“SIC ’EM NED”: EDWARD M. ALMOND AND HIS ARMY, 1916-1953 A Dissertation Submitted to the Temple University Graduate Board In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Michael E. Lynch August 2014 Examining Committee Members: Dr. Gregory J. W. Urwin, Advisory Chair, Department of History Dr. Kenneth L. Kusmer, Department of History Dr. Jay Lockenour, Department of History Dr. Dennis Showalter, External Member, Colorado College i © Copyright 2014 by Michael E. Lynch All Rights Reserved ii ABSTRACT Edward Mallory “Ned” Almond belonged to the generation of US Army officers who came of age during World War I and went on to hold important command positions in World War II and the Korean War. His contemporaries included some of America’s greatest captains such as Omar N. Bradley. While Almond is no longer a household name, he played a key role in Army history. Almond was ambitious and gave his all to everything he did. He was a careful student of his profession, a successful commander at battalion and corps level, a dedicated staff officer, something of a scholar, a paternalistic commander turned vehement racist, and a right-wing zealot. He earned his greatest accolades commanding the American troops who landed at Inchon, South Korea, on September 15, 1950, an amphibious flanking movement that temporarily transformed the nature of the Korean War. A soldier of such accomplishments and contradictions has gone too long without a scholarly biography; this dissertation will fill that void. This biography of Lt. Gen. Edward M. Almond makes a significant and original contribution to the existing historiography by examining his life in the context of the times in which he served. Almond earned tremendous respect throughout his career for his work as a commander and military administrator from his superiors, including Gen. George C. Marshall and Gen. Douglas MacArthur, but his current reputation as the US Army’s most virulent racist overshadows all of these accomplishments. Almond’s attitude was not unique; racism pervaded both the Army and the United States of his day. His views iii reflected the dominant view of the rural white South where he grew up, and did not differ much from those of his more famous peers. Almond, however, would never accept the changes his contemporaries and the Army eventually acknowledged. Almond’s reactionary posture stands in sharp contrast to the rest of his career, in which he distinguished himself as an innovator open to new ideas. This dissertation will attempt to reconcile that other Almond and show that there was more to him than his bigoted command policies. Almond’s career paralleled these developments in American society and changes in the US Army. His highly professional attitude yet stubborn resistance to social change typified the senior military leadership of the era. When those racial attitudes began to change, Almond represented an increasingly outdated ideology that held black men were innately incapable of becoming good soldiers. At the end of a long life and successful career, Almond was better known for his repugnant racial attitudes than for his genuine successes. First, Almond performed better as the commander of the 92nd Division than is commonly reported, despite that unit’s significant difficulties in combat. This dissertation will also explore how his experiences with the 92nd Division, and the Army’s later desegregation decisions, embittered him toward black soldiers. Second, both success and failure marked his command of X Corps in Korea, and his personal relationships with other officers obscured some of his accomplishments. Third, while serving as commandant of the US Army War College, Almond would tap his rich store of military experience to push the Army toward a greater commitment to joint operations. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am extremely fortunate to work in the best military archive in the world. Almost everyone employed at the US Army Heritage and Education Center (USAHEC) in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, has supported my efforts in some way. I would first like to thank the inimitable Dave Keough, whose prodigious memory and incredible understanding of the available primary sources made this work possible. Moreover, Dave first introduced me to Almond through the rich collection of the general’s papers at USAHEC. Dr. Richard Sommers, John Kurash, Marty Andresen, and Molly Bompane alerted me to numerous other related collections that enriched and expanded my work. My colleagues Rich Baker, Gary Johnson, and Louise Arnold-Friend all provided invaluable reference assistance and either helped me find sources or answered detailed questions. I owe extra special thanks to Ross Webb, Pam Cheney, and Beth Shaffer, who helped expedite the security review that my command required. My bosses, Dr. Conrad Crane and Jack Giblin, granted me the liberal leave