Eisenhower turned to Montgomery to sort it out.

[@shawnprivate5322]

@@lyndoncmp5751 😂 u better learn history and contributions of the men before you reply

[@lyndoncmp5751]

@@shawnprivate5322 I know my history. Clearly you don't if you think Bradley was possibly the greatest general ever. That's a hilarious statement 😂

[@Prfdt3]

Sharp as a tack.

[@nisidola1576]

Two great generals and great leaders. Unfortunately they don't know the bizarre manor in which Johnson is managing the Vietnam war.

[@christschool]

5 days after I was born!

[@KLUJICS]

Love Gen and President Eisenhower. I would’ve voted for him. Unfortunately, like today, he let military politics influence many of his decisions. I respect Gen Omar Bradley. The man behind both these men, in my opinion, was Gen George S. Patton. Like him or love him, I thank God every day for Gen Patton. He was truly the right man, right place, and right time. There were two military mistakes made during WW2 and Korea. Patton should’ve been allowed to attack Russia. This led to the problem with Korea. MacArthur should’ve been allowed to cross the 38th parallel to push Communism out of of Korea. We would not have the issues we have today. Truman had a Napoleon complex against MacArthur and decided to let his personal politics create the present day issues with N Korea and Kim Jong-il. I will also add that Gen MacArthur warned America NOT to fight a ground war with SE Asia, ie. Vietnam. Kennedy had to learn and then Johnson escalated Vietnam. But, again, had Patton defeated the Russians and MacArthur crossed the 38th parallel, I always wonder how the world would be different. Here we are now with Putin and N. Korea. America was stronger than ever at the end of the WW2. Russia was weak after fighting the Germans on the Russian front. Patton could’ve finished the job. But Ike had enough and decided he wanted to be POTUS. He knew the war would elect him POTUS. Sorry, Bradley was NOT the general of Patton’s tactical genius. I am convinced the reason Ike did not simply relieve Patton or fire him, was because Patton was too strategic. They all knew it too. Again, thank God for Gen George S. Patton or I don’t think the war would’ve ended with victory over Germany. Please don’t tell me Gen Bradley was instrumental. Patton made Bradley and Bradley’s West Point class was the only reason he was even part of Ike’s staff. Bradley was a”yes-man” for Ike.

[@Idahoguy10157]

As President Eisenhower refused to send American forces into Indochina back in the 1950’s

[@marcosmelendez09]

George Patton is missing there. Too bad what happened to him

[@marissasf7196]

What happened

[@marissasf7196]

@George Washington the US government is responsible for so much evil

[@operdiaspiddle68]

Endless war is a money maker

[@paddle_shift]

Why were they at Archie Bunkers houser?

[@matthewmiller9526]

That house in Gettysburg is now a museum. It is on land that Lee’s army staged the attack now known as Picketts Charge.

[@alexbrown6889]

Put this conversation side by side with one of Biden and Harris. What a contrast!

[@yossarianmnichols9641]

The US did agree to elections when Ike was President but the US undermined the implementation and no election was held. They knew Ho would win in a landslide. He had been working on independence from the French since 1919. He was very popular in the South outside of the major cities. Remember the US funded the French military to fight the Viet Minh and the French withdrew without much effort. This was all documented by the Rand study which was printed word for word in the Pentagon papers. Other than that I am still a big fan of Ike. George C. Marshall was quoted as saying the US should never fight a land war in Asia. He was the guy that gave Ike the job that made him famous, Supreme Commander of the European theater. A dictator will fight a war until the last man in his army is dead. A democracy will fight it until the people vote otherwise.

[@craftingpeople7097]

Bradley the brains and eisenhower the diplomat

[@steveconrad8857]

Be very nice of one of those people said why the hell are we in Vietnam leave those poor people alone

[@williambecker6187]

Because of the frence

[@kyhber1]

Five star General Ike and never once ever ! Action ..

[@08jag81]

Not for a lack of trying, he volunteered to go to France when the US entered WWI. And received a DSM for service during WWI.

