The Most Dangerous Man in America: The Making of Douglas MacArthur

by Mark Perry

At times, even his admirers seemed unsure of what to do with General Douglas MacArthur. Imperious, headstrong, and vain, MacArthur matched an undeniable military genius with a massive ego and a rebellious streak that often seemed to destine him for the dustbin of history. Yet despite his flaws, MacArthur is remembered as a brilliant commander whose combined-arms operation in the Pacific—the first in the history of warfare—secured America’s triumph in World War II and changed the course of history.

In The Most Dangerous Man in America, celebrated historian Mark Perry examines how this paradox of a man overcame personal and professional challenges to lead his countrymen in their darkest hour. As Perry shows, Franklin Roosevelt and a handful of MacArthur’s subordinates made this feat possible, taming MacArthur, making him useful, and finally making him victorious. A gripping, authoritative biography of the Pacific Theater’s most celebrated and misunderstood commander, The Most Dangerous Man in America reveals the secrets of Douglas MacArthur’s success—and the incredible efforts of the men who made it possible.

Genres: History, Biography, Military Fiction, Military History, Nonfiction, American History, World War II

416 pages, Hardcover

First published April 1, 2014

About the author

Mark^Perry. From Wikipedia:

Mark Perry (1950 – 8 August 2021) was an American author specializing in military, intelligence, and foreign affairs analysis.[1][2]

He authored nine books: Four Stars,[3] Eclipse: The Last Days of the CIA,[4] A Fire In Zion: Inside the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process,[5] Conceived in Liberty,[6] Lift Up Thy Voice,[7] Grant and Twain,[8] Partners In Command,[9] Talking To Terrorists,[10] and The Most Dangerous Man in America: The Making of Douglas MacArthur.[11]

Perry’s articles have been featured in a number of publications including The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The Nation, Newsday, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Christian Science Monitor, and The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, Ohio).

Background
Perry was a graduate of Northwestern Military and Naval Academy and of Boston University.

Career
Perry was the former co-Director of the Washington, D.C., London, and Beirut-based Conflicts Forum,[12] which specializes in engaging with Islamist movements in the Levant in dialogue with the West. Perry served as co-Director for over five years. A detailed five-part series on this experience was published by the Asia Times in March and in July 2006.[13] Perry served as an unofficial advisor to PLO Chairman and Palestinian President Yasser Arafat from 1989 to 2004.[14][15]

Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name. See this thread for more information.
Mark Perry: author of Grant and Twain: The Story of an American Friendship

Mark^^Perry: author of War of Darkness (Role Aids/Advanced Dungeons and Dragons)

Mark^^^Perry: author of A Dress for Mona

Mark^^^^Perry: author of Dead Ringers: The Television Series

Mark^^^^^Perry: Illustrator

Mark^^^^^^Perry: author of The Climb: First Steps

Reviews

[Lee · Rating 4 out of 5]

From the title, I expected a focus on MacArthur's political ties to the Republicans or something on the opposition desire to use him as a club to attack Roosevelt's handling of the war. There was some of that, but it was not the focus of the book. MacArthur's wartime personality and actions were the real center of attention for this work.

The opening (prewar) chapters covered what I was looking for, with MacArthur and Roosevelt working around the issues of the Great Depression, the Army's budget, the New Dealers in the Cabinet, and the Congress. After that, the book turns into a more conventional MacArthur wartime biography, with some emphasis on his relationship with Roosevelt. MacArthur's postwar career, including his famous firing by Truman, is wrapped up at the very end.

It was definitely well-written and readable, although some minor technical errors in the naval and aerial sides caught my eye.

Later: The book did address that while MacArthur had very good field commanders working for him (Kenney, Kinkaid, Eichelberger, Krueger, and others), he did poorly at picking an effective staff (Willoughby, Whitney, Sutherland).

