I love the fact the speaker differentiates the following: "General of the Army" "General of the Armies" and "General of the Armies of the United States." That is correctly explained. I have read several sources that claim a reason that the rank of "General of the Army" was adopted in 1944 was because General Marshall wanted to keep General Pershing senior. Pershing and Marshall were very good friends, in fact, Pershing was Marshall's Best Man in his second marriage.
And it was Gen. Marshall who named the rank "General of the Army". The 5-star rank was created to give US generals equality to foreign (particularly British) general officers of the grade Field Marshal and that nomenclature was suggested for the new US general grade. However, Gen. Marshall quashed the name saying he did NOT want to be referred to as "Marshal Marshall"!
@@dennisswaney644 Well rank aside Eisenhower was over everyone. But all thr General ranks are kinda boring and I think we need soemthing like "commander" "Grand admiral" "Commodore" "commodant" "chief"
Pershing was an absolutely amazing man and leader, literally creating the modern US Army as we know it today. He was the mentor of a lot of the US Generals who were successful in WWII.
This scheme would go against the standard set at lower ranks, which is that silver insignia outrank similar gold ones. A second lieutenant is denoted by a gold bar, a first lieutenant by a silver bar. A major wears a gold leaf insignia, and a lieutenant colonel wears a silver leaf.
@@4realjacob637 - the ranks on Battle Dress Uniforms are deliberately more drab. It’s a bad idea to wear anything that would stand out on a battlefield. Metal insignia that glitter in the sun would also make officers particular targets. The British Redcoats found this out to their cost during the American Revolution, when Continental snipers took down many of their top officers, most notably General Simon Fraser, whose death from a sniper’s bullet at Saratoga was a key factor in the resounding American victory in that battle.
My grandfather was a sergeant under General Pershing in the 1916 punitive raid against Pancho Villa. By 1918, he was a lieutenant in the Signal Corps, on his way to France. The war ended before his troop ship embarked.
@@jamesricker3997 Well, Truman was an ass, but MacArthur was a bigger one. However, if Truman had done his job right and directed Mac to WIN the Korean War, there would be a united and free Republic of Korea and probably no Red China today. But Truman didn't and goes down as the first US president to lose a war.
And General Grant was promoted to that rank the day after and Pershing on the 6th. That way Washington was always senior, then Grant, and finally Pershing
I never knew this until about a year ago and I have studied history my whole life, this is what makes history so important to pass down the line or it will be lost forever
@@ChiefMac59 you are severely mistaken. Grant was promoted to 4 star grade in 1866, Pershing was given the honorary rank of "General of the Armies" in 1919
Thanks for the videos you have been posting and sending out by email. I've enjoyed them very much. I knew about Pershing and Dewey, but I was unaware of the 1976 elevation of Washington to General of the Armies. It's always a good day when I learn something new. Best wishes!
Thought I would share the following @ 1975 or early 1976 GEN Don Starry ( newly promoted to 4 star ) was going to testify to Congress. His Driver asked him enroute to the hearing who was just bellow Starry in seniority in the history of the U.S. Army. starry had researched and found that he rated senior to George Washington . Starry started the ball rolling and subsequently Washington was promoted to 6 star General of the Armies and also stipulated he would be the most senior General. That being said... Pershing would be 2nd. With the recent postumous promotion of U.S. Grant to 6 star rank he is now 3d senior general in the history of the US Army . Time for a postumous promotion for MacArthur is now.
As it should be George Washington is forever our seniors military officer and greatest President. However Pershing’s accomplishments are an amazing history to remember
The reason that General Black Jack Pershing was promoted to General of the Army was so he had standing in dealing with the Allies during WW I. The U.S. didn’t have an equivalent rank to Field Marshall and because this was the first time that the U.S. was fight in Europe with other nations. Creating the rank eliminated the possibility of U.S. forces being subordinates to our Allies (except for Black troops that were OPCONed to other nations primarily the French where they won numerous battles and the respect of the French). He was called Black Jack for a reason.