[@spydude38]

@@08jag81 Patton and Eisenhower were neighbors at Camp Meade. Then Patton was sent to fight in Europe and Eisenhower was sent to stand up the first tank training school at Camp Colt which was located on the same field where Pickett's Charge took place in the Civil War. Eisenhower's home was in Gettysburg as seen in the interview.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

Hurtgen Forest? Lorraine? Ardennes retreat. These poor decisions by Eisenhower/Bradley prolonged the war and caused 200,000 American casualties.

[@allencollins6031]

Ya know, I saw a couple of documentaries on Hurtgen. And looking at map of Zigfried Line, all I could think of was why? Why stay north and fight in that forest when they could just continue to push west south of it? Why get bogged down in there? I don't know.

[@CharlesVaughn-bm9gq]

Exactly. But how much can that be due to the fortunes of war. In other words, you can’t be sure what the other side will do. In a football game your offense doesn’t score on every possession. The other side counter punches.

[@robbrobertson8545]

You werent there as Ike said

[@genegleason4987]

Reading a book about operation market garden , Eisenhower let Montgomery run all over him ,allowing market garden to go forward . Montgomery should have been relieved of command for insolence and insubordination.Bradley refused to use shipping space for winter uniforms in the summer of 44 resulting in American soldiers going without proper winter gear during the coldest winter in Europe in 50 years . Not impressed with either one of them

[@marcob.7801]

They may have had class but Eisenhower (whom does ALL the talking, BTW) was obviously wrong OR had a great deal of "military industrial stock!" Despite his famous speech, he did indeed, sell out after having gone to the area and declared it "unwinnable!"

[@聯豐科]

Mac Arthur is a lendary

[@rodolfobulos3147]

Good US Commander General of the Allied Forces and better US President of the american population. If US President Eisenhower still alive, The US Government and the American people, had no suffering and problem in the US upper Hemisphere

[@matrox]

Ike was cool.

[@michae8jackson378]

It should only have Ike's name in this Bradley is only asked to agree w Ike once.....

[@markdony1770]

Michael Jackson Bradley gets a question in this right after. Besides, in part two Bradley is spoken to more.

[@johnburns4017]

Lieutenant General Bodo Zimmerman, Chief of Operations, German Army Group D, said that had the strategy of Montgomery succeeded in the autumn of 1944, there would have been no need to fight for the West Wall, not for the central and upper Rhine, all of 24 which would have fallen automatically. Indeed, had Monty's idea for a 40 division concentrated thrust towards the Ruhr been accepted by Eisenhower instead of messing about in the Lorraine, Alsace, Vosges etc, it would have all been over for the Germans in the west. _"The best course of the Allies would have been to concentrate a really strong striking force with which to break through past Aachen to the Ruhr area. Germany's strength is in the north. South Germany was a side issue. He who holds northern Germany holds Germany. Such a break-through, coupled with air domination, would have torn in pieces the weak German front and ended the war. Berlin and Prague would have been occupied ahead of the Russians. There were no German forces behind the Rhine, and at the end of August our front was wide open. There was the possibility of an operational break-through in the Aachen area, in September. This would have facilitated a rapid conquest of the Ruhr and a quicker advance on Berlin._ _By turning the forces from the Aachen area sharply northward, the German 15th and1st Parachute Armies could have been pinned against the estuaries of the Mass and the Rhine. They could not have escaped eastwards into Germany."_ - Gunther Blumentritt in, _The Other Side Of The Hill_ by Liddell Hart

[@markpaul8178]

John,the port of Antwerp was not taken until late Sept ,early oct therefore we could not be supplied from there.The allies were still running the red ball express from Normandy.Secondly,Eisenhower didn't want to build up and attack in one location because the Germans could mass and direct their fire on such a small front.Rather he wanted to attack on 4 fronts and keep the Germans guessing as to which army had the most buildup and equipment .It did prolong the war but itost certainly saved lives.Gen Hodges sould have been realieved of command for the actions he took in the Hurdgren Forrest.Sending men to their deaths for no gain.