Also, he did address the Clark Field fiasco, but the author inclined to let Brereton off the hook. One error brought up was that when the fighters landed for lunch and refueling and the B17s were still on the ground, other fighter squadrons were tasked to cover the various airfields, but the one to cover Clark didn't get the word.Sutherland is mostly blamed for the inability to even launch a recon flight on the morning of Dec.8, Brereton (hangover inferred) gets credit for asking for permission to launch recons and strikes. Brereton's later wartime career (mediocre at best) was ignored, as was his reputation as a party animal.

An interesting assessment was made for the Luzon 41-42 campaign's mobile portion-- MacArthur seemed to be perpetually behind the "battle tempo". Like many other WW1 veteran commanders, he didn't realize the speed of 1940s infantry operations, which put him in the category of many Allied commanders in their first battles, 1939-1942. Unlike many of them, he did recover-- his open-field operations on Luzon and Korea seemed to bear this out.

[Bill Powers · Rating 5 out of 5]

I came across both The Most Dangerous Man in America & Supreme Commander in the NY Times Book Review - both books are an excellent read for you history buffs out there. A well told story of a very complex man who led us to Pacific victory in World War II, rebuilt Japan and salvaged disaster in Korea. Unfortunately MacArthur is not well understood in today's America. We needed men like MacArthur in the 20th century. Unfortunately, in my opinion, these types of men no longer exist in America and when the day comes when they are needed, the call will go unheeded.

[George · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book was okay. I think the reason that it was somewhat underwhelming for me was that it was less a biography of Douglas MacArthur and more a focused biography of his war years. As someone who is really interested in the Pacific War that wasn’t a bad thing, but I’m not particularly interested in MacArthur’s thoughts on his strategy. Though his thoughts on the Japanese and their commanders were very interesting. The problem is that I didn’t learn much of what made the man or became of him as the book starts in 1931 and ends 1946. So the whole beginning and end of his life are chopped out. MacArthur is such an eccentric person that it would have been interesting to see how this came about and what it lead to. There was apparently a time when he could have stood as a candidate and challenged FDR, but the book only hints at this and doesn’t delve into it. Which is sort of problem because that’s the whole premise of the book, especially considering that it is what the title is in reference too.
I’m glad I read this book because I always like getting different perspectives on the Pacific War, but it wasn’t a particularly illuminating text on MacArthur.

[Dave Hoff · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reading this book so soon after A Mantle of Command was deja vu all over again. The authors must have used the same sources. MacArthur as "Gen. Goober at the Battle of Anacosta" riding his horse, wearing his Sam Browne belr & corncob pipe, leading a Cavalry charge against Vets wanting their War Bonus. His ego was huge, he fought with Roosevelt, Marshall, the JCS and hated Admiral King. His troops hated him, his staff protected him.

[Lilly · Rating 5 out of 5]

First class book with a third class title. This is a very neutral books about the most liked and hated general in US history. I am not a big fan of DMA but after finishing this book, I feel more positive of him. I don't believe people living 21st century have sound justification to make easy conclusions on him. I mean lots of our grandmas still dislike Truman because he relieved MacArthur. Anyway, interesting book but not easy read.

[Kenneth Barber · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book details the relationship between FDR and Douglas MacArthur. The main emphasis of the book, however, is MacArthur. A summary of his family roots and the career of his father is described, as is the relationship with his mother which had a big impact on his life.
MacArthur ‘s career first crossed paths with FDR in 1932 when he commanded the troops that expelled the Bonus Marchers out of Washington DC. FDR was running for president at the time and this incident helped his victory. After his election, FDR appointed MacArthur as Chief of Staff and kept him there despite the objections of many of his advisers. This was a case where FDR respected his abilities but also wanted to keep MacArthur under his control. FDR later appointed MacArthur as commander in Chief of the Southwest Pacific Theatre.
The relationship between the two was always outwardly cordial, but deep philosophical differences were never far below the surface. That combined with MacArthur’s egotism and paranoia always added an edge to their relationship. FDR,consummate politician that he was, managed to work with MacArthur and reap the benefits of his talent while ignoring his less admirable traits. The author also rehabilitates the image of MacArthur by stressing his accomplishments in the winning of the war in the Pacific. Also emphasized are his efforts in the occupation of Japan after the war.

