"Silence Patton" and Follow-Up Book Shed Crucial Light on End of WWII and the Cold War

[JoeB131]

I already owned you

you are just whining now

Obviously, your insecurities require you to get in the last word, so I'll let you have at it. I wouldn't want you to have lower self-esteem.

 

[whitehall]

Actually, it made him look like a better person than he was. For starters, if you watch any newsreels of Patton, the man actually had kind of a squeaky voice, compared to Scott, who had an impressive one.

Also didn't portray Patton's racism or anti-Semitism.

"Better than the person he was"? Ike was a political general, Marshall was a incompetent stooge for FDR, MacArthur was a self promoting failure who abandoned his Troops. Patton was the kind of a hard charger aggressive general that Hollywood and the politicians were afraid of.

 

[JoeB131]

"Better than the person he was"? Ike was a political general, Marshall was a incompetent stooge for FDR, MacArthur was a self promoting failure who abandoned his Troops. Patton was the kind of a hard charger aggressive general that Hollywood and the politicians were afraid of.

You say political like that is a slander. Ike's ability to keep a balance between the various allies, was nothing short of amazing. Same with Marshall. Both of these men did amazing things after the war.

Not sure what MacArthur was supposed to do, exactly, let himself be captured by the Japanese?

 

[mikegriffith1]

"Better than the person he was"? Ike was a political general, Marshall was a incompetent stooge for FDR, MacArthur was a self promoting failure who abandoned his Troops. Patton was the kind of a hard charger aggressive general that Hollywood and the politicians were afraid of.

I have a modestly favorable view of Eisenhower.

Marshall was terrible and may have been a traitor.

As for MacArthur, I don't agree that he abandoned his troops on Bataan and Corregidor. He was prepared to die with his troops, but FDR ordered him to go to Australia against his wishes.

MacArthur's record as a military leader was mixed. He had some genuine successes, two inexcusable failures, and some unfortunate failures. For a balanced look at MacArthur, I recommend Dr. Arthur Herman's book Douglas MacArthur: American Warrior (Random House, 2016).

I agree that Patton was a superb general in most cases, and that he deserves great credit for trying to stop the enslavement of Eastern Europe. However, I find his anti-Semitism revolting. I would be much more of a Patton fan were it not for his anti-Semitism.

It's interesting that both Eisenhower and MacArthur strongly condemned the nuking of Japan as unnecessary and wrong.

 

[JoeB131]

It's interesting that both Eisenhower and MacArthur strongly condemned the nuking of Japan as unnecessary and wrong.

you mean they condemned it years after the fact, when Nuclear Annihilation became an existential dread.

I doubt anyone had any qualms about doing it at the time. It was probably just seen as another weapon. Not to mention most Americans saw the Japanese as sub-human.

I agree that Patton was a superb general in most cases, and that he deserves great credit for trying to stop the enslavement of Eastern Europe. However, I find his anti-Semitism revolting. I would be much more of a Patton fan were it not for his anti-Semitism.

Everyone was anti-Semitic in 1945. It's only after the world felt a big sad over the Holocaust that attitudes changed, which is why Israel is able to get away with the stuff they get away with.

 

[mikegriffith1]

you mean they condemned it years after the fact, when Nuclear Annihilation became an existential dread.

I doubt anyone had any qualms about doing it at the time. It was probably just seen as another weapon. Not to mention most Americans saw the Japanese as sub-human.

Plenty of people at the time opposed nuking Japan and lobbied the White House hard to prevent it, including Admiral William Leahy (FDR's chief of staff), Under Secretary of State Joseph Grew, Admiral Ellis Zacharias (Deputy Director of ONI), General Carter Clarke (a senior officer in the Military Intelligence Division), and several others.

You might read Gar Alperovitz's book The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, Tsuyoshi Hasegawa's book Racing the Enemy: Stalin, Truman, and the Surrender of Japan, and/or Philip Nobile's book Judgment at the Smithsonian: The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Everyone was anti-Semitic in 1945. It's only after the world felt a big sad over the Holocaust that attitudes changed, which is why Israel is able to get away with the stuff they get away with.

Oh, boy. So you're anti-Israeli too, huh? Why am I not surprised? I can just guess what you mean by "which is why Israel is able to geta way with the stuff they get away with." Yeah, stuff like defending themselves against merciless Muslim terrorists who are as bad as the Nazis were. Stuff like creating a democracy in a region dominated by autocratic states, a democracy with a vibrant free press, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, an outstanding public education system, a model health care system with universal coverage, etc., etc.

And, no, everyone was not an anti-Semite in 1945. What a ridiculous statement.

