Patton's take on WWII

[ginscpy]

I doubt Patton ever advocated attacking the Soviets (with German help) as was portrayed in the movie.

Soldier-slapping incident was all blown out of porportion also.

Patton was probably applauded by most of the military and civilian homefront on that matter.

 

[zzzz]

In his book, "The Patton Papers", author Martin Blumenson relates the following...

After the surrender of May 8, 1945 extinguished the common threat of Nazi Germany, Patton was quick to assert the Soviet Union would cease to be an ally of the United States. In fact, he urged his superiors to evict the Soviets from central and eastern Europe. Patton thought that the Red Army was weak, under-supplied, and vulnerable, and the United States should act on these weaknesses before the Soviets could consolidate their position. In this regard, he told then-Undersecretary of War Robert P. Patterson [2] that the "point system" being used to demobilize Third Army troops was destroying it and creating a vacuum that the Soviets would exploit. "Mr. Secretary, for God’s sake, when you go home, stop this point system; stop breaking up these armies," pleaded the general. "Let’s keep our boots polished, bayonets sharpened, and present a picture of force and strength to these people the Soviets. This is the only language they understand." Asked by Patterson — who would become Secretary of War a few months later — what he would do, Patton replied: "I would have you tell the Red Army where their border is, and give them a limited time to get back across. Warn them that if they fail to do so, we will push them back across it."

 

[rightwinger]

In his book, "The Patton Papers", author Martin Blumenson relates the following...

After the surrender of May 8, 1945 extinguished the common threat of Nazi Germany, Patton was quick to assert the Soviet Union would cease to be an ally of the United States. In fact, he urged his superiors to evict the Soviets from central and eastern Europe. Patton thought that the Red Army was weak, under-supplied, and vulnerable, and the United States should act on these weaknesses before the Soviets could consolidate their position. In this regard, he told then-Undersecretary of War Robert P. Patterson [2] that the "point system" being used to demobilize Third Army troops was destroying it and creating a vacuum that the Soviets would exploit. "Mr. Secretary, for God’s sake, when you go home, stop this point system; stop breaking up these armies," pleaded the general. "Let’s keep our boots polished, bayonets sharpened, and present a picture of force and strength to these people the Soviets. This is the only language they understand." Asked by Patterson — who would become Secretary of War a few months later — what he would do, Patton replied: "I would have you tell the Red Army where their border is, and give them a limited time to get back across. Warn them that if they fail to do so, we will push them back across it."

[/QUOTE]

Wow...it is just plain creepy that people would take the guy seriously

 

[JakeStarkey]

Thank heavens Patton's thoughts were not given solid credence. The comment above brings up an interesting point. America was sold on the absolute necessity of killing the fascist regiemes, not the soviets, who were pictured as our allies for more than three years. To follow up on Patton's requests would have required (1) to sell the "new" war to the armed forces personnel, and (2) to their folks at home, who had been fighting recession and bad guys since the fall of 1929. That simply, I think, would have been impossible to sell.

 

[zzzz]

"The murder of Patton is known for a fact, known for the very simple reason that an agent of the well-known OSS (Office Of Strategic Services), an American Military Spy named Douglas Bazata, A Jew of Lebanese origin, announced it in front of 450 invited guests, nearly all high-ranking ex-members of the OSS at the Hilton Hotel in Washington, DC the 25th of September, 1979.

Bazata stated, word-for-word: "For diverse political reasons, many extremely high-ranking persons hated Patton. I know who killed him because I am the one who was hired to do it. Ten thousand dollars. General William J. 'Wild Bill' Donovan himself, director Of O.S.S, entrusted ne with the mission. I set up the 'accident.' Since he didn't die in the accident, he was kept in isolation in the hospital, where he was killed with a cyanide injection." "

"But after a decade-long investigation, military historian Robert Wilcox claims that OSS head General “Wild Bill” Donovan ordered a highly decorated marksman called Douglas Bazata to silence Patton, who gloried in the nickname “Old Blood and Guts”.
His book, “Target Patton”, contains interviews with Mr Bazata, who died in 1999, and extracts from his diaries, detailing how he staged the car crash by getting a troop truck to plough into Patton’s Cadillac and then shot the general with a low-velocity projectile, which broke his neck while his fellow passengers escaped without a scratch.
Mr Bazata also suggested that when Patton began to recover from his injuries, US officials turned a blind eye as agents of the NKVD, the forerunner of the KGB, poisoned the general."

