Comments on: America’s Retreat From Victory

By: xxcr

xxcr — Fri, 23 Mar 2018 12:51:23 +0000

From another review of this book:
https://foseti.wordpress.com/2012/08/19/review-of-americas-retreat-from-victory-by-joseph-r-mccarthy/
(…)
After the fall of China to Communist forces, General Wedemeyer would testify before Congress that while the loss of morale was indeed a cause of the defeat of the Nationalist Chinese forces, the Truman administration’s 1947 decision to discontinue further training and modernizing of Nationalist forces, the U.S.-imposed arms embargo [i.e. Marshall’s policies], and constant anti-Nationalist sentiment expressed by Western journalists and policymakers were primary causes of that loss of morale. In particular, Wedemeyer stressed that if the U.S. had insisted on experienced American military advisers attached at the lower battalion and regimental levels of Nationalist armies [rejected by Marshall] (as it had done with Greek army forces during the Greek Civil War), that aid could have more efficiently been utilized, and that the immediate tactical assistance would have resulted in Nationalist armies performing far better in combat against the Communist Chinese. Vice-Admiral Oscar C. Badger, General Claire Chennault, and Brigadier General Francis Brink also testified that the arms embargo was a significant factor in the loss of China.
(…)

By: Robert PTC

Robert PTC — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 19:54:50 +0000

McCarthy’s rantings? How about this: “Ironically, a 1997 report by liberal Senator Moynihan’s commission on government secrecy vindicated McCarthy’s claims of Communist infiltration.” I guess he wasn’t so crazy or he wasn’t really ranting after all. Look at the fool who occupies the White House now. If he isn’t the product of Communism then my name is George Washington.

By: VincentMVNY

VincentMVNY — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 03:05:00 +0000

“fanatical rantings”, “impune (sic)”,
“patriotsum (sic)”,”did not know of what he spoke”. These statements say a lot about this writer. Are we to assume he knows of what he writes?Dare I guess he’s never read this book but can remember that the left always characterizes McCarthy as hysterical and of making “fanatical rantings”. A friend just sent me this book to read and it’s changed my mind about the high regard in which I held Marshall as a result of what I was spoon fed during my whole life. The book is impeccably documented and footnoted with quotes from the memoirs of Marshall’s contemporaries, friends and foes. McCarthy’s stock has risen since the production of the Venona papers after the fall of Communism proved every one of his allegations regarding Communist penetration into the highest offices of both Roosevelt’s and Truman’s administrations WERE TRUE! The Rosenbergs, SPIES, Acheson, TRAITOR, Hiss, TRAITOR, etc., etc. You’d never know this because the left media would rather you continue to think of Joe McCarthy as a “fanatical ranter”. “McCarthyism” should be a badge of honor.

By: Charleston Voice

Charleston Voice — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 03:29:10 +0000

Isn’t it amusing that while McCarthy’s enemies and detractors malign him in many ways they can point to no inaccuracies in McCarthy’s claims?

By: Ed Bartley Allen

Ed Bartley Allen — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 01:44:51 +0000

Why should Marshall be “sacred”? — especially to the extent of it being “unconscionable” to question him?

I think it is fine for ANYONE to be questioned. It is clear to me that Marshall worked for the establishment, and that same establishment worked hard to build a friendly relationship with slave-labor-state Communist China, to the point where now America can do virtually nothing without the permission of the Chinese oligarchs who hold our debt. Gee, thanks George! What a great patriot.

By: Ed Clark

Ed Clark — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 21:15:24 +0000

I cannot attest the sanity of Joe McCarthy, but growing up I remember hearing his fanatical rantings. I suspect he was trying to copy Richard Nixon’s success with the Chamber’s matter and attain the Presidency. No matter, but to impune the character and patriotsum of General George C. Marshall in this speech is just unconscionable. I suggest a through study of General Marshall before accepting this speech/book as valid. It is apparent that McCarthy did not know of what he spoke and really did not know Marshall. Why do people always want to run to a loud mouth demagog?