 

[JoeB131]

Plenty of people at the time opposed nuking Japan and lobbied the White House hard to prevent it, including Admiral William Leahy (FDR's chief of staff), Under Secretary of State Joseph Grew, Admiral Ellis Zacharias (Deputy Director of ONI), General Carter Clarke (a senior officer in the Military Intelligence Division), and several others.

You might read Gar Alperovitz's book The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, Tsuyoshi Hasegawa's book Racing the Enemy: Stalin, Truman, and the Surrender of Japan, and/or Philip Nobile's book Judgment at the Smithsonian: The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

You mean, everyone AFTER the war wanted to go on record they thought it was a bad idea. You know, after the world was staring down the existential threat of global annihilation.

It was just another weapon in 1945. It really didn't weigh that heavily on the Japanese decision to surrender. Japan surrendered because once the USSR got into the Pacific War, they had whole new front and no soldiers to throw at it. They were done and they knew it.

Oh, boy. So you're anti-Israeli too, huh? Why am I not surprised? I can just guess what you mean by "which is why Israel is able to geta way with the stuff they get away with." Yeah, stuff like defending themselves against merciless Muslim terrorists who are as bad as the Nazis were. Stuff like creating a democracy in a region dominated by autocratic states, a democracy with a vibrant free press, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, an outstanding public education system, a model health care system with universal coverage, etc., etc.

Oh, fuck off. That's like saying the Old South was wonderful if you were white. (Again, you belong to a racist cult that thinks dark skin is a curse from God.) If Israel was REALLY a "democracy", it would cease to exist as the Arab majority votes it out of existence. Israel is an apartheid state.

Here's how Israel can avoid a fight with the Palestinians. Get the hell out of their country and go back to Europe where they came from.

And, no, everyone was not an anti-Semite in 1945. What a ridiculous statement.

Sure they were. No one cared about the Jews. It's why no one wanted to take them in when they fled Germany.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You have an interesting bunch of fantasies, but the reality is, the Russians were always going to get to Berlin first.



There were very few ME262's left by the end of the war. Germany was completely exhausted, having lost 4.3 million men out of a population of 70 million. Even if they could get their industry up and running again, they wouldn't have had the manpower to fight. By the end of the war, Germany was down to the Volksgrenadiers, mostly made up of old men and little boys. The British Empire was equally exhausted, almost entirely relying on Commonwealth troops to fight the war for them.





Not really. Sure the Communists were oppressive, but they weren't genocidal.

At the Battle of Arracort, September 1944, Patton's Third soundly defeated 5th Panzer Army inflicting 10:1 tank kills. The German Panther and IV's were completely outplayed by Shermans and Wolverine TD. There was virtually nothing between Third Army and the Rhine

As Third Army continued their advance, Eisenhower personally visited Patton to tell him to stop!

Battle of Arracourt - Wikipedia

 

[JoeB131]

At the Battle of Arracort, September 1944, Patton's Third soundly defeated 5th Panzer Army inflicting 10:1 tank kills. The German Panther and IV's were completely outplayed by Shermans and Wolverine TD. There was virtually nothing between Third Army and the Rhine

As Third Army continued their advance, Eisenhower personally visited Patton to tell him to stop!

Um, yeah, because Patton was outrunning his supply lines.

We could also talk about Task Force Baum, where Patton needlessly expended men in a foolish attempt to liberate his son-in-law from a German POW camp.

Task Force Baum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Um, yeah, because Patton was outrunning his supply lines.

We could also talk about Task Force Baum, where Patton needlessly expended men in a foolish attempt to liberate his son-in-law from a German POW camp.

Task Force Baum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He was 100 miles from Germany September 1944. Once again, soundly defeating the German Army opposing him

Had FDR not been Stalin’s sock puppet, Patton would have been in Germany by November

 

[JoeB131]

He was 100 miles from Germany September 1944. Once again, soundly defeating the German Army opposing him

Had FDR not been Stalin’s sock puppet, Patton would have been in Germany by November

The reason why Patton was making such progress (but nowhere near the Rhine) was because the Germans were massing their forces for the Battle of the Bulge. The fact they were able to launch such a major offensive that late in the war was telling.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The reason why Patton was making such progress (but nowhere near the Rhine) was because the Germans were massing their forces for the Battle of the Bulge. The fact they were able to launch such a major offensive that late in the war was telling.

Not in September 1944

Your love of Stalin is distorting the facts.

The Allies decided since they going to give Stalin the time to pick up Bulgaria, they were going to go with Montys absurd Market Garden one lone road and many bridges assault

 

[JoeB131]

Not in September 1944

Your love of Stalin is distorting the facts.

