Didn’t a high ranking general get fired after the Tet Offensive? I can’t recall the guys name. Major embarrassment because reports were saying we had the war basically won. Then the VC launched the Tet Offensive and practically took over half of South Vietnam. Some of the heaviest fighting in the war was required to regain control in South Vietnam.
Charles Lee ordered a retreat during the Battle of Monmouth and was relieved when his troops ran into the advancing forces of Washington. He was latter court martialed and stripped of rank. Later still he became the villain of Assassin’s Creed 3.
Shelby Foote once remarked that “The Civil War had no villains, aside from slavery… and General McClellan.”
Obviously, this is hyperbole, as there were some truly villainous participants in the Civil War, and McClellan was not one of them. However, this is history’s verdict on McClellan.
If you’ve ever seen the movie Patton, Patton is portrayed constantly berating subordinates and threatening to relieve them from command, while Omar Bradley is portrayed as the understanding “G.I. General”. It should be noted that the movie was based on Omar Bradley’s memoirs, Omar Bradley was the lead military consultant on the film, and that Omar Bradley personally disliked Patton. In reality, Patton only relieved one general of his command, Orlando Ward, and only after warning him twice beforehand. On the other hand, Omar Bradley was quite sack happy with his subordinate generals, particularly during the Normandy campaign. He relieved Terry de la Mesa Allenof command of 1st Infantry Division after Sicily for disliking his command style; in Bradley’s words “Despite their [prodigious] talents as combat leaders, neither Terry Allen nor Brigadier General Theodore Roosevelt, the assistant division commander, possessed the instincts of a good disciplinarian. They looked upon discipline as an unwelcome crutch to be used by less able and personable commanders.”
In Normandy he relieved 5 of his divisional commanders, Jay W. MacKelvie from the 90th Infantry Division, Eugene M. Landrum from the 90th Infantry Division who he had replaced MacKelvie with, William C. McMahon from the 8th Infantry Division, Leroy H. Watson from the 3rd Armored Division, and Lloyd D. Brown from the 28th Infantry Division.
Here’s an interesting article on the phenomenon:
It gives a lot of 90th ID commanders who were relieved in 1944, and talks about how VERY few are actually relieved these days, and why that’s a problem.
I nominate Lloyd Fredendall:
[QUOTE=wikipedia]
During the advance into Tunisia, Fredendall used an entire engineer company of the 19th Engineer Regiment to build him a large, dug-in Corps headquarters bunker 70 miles (110 km) behind the front[…][4] An entire anti-aircraft battalion was emplaced to protect the headquarters.[…]. General Omar N. Bradley called the headquarters “an embarrassment to every American soldier,” […]
Fredendall rarely visited the front lines, and had a habit of disregarding advice from commanders who had been farther forward and had actually reconnoitered the terrain.[6] He split up units and scattered them widely,[7] and at critical defense points had positioned (against advice) U.S. Army forces too far apart for mutual support or effective employment of artillery
During the Battle of the Kasserine Pass, General Ernest Harmon was sent by Eisenhower to report on the fighting, […] and to determine if Fredendall or his 1st Armored Division commander, Orlando Ward, should be replaced.[11] Harmon thus had the opportunity to observe Fredendall in action as commander of the US Army’s II Corps, as well as his superior, the British General Kenneth Anderson. Harmon noticed that the two generals rarely saw each other, and failed to properly coordinate and integrate forces under their command. Fredendall was barely on speaking terms with General Ward, whom he had deliberately left out of operational meetings after Ward had repeatedly protested the separation of his command into weaker ‘penny packet’ forces distributed across various sectors of the front.[2][12]
Allied forces were bereft of air support during critical attacks, and were frequently positioned by the senior command in positions where they could not offer mutual support to each other. Subordinates later recalled their utter confusion at being handed conflicting orders, not knowing which general to obey - Anderson, or Fredendall.
While interviewing field commanders, Harmon received an earful of criticism over what many Allied officers viewed as a cowardly, confused, and out-of-touch command. Noting that Fredendall seemed out-of-touch (and at one point, intoxicated), he requested and received permission to go to the front and intervene where necessary to shore up Allied defenses.[13]
On 5 March 1943, after the American rout at Kasserine Pass, Eisenhower visited II Corps headquarters and conferred with Bradley. Eisenhower asked “What do you think of the command here?” Bradley’s response was “It’s pretty bad. I’ve talked to all the division commanders. To a man they’ve lost confidence in Fredendall as the corps commander.”
The British general Harold Alexander informed Eisenhower that he would welcome a replacement for Fredendall.[…] On 6 March 1943, at Eisenhower’s direction, George S. Patton replaced Fredendall as commander of II Corps. […]only a week later, after an initial inspection of his new command [Patton said]: “I cannot see what Fredendall did to justify his existence.”[18]
Fredendall was the first of seven American corps commanders in World War II to be “relieved of command”
[/QUOTE]
I just looked it up. General Westmoreland paid the price for Tet
Yes that is from Tom Ricks’ book that I mentioned in post #4. That’s an article he wrote which he tried to sum up some of his points in short form.
Yeah, well he was a notorious Southern sympathizer, and he was a big fan of just about the single most evil villain of the Civil war- Nathan Forrest.
There’s also a HUGE difference between ‘relieved of command’ and “fired” . Most of the Generals that Bradley “fired” kept their rank and just lost their current command- some retired most went back to desk jobs. Westmoreland got a slightly better deal, he was ‘kicked upstairs’ which is still a minor disgrace but a promotion none-the-less.
Not all of these fit the criteria of the OP’s request, but Maj. Gen. Phil Sheridan relieved this guy of command for slowness in the face of the enemy:
President Carter fired this guy for criticizing U.S. military policy in South Korea:
Then-SecDef Cheney fired this guy for blabbing to the press:
President Obama fired this guy, also for blabbing to the press:
Lincoln’s letter to the newly-promoted Maj. Gen. Hooker is well worth a read: Abraham Lincoln's Letter to Major General Joseph Hooker
Grant famously fired McClernand (not to be confused with McClellan) of course, months and months after McClernand deserved to be fired but only when Grant had an absolutely rock-solid basis for it.
The dismissal of brigadier generals in wartime is not that uncommon a thing, historically speaking, but you usually don’t hear about those guys. That’s a rank (and two positions) BELOW the hapless Lloyd Fredendall, who was probably the worst professional soldier to attain general rank in the history of the United States, and most people haven’t even heard of Lloyd Fredendall.
Actually there was a strategy that probably would have worked. But neither Johnston or any other Confederate general would have used it.
They should have done what Sherman was doing - lay waste to the countryside - but done it before Sherman did it. Sherman had cut himself off from his supply lines and his army was living off the land and destroying everything it couldn’t use. But if Johnston had been willing to do the same thing in front of Sherman’s advance, then Sherman wouldn’t have had any supplies and would have had to retreat back to Tennessee.
The 90th was know as a problem formation. I have read that many of the British complaints about American soldiery was actually about the 90th, which was the division they saw most…usually messing up.