Admiral King was right about (Almost) everything-Episode 111
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 сер 2024
- In this week's episode, Bill and Seth discuss the enormous contributions of one of the lesser-known personalities of the Pacific War, Fleet Admiral Ernest J. King. Somewhat lost in the overall history of the Pacific War, King played a vital role in the war's planning, strategy and execution. Tune in to see what the team has to say about the forgotten Fleet Admiral.
#wwii #wwiihistory #ww2 #usnavy #usa #usarmy #medalofhonor #enterprise #aircraft #aircraftcarrier #cv6 #midway #wwii #wwiihistory #ww2 #worldwar2 #usnavy #usnavyseals #usmc #usmarines #saipan #usa #usarmy #aircraft #aircraftcarrier #battleship #battleships #ussenterprise #aircraftcarriers #guadalcanal #naval battles #unitedstatesnavy #marine #marineraiders #admiral
Retired Jarhead (US Marine) here.
While I like to think I know far more about the US Navy during WW2 then 95% of jarheads this series is dramatically expanding that knowledge .
Thanks! And keep up the good work.
Hey Crayon-Eater.
Everyone knows that the Marines are the smartest troops in the US, with the Airborne and MTN Division (Rangers), cause they are expected to do more with less.
May I suggest you enjoy some Drachinifel too? I think you will like it.
This was probably one of the most balanced views I have heard of the controversial Admiral King. Whatever one's opinion, I think most can agree that he was a very patriotic man, a true Naval Officer of the "Old school" who was looking out for the interests of the United States as well as the Navy. The fact that President Roosevelt had confidence in him, despite his cantankerous ways speaks volumes. He may have been an SOB, but he was the right SOB for the times IMHO. Very interesting discussion. I especially appreciated the Captain's "insider" viewpoints.
Delaying the beginning of convoying off the US East Coast was a serious mistake. It wasn't the only problem contributing to that painful time, but serious.
Great discussion. About the timing of Guadalcanal. It is true that the Americans were not ready. But by invading in August 1942, the Marines took the island initially at little cost and before the Japanese had completed the airstrip. Given that the battle for the island hinged on the airstrip, a good case can be made for acting when King did. In addition, the Guadalcanal action played a key role in the Australian victories in the Kokoda Trail and Milne Bay. The Japanese had to divert land forces planned for these operations to Guadalcanal. The Australians would have had a hard time if it were not for these diversions. All three of these actions have to be viewed as a whole.
And while you guys did a great job on assessing King, I think the most underappreciated of America's four-star warriors, I was surprised that you did not mention King's refusal to order Atlantic Seaboard convoys in 1942. I would have liked to have heard a discussion on this.
Agree
Both Guadalcanal and Port Moresby had to happen at the same time to split japanese forces and stretch the supply lines.
These campaigns ate into the "six to twelve months" that Yamamoto had calculated.
@@ricardokowalski1579 Midway was right at 6 months.
Once the Japanese had established an airfield at Guadalcanal the battle very likely could have been completely inverted. The USN would have been compelled to reopen communication with Australia at all costs. It could have been our naval and air assets being attrited during 1942 in favor of the Japanese. Japan would have held the unsinkable aircraft carrier.
@@haldorasgirson9463 Absolutely correct. And the critical process of attriitng the Japanese corps of extremely capable airmen would have been slowed.
Ditto on the rush to take Guadalcanal. What would have been the consequences if the Japanese had an operational airstrip on Guadalcanal at the time we tried to land an amphibious asualt?
Two well-educated, personable, articulate gentlemen sharing important history. Well done.
My dad, Sgt. James Gordon Richardson, was attached to Battery "D" AAA,Third Defense Battalion at Pearl Harbor during the attack. He said he was on his way to chapel at the shipyards when the attack began. The munitions for the 3" AA guns were on the ships. He said he took out his sidearm and began firing .I feel blessed to be able to listen to your podcasts. Thank you.
Thanks to your dad for his service.
@@stischer47I appreciate your thanks.
Nice to see a youtube channel that emphasizes the Pacific War for a change. Most Americans know little about that part of WW II
And even less about Germany's Eastern Front with the Soviet Union. That's where most of World War II's land war occurred.
Most Americans think only D-Day and 11 months later, Germany surrendered.
The Eastern Front lasted three years and 11 months.
The bug of military history bites even non-service amateurs, who eventually dig deeper into the grit, background and detail. My idea of an almost perfect example is Ian Toll's history of the Navy in the eastern pacific campaigns. This series is at the same level of authority, and I continually go back to pick the brains of the hosts on details I'm foggy on. There is no comparable series that covers the entire pacific war in such depth. Thank you and keep it up.
King also realized that any British interests in the pacific would necessarily have colonial overtones. Later this would become "self determination except east of Suez," a famous quote.
Even more lost in the entire history of the U.S. participation in the WW II is the Fleet Admiral who not only ranked King, but served as the highest ranking active-duty officer of the U.S. military - and who happened to be President Roosevelt's 'Chief of Staff': William D. Leahy. He stands beyond the precise remit of your 'unauthorized history' yet surely plays a role in it as well. It would be fascinating to see how you treat him.
