Eisenhower and Patton: Their Motives, and Their Rewards

[PoliticalChic]

1.Does either one need any introduction?
But there were significant differences between the two.....and life had different rewards for each.
If we can assume that the job description, the careers they chose, had to do with service, and the practice of soldiering......which one was the superior in said endeavor?

Which one deserved the lion's share of rewards?


What should be the Litmus Test? If one decides on a realpolitik definition, based on a system of principles of practical, rather than moral or ideological considerations of the job, well then, the determination may change.

Time to compare the lives, and the actions, of Dwight Eisenhower and George Patton.




2. Patton, five years Eisenhower's senior, was rich, and didn't need his army salary. Eisenhower, a poor boy from a working class family, was the very opposite.


"Eisenhower (known as "Ike" by his friends and allies) and Patton first met in 1918 at Camp Colt in Pennsylvania. The two met again at Camp Meade [Maryland] in 1919. When Patton was transferred to Meade he moved next door to where Eisenhower and his wife, Mamie, lived.[7] During this time, Eisenhower encountered Patton's beliefs and ideas. Eisenhower described Patton as, "tall, straight, and soldierly looking… high, squeaking voice… with two passions, the military service and polo."


The two formed a bond, because they were both men of tanks. They loved how tanks worked and how they were used during wartime. Then in mid-April of that year, Patton was transferred from Meade, to go to Washington DC. Eisenhower was the man that replaced Patton as the head of the Tank Corps at Meade. Later that year, Patton returned to Meade and took his position over Eisenhower again. Patton's rank was higher than Eisenhower's, however, this never affected their relationship." Military History Online



3. The man who propelled Dwight Eisenhower to the uppermost levels in the military was George Marshall. He saw things in Eisenhower that inspired trust....most especially, the unhesitating ability....and desire.... to follow orders.

This was a somewhat.....variable.... ability with Patton.

When George Marshall was a colonel in the early years of the Roosevelt administration, Marshall ingratiated himself with the New Dealers by his efforts in behalf of Civilian Conservation Corps. In 1936, Marshall became a brigadier general and in 1938 Roosevelt made him Chief of Staff, jumping him over the heads of twenty major generals and fourteen senior brigadier generals.

Sherwood ["Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History,"byRobert E. Sherwood] reports that Harry Hopkins "strongly recommended" Marshall's appointment as Chief of Staff.


Once one understands who Hopkins was, it sheds new light on George Marshall's actions....

a. Life magazine ran a spread on Hopkins on September 22, 1941, calling Harry Hopkins a one-man cabinet to Roosevelt. In fact, he lived at the White House, in the Lincoln Bedroom, from May 1940 to December 1943.
LIFE

b. Harry Hopkins,- FDR's alter ego, co-president, or Rasputin, "...the closest and most influential adviser to President Franklin D. Roosevelt during World War II, was a Soviet agent." and “the most important of all Soviet wartime agents in the United States.”
The Treachery Of Harry Hopkins The Treachery Of Harry Hopkins



Harry Hopkins picked George Marshall...

..George Marshall picked Dwight Eisenhower.


Military mastery, warrior greatness, picked George Patton.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I go with Patton too. Great post, Political Chic!

 

[PoliticalChic]

I go with Patton too. Great post, Political Chic!

Great seeing you again, Jeremiah!

It's going to take me about two days to put up the entire thread....
....if you have the time, I believe you'll find it informative, and you'll agree with the thesis.

Happy New Year, sis.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Left to his own devises, Patton would have ended the war in Europe 6 months earlier, starting with closing the Falaise pocket, and the US and Brits would have been in Berlin months ahead of the Progressive Heroes, the USSR.

He also decried WWII as a huge strategic failure for the Allies as all it did was trade Hitler's Progressivism for Soviet Progressivism

 

[konradv]

Left to his own devises, Patton would have ended the war in Europe 6 months earlier...

... and started WW III almost immediately thereafter.

 

[gipper]

Great post PC...as usual.

No doubt the FDR apologists will once again ignore truth and accept lies.