Pershing was not promoted to General of the Armies until 3 September, 1919, so your argument is incorrect. It does apply to WW2. Eisenhower needed five stars to have any hope of commanding FM Viscount Montgomery, and promoting Eisenhower was impractical unless Marshall and MacArthur were promoted as well.
Excellent video. I'm interested in exactly who it was that was trying to get MacArthur his sixth star toward the end of WW2. To give him a sixth star would have meant that Leahy would have needed to be promoted as well. A theater commander can not outrank a member of the Joint Chiefs. Additionally, I recall the media speculating that General Schwarzkopf was going to be given a fifth star at the end of the Gulf War. The media kept forgetting (or did not understand) that to do this would have caused a problem. Schwarzkopf would then have outranked his superior, Army Chief of Staff Colin Powell.
IIRC correctly the promotion packet was prepared for Mac for 6 star rank at the Pentagon for the invasion of Japan. As it was envisioned 5 star Generals and Admirals would serve under his command.
Reportedly U.S. Grant was recently promoted to this rank, making three. My grandfather was a colonel in the Phillipines and probably knew Pershing, since both were army officers from St. Louis. After the war, he was the first postmaster of Manila.
Also there is only one 5-star general who held that rank in two military services: Henry "Hap" Arnold. Commander of the US Army Air Forces, on December 21, 1944 he was promoted to General of the Army and retired at that rank on June 30, 1946. On May 7, 1949, he was "promoted" to the rank of General of the Air Force but remained on the retired list. Hap Arnold passed away on January 15, 1950 at the young age of 63.
Rank inflation. You give six stars today, you'll be giving seven stars later. FOUR STARS IS ENOUGH. After that, rank can be discerned by edict or by command position. Everyone knows that the four star chief of staff is superior to all other four star officers. If there are ten four-star officers in a theater of operation, and Congress says four-star General Colin Tecumseh Schwarzkopf is in command, why the hell does it matter how many stars he has. Our generals are going to start to look like third-world dictators for Christ's sake.
Fist off they arent just handing out 6 star ranks only 3 Americans have ever held the rank. 2nd the reason America has a six star rank is because other countries have equivalent ranks and the us government didn't want allied commanders to out rank them or have foreign generals upset that they had to take orders from someone lower ranked then them.
You're completely right about the number of stars of course but if you haven't noticed, the quality of everything seems to be going downhill while the hype it gets about being the best ever keeps spinning wildly out of control.
Just for the record, I think Washington's rank insignia, and only Washington's should be a six pointed star - like the one from his family's crest in England.
Yes there was one General of the Army with six stars: George Washington. That rank was created recently just for him so he will always be our top General.
@@johnparry5742 - He was born in VA. That hardly makes him English. His father left England for America. While he was an English subject, he decided to become head of the Continental Army.
@@anonymousposter3570 Google says: "In 1976, as part of commemorations for the U.S. Bicentennial, General George Washington was posthumously promoted to the rank of General of the Armies of the United States. Although the law did not actually specify the number of stars, some U.S. newspapers and members of Congress described this as a six-star rank."
It's ironic that Pershing was given the 6 star rank. He ended up commanding the AEF in WW I mostly by happenstance since he didn't have anything to do once he finished up in Mexico. He came close to losing his command when the Meuse-Argonne Offensive bogged down. Pershing didn't have a general staff and Congress threatened to give him one. This prompted Pershing to make his own using men he already had in his command. Then when it came tome to negotiate the armistice, Pershing didn't participate with the British and French commanders on an equal footing. Even though it was American manpower that both broke the final German offensive and spearheaded the final Allied offensive of the war, Pershing was very much the junior partner in the Allied high command.