Yes; and it was Leahy, not Stark as stated in the podcast, who was the fourth member (and chairman) of the JCS.
Mr. Guttmann, thanks for your comments, and I concur. I have in my home library, Witness to power : the life of Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy
by Henry H. Adams. It's an excellent read about the quiet Admiral in the background during WWII. I proudly served abroad the U.S.S. LEAHY (DLG-16), March of 70 to Aug of 71, Engineering Department. But the brief here on Admiral King is excellent and a great adjunct to books written about him. BRAVO ZULU to the OPs.
Leahy was dubbed the second most powerful man in USA during the period of WWII, since he has the president's eyes and ears and could influence his military decision during the war, although he was more of an advisor to the president rather than a supreme commander, he also agreed with FDR on arming the North Carolina class BBs with 9x16inch guns instead of 12x14inch guns. He travelled with FDR in numerous ocassions overseas to Allied conferences, meeting with his British and Soviet counterparts, also he was FDR's advisor for some time, replacing Harry Hopkins when he was unavailable or on sick leave. Even after FDR's death he advised Truman to not invade mainland Japan directly with naval and ground troops fearing for high casualties for US. Although he was criticized heavily for his stance during the Post War and early Cold War, he was regarded as one of the officers who had unusual yet vital role during height of WWII. Also he was the first flag officer to have reach the rank of five star admiral
@ramal5708 p
B
.igsalgi,: cc
@@ramal5708 Leahy refused to believe the Atomic Bomb would work until it did. He claimed once that as an expert on explosives it COULD NOT WORK.
I had a class in high school, The Naval and Military History of the United States. The teacher was a Mr. Bill Oxx. He said he was the youngest naval officer to serve in the Nuremberg trials. He was an interesting gentleman and I enjoyed that class. He would have enjoyed your discussions. ...I certainly do. I just liked and subbed to help push your content out to others. V/R, Steve
My understanding from reading Jonathon Parshall, is that Nimitz bascially had to sandbag King to get his to support to go to Midway. Not only that but Nimitz had to cut protocols to get the intelligence about the Midway attack, because once it came from DC, it was late, or washed.
Good discussion.
But if anyone wants a truly great overview of his career I recommend a video from Drachnifel.
Thorough view and goes over well about how he turned a third rate navy into a world dominating navy.
His subordinates Lee and Nimitz did him well too.
I very much enjoy Drachnifel.
@@UnauthorizedHistoryPacificWar I found this channel because of Drach.
Yep. Drach sent me here too.
I think King was also wrong about Frank Jack Fletcher. Yup, I'm one of the John Lundstrom disciples on that item, lol. (Lundstrom's "Black Shoe Carrier Admiral", btw, is a superb read not just for specifics on Fletcher himself, but in the process of telling that story, is itself an excellent discussion of the 1942 carrier war in general).
IMO a bit of larger context was missed while discussing King's qualification in aviation. Right around that time in the late 1920s, Congress passed a reasonable-enough law that naval aviation commands - including aircraft carriers and seaplane tenders - had to be commanded by naval aviators. Okay, fair enough, but there was one problem...naval aviation was still so new that there weren't yet any true career-long naval aviators actually senior enough in rank for these major commands, especially 30K-ish ton ships like Lexington and Saratoga. And there would not be for years. So there were a LOT of surface destroyer/battleship-type officers suddenly going through aviation training in mid/late career. Ernest King was part of that larger trend. It wasn't just that these surface-fleet guys finagled their way into aviation solely through ambition (although obviously that played a large part too)...the Navy NEEDED a cadre of such officers for more than a decade. I've read that Commander R.K. Turner was in King's same flight-school class. William Halsey and John S. McCain are two more examples. Yeah, the "Johnny Come Lately's" were resented by the true career aviators, but there wasn't much of a way around it...they were the best - well, only - solution available for a relatively small but critical officer-management personnel issue from the late 1920s through the beginning of the war.
And there was a "domino effect" as well....by 1941/42, now some of these "true" aviators have gotten through or into carrier command as CAPTs, but there's still very few who've actually made flag rank yet. If one wonders why so many 1942 carrier task forces were commanded by "black shoe" admirals like Spruance, Fletcher, Wilson Brown, and Thomas Kinkaid, well, a scarcity of readily-available aviation admirals was one factor.
Very glad I found your channel. When I was a kid growing up, I was surrounded by WW2 and Korean War vets and unfortunately, because of my age at the time, I didn't realize what treasures I was surrounded by. Fortunately though I did get to hear about a fair amount of stories from time to time and it was amazing what these people endured during that time period. Sure wish I could wind the clock back and have more in depth discussions with these great people.
It's funny how people only want to hear about Battleship Confrontations when there were equally action packed Destroyer vs Destroyer battles, even Cruiser on Cruiser actions that deserve remembering. I guess it's just like boxing, the Heavyweight guys get all the kudos..
Admiral King once said this about dealing with the media - don't tell them anything, then tell them you won
About 25 years ago I read King’s autobiography. It was interesting, but the thing that I remember most about the book was it was the only autobiography I ever read that was written in 3rd person.