[Kamaziz320 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Biographer William Manchester in his book 'American Caesar' described MacArthur as a "thundering paradox of a man". This is an apt description of a man who held the destinies of nations in his hand whenever the war tocsin sounded. In a study of modern Commanders since after the Second World War, there are but a handful of personalities that fit MacArthur's description but none of his achievements. This is not due to the lack of leadership qualities but rather the increasing public scrutiny of a Commanders's behavior and the demand that the military remains subservient to civil authorities. That said, the strategic insights, the mastery of the art of war, the ability to read the 'crystal ball' clearly and the quality of Coup d'oeil, or intuition espoused by Clausewitz remains in demand till this day. History is abound with examples where failure in securing military initiatives will sound the death knell of civilian control as seen in Afghanistan and Iraq today. Would MacArthur be a successful Commander in Afghanistan or Iraq today? Let history decide but one fact remains, his martial mastery remains the key to successful and victorious command in any conflict at any period. A compelling book indeed.

[Bfisher · Rating 4 out of 5]

Prior to reading this book, my view of Douglas MacArthur had been conditioned mainly by reading William Manchester's "American Caesar", which overall left me with a negative view of MacArthur, personally and as a commander.

Perry's take on MacArthur, at least on his military virtues, is more favourable. His book almost exclusively deals with MacArthur as commander in the Philipines after Pearl Harbor, and as SWPOA commander to the end of WW2. The books title is somewhat misleading in that respect, although there is an initial discussion of MacArthur's and FDR's relationship during the overlap of FDR's first term and MacArthur's term as Army Chief-of-Staff.

The book was interesting especially in its description of the relationship between MacArthur and FDR, Gen. Marshall, Admiral King, and the major American commanders in the Pacific arena. Perry had some interesting points to make in how the unending Battle of Washington (between the army and the navy) impacted the Pacific war both positively and negatively.

[Tom · Rating 4 out of 5]

My Dad, who served in the Army Air force in China/India during WW2, despised MacArthur. This bio takes "Dugout Doug" to his greatest triumph, accepting the Japaneses surrender. It does not include his greatest mistake, taking on Harry Truman during Korea. The author alludes to MacArthur's staff's hatred of FDR & far right politics, but does not hold MacArthur responsible, why not?

The US was lucky that another WW2 general won the Republican nomination for President in 1952.

[Matt Ely · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a low 3. It's readable, and I learned more about the overall context of MacArthur in WW2. But as soon as the first shots are fired, large stretches of the narrative have little to do with the man himself. I don't feel like I understand him or his point of view as much as I should after several hundred pages.

Much of the focus is on troop maneuvers within his command, as well as the wartime politics that sometimes affected him. But it feels like there just wasn't enough material on MacArthur, so the author had to pad things out with battle summaries. I understand that it adds context, but the author does little to show how many of these events were the result of MacArthur's influence or how those events impacted him. Of course there are exceptions, but overall it was pretty uneven.

When, in the epilogue, the author tries to summarize his subject's greatness, it feels like a point unproven. There were so many examples of his pettiness, short-sightedness, and selfishness, that calling him the war's greatest commander felt like a stretch designed to justify the book itself. I'm glad I know more, but there are probably better biographical resources out there.