So it seems the conspiracy theory will live on for eternity.

 

[Trajan]

Trajan: that response is nonsensical. we were already supplying Russia and keeping UK afloat with everything from vanilla extract to arms, via the convoy system. // Shifting that to say Africa and then say invading southern France, ala Operation Dragoon, we would have not have utilized or required any more shipping than we already had built by late 43, plus we had a growing surplus with ships rolling off the line almost one a day, in fact taking out the UK from the supply picture due to nazi occupation would have left more shipping for the Mediterranean effort.

No, Trajan, to invade Nazi Europe from the U.S. was impossible. You don't understand logistics.

your reading comprehension is really an issue.

 

[westwall]

Yes, the USA was instrumental in saving Great Britain, which was necessary as a physical platform for invasion of the continent, along with many other advantages. Nonetheless, without our help, the Soviets would have eventually beat back the Germans with one possible exception: if the Nazis had develop the bomb first, civilization would have been held hostage by Hitler.

We didn't need the UK as a jumping off point for the invasion of Europe. We invaded North Africa directly from the US. We could easily have done the same in Europe. Germany could never have developed the bomb. They were following the wrong path and were trying to develop a hydrogen bomb not knowing you needed a fission bomb to set it off.

One, we could not have sustained a supply line from the U.S. to Europe if we invaded with the UK under Nazi control. Two, the shipping was committed to the Pacific. Third, this is one of your wackiest comments.

No, it's not. We landed just as much supply onto the Normandy beaches as the British did in their Mulberry's. Thats fact. We landed directly from the US into North Africa. Thats fact. We landed many of our troops directly from the US into attacks on the various islands in the Pacific. Thats fact. We had an un-challenged ability to project power at that time. We began cancelling orders for ships and other weapons in 1943, so that means we knew we were going to win at that time. We could just as easily have ramped that production back up again and provided the neccessary shipping. We were launching a Liberty ship every 42 days and one ship (just to show it could be done) the Robert E. Peary was launched 4 days and 16 hours after her keel was laid.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We landed an invasion into North Africa from the U.S. and Great Britain. Then we were able to sustain it because we had Great Britain as a floating supply base, factory, airfield, and barracks for more than 3 million Americans plus our allies. No, no, and no again. The U.S. could not have invaded Europe dwithout establishing a safe base in the UK.

Tell you what. Send your thesis to several well known WWII historians and ask them for an opinion. You will be startled to find (1) they really will answer and (2) you will not like their answer.

 

[ginscpy]

If you factor in the US Navy at the end of WW2 - no contest who had the most balanced and powerfull military.

Overwhelming dominant in the air and sea - and almost match the Soviets on land.

"At the end of the war - 24 battleships, 35 aircraft carriers, 77 escort carriers,92 cruisers, 501 destroyers, 406 destroyer escorts, and 262 submarines were in service. This was the greatest Navy that ever sailed the seas." World Book

 

[rightwinger]

If you factor in the US Navy at the end of WW2 - no contest who had the most balanced and powerfull military.

Overwhelming dominant in the air and sea - and almost match the Soviets on land.

"At the end of the war - 24 battleships, 35 aircraft carriers, 77 escort carriers,92 cruisers, 501 destroyers, 406 destroyer escorts, and 262 submarines were in service. This was the greatest Navy that ever sailed the seas." World Book

Largest..not greatest

Todays Navy would wipe them out

 

[ginscpy]

no kidding..