The rumor of the vendetta against McVay III was due to the letter of reprimand from McVay II when he was a junior officer and was caught with a woman on board his ship. The rumor was started by McVay senior as there was no other explanation for his pushing for the Courts-martial when even the captain of the Japanese sub said zig-zaging would not have prevented the sinking. To this day I wonder how he became so powerful with all the things he did.
There is no evidence that King was pushing for McVay's court-martial, although I doubt that he did much to stop it, either. James Forrestal was the guy who wanted McVay court-martialed.
Yes. Until recently, I had never heard of him. What a guy. Also, I did see a picture of him smiling.
There is a picture of him laughing... Oh God Admiral King is laughing!!!
Good Presentation. I am surprised the part about King having doubts about Nimitz was not discussed. My view has always been that King was most heavily in planning and strategy while Nimitz was the man that executed the plans.
Keep watching. We do talk about it.
Interesting episode and thoroughly enjoyed the discussion. Was most interested in your comment that Guadalcanal was too early. Agree that no one had a crystal ball that would have predicted how persistently the Japanese would react to take it back. The converse of that is what would it have been like to invade the island if Henderson Field had been an operational Japanese airbase? Perhaps the move to invade was to deny this - not only as a threat to cutting off the direct route from US to Australia - but also having to deal with it; as the Japanese later had to as an American airbase.
If you want to take another swipe at douggie you can talk about how Norfolk houses the MacArthur Presidential Library…..
You’ve got to be kidding me. . .
The thing seems to be called a memorial. Some on line comments are that it is like a Presidential library. Given his role in Japan, that might be understandable. His role elsewhere is much more debatable (see episode 103), and some even suggest that the Japan work is overrated (a comment in that episode, if memory serves, asserts documentary evidence to that effect).
I am disgusted that they did not defend Joe Rochefort. Joe Rochefort won the early Pacific War for Nimitz. He, from the start of his career (mid 1920's) was a crypto-analyst. Over a course of three years he learned Japanese. To further his education he was stationed in Japan. On the trip over to Japan he met a guy named Layton. Layton was also into code breaking and speaking Japanese. In the build up to Midway, in Washington, D.C. was a parallel office of Japanese codebreaking. They were competition with Nimitz' operations in Hawaii. They both read the same crypto and D.C. did not believe Rochefort's analysis about Midway. Layton, also had Nimitz' ear. Together they convinced Nimitz they were right. The rest is History.
Nimitz stood up for Rochefort as much as he could. The office in D.C. was running a political campaign against Rochefort mainly because he wasn't Annapolis and because he was not a 4.0 in attire (smoking jacket, slippers). Washington had to "cover"their embarrassment that they were wrong about Midway and he was right. The guy who replaced Rochefort was a communications specialist named Redman. His admiral brother was a friend of King. King had a personal vendetta against Rochefort, because Washington was covering their butts and lying to King. Rochefort, crypto trained his entire career, bilingual in Japanese ended being put in charge of a dry dock and never went to a sea command ever. To top it off he wasn't even replaced by someone with crypto skills. That is King and Redman's doing. Nimitz' medal recommendations for Rochefort were denied by King.
Just like Alan Turing (enigma), how fast we forget. Rochefort was awarded a few medals posthumously.
Food for thought: How would Guadalcanal turned out if the Japanese navy kept two carriers from the Midway battle. You can thank Rochefort and his staff for that.
www.history.navy.mil/browse-by-topic/wars-conflicts-and-operations/world-war-ii/world-war-ii-profiles/rochefort-station-hypo.html
Thank you ! ADMIRAL KING did SCREW the POOCH HERE !
Roquefort was gifted, certainly. You are describing Edwin Leyton. He was in Japan as a naval attache. He spoke Japanese. And he knew Yamamoto.
Sorry. Rochefort.
Drachinifel has a great and amusing episode on Adm King....worth the watch. Title: Fleet Admiral Ernest King - Semper Iratus
He made big plans with meager forces because he expected the ships to be manned by sailors like him.
The phrase Hair Fire brought back a memory. A phrase that had oft' been used after I left submarine duty (short time compared to Mr. Toti) was August Hair Fire. It always happened in August back then.
Before seeing this presentation the only thing I knew about Admiral King was his name. Concerning Captain McVeigh, I understand that Condition Yoke was not fully set and USS Indianapolis was not zigzagging when she was attacked and sunk. Still, I think he was scapegoated to cover up for failures higher up. I’m sure you guys will cover this in detail later on. I really enjoyed this discussion. Thanks for starting to bring this relatively obscure personage to life.
Bill responding: Itching to tell that story...
This is the whole McVay deal in one paragraph: There wasn't anything to cover up. McVay was court-marshalled (at Forrestal's insistence) to satisfy the public's demand for someone's scalp. After it was over, the verdict was set-aside by Forrestal, at the recommendation of everyone from Nimitz on down (Nimitz by this time was CNO, King retired), including the prosecuting counsel. McVay returned to duty, was promoted to rear admiral upon retirement. His suicide was the culmination of guilt over losing his ship and crew and being harangued for years by distraught family members.