 

[guno]

General George S. Patton was Deeply Anti-Semitic & Believed in Superiority of the ‘Nordic Race’

Patton at the end of World War II disparaged the Jewish inmates of Hitler’s death camps who had been re-interned in Displaced Person (DP) camps maintained by the U.S. Army in the Allied Zone of Occupation. He also expressed the injudicious opinion that the United States fought the wrong enemy, meaning that he would rather have had the country allied with Hitler’s Germany for a fight against Stalin’s Soviet Union. …”

George S. Patton was an anti-Semite who wrote in his diary that Jews were “sub-human”


General George S. Patton’s diaries, which were published after his death, reveal that Patton was an anti-Semite, and not just akin to the garden-variety, country club anti-Semite that was common in America up to and through the Second World War. According to Leonard Dinnerstein in his book Antisemitism in America, (Oxford Univ. Press, 1995) Patton would not allow Jewish chaplains at his headquarters. (p.139). In light of the fact that the U.S. was engaged in unconditional warfare with the genocidal Nazi regime that had singled out “World Jewry” for liquidation, and the fact that as a commander of a corps and later an army,
thankfully that POS is dead




General George S. Patton was Deeply Anti-Semitic & Believed in Superiority of the ‘Nordic Race’ - The Constantine Report

 

[PoliticalChic]

Strange as it is, the remarkable ability as a general isn't what pushes one to the top in the armed forces. Sometimes, it becomes secondary to.....other things. Why would George Patton, who believed himself the reincarnation of a Roman legionnaire, not be the commander during the biggest invasion in United States history?




4. "June 6, 1944 General Omar Bradley (1893-1981) led the First Army of the United States in the famous D-Day landing on the beaches of Normandy. Interestingly, Bradley was the understudy of another man, General George S. Patton Jr. (1885-1945). How did Bradley overtake his mentor? What caused the Supreme Allied Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower (1890-1979) to give the job to Bradley when Patton had helped lead the Allies to victory in Sicily only a short time before? During the 1943 invasion, Bradley had served under Patton, now Bradley was Patton's commanding officer.

General Patton was an aggressive general; his tactics were unorthodox, but successful. Why would he not be the commander during the biggest invasion in United States history? Why would he be used as a decoy rather than be on the front lines of Normandy? Was this because of the rocky relationship he had with the Allied Commander, General Eisenhower? How did Patton view Eisenhower and how did Eisenhower view Patton?" Military History Online



What sort of machinations were behind the advancement of Eisenhower over Patton?


Guess who hated Patton, and vice versa...Hint: he slaughtered millions of his own citizens.

Good guess!


And Franklin Roosevelt bowed to the every desire and wish of Joseph Stalin.

Eisenhower was agreeable.....Patton very much the opposite.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Left to his own devises, Patton would have ended the war in Europe 6 months earlier...

... and started WW III almost immediately thereafter.

Of course..Roosevelt, and Stalin apologists have to ignore that this result of NOT agreeing to Patton's aims left us with over a hundred thousand dead United States troops later on....

The 'peace' resulted in the Korean War, the United Nations, Red China, Vietnam....and a nuclear Iran


A trip down memory lane:

1. On April 5, 1951, Judge Irving R. Kaufman sentenced the Rosenbergs to death for theft of atomic secrets, and, resulted in "the communist aggression in Korea, with the resultant casualties exceeding 50,000 and who knows but that millions more of innocent people may pay the price of your treason." Judge Kaufman's Sentencing Statement in the Rosenberg Case

It is clear today, based on archival evidence, unearthed by researchers in Russia and released in the United States, that Kaufman was correct. "Absent an atomic bomb, Stalin would not have released Pyongyang's army to conquer the entire Korean peninsula. Confident that his possession of atomic weapons neutralized America's strategic advantage, Stalin was emboldened to unleash war in Korea in 1950." Haynes, Klehr, and Vassiliev, "Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America," p. 143, 545. And Romerstein and Breindel,"The Venona Secrets," p. xv, 253.

2. It is important to connect the treachery with the impact of that treachery: allowing Stalin to survive...and thrive... with 36,940 Americans killed, 91,134 wounded, and 8,176 still missing, and this does not include at least two million civilian lives claimed on both sides.
Bruce Cumings, "The Korean War: A History.'

Included were 1.3 million South Korean casualties, including 400,000 dead. North Korea, 2 million casualties, and 900,000 Chinese soldiers killed.



3. FDR's insistence on allowing the Soviet agents who infiltrated his administration resulted in the United States sabotage of Chaing Kai-Shek and the Nationalists in China in favor of the Mao and the Communists. From the book “Blacklisted From History,” by M. Stanton Evans:Soviet agents in the U.S. State department (and Treasury)worked actively to damage confidence of our government, in the(Nationalist) Chinesefighting in their own country, as our allies against the Japanese, and in favor of the Communist insurgency of Mao Tse-Tung and Chou En-Lai.
While Chiang Kai-Shek was busy as our ally fighting the Japanese, White, Currie, Coe, Glasser, and Hiss were doing all they could to undermine him in favor of Mao and the communists.

1. 
   4. The Vietnam Conflict Extract Data File of the Defense CasualtyAnalysis System (DCAS) Extract Files contains records of 58,220 U.S. military fatal casualties of the Vietnam War. These records were transferred into the custody of the National Archives and Records Administration in 2008.
   Statistical information about casualties of the Vietnam War
   www.archives.gov/.../vietnam...

