General Patton Called It

[Flanders]

International/news
John Kerry: ‘Pretty Clear’ Russia Involved in Malaysian Plane Crash
Melissa Quinn
July 20, 2014

John Kerry: 'Pretty Clear' Russia Involved in Malaysian Plane Crash

I have a foreign policy suggestion for John Kerry:

Go to Moscow and help bring defeat to Russia the way he did to his own country. Of course, he runs the risk of Putin kicking him loose from his asshole physically the way he is doing politically.

Even if John Kerry and the American Left are having second thoughts about resurrecting the defunct Soviet Union —— which is doubtful —— their political ancestors set the stage for today’s defeat when they refused to heed General Patton et al.

In my opinion, the American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest of ease, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these. If it should be necessary to fight the Russians, the sooner we do it the better. George S. Patton (1885 - 1945)

If we have to fight them, now is the time. From now on we will get weaker and they stronger. George S. Patton (1885 - 1945)

Winston Churchill was a bit more philosophical than General Patton but he said the same thing:

If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. Winston Churchill

Irrespective of the Soviet Union’s implosion the question is: What are the consequences of a stronger Communist movement today than they were in 1945?

Add Communist China (1949), Communist Cuba (1959) Communist China seated on the Security Council (1971) defeat in Vietnam (1975), New START (2010), and you have to admit that not taking Patton’s advice made it possible for a second enemy —— Islam’s jihad —— to pick up the pieces in a shooting war between the US and the Communist world.

NOTE: Illegal immigration is a domestic policy that everyone understands, while too few connect open-borders to Latin American Communists who come here and wrap themselves in the American flag. (Every item can be traced directly to the Democrat party’s agenda, and I’ve only listed a few highlights.)

Incidentally, you are nuts if you think Democrats care which enemy defeats this country so long as it is defeated. All of their domestic and foreign policies make my case. Frankly, it is illogical to think this Administration will do anything that might derail worldwide Communism when they are so close to victory.

Finally, perhaps Kerry might get lucky if he stumbles around in the Middle East. Oh wait! They don’t want him either:

Convinced that their region has suffered as much Obama administration meddling as it can possibly stand, Israel and Egypt took the extraordinary step earlier this week of jointly rejecting requests by US Secretary of State John Kerry to involve himself in ceasefire talks with the terrorist group Hamas.

Egypt/Israel To John Kerry's Mediation Offer --'Please God, NO!'
by Thomas Rose 20 Jul 2014

Egypt/Israel To John Kerry's Mediation Offer --'Please God, NO!'​

 

[Friends]

International/news
John Kerry: ‘Pretty Clear’ Russia Involved in Malaysian Plane Crash
Melissa Quinn
July 20, 2014

John Kerry: 'Pretty Clear' Russia Involved in Malaysian Plane Crash

I have a foreign policy suggestion for John Kerry:

Go to Moscow and help bring defeat to Russia the way he did to his own country. Of course, he runs the risk of Putin kicking him loose from his asshole physically the way he is doing politically.

Even if John Kerry and the American Left are having second thoughts about resurrecting the defunct Soviet Union —— which is doubtful —— their political ancestors set the stage for today’s defeat when they refused to heed General Patton et al.

In my opinion, the American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest of ease, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these. If it should be necessary to fight the Russians, the sooner we do it the better. George S. Patton (1885 - 1945)

If we have to fight them, now is the time. From now on we will get weaker and they stronger. George S. Patton (1885 - 1945)

Winston Churchill was a bit more philosophical than General Patton but he said the same thing:

If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. Winston Churchill

Irrespective of the Soviet Union’s implosion the question is: What are the consequences of a stronger Communist movement today than they were in 1945?

Add Communist China (1949), Communist Cuba (1959) Communist China seated on the Security Council (1971) defeat in Vietnam (1975), New START (2010), and you have to admit that not taking Patton’s advice made it possible for a second enemy —— Islam’s jihad —— to pick up the pieces in a shooting war between the US and the Communist world.

NOTE: Illegal immigration is a domestic policy that everyone understands, while too few connect open-borders to Latin American Communists who come here and wrap themselves in the American flag. (Every item can be traced directly to the Democrat party’s agenda, and I’ve only listed a few highlights.)