@@JackNiles-hc8yz Shameful episode in the history of the US Navy. Thanks for clarifying the events after USS Indianapolis was sunk. A similar prosecution almost happened in the Royal Navy after the Bismarck was sunk. First Sea Lord Dudley Pound wanted Admiral Wake-Walker, commanding the cruisers Norfolk and Suffolk, and Captain Leach of HMS Prince of Wales court-martialed for not continuing to engage Bismarck and Prinz Eugen after Hood had been sunk and POW had been hit seven times by the German ships, including a hit below the waterline and a hit on the bridge that killed or wounded everyone on the bridge except Captain Leach. Admiral Wake-Walker, senior officer present afloat after Hood was sunk, ordered POW to break off the action and continue shadowing the German ships along with the two cruisers. Admiral John Tovey, C-in-C of the Home Fleet, was indignant over the very idea that Wake-Walker and Leach had acted improperly, and threatened to resign after Dudley Pound suggested a court-martial for the two officers. Wisely, the First Sea Lord quietly let the matter drop.
Great episode guys thanks for that!
Thank you for setting right the narrative of King's leadership and essential contribution to the enormity of the U.S. Navy's growth to become the undisputed master of the seven seas. I am tired of the carping about u boats and such. Not that the losses sustained on the eastern seaboard were not worthy of remembrance. But, come on, the fleet that sailed into Tokyo Bay in September 1945 was the greatest achievement in naval history. And COMINCH was King, and thus nobody else deserves the ultimate credit for that triumph.
I’ve learned so much from this podcast it’s just ridiculous.
I have always been much more interested in the European Theater WWII till I found your series. I find every minute of all your videos so far to be interesting. WOW
Symonds, & Ian Toll (& Hornfisher) included King's early heavy handedness for the first year in the Pacific
You didn't finish your thought here.
Incredible knowledge and awareness of the Pacific campaign. These guys are truly amazing. Thank you.
I really admire how aggressive our top Navy brass was during the Pacific war--pressure and gaining /retaining initiative was exactly the right strategy. Sure he was a meanie, who got things done. Administrative is a word for a lot of nut and bolt logistics; it takes a sharp intellect to handle all of it.
As I understand history, King was an ardent Anglophobe. Thus, he refused to take the advice of the Commonwealth about convoys and thereby condemned countless American merchant seamen to death by u-boat in 1942. We had had two years of fighting the Natis in the Atlantic and our experience, in King's eyes, amounted to nought. This might be an interesting angle to explore.
That "angle" has been flogged to death.
Very good job. Concerning the timing of the Guadalcanal campaign, you guys seem to forget that Japan had a LOT of influence on that. The US needed to keep the Japanese from building an airfield there, so it was a case of, ready or not, we had to go.
Relative to Japan, I wonder what the existing plans stated, or were there existing operational plans in place? It would be interesting to discuss the history of Joint / Naval / operational planning. I'm a 2013 Army War College grad. Love what you guys are doing. COL (RET) R.
You guys are doing a great job with these videos
The timing of the Canal in 1942, Was there ever a good time. As you both stated in the program the Japanese were only going to get stronger. Had the Japanese made another major push in 1942, well we would have had to counter. The canal would have waited until 43, how well defended could it have been then? I was just a GMG2 71-75, but I consider myself well read on the Pacific war. regarding the USS Indianapolis, I have always been dumbfounded as to how the Captain was found guilty of the loss of that ship. Great show thank you.
Gentlemen: Another excellent episode. Well done! Thank you.
Glad you enjoyed it
King's big failure, imo, is neglecting ASW off the Atlantic seaboard in early 1942, which caused enormous losses in shipping.
King is no hero to any family which had merchant seaman involved in WWII from either side of the Atlantic.
There is a difference between "neglect" and "inability". King had no ASW resources to neglect using in spring 1942.
@@NJTCO1 It was not lack of resource or neglect. It was willful refusal to utilise the proven convoy system because the British had advised that massed ships reduced losses.
@@gordonwood1594 And where were the magic destroyers for those convoys to be conjured up from?
@@NJTCO1 The RN had improved the convoy system with purpose built corvettes, lease lend destroyers and escort aircraft carriers. The long range US Liberators could have covered the convoys almost halfway across the Atlantic. Kings refusal to accept anything in the way of help or advise from the British meant the death of hundreds of US merchant marine sailors in what the Germans called "The second happy time"
Great series so far. Looking forward to finishing it in the coming days.
I think the best thing I could say about you two is that I would love to sit down and have a beer with you guys and talk history. Could not imagine a better time!
I’m so glad I found this podcast. I forget how I stumbled upon it, may have been searching Guadalcanal. Sadly I’ll be caught up and current in no time then I’ll have to wait a week in between videos.
Learned a lot in this one guys. Thanks
When Admiral King was a midshipman at Annapolis he conspired with a couple of other classmates to tutor the classmates who were struggling before exams and were especially interested in the classmates who were being targeted by instructors bent upon failing them. None of his classmates failed. His daughter said that he had two moods: angry and enraged.
Really informative regarding Admiral King and comments about him from other senior officers.
Great podcast! True, eye-opening discussion on Ernest King's contribution to winning WW2.
Please comment on his apparently ineffective anti-submarine strategy, against the U-boats, off the eastern shore of the US, where the Germans sunk a large number of ships with apparent ease. Looking forward to your next podcast!
