Patton's take on WWII

[Trajan]

the mongols invaded 'Russia' in the 13th century, so I am having a hard time seeing how they made their way into this conversation..

 

[Trajan]

Not true at all. The Mongols made short work of them. Napoleon was totally victorious and was only driven back by the winter. He had defeated all the troops the Russians sent against him. Easily.

Which is why Russia is populated with Mongols and French.

You might want to take a look at the demographics of Russia there genius. Mongols were the troops that were used to drive the Germans back during Operation Typhoon. The French indeed were driven back after the winter, but the Mongols are still there.

I think Siberian is more accurate.

 

[Sallow]

Not true at all. The Mongols made short work of them. Napoleon was totally victorious and was only driven back by the winter. He had defeated all the troops the Russians sent against him. Easily.

Which is why Russia is populated with Mongols and French.

You might want to take a look at the demographics of Russia there genius. Mongols were the troops that were used to drive the Germans back during Operation Typhoon. The French indeed were driven back after the winter, but the Mongols are still there.

You are talking about events that occurred in the 12th Century over many many years against a fractured and splintered Russia. Around the 17th century Russia became an empire. It's ridiculous to have these sorts of "bring everything into the mix" sort of conversations. Russia during WWII was very different then Russia in the 12th Century.

Any idea that Russia was "ripe for the taking" after WWII is ridiculous. And..even if it did happen..the same outcome probably would have taken place..massive death in Russia. Probably moreso with another war. Anyone that thinks the cleanup after WWII was somehow peaches and cream is naive. The world suffered a great deal. There were lots of deaths.

 

[Sallow]

The Russian Army at the end of the European war was just about completely evaporated.
They couldn't have defeated an Ivory Coast invasion at that point.

As a clarification, I am not saying I agree with Patton...as I said above, if we would have invaded/conquered Russia - what the hell would we have done with them?

No "we" could not. Russians are tough people and by that point they were harden fighters. Add in..anyone who's tried to conquer Russia has failed..and failed miserably.

That's not taking into account that an attack on the Russians, an ally, would have broken the Alliance. The Chinese, while no friends of the Russians, for one, would not let such a treachery slide.

the Chinese civil war was raging, our ally Chiang Kai-shek and all, Mao didn't give a hoot for the Russians he had other problems. It took till 49 for Mao to get Chiang totally out of China.

Which more then likely would have changed has America invaded. And that's not the only ally likely to split from the European powers.

 

[westwall]

Which is why Russia is populated with Mongols and French.

You might want to take a look at the demographics of Russia there genius. Mongols were the troops that were used to drive the Germans back during Operation Typhoon. The French indeed were driven back after the winter, but the Mongols are still there.

I think Siberian is more accurate.

See those asian looking guys? They're Mongolian. From Mongolia.



http://histclo.com/imagef/date/2008/09/sib01s.jpg

 

[Sallow]

You might want to take a look at the demographics of Russia there genius. Mongols were the troops that were used to drive the Germans back during Operation Typhoon. The French indeed were driven back after the winter, but the Mongols are still there.

I think Siberian is more accurate.

See those asian looking guys? They're Mongolian. From Mongolia.



http://histclo.com/imagef/date/2008/09/sib01s.jpg

Yep..ol' Uncle Joe Stalin.

A Mongol through and through..

Joseph Stalin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Sallow]

Hey..and Britain? Still Roman..

Yep..Rome never left.

 

[Sallow]

Why..in fact..all of China..really should have been called..Mongolia. There are no Han Chinese..they are really Mongolian. Tibetans? Peeshaw..Mongols. Zhuang? Naw..Mongols. What about the Manchus...Nope, those are really Mongols. Uyghur? Sheesh..you crazy? Mongols. Yao? Mongols.

Bai? Buyei? No no no. Mongols.

We never got past the invading hordes.

Russia should be called Mongolia too.