Incidentally, you are nuts if you think Democrats care which enemy defeats this country so long as it is defeated. All of their domestic and foreign policies make my case. Frankly, it is illogical to think this Administration will do anything that might derail worldwide Communism when they are so close to victory.

Finally, perhaps Kerry might get lucky if he stumbles around in the Middle East. Oh wait! They don’t want him either:

Convinced that their region has suffered as much Obama administration meddling as it can possibly stand, Israel and Egypt took the extraordinary step earlier this week of jointly rejecting requests by US Secretary of State John Kerry to involve himself in ceasefire talks with the terrorist group Hamas.

Egypt/Israel To John Kerry's Mediation Offer --'Please God, NO!'
by Thomas Rose 20 Jul 2014

Egypt/Israel To John Kerry's Mediation Offer --'Please God, NO!'​

Gen. Patton died just in time before he had time to cause some real damage. The unprovoked U.S. invasion of the Soviet Union which he wanted right after World War II would have been disastrous for both countries. The American people would not have supported it.

Chinese Communists would still have won their civil war in China. The difference would have been that they United States would not have been able to stop North Korean aggression in South Korea. The United States would not have been able to defend Taiwan and Japan against possible Communist Chinese invasions.

 

[rightwinger]

Patton was a moron

The Russians had killed ten million Germans. How many American lives was Patton willing to give up?

 

[R.C. Christian]

This thread is complete fail. Possibly EPIC.

 

[whitehall]

Obviously "the sooner the better" option is off the table so what's left, a shooting war between nuclear powers?

 

[Flanders]

Gen. Patton died just in time before he had time to cause some real damage.

To Friends: You obviously do not think Soviet brutality throughout the Cold War counts as damage.

The unprovoked U.S. invasion of the Soviet Union which he wanted right after World War II would have been disastrous for both countries.

To Friends: America’s monopoly on the Atomic Bomb would have made an invasion unnecessary if President Truman would have told the Soviets to retreat behind the borders of the original Russia or else.

NOTE: At the end of WWII the Soviet Union occupied Afghanistan. Truman told Stalin he had three days to get out. By then Stalin knew America had the Atomic Bomb; so in three days there was not a Soviet soldier in Afghanistan. In 1979 the Soviets invaded Afghanistan because they were nuclear power thanks in part to American traitors. Ten years of Communist brutality against the Afghan people followed. Also note that Muslims hanged Afghanistan’s Soviet puppets after the Soviets withdrew.

The American people would not have supported it.

To Friends: Americans would have supported freeing those counties the Soviet Union enslaved because that generation understood that their liberties depended upon fighting Communist expansion.

Chinese Communists would still have won their civil war in China.

To Friends: Not if FDR gave Chiang Kai-shek the help he needed in the form of military equipment and advisors. Research”Who lost China” and you’ll see the ugly hand of American Communists in every decision.

Parenthetically, FDR could have tied assistance to meaningful reforms after the Communists were defeated. In short: Americans would been in China to oversee reforms instead of what happened when the Commies took over.

The difference would have been that they United States would not have been able to stop North Korean aggression in South Korea. The United States would not have been able to defend Taiwan and Japan against possible Communist Chinese invasions.

To Friends: That’s circular logic. Your argument assumes the Communists would have won no matter how much help Chiang Kai-shek received. In fact, there would have been no aggression in Korea had Mao been defeated.

Bottom line: Had the Soviet Union been fought when Patton suggested there would have been no wars in Korea or Vietnam —— two wars where Soviet Communists helped fellow Communists kill Americans.

And let’s not forget a nuclear North Korea because American Communists lost China.

By the way, balance the tens of millions that Mao slaughtered against a nuclear war. I doubt if the people who got killed see any difference.

How many American lives was Patton willing to give up?

To rightwinger: A lot fewer than fighting a Communist country(s) today.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Patton was a moron

The Riusians had killed ten million Germans. How many American lives was Patton willing to give up?

To put that into perspective, we only put 10 million people into uniform in WW2, and only 1 million saw a combat zone.

 

[Flanders]

To put that into perspective, we only put 10 million people into uniform in WW2, and only 1 million saw a combat zone.