[@johnburns4017]

@@markpaul8178 The Port of Antwerp was taken 1 September 1944 by British forces. The approaches clearing was delayed by Eisenhower. As I posted, the Germans thought otherwise - that a full blooded 40 division thrust would have walked all over them. It would have been too big to resist. Eisenhower, a colonel only a few years previously, didn't have much of a clue. Montgomery to Alan Brooke.. _"If we want the war to end within any reasonable period you have to get Eisenhower’s hand taken off the land battle. I regret to say that in my opinion he just doesn’t know what he is doing._ Montgomery wrote of Eisenhower and his ridiculous broad-front strategy on 22 January 1945: _“I fear that the old snags of indecision and vacillation and refusal to consider the military problem fairly and squarely are coming to the front again . . . The real trouble is that there is no control and the three army groups are each intent on their own affairs. Patton today issued a stirring order to Third Army, saying the next step would be Cologne . . . One has to preserve a sense of humour these days, otherwise one would go mad.”_ Alanbrooke wrote in his diary about Eisenhower: _“At the end of this morning's C.O.S. [Chief of Staff] meeting I put before the committee my views on the very unsatisfactory state of affairs in France, with no one running the land battle. Eisenhower, though supposed to be doing so, is on the golf links at Rheims_ *_- entirely detached and taking practically no part in running of the war._* _Matters got so bad lately that a deputation of Whiteley, Bedell Smith and a few others went up to tell him that he must get down to it and RUN the war, which he said he would."_ _"We discussed the advisability of getting Marshall to come out to discuss the matter, but we are doubtful if he would appreciate the situation. Finally decided that I am to see the P.M. to discuss the situation with him.”_ _"November 28th I went to see the P.M. I told him I was very worried."_ Alan Brooke described in his daily diary that American generals Eisenhower and Marshall as poor strategists, when they were in jobs were strategy mattered. Brooke wrote to Montgomery about his talks with Eisenhower, _“it is equally clear that Ike has the very vaguest conception of war!”_

[@markpaul8178]

@@johnburns4017 John,the Canadians took the port of Antwerp.

[@markpaul8178]

The British might have been there,but Canadians did capture it.You are right about the outcome though.Esienhower was over cautious and didn't want to attack on a narrow front,which yes,was a mistake.

[@johnburns4017]

@@markpaul8178 The British forces took the port of Antwerp - XXX Corps. _the 11th Armoured Division entered Antwerp. Ignoring the lure of Brussels and waving aside the crowds that blocked their path, Pip Robert’s division entered the port against light opposition to find it virtually undamaged._ - Battle for the Rhine by Neillands. Predominately Canadians cleared the Scheldt. The Canadians on breaking out of Normandy hugged the Channel coast clearing the towns chasing the German 15th Army, while British forces went straight ahead. Montgomery set the end of the Normandy operation, when they would cross the Seine, as D-Day plus 90 in the planning. On that day British forces were about to take Antwerp with US forces in eastern France.

[@catherinefloydlewis5465]

He helped create the United nations.

[@johnburns4017]