But....heck....let's not call it WWIII.

 

[PoliticalChic]

5. Stalin insisted on a 'second front,' the assumption being that Hitler's attack on the Soviet homeland, June 21, 1941, was the 'first front.'

Further, Stalin insisted....demanded .....that the second front be as far west in Europe as possible....so that at war's end, the Red Army could occupy and control all of Eastern Europe.

This meant that, although the Allies had control of Italy and could advance north into Germany, the Adriatic second front was not acceptable to Stalin....only Normandy, France, was.




Soviet Spy Hopkins and 'Yes,sir, yes sir' George Marshall were fully behind handing all of Eastern Europe over to Stalin's tender mercies.

Remember...they knew full well of the Terror Famine, the Katyn Forest Massacre, and other blood purges. by Stalin...all met with 'Leftist shrug.'



Evidence of their intentions can be seen in a document which Hopkins took with him to the Quebec conference in August, 1943, entitled "Russia's Position," quoted as follows in Sherwood's book ["Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History,"byRobert E. Sherwood]: "Russia's post-war position in Europe will be a dominant one. With Germany crushed, there is no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."



Care to guess what Eisenhower's 'opinion' was.....and when and why?

 

[PoliticalChic]

General Patton never hid his opinion of Russia and of Stalin.



6. Patton has been wary of Russian duplicity as far back as November 1943, when he noted in his diary that "It will be just as bad for us to have Russia win the war as it will be for Germany to do so. To be a success and maintain world peace, the U.S. and the U.S. alone should destroy Germany and Japan and be ready to stop Russia."

If only that had occurred....unfortunately, with Roosevelt's support.....Russian communism did win.


A number of Roosevelt's advisers warned of Russian duplicity, too. He ignored them.


'Patton is incensed about the Roosevelt-Marshall-Eisenhower plans: "You cannot lay down with a diseased jackal," he recently insisted to a group of journalists. "Neither can we ever do business with the Russians."

When Undersecretary of War Robert Patterson visited the Third Army, Patton openly lobbied for at least 30 percent of all American troops to remain in Europe, "Keeping our forces intact. Let's keep our boots polished, bayonets sharpened, and present a picture of force and strength to these people. This is the only language they understand and respect. If you fail to do this, then I would like to say to you that we have had a victory over the Germans but have lost the war." "Killing Patton: The Strange Death of World War II's Most Audacious General,"
byBill O'ReillyandMartin Dugard, p. 259-260

A truer prediction was never made. In today's America, the dominant political party is a spawn of Soviet Communism...it stands for the same things that the communist party did.



"Even Patton's nemesis, British field marshal Montgomery, agrees: when accepting the surrender of German soldiers, he ordered his troops to stack the Wehrmacht rifles in such a way that they could easily be redistributed should the Germans and British need to defend themselves against a Russian advance.

In time, of course, Patton's predictions will come true, and the world will have to live with the consequences of American gullibility."
Ibid.

 

[Syriusly]

More of PC's hisotrical revisionist nuttiness.

 

[PoliticalChic]

More of PC's hisotrical revisionist nuttiness.

I haven't spanked you enough???

Let everyone recognize that you are one of said Roosevelt lap-dogs
and
every one of my posts is linked,sourced, and totally accurate....Compare that with the ubiquitous "is not, is noooottttt' postings by the hot air battalion.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. While Franklin Roosevelt lies to the American public about Russia, hiding the pathological character of his pal Joseph Stalin, ....

....the finest of the Allied generals, George Patton knows the truth about the Soviets and is not shy about sharing it.



a. It is a conflict that Patton believes will be fought soon.The Russians are moving to forcibly spread communism throughout the world,and Patton knows it. "They are a scurvy race and simply savages," he writes of the Russians in his journal. "We could beat the hell out of them."
"Patton," By Martin Blumenson, Kevin M. Hymel, p. 84



The facts agree with Patton.
As with Prague,Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”




And, Patton opened his mouth again, saying that the Nazis were better than the Russians were in Late 1944. He also compared Nazis to Republicans and Democrats because Nazis only cared about themselves as do the Republicans and Democrats. Patton said of the Russians:

'Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think? We are going to have to fight them sooner or later, within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end kicked back to Russia in three months? We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]

These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss.'
Military History Online


Eisenhower didn't discipline Patton because he disagreed with Patton's sentiments vis-a-vis the Russians....
...he did it to save his star.


Roosevelt, Harry Hopkins, George Marshall, and Eisenhower were, essentially, under Stalin's control.

Patton couldn't win.

 

[regent]

7. While Franklin Roosevelt lies to the American public about Russia, hiding the pathological character of his pal Joseph Stalin, ....