@@bob80q The position of General of the Armies of the United States was created for Washington, but he was never officially appointed during his lifetime, and the position then lapsed. The position was revived with the title General of the Army for U.S. Grant and was later held by both Sherman and Sheridan before being given to Pershing as General of the Armies. In 1924 the U.S. Comptroller General ruled that the rank intended for Washington and then held by Grant was the same rank that was given to Pershing. Pershing was only a major general when the U.S. entered World War I, but he was made General of the Armies before the war ended. The rank was intended only as an emergency wartime measure, and Pershing, along with Army Chief of Staff March, were to revert back to major general rank when the war ended. But, President Wilson asked Congress to make the higher rank permanent with Pershing outranking March. Congress passed a law to promote Pershing while repealing a 1917 law that made the Army Chief of Staff senior to all other army generals. Congress then defeated the bill that would have promoted March. Pershing’s General of the Armies rank was rather ambiguous until 1976. When the 5 star rank was created in World War II the law specified that Pershing would still outrank the 5 stars, but whether or not this was by having a higher rank or simply by seniority among the 5 stars was not specified. When the World War II 5 stars came out Pershing was too old and ill to design new insignia for himself and efforts to have him buried with 6 stars failed and he was buried with the 4 stars that he had always worn. Washington was posthumously promoted to General of the Armies in 1776 with the law stipulating that he would forever be the highest ranking officer in the Army. U.S. Representative F. Edward Hébert insisted that the resolution gave Washington 6 star status, which means Pershing should also have had 6 stars status, but in 1992 the U.S. Army Institute of Heraldry declared that Pershing only had 5 star rank because he was junior to Washington. But, if this is true, then why did the 5 star rank have to be created in World War II, if it already existed with Pershing? The World War II 5 star law was handled as new legislation, when all that was needed was an amendment to the law that promoted Pershing.
@@christianpatriot7439 Washingtons rank was General of the Armies of the United States. He is the equivalent of a 7 star officer since he outranks Dewey and Pershing who outrank all other military officers.
@@bob80q Washington was only a Lieutenant General during his lifetime. That's the same rank that Grant finished with, but Grant had more authority since he had the power to order naval units to assist the army. I don't think Pershing had any authority over the Navy, although Eisenhower and MacArthur did with just their 5 star rank. Washington was given the General of the Armies rank posthumously in 1976 and the law stipulated that he would forever be the highest ranking member of the armed forces. This would give him 6 star rank in grade, but superior rank in terms of seniority.
So, as I understand it. President Washington will always be senior ranking officer as General of the Armies of the United States. General Pershing will always be second as General of the Armies ( With 4 gold stars). Then we have our Generals of the Army. Admiral Dewey will always be senior ranking officer in the Navy as Admiral of the United States Navy, with our Fleet Admirals junior to him. Corrections welcome. TIA.
I second this one, the content is awesome but I have my sound bar cranked to its nearly highest setting which would probably wake up my hole building if I didn’t turn it didn’t before playing another channels video
Yes, G Washington in 1976 was promoted to General of the Armies with all Seniority, which means no one can ever out rank him whether it be 5 or 6 stars
Douglas MacArthur held the rank of Field Marshal in the Philippine Army when he commanded it before Pearl Harbor and it was an American colony. I can't find any pictures or any information shedding light on what insignia or how many stars (if any) his uniform would have had. Any military historians out there that know?
You may want to google McArthur in his Philippine Commonwealth Army uniform beside the Commonwealth President Manuel Quezon or his early uniform wear in the early part of the Pacific War. His signature outfit was the Rayban glasses, corncob pipe and the old Field Marshal of the Commonwealth Army cap with the scrambled eggs visor.
