Be the leading expert on the history of modern american soldiers in combat. He is the author of 15 best selling and Award Winning books, military history, including in the dead and those about die. September hope and fire and fortitude, a native of st louis and john is a curators professor of u. S. Military history at Missouri University of science and technology and rolla, this professor worship is bestowed by the university of missouri board of curators and the most outstanding scholars in the university of missouri system. During the 2018 2019 academic year, john was in residence at, the u. S. Naval academy and, annapolis, as the leo schiffrin, chair of naval, naval and military history, a distinguished visiting professor. Johns latest to the ends of the earth is the installment of three part history on the u. S. Army. During World War Two to the ends of the earth recounts the stories of us army in the final days, the battle bringing to life both the experiences of the foot soldiers and the strategy of commanders. To quote a review from general david petraeus, this brilliant and riveting final volume in an extraordinary trilogy solidifies john mcmanus reputation as one of the greatest historians of times. Please help me. We welcome john mcmanus. Thank you so much. Thank you. I dont know what to say after that. Thank you for that introduction. I paid general petraeus a lot of money for that blurb and boy, did that pay off. Id like to also thank kari, robb and my old friend whos who did all these arrangements to make this a success tonight. And id like to thank all of you for making time and trouble to come and see me on such beautiful evening. And im sure you could be doing a lot of other. But i want to tell you how much i appreciate that. You know, i want to just take you into the into the world of the us army in 1945 tonight its a when you take a look at this map you can just see the vastness of the of the theater. Its just almost stagger at this point. 1945, the army had had started to come into full maturity. And its its basically spread out along our map here from desolate outposts in alaska to choking jungles and burma, new guinea, the solomon islands, the caves back to the hills, a late in all of these other little sort of seemingly insignificant places in between. The army has really by this point done the vast majority of the fighting and the plurality of the dying in this war. So as of 1945, about 1. 4 million soldiers were spread across nearly a third of the globe surface, which you see here and answer no single commander, because it was a dispersion and of geography and command was really unprecedented before or since in American History by this army thats fighting in the pacific against japan have matured into one of those potent, sophisticated land forces in Human History. And yet a lot of major battles loomed. So the question now is not really whether the allies are going to win the war. They arent going to win the war and what would victory take and maybe even more significantly, how costly would be to achieve. So in the course of this war, by the time its done, more than 1. 8 million american ground soldiers served in in the war against japan to give you a little perspective, thats the Third Largest land force this country has ever sent overseas to fight a war behind only, of course, the european theater armies in both world wars one and two. And it is, of course, the army in the pacific, the certainly the most amphibious experienced ground force, Human History up to that point in time. And at that point, it comprised at least 21 infantry and airborne divisions, plus all sorts of independent teams, engineer, infantry armor. That really equates to about four more divisions worth of manpower. And of course, on top of that now, you have the massive numbers of Accompanying Service forces forces, again, engineering units and other specialist units that you would have to have to support this force and that number of them, including, by the way, i mentioned to you, by the way, does not include the army air force, as you probably know the air force was part of the army in World War Two before getting its independence after, the war. So the number i quoted you doesnt include the army air forces, the size of the army in dwarfed the United States marine corps. Yet i think its fair to say, in popular memory of the war against japan, there is notion that persists that the marines really did most all of the Ground Fighting and the army kind of just focused on europe while the army focusing on europe, of course, too. But point is, its also heavily involved in the pacific and asia as well. So its actually the army and not the marine corps that carries out most of the amphibious landings. Example, the marines carried 15 amphibious landings in course of the war against japan. Lieutenant general robert eichelberger, his eighth army alone, carried 35 in the spring in 1945. In the philippines alone. My purpose in mentioning this is actually to in some ways lionize the marine corps because, you know, its when you a sense of this larger perspective, you just how incredibly valorous the marines were, what major contribution they made. There just werent that many of them. They mobilized six divisions in the course of the war. Then youve got about four times that much army combat power. So the marines, by were supposed to be a select and mainly focused on combat. The army dealing not just with combat, but also is these other vast tasks that had to be done in order to win the war. So 42,000 of these soldiers, guys, this you see here would survive the army really does the plurality of the dying. They were felled by combat disease, accidents, the terrible privation of captivity. It was a of death. Again, to give you another perspective here, harvest of death that totaled than the entirety of any previous american conflict, except, of course the civil war in world war one. So just the army lost more dead army in the pacific alone, lost more in World War Two than in any previous american war, except