[Alexander · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm new to WWII history (thanks Dan Carlin!), and starting with the enigmatic Douglas MacArthur seemed like a good idea. He's an fascinating character, simultaneously brilliant and also blind to his own personal shortcomings. And while I wanted the author to focus more on the man and examining his psychology, this book is less about the man and more about MacArthur's role in the Pacific theater of WWII and his contentious relationship with Pres. Roosevelt. And in that capacity, it works well. I learned a great deal about MacArthur's connection to the Philippines and why it was so important for him to return to the Philippines during the war, as well as the subsequent unfolding of the U.S. and ally reconquering of the Pacific from Japan. I would have like to have had more coverage of what Japan was up to in China and also the bombing of an occupation of Japan. Also wanted more context for his role in the Bonus Army debacle. And I don't think the book ever quite delivers on its title "The Most Dangerous Man in America." Overall, this is a good introduction to the Pacific theater of WWII and MacArthur's role in it.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Became interested in MacArthur after reading Shoe Dog and the esteem Phil Knight apparently had for him. I also drive by MacArthur Blvd on a near daily basis and thought it would be interesting to learn more about the guy.

Enjoyed the book although it was more a snapshot of the Pacific campaign and MacArthur's role during WWII than a biography. However, the details into the battle for the Philippines were in depth and highlighted the sacrifices and strategies of the campaign. Book was even handed and highlighted strengths (strategy, loyalty to causes he believed in, leadership) and weaknesses (huge ego, tendency to be two faced).

[Larry Walsh · Rating 3 out of 5]

As a MacArthur admirer, the book was often difficult to read. The author took a contrarian view of MacArthur, painting him as an ego-maniac, insubordinate and largely ineffective leader. I would say this book gives context to the general but is not a definitive portrait of his capabilities, accomplishments, and legacy.

[Nick A · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really enjoyed the book. Well written and showed MacArthurs strategy in the pacific as well as some political maneuvering during WW2. However the subtitle of The Making of Douglas MacArthur’ Is a bit misleading as it implies a more biographical approach whereas this book solely focused on his efforts during WW2. Would recommend this book if looking to learn more about the South Pacific theater.

[John Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book is an excellent read and provides some major insights to WW II in the Pacific. It also highlights the inter-service rivalry between the US Army and US Navy. It was also telling of the relationship of Franklin Roosevelt with Douglas MacArthur.

[Sammy Duncan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found this to be an extraordinary biography of Douglas MacArthur as it was told through through he eyes of his relationship with FDR, who very famously stated that he would need to tame MacArthur. MacArthur was an over-sized personality in a time of over-sized personalities.

[Jeff Aldrich · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating, detailed biography of Douglas McArthur from just prior to WWII through the end of the war and his important relationship with FDR. The book suffers from a lack of detailed maps but compensates with first person correspondence from friends and foes of McArthur.

[Karunya Sethuraman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Suprisingly interesting for a long, non-fiction book! Would absolutely recommend!

[Gus Breymann · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a balanced biography of a man with great strengths, flaws and personal failings. By the end of the book, you will find evidence of all those traits in this military genius. It relies almost exclusively on the firsthand accounts of the men who knew and worked with MacArthur, as well as the multi-volume official army and army air forces histories of WWII. I recommend it highly. A hint to potential readers: read the eight-page epilogue first because it provides helpful perspective for the body of the book.

I found the following highlights:(1)the critical importance of MacArthur's strategic decision to take Rabaul in Operation Cartwheel as a key to defeating Japan; (2)MacArthur's first Southwest Pacific command victory at Milne Bay; and (3) the very careful communications between Marshall, Roosevelt, and MacArthur that had the effect of moving the war forward throughout the Pacific.

More than some other biographies, this one emphasizes the emotional attachment MacArthur had to the Philippines, going all the way back to his father's posting there. This ultimately determined that the campaign would be fought through the Philippines.

I quibble with the author over his portrayal of General Lewis Hyde Brereton. I know of no evidence that Brereton was drunk or hung over after the 27th Bombardment Group bash at the Manila Hotel in the hours before the Japanese attack on Luzon on December 8th. The author uses this to explain why General Sutherland refused to allow Brereton to speak directly to MacArthur twice after news of Pearl Harbor arrived. Furthermore, while MacArthur did want Brereton out of his command structure, Brereton proceeded to competent performance, senior commands and promotion to lieutenant general in the Mideast and Europe for the remainder of the war. He held command positions in more theaters of WWII than virtually any other general.