....the finest of the Allied generals, George Patton knows the truth about the Soviets and is not shy about sharing it.



a. It is a conflict that Patton believes will be fought soon.The Russians are moving to forcibly spread communism throughout the world,and Patton knows it. "They are a scurvy race and simply savages," he writes of the Russians in his journal. "We could beat the hell out of them."
"Patton," By Martin Blumenson, Kevin M. Hymel, p. 84



The facts agree with Patton.
As with Prague,Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”




And, Patton opened his mouth again, saying that the Nazis were better than the Russians were in Late 1944. He also compared Nazis to Republicans and Democrats because Nazis only cared about themselves as do the Republicans and Democrats. Patton said of the Russians:

'Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think? We are going to have to fight them sooner or later, within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end kicked back to Russia in three months? We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]

These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss.'
Military History Online


Eisenhower didn't discipline Patton because he disagreed with Patton's sentiments vis-a-vis the Russians....
...he did it to save his star.


Roosevelt, Harry Hopkins, George Marshall, and Eisenhower were, essentially, under Stalin's control.

Patton couldn't win.

There are those that love to wallow in a war, and Patton seems to be one, but do most Americans love that wallow? Seems most of the military just wanted to come home, raise a family, have a job and pay their taxes. Ike was right to put him on a short leash and let him become another key in the conservative "I think history."

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Left to his own devises, Patton would have ended the war in Europe 6 months earlier...

... and started WW III almost immediately thereafter.

Good. We would have crushed the USSR. It would have been a whole different, more peaceful and prosperous world.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. While Franklin Roosevelt lies to the American public about Russia, hiding the pathological character of his pal Joseph Stalin, ....

....the finest of the Allied generals, George Patton knows the truth about the Soviets and is not shy about sharing it.



a. It is a conflict that Patton believes will be fought soon.The Russians are moving to forcibly spread communism throughout the world,and Patton knows it. "They are a scurvy race and simply savages," he writes of the Russians in his journal. "We could beat the hell out of them."
"Patton," By Martin Blumenson, Kevin M. Hymel, p. 84



The facts agree with Patton.
As with Prague,Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”




And, Patton opened his mouth again, saying that the Nazis were better than the Russians were in Late 1944. He also compared Nazis to Republicans and Democrats because Nazis only cared about themselves as do the Republicans and Democrats. Patton said of the Russians:

'Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think? We are going to have to fight them sooner or later, within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end kicked back to Russia in three months? We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]

These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss.'
Military History Online


Eisenhower didn't discipline Patton because he disagreed with Patton's sentiments vis-a-vis the Russians....
...he did it to save his star.


Roosevelt, Harry Hopkins, George Marshall, and Eisenhower were, essentially, under Stalin's control.

Patton couldn't win.

There are those that love to wallow in a war, and Patton seems to be one, but do most Americans love that wallow? Seems most of the military just wanted to come home, raise a family, have a job and pay their taxes. Ike was right to put him on a short leash and let him become another key in the conservative "I think history."

"There are those that love to wallow in a war,...."

And they there's you..."Better Red Than Dead"

Let's see how John Stewart Mill deals with you:

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

 

[konradv]

Left to his own devises, Patton would have ended the war in Europe 6 months earlier...

... and started WW III almost immediately thereafter.

Good. We would have crushed the USSR. It would have been a whole different, more peaceful and prosperous world.

They had more men, better tanks and we were still fighting Japan. Nukes would have to have been dropped to even the score, resulting in even more millions dead and more destruction in Europe. Taking all that into account, what happened over the next 45 years and with all the proxy wars, the misery would have been much greater, if the war continued.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Left to his own devises, Patton would have ended the war in Europe 6 months earlier...

... and started WW III almost immediately thereafter.

Good. We would have crushed the USSR. It would have been a whole different, more peaceful and prosperous world.

They had more men, better tanks and we were still fighting Japan. Nukes would have to have been dropped to even the score, resulting in even more millions dead and more destruction in Europe. Taking all that into account, what happened over the next 45 years and with all the proxy wars, the misery would have been much greater, if the war continued.

I want to thank you for rushing to your Magic 8-Ball for help in constructing that response.
It is so much less messy than the way your formerly came up with your....'knowledge'....slicing open a goat and 'reading' its entrails.

 

[konradv]

I want to thank you for rushing to your Magic 8-Ball for help in constructing that response. It is so much less messy than the way your formerly came up with your....'knowledge'....slicing open a goat and 'reading' its entrails.

It's easily as valid as anything you've said. War is messy and seldon the slam dunk some pretend it to be. How about telling me what was wrong with my analysis? I find it strange that you didn't engage in your usually extensive "proofs". Makes me think you're the one that really doesn't know what they're talking about.