In the French army of the Ancien Régime, the normal brigade command rank was field marshal (maréchal de camp). In 1793, during the French Revolution, the rank of field marshal was replaced by the rank of brigade general. The rank insignia of field marshal was two stars (one-star being used for a senior colonel rank). The French field marshal rank was below lieutenant-general, which in 1793 became divisional-general. In the title maréchal de camp and the English "field marshal", there is an etymological confusion in the French camp between the English words "camp" and "field". The French rank of field marshal should not be confused with the rank of Marshal of France, which has been the highest rank of the French Army since the higher dignity of Marshal General of France was abolished in 1848 (although in theory it is not an actual rank but a "state dignity"). Generalfeldmarschall (general field marshal, field marshal general, or field marshal / About this soundlisten (help·info), abbreviated to Feldmarschall) was the most senior general officer rank in the armies of several German states, including Saxony, Brandenburg-Prussia, Prussia, the German Empire, and lastly, Germany (from 1918). In the Habsburg Monarchy, the Austrian Empire and Austria-Hungary, the rank Feldmarschall was used. The rank was also given to generals in southern German States and Austria by the Holy Roman Emperor during the existence of the Holy Roman Empire up to 1806. No branch of the United States Armed Forces has ever used the rank of field marshal. However, General Douglas MacArthur was commissioned a field marshal of the Philippine Army in 24 August 1936, serving until 31 December 1937, while still serving as a United States Army officer.
he is actually the equivalent of a 7 star officer since he outranks Dewey and Pershing, they outrank all other military officers thus are the equivalent of 6 stars
@@bob80q not really. There is something called date of rank . If x soldier was promoted to say 4 star General now and another is promoted to 4 stars say a year later then soldier x is senior between is senior ranking.
@@paratrooper629 yeah, 26 years military service so I know all about DOR. There is a small matter that when Washington received his posthumous promotion to General he was declared to be the most senior US military officer of all time, outranking Pershing.
If I was a 6 star General I would expect the military to give me 6 platinum stars. With all the hard work i put in. But I never have been in the military.
The highest ranking military officer of all countries during WW2 was Hermann Göring with the rank of Reichsmarschall Rank: Six-star (unofficial) NATO rank: OF-11 Non-NATO rank: O-12
General of the Armies of the United States... It written that way in the official army register archive.org/stream/officialarmyregi1925unit#page/772/mode/1up Also Marshall gave the suggestion the 5 star title be General of the Army that would leave Pershing the only man to have been a General of the Armies. books.google.co.id/books?id=Gwq6WvWxe6oC&pg=PA491&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false And then on January 19, 1976, a joint Congressional resolution recommended that George Washington be promoted to the rank of General of the Armies of the United States. President Gerald R. Ford implemented the resolution by advancing Washington on October 11, 1976, further mandating that no other officer should ever outrank him. allthingsliberty.com/2013/09/clarifying-washingtons-rank/ With that facts, we can say that until know only 2 person held the rank of General of the Armies of the United States, Washington and Pershing. And in theory George Washington held the highest seniority between the two of them.
No Pershing was given the title of General of the Armies after WW 1. No 5 star rank until Dec 1944 in the Army. Pershing chose to wear 4 gold stars to distinguish him from 4 star generals. Question.... Mac was buried in a khaki class A uniform with only his 5 stars and U.S. on his uniform. He explicitly stated no ribbons or medals. Ike was buried in the uniform he wore on D Day. Army DSM, Navy DSM and the Legion of Merit ribbons.
We should not forget that Grant was also issued the rank of general of the armies. Correction: he was general of the army, not armies. Sorry about that.
@@michaelceres1042 now that Grant has been postumously promoted I hope MacArthur will be promoted next. Really will not cost $$$ to do so and would have been promoted had the invasion of Japan. Plus congress drafted legislation for his promotion in the mid 1950s and even in the early 1960s. Truman in that case offered to take the stance of neutral support for it as ex president. Would not endorse or be opposed Mac being promoted to 6 star rank. My personal belief that if JFK had not been killed the promotion would have happened.
Then what about Genghis Khan absolute ruler of the army and was the government to, Bonaparte got beat ,Khan never, if going worldwide he's a seven star. No Senate armed service committee no little twep Congressmen on a fact finding tour no biased media second guessing him he didn't need stars or rank he was the great khan no one ever had his power so he's # 1
I don’t understand why a new star has to be added because Washington would have presidence in grade. If five is the highest grade he would just have to be first in presidence and he would always be senior.