To Vandalshandle: That just goes to show that quality beats quantity every time. In the same vain, I’ve always said that a billion Muslims, or a billion Chinese, only means more targets.

Incidentally, Socialism/Communism had a 32 year head start on General Patton’s warning if you start the clock in 1913 —— the XVI & XVII Amendments. That lead has lengthened to 101 years.

 

[rightwinger]

To put that into perspective, we only put 10 million people into uniform in WW2, and only 1 million saw a combat zone.

To Vandalshandle: That just goes to show that quality beats quantity every time. In the same vain, I’ve always said that a billion Muslims, or a billion Chinese, only means more targets.

Incidentally, Socialism/Communism had a 32 year head start on General Patton’s warning if you start the clock in 1913 —— the XVI & XVII Amendments. That lead has lengthened to 101 years.

Today, you can sit back in your easy chair and call in attacks against your enemies. Back then, you had to get more face to face. Tanks had to fight tanks and the Russians had better tanks. Aircraft had to be exposed to fire. Ground infantry had to fight ground infantry

But even suppose we had gone nuclear and forced a surrender. We would be worldwide pariahs and would be no better than Hitler or Stalin in our brutality. Much like Iraq, we would find that being unwelcome occupiers is no beter than being invaders.

The American people would have just been through a depression and four years of war. Do you think they would have tollerated a massive attack with massive casualties on a country that had not attacked us?

 

[regent]

Patton's superiors deserve more accolades. They used his military talents and muzzled him. Patton certainly entered that conflict with a reputation that others in the military were well aware of. Patton could have created disaster, but he emerged a hero, but the real heroes were his officer comrades.

 

[rightwinger]

Patton's superiors deserve more accolades. They used his military talents and muzzled him. Patton certainly entered that conflict with a reputation that others in the military were well aware of. Patton could have created disaster, but he emerged a hero, but the real heroes were his officer comrades.

The role that Gen George Marshall played was under appreciated

 

[whitehall]

Slap one malingerer and the legacy is tarnished forever. MacArthur lost his entire freaking army four months into WW2 and was rescued while his men endured the Death March and he was awarded the MOH. Gregory Peck played MacArthur in the movie and quirky George C. Scott played Patton. That's how Hollywood works.

 

[Flanders]

Today, you can sit back in your easy chair and call in attacks against your enemies. Back then, you had to get more face to face. Tanks had to fight tanks and the Russians had better tanks. Aircraft had to be exposed to fire. Ground infantry had to fight ground infantry

To rightwinger: If it’s all the same to you, I’ll stick with General Patton’s evaluation:

In my opinion, the American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest of ease, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these. If it should be necessary to fight the Russians, the sooner we do it the better. George S. Patton (1885 - 1945)

But even suppose we had gone nuclear and forced a surrender. We would be worldwide pariahs and would be no better than Hitler or Stalin in our brutality.

To rightwinger: Get real. Being called a pariah by Communists is a badge of honor.

Incidentally, Communist racists are still pissing and moaning about Hiroshima and Nagasaki but never a word about what bombing did to Germany when both campaigns were necessary for victory. The American Left does all of the complaining because they think it makes them look morally superior. In truth, defeating Soviet Communism without conquest as the goal would have been seen as a superb benefit for mankind regardless of how it was accomplished.

Much like Iraq, we would find that being unwelcome occupiers is no beter than being invaders.

To rightwinger: America-haters are using the same tactic they used to justify defeat in Vietnam. No matter how many times they say otherwise taking the war to enemy territory was the right thing to do in Iraq; more so since it ended in a victory that filth like the people in the current Administration threw away.

The American people would have just been through a depression and four years of war. Do you think they would have tollerated a massive attack with massive casualties on a country that had not attacked us?

To rightwinger: North Korea did not attack us either.

You are a true child of the parasite class. You want everything for nothing including the freedoms you enjoy without fighting for them. Someday Communism will have to be defeated militarily, and decisively, or those freedoms will be taken away from your kind by the very people you now defend.

Patton's superiors deserve more accolades. They used his military talents and muzzled him. Patton certainly entered that conflict with a reputation that others in the military were well aware of. Patton could have created disaster, but he emerged a hero, but the real heroes were his officer comrades.

To regent: They, in turn, were muzzled by Soviet sympathizers that permeated FDR’s administration.

