H.W. Brands: "The General vs. The President"

At the dawn of a new era in American history, President Harry S. Truman struggled with unfavorable public opinion in response to growing concerns about the Soviet Union and a challenging economic transition following World War II. For our embattled 33rd president, the future appeared complicated and uncertain.
In stark contrast to Truman, General Douglas MacArthur enjoyed immense popularity. His experiences in war led him to believe in the inevitability of a military showdown with communist countries. For this celebrated general, the future was easy to predict and urgent in its demands.
Distinguished historian H.W. Brands will discuss the conflict between these different men, a story that unfolded amid the difficulties of the Korean War and the hysteria of McCarthyism. His latest book, The General vs. the President: MacArthur and Truman at the Brink of Nuclear War, is sure to challenge those seeking to learn more about the relationship between two iconic figures of American life at midcentury.

[@mateuszmattias]

I've seen his presentations many times, and Goddamn, that man knows how to give a lecture.

[@jingyushi5857]

me too. I am not sure I think it is not only attractive in history, but attractive in other ways also. good professor

[@GH-oi2jf]

My favorite historian. I am always interested in his lectures.

[@willboudreau1187]

A delightful and engaging speaker.

[@johnferguson7235]

My father was on the ship heading out to the invasion of Japan when Truman dropped the A-bombs. The ship never sailed and the troops were disembarked and my father went to work at a veterans' hospital. He always said that Harry Truman was his favorite president. He would vote for Harry Truman twice in every election if they would let him.

[@redriver6541]

He saved a LOT of young men's lives when heade that decision. It's horrible it had to be done. But....don't start a fight unless you're willing to see it to fruition. I wonder how many more millions of Japanese lives would have been lost by carpet bombing, a blockade of the island (starvation and disease), or by an enormous force in the inevitable invasion.

[@chuckiedimes1466]

Great lecturer, walks the stage like a stand-up comedian.

[@CaminoAir]

Another excellent and enlightening lecture.

[@J.B24]

As any good history professor is, he's a good storyteller.

[@2012photograph]

A great program to watch

[@yankeegonesouth4973]

I listened to an entire lecture from Brands thinking it sounded similar to another personality, but I just couldn't place it. Then I stumbled across a Paul Harrell video. They are both from Oregon, and presumably from the same state region. Linguistic mystery solved!

[@pauleohl]

Such an interesting lecture and so few views.

[@charlessalmans4496]

Excellent lecture and excellent book. General Douglas MacArthur, both brilliant and flawed, was in 1950 one of America’s most admired figures. President Harry Truman, in contrast, probably had more critics than admirers and in any event was regarded as an “accidental president”. Both have been the subject of well-regarded biographies, but H.W. Brands wisely chooses to undertake a focused examination of the conflict arising between both men as war broke out in Korea. This was a confrontation that tested the executive powers of the President over the military under the Constitution and assumed historic importance because it occurred under circumstances under which nuclear weapons might be employed. Brands writes clearly and by examining the confrontation between Truman and MacArthur sheds light on the debate over the use of nuclear weapons in the immediate post-World War II period as well as dramatizing a general’s challenge to presidential authority. Fortunately, civilian control and judgement prevailed over a brilliant but flawed military hero.

[@nickjung7394]

Really interesting thanks very much.

[@askmartin2220]

I recently gotten interested in General Macarthur. I saw this video a few days ago with H.W.Brands. Today I was watching history Chanel about cars. I saw a gentleman talking looked like H .W.Brands I didn't see the name it U saw professor in Texas. Was this the same person or no?

[@JRobbySh]

He should look at the way that Grant turned on Andrew Johnson. He was quick to accept honors for his rollin the war, and I think he had his eye on the Presidency. Much of this had to do with his wife, whom he had earlier disappointed.

[@jadedamerican7342]

"The buck stops here" vs. "It's not my fault".Lovely man, what were you thinking? Mad doesn't begin to cover it.

[@texasforever7887]

Great lecture but I do question the comment about President Ford's moral's.