The six star rank was created for Washington. He was promoted to it because there had already been 2 6 star officers amd congress wanted him to outrank them. The reason the US has six star ranks is because other countries already had them
I hear there is talk of posthumously promoting Grant to General of the Armies of the United States or GAS , the abbreviation making him the third GAS. I think Pershing is the only GAS to be promoted to that rank during his lifetime. Of course, George Washington always will be the most senior officer past and present
Interesting discussion but it includes a lot of supposition. It is not technically fact driven nor are the conclusions anything but supposition since there has not been a six star rank formally approved. It is interesting that this video and supposition comes from the Mac Arthur Museum.
There have been a few five star Generals - Ike was one. The fifth star can only be awarded for service while at war (I think). But Pershing and Washington were the only two to be awarded General of the Armies of the United States, and it is above a five star General of the Army of the United States, which is why it is considered a six star. So both Pershing and Washington outranked Ike. I don't see another sixth star being awarded. I don't believe we have any living five star Generals, and I include Colin Powell, as it would mean meritorious service in a conflict as large or larger than the one Pershing was in (WWI).
Of Course, Other Countries Created Higher Ranks like That; In The German Army/Luftwaffe, Generalfeldmarshal was The 5 Star Rank; However, Hermann Goering was Awarded the Rank of Reichsmarshal,A Six Star Rank.
Actually, there has only been ONE “official” 6 Star General. That was given by Congress to General Washington. Pershing chose FOUR GOLD STARS to his 4 silver Stars. If Pershing had wanted, he could have given himself 5 Stars, not 6. So the argument to jump from 4 stars to 6 stars is TOTALLY INCORRECT both under Military Law and under the Constitutional Powers of Congress. So, when Congress authorized the 5th Star, Pershing was the FIRST 5 Star to the 7 in history who followed Pershing. Hence Pershing out ranked all those who followed with 5 Stars as a 5 Star General. MacArther was only a 5 Star General; like Omar Bradley, Eisenhower, etc.
It should be noted that, during the War for Independence, Washington held the rank of general, i.e., a four star rank, although that insignia was not in use at the time. His designation as lieutenant general came during the Quasi War during the administration of John Adams.
@@bob80q No, I am right. Washington held the rank of lieutenant general when he was appointed to command the army during the Quai War in administration of John Adams. However during the war for Independence, his rank was general, that is, full general.
@@bob80q IIRC Grant was promoted to 4 stars and Sherman to LTG in the mid 1860s. Curious how congress back then was not rewarding other Generals with LTG rank... Handcock certainly earned it. Move forward to WW2... Eichelberger commander 8th Army, Patch 7th Army and truscott 5th Army. @ 1955 after they had been retired Congress promoted to 4 star generals. BTW... I recently read bios of Devers and Truscott. I highly recommend reading them.
George Washington was Lieutenant-General. He was retroactively promoted to a higher rank in the 1976. The presentation explain it briefly around the 4th minute in the presentation. It is my understanding that this promotion was to ensure that no one can ever attain the broad power Washington had during his time as he was effectively in charge of everything. I might be wrong on that point as i did not push too mush in this line of inquiry.
When I was in first grade I recieved 15 stars in less than 3 weeks ! So. I out rank all of them . Dig it . Now at 55 + years old I serve as an arm chair general calling the shot in wars that never happened . And missions that are so classified that only I know about . Your welcomed America ...
Having not watched the video yet (so be patient with my point of view and coming from someone who served a long time in the military) when I read something like this I immediately think that this person doesn't even understand the nature of the 5 star rank and why it was so rare and not used today. With that I will watch the video and see their point of view, and see if I'm enlightened by what he is trying to say.
I think Washington's forever senior grade should be its own insignia without stars, like the seal of the United States with perhaps a decorative wreath around it. And anyone who carries the superior-to-all-generals rank would wear a similar seal with no wreath. Or perhaps both have a wreath, but Washington's is gold, and non-posthumous holders' is silver.... but that creates a different problem, as other officer grades of same insignia have gold as lower and silver as higher (second and first lieutenant, for example. As well as major to lieutenant colonel). But its just a thought
You should clarify that you’re saying "Army" vs. "Armies" and "Navy" vs. "Navies". Unless you enunciate very, VERY carefully, it can be hard to hear which you are saying.