The Allies decided since they going to give Stalin the time to pick up Bulgaria, they were going to go with Montys absurd Market Garden one lone road and many bridges assault

Market Garden was a stupid idea.

But you need to learn more about Bulgaria and how it fared in the war.

First, Bulgaria never declared war on the USSR. It switched sides without one Soviet Boot hitting their soil. The Soviets ended up dominating it because Churchill and Stalin agreed that Bulgaria would be in the Soviet sphere of influence. (It didn't help that the Nazis whacked the Tsar of Bulgaria and his successor was a child with no power.)

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Market Garden was a stupid idea.

But you need to learn more about Bulgaria and how it fared in the war.

First, Bulgaria never declared war on the USSR. It switched sides without one Soviet Boot hitting their soil. The Soviets ended up dominating it because Churchill and Stalin agreed that Bulgaria would be in the Soviet sphere of influence. (It didn't help that the Nazis whacked the Tsar of Bulgaria and his successor was a child with no power.)

As I said, FDR was Stalin's accomplice, hence allowing "Uncle Joe" to pick up Bulgaria and stalling Patton's drive into Germany

 

[Oddball]

As I said, FDR was Stalin's accomplice, hence allowing "Uncle Joe" to pick up Bulgaria and stalling Patton's drive into Germany

The west also handed Stalin the entirety of Poland, whose autonomy and freedom was allegedly the point of the war.

At least Germany had 2/3 of the nation returned to its people.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Market Garden was a stupid idea.

But you need to learn more about Bulgaria and how it fared in the war.

First, Bulgaria never declared war on the USSR. It switched sides without one Soviet Boot hitting their soil. The Soviets ended up dominating it because Churchill and Stalin agreed that Bulgaria would be in the Soviet sphere of influence. (It didn't help that the Nazis whacked the Tsar of Bulgaria and his successor was a child with no power.)

Eastern Europe fell under Stalin's boot because FDR was Stalin's sock puppet

 

[whitehall]

You say political like that is a slander. Ike's ability to keep a balance between the various allies, was nothing short of amazing. Same with Marshall. Both of these men did amazing things after the war.

Not sure what MacArthur was supposed to do, exactly, let himself be captured by the Japanese?

It's not slander if it's fact. Ike made a successful president. A successful general shouldn't have been in the position to surrender or be captured. MacArthur escaped and left his subordinates holding the bag. FDR recommended him for the MOH in the shortest citation in the book. What was it about Marshall that caused FDR to promote him over more qualified generals? He was a relatively obscure, some would say lack of leadership in his career. Marshall was credited with a near photographic memory but his memory failed him on the eve of the "Day of Infamy". What was he hiding?

 

[JoeB131]

As I said, FDR was Stalin's accomplice, hence allowing "Uncle Joe" to pick up Bulgaria and stalling Patton's drive into Germany

You can keep saying it, but it doesn't make it true.

Truth is, Stalin did most of the heavy lifting in WWII, and he was going to park his ass wherever he felt like it.

Thankfully, all he wanted was a buffer with the west, instead of all of Europe, which he'd have had no trouble taking if he wanted to.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You can keep saying it, but it doesn't make it true.

Truth is, Stalin did most of the heavy lifting in WWII, and he was going to park his ass wherever he felt like it.

Thankfully, all he wanted was a buffer with the west, instead of all of Europe, which he'd have had no trouble taking if he wanted to.

Thankfully? Hundreds of million under Soviet Communism and that gets a thankfully for you?

Patton averaged 100 miles a month after the Normandy landing. Third Army soundly defeated the Germany at Arracort end of September and would have covered the last hundred miles to the German border by early November.

Your love of Communism is demented

 

[JoeB131]

Thankfully? Hundreds of million under Soviet Communism and that gets a thankfully for you?

Those hundreds of millions (Not really) threw in with the Axis during the war. Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, - All members of the Axis, hoping to get territory from Germany's victims. All of them were happy to send their Jewish neighbors to the camps. Can't work up a lot of sympathy for them.

Patton averaged 100 miles a month after the Normandy landing. Third Army soundly defeated the Germany at Arracort end of September and would have covered the last hundred miles to the German border by early November.

He defeated one German Corps... not the entire Wehrmacht, most of which was engaged on the eastern front. This is what you guys don't get. At any given time, 70% of the Wehrmacht, and most of Germany's allies, were engaged on the Eastern Front.

Your love of Communism is demented

Hardly. I can actually read a history book, which you clearly can't.