The role that Gen George Marshall played was under appreciated

To rightwinger: Several years after the war, Secretary of State Marshall saw Soviet Communists for what they were. By then, FDR’s pro-Soviet people were so entrenched it was decided that containment was the way to deal with Soviet Union expansion. Containment was a poor substitute for General Patton’s way of dealing with Communists as Korea, Vietnam, and the spread of Communism to our hemisphere proves.

NOTE: Media influence got behind the Policy of Containment. Print media, Hollywood, and later television, eventually turned a blind eye to Communist expansion as well as justifying Communism by supporting the birth and growth of the welfare state.

Let me clarify one thing. Briefly, containment is a joke in a Communist country with a military. Any country can have Communism if they want it so long as they do not have a military. Nothing is going to change until a few countries are willing to disarm every country with expansionist ambitions. Wipe out one or two such countries and the rest will get the message.

Slap one malingerer and the legacy is tarnished forever. MacArthur lost his entire freaking army four months into WW2 and was rescued while his men endured the Death March and he was awarded the MOH. Gregory Peck played MacArthur in the movie and quirky George C. Scott played Patton. That's how Hollywood works.

To whitehall: I suspect that General MacArthur’s views coincided with Patton’s in that MacArthur wanted to bomb the Chinese Communists. Indeed, our greatest military minds surely understood the threat of Communism long before WWII began.

General MacArthur’s views on Communism are clearly expressed in this brief excerpt from his Farewell Address to Congress:

​

Here’s the full text that should be read by every American looking to understand:

Douglas MacArthur's Farewell Speech to Congress : 'Old soldiers never die; they just fade away.'

 

[rightwinger]

One question: How many additional US deaths if we invaded USSR?

 

[rightwinger]

Today, you can sit back in your easy chair and call in attacks against your enemies. Back then, you had to get more face to face. Tanks had to fight tanks and the Russians had better tanks. Aircraft had to be exposed to fire. Ground infantry had to fight ground infantry

To rightwinger: If it’s all the same to you, I’ll stick with General Patton’s evaluation:

In my opinion, the American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest of ease, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these. If it should be necessary to fight the Russians, the sooner we do it the better. George S. Patton (1885 - 1945)

Didn't Hitler make the same assessment of Soviet strength?

 

[regent]

Today, you can sit back in your easy chair and call in attacks against your enemies. Back then, you had to get more face to face. Tanks had to fight tanks and the Russians had better tanks. Aircraft had to be exposed to fire. Ground infantry had to fight ground infantry

To rightwinger: If it’s all the same to you, I’ll stick with General Patton’s evaluation:

In my opinion, the American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest of ease, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these. If it should be necessary to fight the Russians, the sooner we do it the better. George S. Patton (1885 - 1945)

To rightwinger: Get real. Being called a pariah by Communists is a badge of honor.

Incidentally, Communist racists are still pissing and moaning about Hiroshima and Nagasaki but never a word about what bombing did to Germany when both campaigns were necessary for victory. The American Left does all of the complaining because they think it makes them look morally superior. In truth, defeating Soviet Communism without conquest as the goal would have been seen as a superb benefit for mankind regardless of how it was accomplished.



To rightwinger: America-haters are using the same tactic they used to justify defeat in Vietnam. No matter how many times they say otherwise taking the war to enemy territory was the right thing to do in Iraq; more so since it ended in a victory that filth like the people in the current Administration threw away.



To rightwinger: North Korea did not attack us either.

You are a true child of the parasite class. You want everything for nothing including the freedoms you enjoy without fighting for them. Someday Communism will have to be defeated militarily, and decisively, or those freedoms will be taken away from your kind by the very people you now defend.



To regent: They, in turn, were muzzled by Soviet sympathizers that permeated FDR’s administration.



To rightwinger: Several years after the war, Secretary of State Marshall saw Soviet Communists for what they were. By then, FDR’s pro-Soviet people were so entrenched it was decided that containment was the way to deal with Soviet Union expansion. Containment was a poor substitute for General Patton’s way of dealing with Communists as Korea, Vietnam, and the spread of Communism to our hemisphere proves.