Having just quibbled, however, I must add that Perry makes the point that, even if Lewis Brereton had sent his FEAF planes north to bomb Formosa on December 8th, it would not have made a difference because the size of Japanese forces was far superior at the time.

A key value of this volume is that it highlights the great leadership of men in the Pacific like Kenney, Whitehead, Eichelberger, Krueger, Barbee and others who have been insufficiently regarded because they were overshadowed in the news by European generals like Eisenhower and Bradley. The 5th Air Force was known as the "Forgotten Fifth" for a reason.

An interesting sidelight to Perry's book concerns the very attractive secretaries (WAC officers)who accompanied some of MacArthur's top aides all the way to Tokyo. The author mentions Elaine Bessemer-Clarke, who was General Sutherland's mistress. MacArthur sent her packing back to Australia after Sutherland disobeyed his boss twice about discontinuing their public relationship. The author does not, however, mention General George Kenney's secretary, Beryl Speirs Stevenson, who was present in Brisbane, Port Moresby, Hollandia, Leyte and Manila. Nor does Perry mention Louise Mowat, another especially attractive young woman who was General Richard Marshall's secretary until the end of the war. Oveta Culp Hobby, director of the WAAC and WAC, fought very hard to prevent the women from being commissioned so that they could accompany their bosses into the war zone. Hobby lost.

[Bryan · Rating 5 out of 5]

For some reason, I’ve always been drawn to MacArthur (and Truman, the other player in the Greek Tragedy). I think it is because I would like to flatter myself that I share some of his strengths, such as his creative problem solving and ability to bring the best out in people, while I know I possess some of his weaknesses, such as overconfidence and unwillingness to share the limelight with others. There are probably as many books and internet pages that take a dim view of MacArthur’s generalship as there are those that proclaim him a genius. This book, with a very misleading title, is firmly in the MacArthur admirers column, so I really enjoyed it.

The book covers MacArthur during the buildup and denouement of World War II. It builds a strong case that MacArthur was a very able, if not brilliant, commander during those years. He had an incredibly strong supporting cast of field commanders, including, my favorite since I’m a retired Air Force Captain, George Kenney, his Army Air Corps commander. Kenney infected MacArthur with his confidence, assuring MacArthur during his daily visits to MacArthur’s headquarters that the Air Corp would come through, a performance that was so studied and measured that an aide compared it to a cat on a hot tin roof. The Air Corps did come through, brilliantly, as well as MacArthur. The book doesn’t gloss over MacArthur’s faults, but the overwhelming egoism that cost him his job in Korea had not manifested enough during these years to detract much from a masterful performance.

I loved this book, so ignore the title and read a good book that makes an excellent argument about a controversial subject.

[Rich McAllister · Rating 3 out of 5]

Wanting to read a MacArthur bio, picked this one because Manchester's was checked out at the library and reviews seem to indicate this was "balanced", neither a hatchet job or a hagiography. Reading it, I'm coming to the conclusion Perry wanted to write a close to a hagiography as he could while remaining true to the sources. The book tends to wander a bit into straight WWII history, even diving off into parts of the war (Europe) that MacArthur had nothing to do with. Most disappointing to me was the decision to stop at the end of WWII, and not go into the Korean War and the confrontation with Truman. That's actually what I most wanted to read about. It seems to me that Perry couldn't figure out a way to spin that incident in a way that made MacArthur look good, so he just stopped before he had to deal with it.

On the other hand, the descriptions of the military campaigns are good; if I had wanted a history of the SW Pacific theater I'd been happy except for complaining a bit about too much focus on MacArthur.

Maybe I'll put the Manchester one on reserve....