for those two. Its just a course of staggering, epically complex by this point in time, vast capability, seldom seen in the course of human events. Its an army that by 1945 had proven very adept a variety of missions just to give a few examples grand strategic planning, interservice coordination of which there had to be a lot. Youre going nowhere without. The navy right. You need air support youre working with the marines. Youre working with the guard, you know, so youve a lot of interservice coordination, diplomacy, diplomacy with foreign leaders, military formations, intel gathering joint operations with allies like the australians would be my example. And also the chinese logistics, which are massive every single bullet, every paperclip every person has to be moved by somewhere, maybe by plane too, but mainly by ship that a lot of planning, logistics, sustainment, supply, all that unglamorous stuff. The armys doing most of it transportation. And of course, i mainly on land. Although the army had own little navy during the war too overstretched was the navy. The army commissioned ships so but you know transportation. You talk about trucking and and jeeps and whatnot necessary to move stuff to where it needs to be engineering. Theres an enormous engineering, the pacific war on a lot levels. And the army is dealing with the bulk of that guerrilla warfare, especially in the philippines. Is the army is a big part of that medical care on a scale even a generation earlier, civil affairs, mortuary affairs, dealing with captivity, and then, of course, Ground Combat operations of nearly every type, every distinction, every kind of brutal reality in sport and some of the worlds most inhospitable terrain and some of the worst places on the planet. Youre plunged into kind of elemental death struggle whose base nature. I think its fair to say few americans really grasp at the time and probably ever since as well. So many of those soldiers had also kind of glimpsed the sort of troubling future. There are a lot of harbingers, and i think thats partially whats so fascinating about, studying the the army in the pacific theater, because it really is so relevant to the 21st century, too. And so that point i was making that, the army does really the vast majority, the fighting, the plurality of the dying and all the other stuff to it is, i think, instructive, because when you look at the armys experience, you can see a lot of the subsequent history that happens. Like what . Well irregular warfare, guerrilla warfare in the philippines or in the South Pacific or in china, in burma or wherever it would be this sort of moral ambiguities of combat. Youre fighting an enemy that recognizes no geneva convention, as you would think of it, that really actively wants to shoot medical personnel, that treats prisoners horribly. And the americans have to come face to face with their own, you know, tendency to brutality, to against an enemy like that, and wonder what rules do we follow . How do we deal with this . I think its fair to say, weve weve confronted that ever since in all of our wars. So this is not, you know, a sort mark of queensbury kind of war theres a lot of racial strife, theres postcolonial uncertainty, theres flawed alliances and just this sort of byzantine struggle for influence in asia and the pacific. And id venture to say thats a crucial enterprise that the us has never really mastered, nor has it relinquished. And it remains very important today. So with the exception of grenada, panama and mogadishu every american war since World War Two has been fought somewhere, the asian landmass. And thats probably an accident. Ground fighting accounted for 90 of american war deaths since World War Two at the very time when nuclear weapons, air power, Power Technology was supposed to make Ground Fighting obsolete, actually, opposite happened. And of course, most of those deaths were suffered by Army Soldiers. So i dont propose to walk you through the armys whole 45 experiences tonight for that course, i got to read the book. Thats what i always i mean, i still recommend that, you know, and you really cant get the flavor of unless you actually buy it and listen to it. It read it many, many times, know take it to heart. I mean, thats obviously the best way to do this, but i certainly cant you a few highlights by looking at a few key personalities a few of the battles so of course we have to begin with this who really needs very little introduction for me . General douglas macarthur, you may notice hes a five star general in this and this particular picture when was he promoted to five star general in december 1944. So by the invasion of luzon the next month. Hes a five star. And, of course certainly by his own estimation, hes the main character the theater. Hes the main character. Wherever he goes, no matter what he does hes an olympian figure. Hes a byzantine figure. Hes, you know megalomaniacal figure on a lot levels, too. But, you know, hes hes been through a lot by 1945, certainly a long army career, very distinguished army career. But i mean, in World War Two, he famously his military forces are are defeated in the philippines in 1942. His commanded out by roosevelt to to go to australia. And he his forces. And so macarthur had spent the better part of the next two plus years leading military forces across new guinea and elsewhere with the purpose of getting back to the philippines. And he had he had of course this by october 1944 on an island called later in the sort of mid section of the philippine islands. And so hes on the cusp by 1945 of what he sees as the of this whole thing the liberation of lose on the largest and often called island of the philippines and really the place he had called home especially manila. So this is a very complex due to of course and it is one of his close aides once said of him. He said, none of us really macarthur. We all saw fragments. The man i think theres a great deal of truth to that. He was remarkably courageous. He was epically conniving. He believed with an