I will let the Germans have the first say on the Bulge: *General Hasso von Manteuffel:* _‘The operations of the American First Army had developed into a series of individual holding actions. Montgomery's contribution to restoring the situation was that he turned a series of isolated actions into a coherent battle fought according to a clear and definite plan. It was his refusal to engage in premature and piecemeal counter-attacks which enabled the Americans to gather their reserves and frustrate the German attempts to extend their breakthrough’._ By November 1944, British SHEAF officer, Strong, noted that there was a possibility of a German counter-offensive in the Ardennes or the Vosges. Strong went to personally warn Bradley at his HQ, who said, _"let 'em come"._ Montgomery on hearing of the attack _immediately,_ without consulting Eisenhower, took British forces to the Meuse to prevent any German forces from making a bridgehead, securing the rear. He was prepared to halt their advance and attack them. This was while Eisenhower and Bradley were doing nothing. _even by 19 December,_ *_three days_* _into the offensive, no overall plan had emerged from 12th Army Group or SHAEF, other than the decision to send Patton’s forces north to Bastogne. Overall, the Ardennes battle was in urgent need of grip. General Hodges had yet to see Bradley or receive more than the sketchiest orders from his Army Group commander._ - Neillands, Robin. The Battle for the Rhine 1944 On 20 December, Montgomery had sent a signal to Alanbrooke regarding the US forces: _"Not good... definite lack of grip and control. I have heard_ *_nothing_* _from Ike or Bradley and had no orders or requests of any sort. My own opinion is that the American forces have been cut in half and the Germans can reach the Meuse at Namur without opposition."_ Omar Bradley, commander of the 12th Army Group, did very little: *16 Dec,* the first day, for 12 hours did *nothing.* *16 Dec,* after 12 hours, he sent two armoured divisions from the flanking Ninth and Third Armies. *17 Dec,* after 24 Hours, he then called in two US airborne divisions from Champagne. *18 Dec,* he ordered Patton to halt his pending offensive in the Saar. *18 Dec,* he had still not established contact with the First Army, while Monty had. *19 Dec,* he withdrew divisions from the Aachen front to shore up the Ardennes. *19 Dec,* he had still not produced an overall defensive plan. *19 Dec,* the Supreme Commander intervened directly late in the day. *20 Dec,* Eisenhower telephoned Montgomery telling him to take command of the US First and Ninth Armies While all this dillying by Bradley was going on, German armies were pounding forward into his lines. *Bradley should have been fired.* Hodges ran away from his command post. British officer Whiteley & American officer Betts of SHEAF visited the U.S. First Army HQ after the German attack, seeing the shambles. Strong, Whiteley, and Betts recommended that command of the armies north of the Ardennes be transferred from Bradley to Montgomery. Unfortunately only the two British officers approached Beddel Smith of their recommendations, who immediately fired the pair, claiming it was a nationalistic thing. The next morning, Beddel Smith apologized seeing the three were right, recommending to Eisenhower to bring in Monty. During the Battle of the Bulge Eisenhower was stuck self imprisoned in his HQ in des-res Versailles near Paris in fear of German paratroopers wearing US uniforms with the objective to kill allied generals. He had remained locked up more than 30 days without sending a single message or order to Montgomery, and that is when he thought he was doing _ground control_ of the campaign, when in effect Montgomery was in control as two US armies had to be put under his control after the German attack, the US First and Ninth armies. Coningham of the RAF had to take control of US air force units. The Ninth stayed under Monty's control until the end of the war, just about. And yet biased American authors such as Stephen Ambrose said that Eisenhower took control of the Bulge and made the battle _his_ veneering it as an all American victory. Ambrose completely falsified history. The only thing Eisenhower did was tell Monty to get control of two out of control US armies, tell the US 101st to go to Bastogne (who were in northern France after the buffer Market Garden was created) and men under Bradley to counterattack. That is it. At the end of the Bulge would you believe it, Eisenhower gave Bradley an award.

[@LarryThacker-c9v]

We never should have been involved in Vietnam, Ike was a good domestic president but his foreign policy, especially the collaboration with Dulles and the CIA was not something he or the country should be proud of.

[@johnburns4017]

Eisenhower did not understand the strategy in Normandy. Brooke's letter to Monty on Eisenhower: _My dear Monty_ _The trouble between you and the P.M. has been satisfactorily settler for the present, but the other trouble I spoke to you about is looming large still and wants watching very carefully._ _Ike lunched with P.M. again this week and as a result I was sent for by P.M. and told that Ike was worried at the outlook taken by the American Press that the British were not taking their share of the fighting and of the casualties. There seems to be more in it than that and Ike himself seemed to consider that the British Army could and should be more offensive. The P.M. asked me to meet Ike at dinner with him which I did last night, Beddel was there also._ _It is quite clear that Ike considers that Dempsey should be doing more than he does;_ *_it is equally clear that Ike has the very vaguest conception of war!_* _I drew attention to what your basic strategy had been, i.e., to hold with your left and draw the Germans onto the flank while you pushed with your right [US armies]. I explained how in my mind this conception was being carried out, that the bulk of the armour had continuously been kept against the British._ _He could not refute these arguments, and then asked whether I did not consider that we were in a position to launch major offensives on each Army front simultaneously. I told him that in view of the fact that the German density in Normandy is 2 ½ times that on the Russian front, whilst our superiority in strength was only in the nature of some 25% as compared to 300% on the Russian superiority on the Eastern front, I did not consider that we were in a position to launch an all out offensive along the whole front. Such a procedure would definitely not fit in with our strategy of opening up Brest by swinging forward Western Flank._ -Hamilton, Nigel. _Monty. Master of the Battlefield, 1942-1944_