Guadalcanal was King's finest hour. Midway gave us the breathing room to do something aggressive, and King's decision to invade NOW (not later when we were stronger), when the Japanese possessed greater surface assets, was the key. The Japanese were out of balance because of their loss of most of the Combined fleet's flight decks, and King's brilliant mind sensed that THIS site was where the Japanese could be bled. In another two months the airfield at Guadalcanal would have been finished, the number of defenders would have increased A LOT, and the marines may not have been able to do the job. Timing here, is crucial.
The distance the Japanese land-based air assets had to travel to reach Henderson was central to the plan, and we should have been able to track surface forces (even Cruiser 8), too. Some missteps and Japanese tenacity kept things in doubt for a good while. Guadalcanal, and the US industrial capacity, sealed the deal.
If the first thing any American reads about the Pacific war is Morison, you won't have an inaccurate view of King. He loved Nimitz and Spruance and is (in my view) unfair to Jack Fletcher, but Morison's King seems fair to me.
Guadalcanal was won by marines sailors and army people. Not King.
@@briancooper2112 Of course you're correct; the people putting their lives on the line and actually DOING the lifting deserve the most respect and credit. They are the tip of the spear, as the saying goes.
I was only considering (when I made the comment) the command decisions that create the framework around which those actions take place. Everyone knows the garbage truck drivers are MUCH MORE important than the city managers who design the program, see that it is funded and maintained, or the citizens who vote for the funding. Here we should ONLY talk about the drivers and the equipment maintenance crews.
The same can be said of cops and tax collectors or border security. The politicians and citizens selecting those who set policy don't matter much at all.
King also helped Kenny get through the redtape goop pile, enabling special supplies to get to Kenny's Airforce..leading to bombers being turned in strafing nightmares..
- And in the Atlantic, King was criticized for not adopting convoying in the Atlantic from the beginning of the war. The U-boats caused huge losses in 1942, but in all fairness, the US wasn't ready to adopt convoying at a large scale, and holding up shops until convoys could be organized would have imposed significant costs in delays of material. Once he had the opportunity to accumulate sufficient forces in quantity and quality, King's "10th Fleet" did very well in handling the U-Boat menace.
@stevehofer3482 I don't see that "in all fairness" is being fair. King fought reasonable protections and a lot of men died.
@@ejt3708 King didn't "fight" anything of the sort. There were no escorts available for coastal convoys, and the Navy correctly declined to operate unescorted convoys.
You guys I love watching
Great episode gentlemen. A great source on King is the book ‘The Admirals’. It really goes into King and his career and success as CNO.
I know we may not have been fully ready for Guadalcanal but neither were the Japanese.
It is indeed a great book...
That's a subtle but important point. Obviously very different in almost any/all respects...but in one way I see a parallel between Guadalcanal and another big battle that was going on concurrently: Stalingrad. In each case, both sides initially may not have foreseen just how enormous a commitment it would be, but both fights somewhat took on a life of their own, and grew into these titanic, lengthy struggles which wound up having a outsized, even decisive, impact on the conduct of all subsequent operations - by both sides - in their respective theaters for the rest of the war.
The metaphor between Apollo 13 and the early Pacific campaign had been made by director Gene Kranz. All of his systems station chiefs said they had all but crashed, and the infighting started & Kranz had it . " Alright!! What systems work!?" And completely redirected operations towards a goal of survival and returning to earth 🌎
Mk 14 torpedo ...
Sorry you missed the boat, not right about that.
Excellent audio quality, something that too many others fail to do on this platform.
Messed up on the best cryptoanalyst in the 2nd World War, and Hypo---what he did to Rochefort was horrific. Unnecessarily annoyed Nimitz.
You guys are great! I love your shows!
You guys are great! The best place to get the skinny! Thank you Gentlemen!
Okay, this desert rat, Army Vet, Air Force Brat (so far away from you Navy types) didn’t know anything about this cat!
Thanks for expanding my knowledge 👍🫡
Liked the commentary very much. The comentators seem well-informed and truly interested in the subject matter. I've read many treatments of King. Seth & Bill touched on most of the important issues surrounding his "colorful" wartiime career. Look forward to more topics from the Pacific war.
Everyone know about King's hatred for the British, but fewer know about him hating on Macarthur and Bureau of Ordinance even more than he hates the British, for MacArthur he did his damnest to not having the Navy and Marines to go through Mac's head on assault on Rabaul (which was ludicrous), that's why he moved the boundaries of Guadalcanal area of operations into Navy's SoPac Command not Mac's SoWestPac Command. Also for Leyte Gulf he and Nimitz would never let Mac gains control or authority of the Fast Carrier Task Force (TF38/58), Mac eventually settled with Kinkaid's older standard battleships, some cruisers and the escort carriers, that is why there was a conflict of command and this problem shows lack of unify overall commander of Leyte operations which was then evident when Halsey steamed north with all his force without telling Kinkaid where he was going and never let him know there's no US surface force guarding Bernardino Strait.
Love the dark (Navy Blue) covers. Wish we had them during my brief time.
1st boots in Marine corps history are the Edson's. Halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli and the pepper wars in-between.
Admiral King called for the capture of Guadalcanal at the right time.