I would classify Washington as an infinite-star general. No matter what officers come after him, they are inferior to him in rank. Dewey would outrank Pershing due to seniority, but I should think their ranks on paper would be the same: a six-star rank.
No he is has seniority in grade to the other 2 6 star officers not by rank. He holds the same rank as pershing and an equivalent rank to admiral Dewey making him a 6 star officer
Dugout Doug was FIRED. It's too bad he wasn't fired before the disaster in the Philippines. The ONLY things he was good at were taking credit for the acts of others, and getting attention in the press. The idea that this incompetent hack should have been a 6-star general is ludicrous.
The "Six-Star" General seemed to come about as "What about General Pershing?😁 Admiral Dewey having died 1917, wasn't a concern. Hence, the U.S. Navy doesn't officially have a 6-Star rank. Great video.
@@LA_Commander Watch the video. Also read: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_of_the_Armies I used the generic term, "6-Star Rank" to reference to "Admiral of the Navies". The Rank of "Admiral of the Navies" and "General of the Armies" has NO insignia. However, I don't see any problem using the term "6-star" to reference those ranks.
Well this became dated quickly. On Dec 28 2022 Ulysses S. Grant was posthumously promoted to General of the Armies at the equivalent rank as Gen. Pershing though Grant would technically outrank Pershing via seniority. This essentially makes U.S. Grant the second highest ranking General Officer in U.S. Army’s history. I think that’s exactly right as in U.S. History, as General Officers, Washington and Grants accomplishments were the greatest. Washington founded a great nation and Grant saved that nation.
Washington is not a six star general and is not considered to be so. His title as General of the Armies was a positional title, not a rank. His rank was Lt. General - 3 stars. An example of positional title would be on June 30, 1986 Admiral Kelso was promoted to 4 star admiral, and at that instant he was the most junior admiral in the US Navy. A few minutes later he was assigned the title of Chief of Naval Operations, which made him the most senior admiral in the US Navy, not by rank but by the position he held.
Why do they not make the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff a Five Star General to adequately differentiate the seniority of that position? A Or would they ever consider doing so?
And really.... Why do we need 5 star rank since WW2? Bradley was promoted to 5 stars as chairman JCS in the summer of 1950 obsessively because Mac had 5 stars. Consider this... Why has no one since has been promoted to 5 stars? By law a five star is never retired. I remember shortly after Desert Storm promoting Schwartzkopf to 5 stars along with Powell. Time magazine at the time called Powell the black Eisenhower. I never knew IKe but when I was a new infantry Major I was in the 1st Cavalry Division. I briefed Powell as we were getting ready to deploy during desert shield. I was not impressed with Colin . I could say more but I choose not to. Plus.... Who post WW2 would have been of the same stature and accomplished than those promoted to the rank of 5 stars? Storming Norman comes to mind. There was talk of doing so yet did not happen. There was a movement to promote Petraus but his having an adulterous affair with a female Major killed it. And rightly so. Even if that did not happen.... While a great General and his distinguished service 4 stars for him was right. Back to Bradley..... Way overrated and a butt buddy of Ike and Truman. He was over his head as an Army and Army group commander. Best left as a Corps Commander in Italy.... Let's see how that works with Mark Clark. Or see how he works out as a Corps or division commander in the Pacific.
The presenter said that Washington would always be senior to ANY US General/Admiral past and present; what about the future? Surely Congress intended Washington to be senior to ANY US General/Admiral in perpetuity!
Why would MacArthur be promoted when he was fired from Korea in disgrace, and only the Public Affairs nightmare kept him from being court martialed during the Korean conflict?
I was wondering myself the question why didn't the U.S.A have rank of Field-marschal, all great powers had that rank at the time so why didn't the Americans
I thought G. Washington was considered a 7 star General officer, while J. Perhing was considered a six star General Officer. The difference being given in the rank titles. General of the Armies, Pershing VS. General of the Armies Of the United States Washington