[Gerry · Rating 2 out of 5]

The title comes from what presidential candidate FDR termed him, and the book explains the relationship between Roosevelt and MacArthur. This facet was interesting, as was learning of Generals Eichelbeger and Krueger, long relegated to MacArthur's shadow. In the epilogue, the author states, "MacArthur's lasting memorial is Operation Cartwheel...the most successful air, land, and sea campaign in the history of warfare." I found little in the narrative to support this, or to answer the "so what?" question, that is, the results of, and impact upon the enemy, of the operation. Neither this, nor Manchester's earlier tome, really explain MacArthur's greatness as a commander, so the search continues, although this isn't too bad as a biography, if you forgive his saying (on p.41) that he was born in Texas (actually, Little Rock, Ark.)!

[Jason Keenan · Rating 5 out of 5]

https://101booksjapan.blogspot.ca/

The Most Dangerous Man in America zeroes in on what might be called the critical years of MacArthur's military career -- the close to 13 years of FDR's presidency. Boiled down it's the story of creative conflict -- between FDR and MacArthur through those years, and between MacArthur in command of the army and Ernest King from the navy over who should run the campaign against Japan.

In both cases the competition sparked creativity -- and ultimately better results if there had been no competition.

A fairly even assessment of MacArthur -- good and bad -- it's the perfect prequel to Supreme Commander (which picks up the story after the war and during the occupation of Japan.)

MacArthur was complex - and The Most Dangerous Man in America explains some of that in a compelling way.

[Lee · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book tells the story of Macarthur’s life as Chief of Staff of the Army just prior to WWII and the battles to try and keep the military prepared against the members of FDR and the isolationists in the US who want to cut military spending to the bone. It shows how FDR outmaneuvered MacArthur in replacing him as chief of staff and sending him to the Philippines and how Macarthur handled the battles on the Philippines when the Japanese invaded. His flight to Australia and then his direction of the war in the Pacific, battles with Naval Commanders and politicians over getting the troops and resources to fight against the Japanese. Lastly it covers his relationships with his subordinates as he assembles the team to win the war in the Pacific. Good read.

[Ross Cohen]

Mark Perry's "The Most Dangerous Man in America: The Making of Douglas MacArthur" is primarily about MacArthur's role as the Southwestern Pacific Commander. It is also about MacArthur's hot and cold relationship with Franklin Roosevelt. Perry does great service toward both of these aims, though I wish he had spent more time on "The Making of Douglas MacArthur." MacArthur was a complicated man, whose military strengths and weaknesses were an extension of those of his personality. The MacArthur of Perry's book arrives nearly fully-made, which was something of a let-down for this reader, who enjoys stories of self-creation.

[Sharron · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although I purchased this book believing it to be a biography of MacArthur, I quickly discovered it is not. It is instead a military and a political history of the Pacific theater during WWII. Though at times the details of a specific battle were overwhelming, for the most part Perry maintains a good narrative pace with accounts of the infighting among the officers, both army and navy, who led the campaign along with an explanation of the political realities, both in the USA and Europe which informed their decisions.

[Dave Ives · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you're a MacArthur fan, you'll love this book. Even if you're not, you'll probably find it interesting as it's well written and MacArthur is a major player in US military history. The book is fair in that it tells us of MacAthur's high points - victories, triumphs - and not so high points where he comes across as ordinary and sometimes even worse. The book covers the World War II years so nothing here about his Korean War or World War I exploits.

[Mike Phillips · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent read!!!! I have read many biographies on General MacArthur. This one is unique in its focus on his interactions with those in the chain of command. I would recommend this to anyone looking for a better understanding of how the war was fought not only in the field but in the corridors of power in Washington as well.

[Janet · Rating 3 out of 5]

A book sympathetic to MacArthur. A needful overview of the war in the Pacific. The narrative was frustratingly bereft of time lines and useful maps to help the reader follow the battles narratives. A book club book that won us the surprised respect of a couple of husbands who now want to read our books.

[Bruce · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good, balanced coverage of MacArthur's life and army career. The inter-service rivalries over resource distribution and chains of command are interesting reading. All the major players had faults that affected their impact on the conduct of the war. The maps are inadequate. You'll have to consult other map sources to follow the evolution of landings and battles.