1. The island was on the border of the Japanese empire. Far from their main forces.
2. Our ships could sail out side of Japans patrol areas to resupply and support.
3. It was a burr under the saddle and a distraction from Japans plan. Forcing them into battle on our terms vs their terms.
4. We could do it without the Army and MacArthur! The Navy could do it with out the Army s interference.
5. It came at a time where the Japanese had run out of there planned war plans and we're involved in consolidation of their conquests.
6. Later Japan would be able to call in surplus troops from settled down parts of the empire.
Wasn't the biggest issue, if the Japanese had taken Guadalcanal they could have cut us off from Australia, possibly they could have attacked Australia. Guaducanal would provide them with a good air base where they could expand their power to all islands in the region, and bomb supply ships from US to Australia.
Thanks
Seems he was the expert in amphibious landings. Still use his uncanny accuracy in amphibious landings for casualties, still in use today. Wrote the book on modern warfare.
Thanks, good job gentlemen.
David Kohnen at the Naval War College has written a three volume on King. Unfortunately, he is having difficulty finding a publisher.
Dr. Kohnen has a publisher, and the new book will be published in September 2024. Looking forward to reading it!
o
He should self publish. I can help
THAT should be interesting!
Yes the margin was thin for the Guadalcanal campaign - But from the point of view where Admiral King was sitting in July-august 1942, it looked better than it would look after early American losses in the campaign. King was presented with the opportunity to get a strategically located island with an almost completed - but not well-defended airfield. He had temporary superiority in aircraft carriers, with 4 at his disposal. Japan only had two fleet carriers. I don't think King should have anticipated the disastrous one-sided loss at Savo Island. Even more-so, the loss of the Wasp, North Carolina (albeit temporary) and O'Brien in one torpedo salvo by the I-19 was a fluke that substantially changed the balance of power in the seas off of Guadalcanal. If the US would have at least held its own at Savo Island, and if the Wasp and North Carolina would have been available for the rest of the campaign, things would have been easier for the Americans.
General MacArthur also had a role in island hopping, it wasn't just Admiral King alone. It seems both MacArthur and King had poor personalities but were well endowed in strategic thinking.
Reminds me of an old saying, “He was an awful SOB but… He was OUR SOB”.
@warrenklein7817 Island hopping is an inevitable development when you have command of the sea. I would like to see a detailed discussion as to who was responsible for the actual development (King, MacArthur, or Nimitz). Note that MacArthur at first was gung ho for taking Rabaul. Did he change his mind on his own or did King and Nimitz talk him out of it?
@@CFarnwide MacArthur was a flawed commander in many ways. He should have been court marshaled for his defense of the Philippines. And he treated the Australians shabbily. Any competent commander could have achieved victories in the Pacific given the massive American balance of power. One thing he did superbly was the occupation of Japan.
@@dennisweidner288 he did his best inthe philipines he cause one japanese general to be fired his defensive lasted to may 1942 when a british general that out number and had better equipment was defeated in 2 weeks in singpore
@@brucenadeau2172 The men on Americans and Filipinos on Bataan performed brilliantly. There was no Singapore-like collapse. You are absolutely correct about that. It was the first real resistance, with the exception of the Flying Tigers, that the Japanese encountered after Pearl Harbor.
But little of that was due to MacArthur. He was warned about what happened at Pearl and had hours to prepare. Yet he allowed much of American air power to be destroyed on the ground. The defense of the Philippines was a shambles. When the men retreated to Bataan they did so without supplies. And there was no pre-positioning of supplies. MacArthur holed up on Corregidor and had little to do with the fighting on Bataan. The men called him "Dugout Doug". The men at Bataan were not defeated militarily. They ran out of food and ammunition. All of which MacArthur was responsible for.
An amazing admiral just like myself.
Credit for Guadalcanal goes to the on-site commanders. King threw a fit because of the emphasis on Europe. We were not prepared for the campaign. It was put together on the fly. Credit the commanders in the area, Vandergrift, Fletcher. His personal bias against some commanders & rudness to allies helped nobody.
You guys are so outstanding with this podcast/YT channel, I can’t get enough of your intelligent conversation. I normally agree with 98% of the things you say, but I have to take exception to your assessment of Admiral King in so far as something he failed to do; Acting to counter the German navy’s Operation Drumbeat in a more reasonable period of time.
Admiral King dithered in responding effectively to the almost year long wholesale slaughter of U.S. and Allied merchant tanker shipping along the North American Eastern Seaboard during the earlier part of the war in the Atlantic (The U-Boat’s 2nd “happy time”).
How much of this foot dragging by King was a product of his obvious Anglophobia and refusal to accept assistance and support from the British is debatable, but it was certainly a factor. A very dark stain on King’s record as far as I’m concerned. And I’m a little surprised you guys never discussed the issue in this particular video edition.
Bil responding here (I'm sure Seth has an opinion too). IMO we should have included King's dislike of anything British as one of the things he got wrong. And yes, he might (emphasize "might") have been able to do more vis-a-vis the U-boat threat. But recall the first "happy time" was before King was COMINCH or CNO, and was largely metered by our ability to construct transports, and it's not like when he became COMINCH he was holding escorts back. He committed 100% of them to one theater or the other. You can argue with the mix Atlantic vs Pacific, and you can argue with his motives, but the plain truth is we didn't have enough escorts to fight a two ocean war. But you can't argue with his disdain for our staunchest ally-- like so many of his other foibles, it was inexcusable.