almost evangelical intensity, that americas future lay in the pacific and asia. And i dont know that hes really about that, but he also thinks, well, im in this room, so it must be the most important room in the house, right theres a little bit of that, too. His pilot, lieutenant dusty rhodes, who probably knew him as well as anybody said of them, he had some feeling that he was a of destiny. He seemed to believe that he was especially protected so that he could fulfill a mission. What mission . Well, of the liberation of the philippines, which he saw as a modern crusade and i think crusade was kind of a small word for what he really envisioned here. A redemption on some levels, too, certainly for the us, but also for him personally. He loved the people of the philippines. It was his home and also to him liberating the philippines really almost in some ways mattered more than defeating japan, you know, then going in tokyo on some level. So his two key instruments to carry out this crusade were his army commanders, both of whom were highly experienced combat leaders. By 1945 and had an develop a kind of intense rivalry. So the first one, of course, is that the guy on the left, Lieutenant GeneralWalter Kruger, is on the left. Yeah, hes on the left. You standing there . The naval officer with him is vice admiral thomas kinkaid, who is a very much a leading naval who works very closely with macarthur and his forces during the war. Kruger is a fascinating guy, very much a selfmade person. He was actually born in germany when he was an adolescent his father died. His father was in the german army and his mother moved him here actually to saint louis. They immigrated here. They came here ostensibly because kruger had an uncle who owned a brewery here in, saint louis. So thats a big part of the germanamerican in the 19th century. He was born in 1881, so he comes here as i said, in his adolescence and in 1898. War breaks out with spain. So walter decides that going to join the us army as a 17 year old private and that begins a military career that does not end until 1946. Incredible isnt it 17 year old private he earns a commission and he gets commissioned by the way in the philippines, you know, serving there in the philippineamerican war, which was a basically an war to try and suppress filipino that the americans successfully did that. So he knew a lot about the philippines and about luzon. And so interesting thing about him, i mean, hes had to remake himself as an immigrant. He was very proud to speak english with hardly an accent at all. Obviously, he spoke german. He spoke spanish, spoke french. He this kind of military wonk writing deep dive strategy and policy papers and whatnot in military journals. And the interesting thing is that not only did he have no west point pedigree, like many of his peers did course he had no college degree, he had no high school diploma, and he becomes a four star general. I venture to. Say thats never going to happen again. So hes certainly certainly a selfmade kind of guy and hes obviously got a deep affinity for the average soldier. Thats a real strength because he was one. And so he understands that. But hes also the word often associated with him is cautious. And theres a lot of truth to that methodical. Hes exacting, hes brusk. Hes remarkably rude at times and kind of close minded on some levels. Those are his weaknesses. But but he also is a very honest Dwight Eisenhower served as one of his key aides in right before World War Two. And he once said of him few generals were physically or more active, relentless driving himself. He had little need of driving others. They were quick to follow his example. One of his commanders once assessed, i think, very insightful he was a good soldier and a good strategist and a very sound thinker. But he didnt have much of a personality i think thats clear. He just didnt warm up a room. He would say things that youd just be like, how can you be so, you know, dense so you know, how can you be so i mean, thats sort of the downside. Army. He didnt suffer fools gladly, but he has an extraordinarily good heart. Hes very bright. Hes actually when you really delve into his biography, you really see his warm side. He was his his wife, grace was his true soul. He was a really good husband. He was an excellent, warm father to his three children. So, Walter Kruger had much to recommend him on the personal level. But when he was wearing his professional hat, then it was business, you know. So you didnt warm up to him that much. But sometimes would see his human side come out with enlisted soldiers. Thats who we really related to on some level. So an example id give you, this happened in new guinea. He was supposed to inspect an Infantry Battalion in particular an Infantry Company that everybody on his staff assumed was going to be training really hard for the next operation. When he shows up. The soldiers actually were in the middle of a very spirited volleyball game. So their commanders were like, oh, my god, whats the general going to do. Hes going to be angry. Hes really going to chew us out and. You know, theres this tension. And then kruger sort of sits back and sits down on a log and says go on. I want to see who won the game, you know, and theyre like, oh my god. And, you know, the volleyball game goes on. And then his staff is just sort of like breathing a sigh of relief. It gives you a sense that hes going to be on his best behavior around the enlisted men. Its the and colonels that he really is rude with so it on which is interesting it was his sixth army led the invasion and dominated the campaign to follow his his peer his colleague is this guy, Lieutenant General robert eichelberger, who i mentioned briefly moments ago. And of course, hes a very different background, although they have more in common than they would to admit they become big rivals. Eichelberger was the of a very successful full Civil War Veteran of the union side in ohio. His father was a successful lawyer and gentleman farmer eichelberger came fr