[@OUigot]

Many facts showed Eisenhower wasn't a battlefield General, he was in his position as the mediator between the British and Americans. His job was political.

[@johnburns4017]

@@OUigot Monty was ground forces commander in Normandy. It then moved over to Ike, who then had to do two jobs. The ground forces command Eisenhower was totally unsuited for. The political aspect he was perfect. His broad-front strategy highlighted how poor he was at the ground forces job. Then after the Bulge debacle it was plainly obvious he was unsuited. Monty put it in writing that he should hand over the ground forces job to him, after Monty had to take control of two shambolic US armies. Monty saved the US's rear ends at the Bulge, then jealous and sniping US generals wanted him out because he made them look like they were - *amateurs.* Monty insisted on all ground forces given back to him to ensure victory and save lives - US armies were wasting the lives of their men like crazy. _"The next day, 29th December, I sent Eisenhower the following letter:_ _“My dear Ike,_ _1. It was very pleasant to see you again yesterday and to have a talk on the battle situation._ _2. I would like to refer to the matter of operational control of all forces engaged in the northern thrust towards the Ruhr, i.e. 12 and 21 Army Groups. I think we want to be careful, because_ *_we have had one very definite failure_* _when we tried to produce a formula that would meet this case; that was the formula produced in SHAEF FWD 15510 dated 23-9-44, which formula very definitely did not work._ _3. When you and Bradley and myself met at Maastricht on 7 December, it was very clear to me that Bradley opposed any idea that I should have operational control over his Army Group; so I did not then pursue the subject. I therefore consider that it will be necessary for you to be very firm on the subject, and any loosely worded statement will be quite useless._ _4. I consider that if you merely use the word ‘co-ordination’ it will not work. The person designated by you must have powers of operational direction and control of the operations that will follow on your directive._ _5. I would say that your directive will assign tasks and objectives to the two Army Groups, allot boundaries, and so on. Thereafter preparations are made and battle is joined._ *_It is then that one commander must have powers to direct and control the operations; you cannot possibly do it yourself,_* _and so you would have to nominate someone else._ _6. I suggest that your directive should finish with this sentence:_ *_‘12 and 21 Army Groups will develop operations in accordance with the above instructions. From now onwards full operational direction, control, and co-ordination of these operations is vested in the C.-in-C. 21 Army Group,_* _subject to such instructions as may be issued by the Supreme Commander from time to time’_ _7. I put this matter up to you again only because I am so anxious not to have_ *_another failure._* _I am absolutely convinced that the key to success lies in:__(a) all available offensive power being assigned to the northern line of advance to the Ruhr;_ _(b) a sound set-up for command, and this implies_ *_one man directing and controlling the whole tactical battle on the northern thrust._*___I am certain that if we do not comply with these two basic conditions, then we will_ *_fail again._* _8. I would be grateful if you would not mention to Bradley the point I have referred to in para. 3. I would not like him to think that I remembered that point and had brought it up._ _Yours always, and your very devoted friend Monty"_ - Memoirs of Field-Marshal Montgomery, Montgomery of Alamein. The letter infuriated US generals because Monty pointed out they had a big *failure,* and that he should rightly be given back control of all ground armies as he saved the day at the Bulge having to take control of two shambolic US armies, and brought in Normandy ahead of schedule with 22% less casualties than predicted. Monty wanted to be in control of all ground forces dropping the broad-front. The letter clearly states that.