@parrot849 It is all the more difficult to understand given the U.S. Navy's operations in the North Atlantic in 1940-41 focused on protecting convoys. I would have liked to have heard a discussion of this.
@@UnauthorizedHistoryPacificWar HOW ABOUT THEN THE FAMOUS QUOTE :"There will always be an E N G L A N D in the USN ! " = the most penetrating example ever of orwellian semi-schizophrenic double-think throughout the ages ...; heavily doubt there is 1 (USS) any longer. Suggest dig up when the order was countermanded ! The day Ernie expired ?
@@dukeford8893 While I basically agree with you, I think the U.S. Navy's reaction to Drumbealt was inadequate at best. But, unlike King's critics, recognize that Pearl Harbor meant that the Navy had to shift much of what little it had to the Pacific. I would have liked to have heard a discussion of this. While a lot of shipping was lost as a result of Drumbeat, I think you are correct that it did not affect the overall American response to the U-boats.
If you look at tonnage losses it can be argued that the U-boats on the Eastern seaboard were the smallest threat of those facing the USN. IIRC they needed to sink something like 300,000 tons a month to shut down the UK. The best they ever did was about 270k. Is it more important for those destroyers to be hunting U-boats in the Gulf Stream, screening carriers in the Pacific, escorting convoys in the Med to keep 8th Army fighting, escorting convoys to Britain, or escorting convoys to Russia?
Russia is critical. Britain and the bombing campaign is critical. 8th Army is keeping Rommel out of the oil fields and the Suez Canal. The entire Pacific theater and Australia hinges on carriers. Losing coastal commerce is bad but not going to lose the war.
Great episode!
All served from beginning to end.
After watching the Nimitz and King episodes back to back this one on King seems a bit unbalanced to me, I would expect the Nimitz session to be much longer instead the situation was reversed. I was left a bit confused as to who the author of the island hopping campaign was. Drachinifel’s session on King is about the same length and is much more informative IMO.
When you study the war college and the surgers vs. the island hoppers its very interesting. One school of thought was to hit Japan as quickly as possible, while the others were more conservative. These studies were going on during the 30’s especially after Japan shows its aggression toward Korea and China. When they played out the surge doctrine the losses were really surprising with the technology we had. They didn’t play out the development of the kamikaze which may have changed some of our notions about charging across the pacific….
Great observations! Which war college did you attend?
Island hopping was of necessity due to lack of resources - ETO first was eating all logistics and of design if you consider Japs lines of communications. King was caustically toxic. Would have made a typical USMC Officer.
I agree regarding King and the Pacific War management, as well as his being wrong about McVeigh. I realize it's out if the channel's scope, but how would you respond to those who say he totally botched things on our eastern coast, resulting in the sinking if so many merchant ships early in the war?
We do briefly touch on this in one of our episodes where we mention his distribution of forces Atlantic/Pacific and his leadership of 10th Fleet. Can't remember which one.
Re Adml King's opinions on landing in Europe, some thoughts -
Only after 'Black May', 1943, were Atlantic convoys sufficiently safe from U-boats for troops and supplies.
Air superiority prevented air attack on shipping and landings.
Developments before D-Day landings, random order...
-Numbers of landing craft and ships
-Mulberry harbours
-PLUTO fuel pipeline
-'Hobart's Funnies', modified tanks, incl DD (swimming) Shermans, Crocodiles, AVRE, bridging, ditch-filling, mine clearing
-One million air photos
-Locations of shoreline radars determined for attack from air
-FUSAG deception plan
-Bombing railways and road bridges over rivers to delay re-inforcements
I am sure there are others from US Air Force, Army and Navy
Thank you gents. Bit of a latecomer, but trawling through your excellent content. It makes me look forward to otherwise mundane household tasks now, because it's become enjoyable with you guys chatting in the background.
Not heard of the acronym CINCUS before, and initially can well understand the desire for change. Having thought about it for a while I kind of like it though. It seems an appropriately Laconic response by a Navy to give when asked to surrender!
His reported dislike of the British led to his refusal to listen to them when they urged he adopt the convoy system on the US eastern seaboard, which led to many sinkings and a large loss of life, which only dropped when convoys were belatedly introduced.
If you think you can make a case for King doing a worse job of protecting convoys in 1942 when the USA went from being "neutral" to at war with the Axis in less than a week than the RN did in 1917, please do so.
USS Washington In early 1942, the ship and her crew served in the North Atlantic and escorted convoys to Russia.
Why no comment about how Adm Leahy influenced the actions of King and dispositions of forces?
Probably because there was little influence. Leahy had nothing to do with disposition of Naval forces, and he had no authority over King.
It is very Clear that Bill and Seth's favorite major actors in the Pacific War are Admiral King and Nimitz. Almost gushing over King.
Must watch an episode every night, I learn so much that I had so little knowledge of and for that I thank you all, one point.....could you organize them so we can better follow them, a matrix or alpha listing would do wonders, thanks again.
Thank-you... King : Semper Iratus.. Capt, It was Gene Krantz; What do we have that still works.