I need to complete the project. Finally, Col. Matt Dawson, Col. Rob Dalessandro, and Lt.Col. Mark Viney provided me steady encouragement and moral support. At the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA II), College Park, Maryland, Rich Boylan provided me with a graduate-level education in the relevant collections there. At the Virginia Military Institute Library and Archives, Lexington, Virginia, Mary Laura Kludy introduced me to the VMI curricular archives and the Almond Alumni Collection. Paul Barron and Jeffrey Kozak at the George C. Marshall Library and Archives not only assisted me in using the Marshall papers, but also alerted v me to other valuable collections as well. Col. Keith Gibson from the VMI Museum gave me a very valuable copy of The Bomb from 1915, which I have since donated to USAHEC. At the Center of Military History, I am very grateful for help from friends and colleagues Frank Shirer, who initially got me into the 92nd Infantry Division official records; Bryan Hockensmith, who tracked down several CMH publications for me in digital form; and Bill Epley, who not only related his father’s memories of Almond but helped point me to some additional sources and served as a sounding board. A good archivist often knows what a historian needs better than the historian himself, and Jim Zobel at the MacArthur Memorial Archives in Norfolk, Virginia, is one of the best there is. He met me at the door of the MMA saying, “I know what you said you wanted to see, but here is what I think you need.” He was correct, and it was one of the most productive days of all the days I spent doing research. The friendly staff at the Hoover Institution and Archives, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, helped me mine the valuable collections there. The Tennessee State Library and Archives holds the Charles M. Fergusson family papers, and the staff there helped me access them efficiently, and got me an expedited copy of the microfilm. Laura Shigemitsu, then the Hanashi Oral History Program Manager at the Go For Broke National Education Center in Los Angeles, California, helped me get online access to those valuable collections, and Hanashi program volunteer Tim Yuge chased down some critical information I needed to properly cite the interviews. Finally, I spent many hours in the Dickinson College Library using both its excellent resources, and Ellen Kelly not only helped countless times but made it a warm and welcoming environment. vi Most writers are their own worst editors, as my dissertation committee will verify. I am deeply indebted to some sharp-eyed editors who have saved me many times from great embarrassment: Rachel Warzala, Lindsay Harlow, and Jessica Sheets. If I had sought your help earlier in the process, I would have finished much sooner. Finding the sources is one thing, but understanding and interpreting them is another. I’ve had the great fortune to know many historians and other friends who spent time discussing the project with me, and I’ve learned a lot from their thoughts and comments. Bob Mages and I discussed the project countless times over gallons of coffee, and I found his insights incredibly valuable. I also relish the experience of interacting with my classmates at Temple. E. J. Catagnus, Jr., Marty Clemis, Dr. Eric Klinek, and Dr. Rich Grippaldi gave moral support, and Dr. Michael Dolski fired provocative questions that challenged my assumptions. The “Temple Mafia” extends well beyond my classmates, and includes scholars from throughout academia and the military. Dr. Grant Weller, Dr. Dave Ulbrich, and Dr. Bob Wintermute were completing their programs as I was beginning mine, and they provided moral support and a ready ear whenever I needed it. My colleagues at the Army War College also include a fair number of Temple alumni, and Dr. Henry Gole, Dr. Doug Johnson, Dr. Michael Matheny, and Dr. John Bonin have all provided moral support, prodding, and reference assistance whenever needed. Col. Don Boose (Ret.) has also been a great help in pointing out sources I had missed and helping me understand some of those I had found. The military history community is a warm and welcoming one, and I’ve been pleased and humbled by the acceptance I have received from numerous noted historians who have both lent moral support and pointed me toward more sources. Rick Atkinson vii identified a valuable interview that I had overlooked, as did Dr. Kurt Piehler, and they along with Dr. Brian Linn, Dr. Michael Neiberg, Dr. Robert Citino, and Dr. Bob Sorley never failed to ask me about my progress and to encourage me. Other historians doing research in related topics at USAHEC have also been very generous and helpful. Dr. Carolyn Johnston shared with me her research on her father, who commanded a company in the 92nd Infantry Division, and Dr. Krewasky Salter graciously shared his research on African-American officers.