WW2 Navy best in relative terms

Nobody today to fight today expcept Somalui pirates and punk N. Koreans

Punked the mighty Japanese Imperial Navy in the Big One

 

[ginscpy]

5 deaths on USA mainland during WW2 - Jap ballon bomb who killed family camping in Oregon forests

20 million deaths in the Soviet Union

Soviet Union difficult to conguor - USA impossible to set foot on..............................

 

[westwall]

We landed an invasion into North Africa from the U.S. and Great Britain. Then we were able to sustain it because we had Great Britain as a floating supply base, factory, airfield, and barracks for more than 3 million Americans plus our allies. No, no, and no again. The U.S. could not have invaded Europe dwithout establishing a safe base in the UK.

Tell you what. Send your thesis to several well known WWII historians and ask them for an opinion. You will be startled to find (1) they really will answer and (2) you will not like their answer.

There are at least three MHQ articles that support what I am saying. All written by well respected military historians. I got the information from them. It is not my contention. After reading the three articles I agree with them. You need to read more.

 

[ginscpy]

Soviets ww2 surface navy was pathetic/non-existent

We had THE BEST NAVY OF ALL TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1.

 

[ginscpy]

Pacific War dwarfed the Europe War in logistical terms.

US won 2 wars on broad fronts -while the Soviets prevailed on one front with a lot of help..............................

 

[JakeStarkey]

We landed an invasion into North Africa from the U.S. and Great Britain. Then we were able to sustain it because we had Great Britain as a floating supply base, factory, airfield, and barracks for more than 3 million Americans plus our allies. No, no, and no again. The U.S. could not have invaded Europe dwithout establishing a safe base in the UK.

Tell you what. Send your thesis to several well known WWII historians and ask them for an opinion. You will be startled to find (1) they really will answer and (2) you will not like their answer.

There are at least three MHQ articles that support what I am saying. All written by well respected military historians. I got the information from them. It is not my contention. After reading the three articles I agree with them. You need to read more.

Post the articles or links to them so that we can read. I will probably disagree at the end, but I would like to read them for exposure to other ideas.

 

[rightwinger]

Pacific War dwarfed the Europe War in logistical terms.

US won 2 wars on broad fronts -while the Soviets prevailed on one front with a lot of help..............................

The US won the Pacific
The Soviets beat the Nazis

 

[westwall]

We landed an invasion into North Africa from the U.S. and Great Britain. Then we were able to sustain it because we had Great Britain as a floating supply base, factory, airfield, and barracks for more than 3 million Americans plus our allies. No, no, and no again. The U.S. could not have invaded Europe dwithout establishing a safe base in the UK.

Tell you what. Send your thesis to several well known WWII historians and ask them for an opinion. You will be startled to find (1) they really will answer and (2) you will not like their answer.

There are at least three MHQ articles that support what I am saying. All written by well respected military historians. I got the information from them. It is not my contention. After reading the three articles I agree with them. You need to read more.

Post the articles or links to them so that we can read. I will probably disagree at the end, but I would like to read them for exposure to other ideas.

MHQ doesn't post their articles online I'm afraid. One of the articles is from 1994 and I will have to find the others. When I do I will see if I can scan the relevant passage in and post it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I can get to the copies of MHQ if you have the references for them.

 

[westwall]

Pacific War dwarfed the Europe War in logistical terms.

US won 2 wars on broad fronts -while the Soviets prevailed on one front with a lot of help..............................

The US won the Pacific
The Soviets beat the Nazis

The Soviets beat the Nazi's becaue the US gave them more supplies than they could provide for themselves when it was the most critical. Had it not been for the support of the US and the UK during the initial onslaught of Barbarossa and into the beginning of Operation Typhoon the Germans would have won.

After the front was stabilized the continuing support of the western allies made it possible for the Soviets to grind the Germans down while they rebuilt their industrial capacity in the Urals far from German attack, once again making it possible for the Soviets to prevail during that critical time.

And don't ever forget the thousands of American Merchant Seamen who died getting those supplies to the Soviets. Those men KNEW they had a better chance of not coming home than a Marine fighting in the Pacific did and still they went.


The US produced more of everything then the entire rest of the world did and got it to those who needed it most.