 

[geauxtohell]

Hypothetical hindsight is always 20/20. Hypothetically speaking.

We won the war. If Patton was running the show, it might have gone better or it might have been a disaster.

We'll never know. As it stands, bashing Omar Bradley, one of the most competent commanders of the war, is idiotic.

If it weren't for Bradley, Patton probably would have lost his command after he smacked his soldier.

Uhhhh, he did. He was the commander of the 7th Army and was relieved. He was placed in command of the Third Army for Operation Cobra over the protests of Bradley but Ike knew he needed Patton to run it because everyone else was too timid. One other thing the Falaise Pocket debacle was the fault of Monty. He was the overall commander on the ground in Normandy (Bradley was under him) and he was also in direct control of the northern pincher of the attack. He delayed his final assault long enough that the Germans were able to slip away. They left behind most of their equipment but they got the people out.

Whoops. You are right.

At any rate, portraying Bradley as the villain in this thing is silly.

From Marshall to Eisenhower to Bradley to the Division Commanders the American Command Structure was a large reason we were successful.

 

[Trajan]

You might want to take a look at the demographics of Russia there genius. Mongols were the troops that were used to drive the Germans back during Operation Typhoon. The French indeed were driven back after the winter, but the Mongols are still there.

I think Siberian is more accurate.

See those asian looking guys? They're Mongolian. From Mongolia.



http://histclo.com/imagef/date/2008/09/sib01s.jpg

they are from the general region but really they aren't 'Mongolian', I think they are more Tungas than Mongolian. But the cultures certianly mixed....




https://qed.princeton.edu/getfile.php?f=The_Chinese_Republic_with_Tibet_and_Mongolia_c._1935.jpg

 

[westwall]

Why..in fact..all of China..really should have been called..Mongolia. There are no Han Chinese..they are really Mongolian. Tibetans? Peeshaw..Mongols. Zhuang? Naw..Mongols. What about the Manchus...Nope, those are really Mongols. Uyghur? Sheesh..you crazy? Mongols. Yao? Mongols.

Bai? Buyei? No no no. Mongols.

We never got past the invading hordes.

Russia should be called Mongolia too.

Actually there is some truth to that. The Mongols under Kublai Khan were more Chinese in lifestyle than Mongolian (though Kublai did have a yurt in his palace courtyard. One other thing to take note of, 800 years after he was dead it was still a law that a blood relation of Temujin had to be in the government. That is the longest reach of any leader ever.

The Mongols conquered more than the known world at the time. They did it with an army that never numbered over 100,000 men. You should read Harold Lambs book on the Mongols, it is quite good.

 

[westwall]

I think Siberian is more accurate.

See those asian looking guys? They're Mongolian. From Mongolia.



http://histclo.com/imagef/date/2008/09/sib01s.jpg

they are from the general region but really they aren't 'Mongolian', I think they are more Tungas than Mongolian. But the cultures certianly mixed....




https://qed.princeton.edu/getfile.php?f=The_Chinese_Republic_with_Tibet_and_Mongolia_c._1935.jpg

OK, I'll give you that one!

 

[Sallow]

Why..in fact..all of China..really should have been called..Mongolia. There are no Han Chinese..they are really Mongolian. Tibetans? Peeshaw..Mongols. Zhuang? Naw..Mongols. What about the Manchus...Nope, those are really Mongols. Uyghur? Sheesh..you crazy? Mongols. Yao? Mongols.

Bai? Buyei? No no no. Mongols.

We never got past the invading hordes.

Russia should be called Mongolia too.

Actually there is some truth to that. The Mongols under Kublai Khan were more Chinese in lifestyle than Mongolian (though Kublai did have a yurt in his palace courtyard. One other thing to take note of, 800 years after he was dead it was still a law that a blood relation of Temujin had to be in the government. That is the longest reach of any leader ever.

The Mongols conquered more than the known world at the time. They did it with an army that never numbered over 100,000 men. You should read Harold Lambs book on the Mongols, it is quite good.