[@user-qm7nw7vd5s]

This guy totally misrepresents Douglas MacArthur’s keynote RNC 1952 speech (in another delivery of the same book tour talk). I just watched speech, unabridged. It is a BRILLIANT, warm and thoughtful speech, delivered with grace and power. MacArthur looks great out of uniform, strong, magnanimous. And contrary to misrepresentations made here, the speech did not fall flat, rather there was thunderous applause at nearly every pause through to the end. MacArthur, in his speech, specifically addresses the needs of the “common man,” reading a letter from laborer, whose day to day real wages have decreased, despite promises of “bread, land and peace” under the communist enthralled Roosevelt and Truman administrations. This lecturer is such a sneaky liar. He even tries to, in a typically underhanded manner, paint MacArthur as a dangerous dictator in waiting, suggesting he could have been the next Mussolini or Hitler, were he not stopped by the responsible leaders in power at the time, ie Democrats. Today, the word Democrat has morphed into a pseudonym for Communist, a process that MacArthur picked up on even back in 1952. Thankfully, with some effort, you can go to the source, hear MacArthur in his own words, to debunk the lies spread here.

[@EbayUsedGoods]

1:10:30 consider it done!

[@im1sickpup269]

Ha Ha .. my dad used to call MacArthur "Dugout Doug" too. When he talks about soldiers despising MacArthur.. he isn't kidding. I think my dad hated him more than he hated the Japanese.

[@JRobbySh]

He hardly knew the whole story. MacArthur’s forces took far fewer casualties than the men under Nimitiz. That is until the Philippines. But then they were liberating American territory, whom the Navy would have allowed to remain under Japanese rule till the end of the war.

[@Mac-nv2xs]

MacArthur wasn't wrong that the future was in Asia, not Europe. In many ways, he was a visionary. He saw the rise of communist China and perceived rightly that they would be a problem in the future. I never look at him as a bad General. Many of his contemporaries saw him as the greatest General of ww2. He was flawed and had an ego as most military commanders do. However, he was a force to be reckoned with on the battlefield. He would also share the risks his soldiers faced many times. He is directly responsible for the modern Japanese state, and many of his campaigns were nothing short of brilliant. He made mistakes like other generals did. However, it's also important to point out that he eventually found a way to bring about victory. I don't think Marshall would've ever put up with him if he didn't. I think MacArthur's legacy needs to be revisited. He was an American icon that needs his proper place in history. The good and the bad. We're lucky this man was alive in such an important time in human history.

[@roscomeon3965]

Nope. He was simply a wanna be dictator like Hitler. Used young men for his notoriety. They died for him. A pr scumbag. May he rot in hell

[@scottweaverphotovideo]

The irory of so much of this is incredible realizing this talk was given as the Trump admin was beginning. Someone that would demean his own generals in a manner unthinkable by Harry Truman.

[@glaslynx123]

MacArthur gave Shiro Ishi Immunity. Shiro Ishi tortured to death 10'000 Chinese civilian and POWs in despicable human experimentation . He gave him immunity for the information he had gained during his experiments on biological warfare. Ishi went to Maryland to advise on biological warfare. Disgusting

[@davidamble5375]

Loves to stroke his hair.

[@powerdriller4124]

MacArthur had many tRump traits, besides the narcissism, other was giving himself merits he never earned. MacArthur did not really have military merits. The Navy did most of the fight in the Pacific WWII. And he was a lousy strategist in the Korean War.

[@peckerwood6078]

A total lack of any meaningful insight into the persona of a great Warrior. I'm sorry but Mr. Brands is not the most interesting speaker I have ever listened to. Unfortunately, not even close. If flighty and difficult to follow is your interest then I suppose there might be something there but very little at that. Shallow insights with a narrow, passing and fleeting lack of context. If you're looking for a stand up venue then I suppose you could enjoy this obviously slanted view. Had listened to the Ranch episode on "Mr.Bills" book on US Grant which was so pitiful that I wanted to make some comments regarding how poorly related the character and cultural treatment of Grant as an American had been portrayed. For some reason the comments there were turned off. It would seem there were others who as well found the presentation badly done. To say that this is revisionism would give too much credit to presenter in that this would presume to suggest that there was a direction or theme to the talk but certainly that cannot be the case as there is none of either. A continuous diatribe of disjointed drivel. Both this and that on US Grant. Won't be listening to any more of what "Mr.Bill" has to relate. His assertion that there "has never been an administrator with the kind of power that MacArthur held in Japan" Illustrates the puddle deep field of reference which is being drawn upon. It might be best if "Mr. Bill" did some remedial reading on subjects like perhaps the Viceroy of India Lord Dufferin, former Governor General of Canada. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Hamilton-Temple-Blackwood,_1st_Marquess_of_Dufferin_and_Ava

[@GH-oi2jf]

What this means is: Brands doesn’t support your preconceived beliefs.

[@sassafras8677]

Agree, what a bunch of garbage, laughable, par for the course these days.

[@roscomeon3965]

Speaker is a Typical American bs. 20 minutes would have dealt with the subject less all the crap.