[@08jag81]

From 1920, Eisenhower served under a succession of talented generals - Fox Conner, John J. Pershing, Douglas MacArthur and George Marshall. He first became executive officer to General Conner in the Panama Canal Zone, where he served until 1924. Under Conner's tutelage, he studied military history and theory (including Carl von Clausewitz's On War), and later cited Conner's enormous influence on his military thinking, saying in 1962 that "Fox Conner was the ablest man I ever knew." Conner's comment on Eisenhower was, "[He] is one of the most capable, efficient and loyal officers I have ever met." On Conner's recommendation, in 1925-26 he attended the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, where he graduated first in a class of 245 officers.

[@johnburns4017]

@@08jag81 Eisenhower should have been removed from the ground forces job, along with Hodges and Bradley after the Bulge debacle. Top US generals were incompetent.

[@08jag81]

Bradley was cut off from his command post in the "bulge". And the debacle of 1940?

[@Bartonfink3434]

I like Ike!

[@chrismad1344]

PATTON BEST EVER

[@MapleSyrupPoet]

Should have stayed clear of Vietnam ...no dis-respect meant ...but the terrain, and distance away, should have made, "Bells go off" ...other ways to fight wars, then way it went

[@shaunsteele4968]

You failed to close the Gap. Then you told Patton to go back to Bed. We had won. Yep. There's going to he critics.

[@TheJeremyseattle]

They seem very sold on the meat grinder at this point. I wonder why the war was fought so badly on purpose.

[@JokersAce0]

Omar Bradley didn't say anything lol

[@jaysoper3974]

Sad to see Ike nervously trying to defend an indefensible war like Vietnam

[@panagdimi]

Eisenhower and Bradley: Two of the most overrated generals in the history of the United States. Yet mainstream media portray them as the best of the best while at the same time disparage monumental characters like generals Patton and MacArthur.

[@elec174]

Bradley was indeed overrated, Bradley at a party in Paris was warned of a German attack which became known as the Battle of the Bulge, he choose to ignore this threat as did intelligence. He was slow in summoning Gen. Patton and Montgomery to the aid of the pinned down G.I.s. I am not saying that he was fully to blame for the high casualties, but prompt action on his part could have saved many lives.

[@vesislavdyulgerov4005]

And who killed Paton?

[@shawnmichaelduncan5951]

Russians. They knew he would stopped spread of communism in Europe.

[@GG-un7hj]

The Slavs obviously.

[@shawnprivate5322]

Ike was full of sit,Brad knewnut,knew it, did MacArthur

[@scottconlon5124]

They sound like PUTIN

[@catherinefloydlewis5465]

And nato

[@abk4202020]

first comment

[@mylau9863]

They all knew that war had nothing to do with communism, but only against Freemasonry.

[@davido1953]

?

[@joeiiiful]

No, it was about Nationalism, not Communism. Vietnam wanted to be undivided as a nation. The 17th parallel was the problem that shouldn't have happened and the elections were canceled because it was clear that "north Vietnam" would have easily won the election and United the country. So many mistakes were made culminating in over 58,000 American lives lost. I served two years in Vietnam and I can say that we never conducted the war properly.

[@parkpeterk]

Propaganda preachers.

[@bretwahlberg1146]

Two of the worse General’s ever !!!!

[@paratrooper629]

Thanks for posting. BTW- Bradley was way overrated.

[@chuckmartin935]

Damn- if we only had these men back today!

[@chuckmartin935]

Damn- if we only had these men back today!

[@AconservativeThought]

There still around.....trust me, They will come out of the woodworks when it is absolutely needed. Absolute necessity is the main ingredient that makes men like that. Keep in mind we literally let the cities of great Brittian get completely and utterly destroyed and still diddn't do anything about it. Our military force was damnn DAMN small. The smallest it had been in the 1900's and never returned to that size again until Obamas second term. Actually was llower if I remember correctly. Look what is going on in the world.....174,000 in 1939 to 8million + by 1945 out of a country that had roughly 150 million people at the time.