Difficult to understand not addressing the criticism of King for the eastern seaboard "second happy time" U-boat successes in this cast, it's the main historical black mark often blamed on his command
This, and the direct claim made that King ever made effective decisions against the U-boats, cast the credibility of everything else into question.
Much of the blame is misplaced. Such as not having the coast blacked out. In fact control and protection of the coasts out to about 75 miles was the domain of the Army and its Air Corps. The Navy was a blue water force. King did not control the coastline and beaches.
He had minimal assets to work with, and was now in charge of Naval actions worldwide. In the east, contrary to the author of Operation Drumbeat he had no destroyers available not committed to ocean convoy duty. Then there’s the rest of the world. The Pacific was going to need the vast majority of anything available.
In all theaters 1942, particularly the first six months, was absorbing blows and scrambling for a coherent response that would begin to build upon. After the first six months the losses dropped of dramatically. While there were coastal losses throughout the war, none came near to the early months when we were not ready and little to work with. What matters is what happened after.
@@hifi6638 You're not implying it was the Army's job to organize convoys right?
@@hifi6638 - It fairly well documented King refused to work with the British on the u-boat issue to the point King’s HQ subordinate officers had to keep quiet from King the fact they had met with their British naval ASW counterparts in London during this period to nevertheless brainstorm the submarine problem off the U.S. Atlantic coast.
Additionally, you mentioned the lack of “destroyers” available to King for u-boat problem. Operation Drumbeat was taking place successfully in and through North American coastal waters, not, by in large, in open ocean locations. It’s a fact many sorts and classes, both civil and naval, of smaller retrofitted American vessels were eventually pressed into service acting as convoy escorts; convoys that were convened many months too late, after King’s dithering for what ever his reasons, to save all those allied tankers sunk right off our east coast and all those lives loss from the beginning of Hitler’s attack on our sea coast. Sufficient numbers of specialized destroyers would have been a nice luxury, but not necessarily critical in those first beginning crucial months of escort duties during convoy assembly in order to get up and running a successful combined AIR-sea antisubmarine operation.
Don’t get me wrong, I still think King was a superb CNO and we were lucky to have him to lead the navy during WW2. But on this particular issue, the tanker losses to u-boat attack off the east coast, he did not shine…, and I believe this irrational hatred of the “English” that festered within him had much to due with it.
What was our coast gard doing?
When asked about his meteoritic rise in the ranks to Commander in Chief, United States Fleet and Chief of Naval Operations, King stated, “When the bullets start to fly, they come looking for the sons of bitches".
Thanks!
I think the next major naval battles will be disgusting. Weird and very unexpected things will happen and it won't be good. We will have to learn again, but will we have the industry this time around in order to compete and conquer?
Interestingly, Admiral Doenitz used the US Pacific carbon-copy of his U-boat tactics to escape punishment at Nuremberg.
@tomhutchins7495 Not exactly. Doenitz did use that argument and he was right. But he did not escape punishment. He probably escaped execution, but he was found guilty and received a prison term.
@@dennisweidner288 good correction. I was indeed thinking of execution when I said he escaped punishment.
@@tomhutchins7495 I guessed as much. You know, one interesting little detail from the video. The President never authorized unrestricted submarine warfare. King did that on his own authority. Interesting that the military could do that in America, but Doenitz needed Hitler's authorization for many steps in the U-boat campaign.
You are correct about Roosevelt never officially authorized unrestricted submarine warfare, but actually this order was given before King was COMINCH. It was Stark that gave the order. We do talk about that. Of course Roosevelt knew about it and never rescinded it.
@@tomhutchins7495 As more information came out after the war, I believe Doenitz was lucky not to be executed. I think he knew far more the people realized about the use of slave labor and other Nazi crimes.
Love it you guys are great. Thank you for the informative show😎
At least King wanted to do something while many were saying to wait.
I question whether delaying Watchtower would have been better. In a month or so the Japanese airfield on Guadalcanal would have been complete an operational, as would the seaplane base on Tulagi. The US would not have had any more carrier aviation in October than in August. Yes there would have been time for more thorough training but Ghormley would still have been in charge
All in all it is at least questionable.
I think the reason there was a court-martial was the Navy had to be shown doing something about the tremendous loss of life when the USS Indianapolis was in the water and no one knew where the ship was and known was concerned about the ship. There had to be a sacrificial lamb placed on the altar of political Justice. McVeigh was that lamb
This may surprise many but, Admiral King advocated building Flower class corvettes for the UN. This was before US entry to the war. This recommendation was turned down by the Navy.
What about the east coast resistance to convoys and losses to u-boats?? However, great series- keep it going
His stubborn refusal to learn from the British officers sent to pass on their war experience led to the second U-Boat "happy time " . So many ships sunk and lives lost.
@@daniellarge9784 Nonsense.
Thanks a lot for your great effort.
JOHN TOWERS is the father of U.S. Naval Aviation - excellent monography on him exists by Reynolds 600pp, (IMMSMC). Was in Nimitz ' s close staff throughout the war, but never in combat cmd cause N would not risk his ....services.
Of course there was a lot of conflict between Towers and Nimitz, but the latter was discrete and managed it well.