Even more the reason for Patton's suggestion to be considered ludicrous. You think the Mongol nation would have stood up for an American assault on the Mongol State of Russia?

The Mongol State of China would have joined their brothers.

Man..the things you learn here.

Thanks for setting me straight.

And destroying your own argument.

 

[rightwinger]

Patton was a fucking moron

Invading the Soviet Union would have killed a million Americans

 

[del]

Patton was a brilliant commander.
And he was dead on about Russia as history shows us.
Patton correctly saw Stalin as worse even than Hitler, and correctly predicted that they would dominate the entire theatre with great human suffering.

At the same time however, what we would have done with Russia if we would have conquered them is a whole other story.

The Russians had just finished killing 4 million Germans.

How many Americans would we have been willing to sacrifice?

The Russian Army at the end of the European war was just about completely evaporated.
They couldn't have defeated an Ivory Coast invasion at that point.

As a clarification, I am not saying I agree with Patton...as I said above, if we would have invaded/conquered Russia - what the hell would we have done with them?

the red army at the end of WWII had over 2 million soldiers, 4000+ tanks, 35,000+ artillery pieces and 6500+ aircraft within 50 km of berlin.

you should read some history before you attempt to revise it.

 

[westwall]

The Russians had just finished killing 4 million Germans.

How many Americans would we have been willing to sacrifice?

The Russian Army at the end of the European war was just about completely evaporated.
They couldn't have defeated an Ivory Coast invasion at that point.

As a clarification, I am not saying I agree with Patton...as I said above, if we would have invaded/conquered Russia - what the hell would we have done with them?

the red army at the end of WWII had over 2 million soldiers, 4000+ tanks, 35,000+ artillery pieces and 6500+ aircraft within 50 km of berlin.

you should read some history before you attempt to revise it.

And don't forget the 600,000 trucks we gave them to keep it all supplied.

 

[elvis]

we were actually supporting the soviets before pearl. without the US, the entire russian (and the other ethnic groups of the soviet union) civilization would be extinct.

 

[westwall]

we were actually supporting the soviets before pearl. without the US, the entire russian (and the other ethnic groups of the soviet union) civilization would be extinct.

Maybe. They had so much land to trade for time and the Germans didn't enter into full war production till 1945 so while we certainly made the Russians battle a lot easier (especially with those aformentioned trucks) they would most probably have prevailed. But they would have been a shadow of their former selves doing it.

 

[rightwinger]

we were actually supporting the soviets before pearl. without the US, the entire russian (and the other ethnic groups of the soviet union) civilization would be extinct.

The Soviets killed 20 times the number of Nazis than we did.

It was Soviet blood that won the war

 

[zzzz]

So we should have stabbed an ally in the back at the end of WWII? Remember we had just become one of the more powerful nations in the world at that time. 5 years earlier we were just a marginal power compared with the Japs, and the European countries. That would have established a bad precedence for a new global power, turning on your friends. Sure Stalin was a monster and they became our enemy but at the end of the war the American people were sick of war and would not have supported it.

China was in a war with Japan, as was Russia. Large parts of China were still occupied with Japs when the Germans were defeated so if we did enter Russia ... well we would have had the bomb before we even got to Russian territory (The eastern European bufferzone would have to be taken against a numerically superior army) and if we were at war with them we would have used several A-bombs on them because at the time there was no outcry on using them.

War is comprised of tactical battles to obtain a strategic political objective. The politicians set the stage and decide the parameters and the end and the military are the instruments. Patton was very good at battle and pushing his men into battle. The breakout at Normandy was a good example. But he was also at times reckless by pushing his armor till they ran out of gas and were sitting ducks and of course his escapades in Sicily. History has judged him to be one of the best commanders in the army and rightly so. But it has also shown that strategically, IKE and Bradley were more in tune with FDR's plan of action and in the end FDR was the man!