NOTE: Media influence got behind the Policy of Containment. Print media, Hollywood, and later television, eventually turned a blind eye to Communist expansion as well as justifying Communism by supporting the birth and growth of the welfare state.

Let me clarify one thing. Briefly, containment is a joke in a Communist country with a military. Any country can have Communism if they want it so long as they do not have a military. Nothing is going to change until a few countries are willing to disarm every country with expansionist ambitions. Wipe out one or two such countries and the rest will get the message.

Slap one malingerer and the legacy is tarnished forever. MacArthur lost his entire freaking army four months into WW2 and was rescued while his men endured the Death March and he was awarded the MOH. Gregory Peck played MacArthur in the movie and quirky George C. Scott played Patton. That's how Hollywood works.

To whitehall: I suspect that General MacArthur’s views coincided with Patton’s in that MacArthur wanted to bomb the Chinese Communists. Indeed, our greatest military minds surely understood the threat of Communism long before WWII began.

General MacArthur’s views on Communism are clearly expressed in this brief excerpt from his Farewell Address to Congress:

​

Here’s the full text that should be read by every American looking to understand:

Douglas MacArthur's Farewell Speech to Congress : 'Old soldiers never die; they just fade away.'

The worst thing FDR ever did was rescue MacArthur from Bataan and give him command of the SW Pacific theater. MacArthur's goal was always to enhance MacArthur, and the cost to enhance MacArthur was thousands of American lives.

 

[Flanders]

Didn't Hitler make the same assessment of Soviet strength?

To rightwinger: His assessment was correct in June 1941 as early successes proved. Later on, Hitler overruled his generals and made huge mistakes that Generals Patton, MacArthur, Eisenhower, and others would not have made —— less so after learning from Hitler’s mistakes.

The worst thing FDR ever did was rescue MacArthur from Bataan and give him command of the SW Pacific theater. MacArthur's goal was always to enhance MacArthur, and the cost to enhance MacArthur was thousands of American lives.

To regent: Your MacArthur bashing is ridiculous. General MacArthur was, by far, America’s best general although the war in Europe got most of the coverage —— and 90 percent of the war effort in the early years.

Look at the number of movies made about the war in Germany while the war was being fought compared to the number of movies made about the war in the Pacific. I think the ratio was 40 or fifty to one.

Japan could have been defeated in a year, but saving Soviet Communism was considered more important than was defeating Japan.

 

[whitehall]

MacArthur made wild threats to nuke China after the ego-trip that forced US Troops into the biggest ambush in history in Korea failed. I doubt if he really meant it and I doubt if he was in his right mind during the time he was commander of US Troops in Korea.

 

[Flanders]

MacArthur made wild threats to nuke China after the ego-trip that forced US Troops into the biggest ambush in history in Korea failed. I doubt if he really meant it and I doubt if he was in his right mind during the time he was commander of US Troops in Korea.

To whitehall: Thank God I have a sense of humor.

Anyone who contributes a lot to his country is allowed a large ego; however, your hangup on MacArthur’s ego clouded your interpretation of events. I am not going to go over the conflict between General MacArthur and President Truman. Anybody who is interested can do a little research to get an accurate picture of the Korean War and General MacArthur’s military capabilities. One need not look far to find his motives:

But once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end. War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision.

In war there is no substitute for victory.

There are some who for varying reasons would appease Red China. They are blind to history's clear lesson, for history teaches with unmistakable emphasis that appeasement but begets new and bloodier war. It points to no single instance where this end has justified that means, where appeasement had led to more than a sham peace.

Like blackmail, it lays the basis for new and successively greater demands until, as in blackmail, violence becomes the only alternative. Why, my soldiers asked of me, surrender military advantages to an enemy in the field? I could not answer.

XXXXX​

The world has turned over many times since I took the oath on the plain at West Point, and the hopes and dreams have long since vanished, but I still remember the refrain of one of the most popular barracks ballads of that day which proclaimed most proudly that old soldiers never die; they just fade away.

And like the old soldier of that ballad, I now close my military career and just fade away, an old soldier who tried to do his duty as God gave him the light to see that duty. Good-by.

 

[rightwinger]

MacArthur was THE most overrated General in our history. Worse than McClellen

Nimitz won the war in the Pacific....MacArthur took credit