More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
National trauma—social, political, economic, and military—produces a cultural tension that can challenge democratic norms. In such circumstances, the loudest, most aggressive voices often assume leadership roles. During World War II, military and naval leaders such as Admiral Ernest J. King, General Douglas MacArthur, Admiral “Bull” Halsey, and General George Patton all rose to prominence. All were talented and competent. All were also larger-than-life figures whose temperament, stubbornness, self-assurance, and impatience characterized their leadership. They were, and are, polarizing figures.
Nimitz, like Generals George Marshall and Dwight Eisenhower, exemplified another leadership style, a quieter one that depended on intelligent listening, humility, and patience. Nimitz did not shrink from hard decisions—he was, at critical moments, as bold as any commander in the war. Yet he believed that ultimate success depended on accommodation as well as determination, on humility as well as aggressiveness, on nurturing available human resources as well as asserting his authority.
Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), Admiral Harold Stark,
fleet commander, Admiral J. O. Richardson.
Husband E. Kimmel.
Admiral Ernest J. King,
Lieutenant H. Arthur “Hal” Lamar,
It was dogma in the naval service that pitting guns afloat against guns ashore was a fool’s bet.
“An attack by ship-based aircraft against shore-based aircraft except when the element of surprise is present,” he wrote, “may result in serious losses.”
Like Pye, Brown believed that carrier raids against land bases could be effective only if they achieved tactical surprise. In his view, “the ever growing importance and effectiveness of aircraft has not changed the old truism that ships are at
disadvantage in attacking strongly defended shore positions.”
