The Politics of General Patton

[francoHFW]

What most armchair generals don't know is the Japanese, when they first contacted the defenders of Singapore were there to negotiate the Japanese surrender! The British commander though, who is one of the most colossal idiots ever to be in military service offered to surrender first! Before he had heard anything!

..............................................

My Brit uncle was on the last ship into Singapore and died on the River Kwai. He would say that RW Yanks were always a big PIA on EVERYTHING 1919-41, and they still are full of shytte.

 

[Camp]

5. What was the cost of FDR's unswerving dedication to the Soviets? One example, found in Paul Johnson's "Modern Times," 'included 200 modern fighter aircraft, originally intended for Britain's highly vulnerable base in Singapore, which had no modern fighters at all. The diversion of these aircraft, plus tanks, to Russia sealed the fate of Singapore."
Johnson, Op.Cit., p. 386.

a. Singapore fell February 15, 1942.

There was no way to get them there and even if there was, there was no place to put them. The Battleship and Heavy Cruiser Prince of Wales and Repulse had be sunk in the sea north of Singapore. The possibility of delivery by sea was out of the question. The Japanese controlled the skies as well. Air delivery, flying the planes in, would have required them to fly over large expanses of Japanese controlled territory without opportunity to refuel or restock of munitions to fight their way to Singapore. And even if they made it to their destination, there was no place to land and store the planes. All but one of the airbases were under Japanese artillery fire and the runways made useless. The only airfield left was under regular air attack. Any aircraft that arrived there would have been immediately destroyed.

"And even if they made it to their destination, blah blah blah..."
Rather than listen to your bloviation, let's see the reality:


1. Japan attacked 151,000 Americans and Filipinos stationed in the Philippines. Think Bataan and Corregidor. The 200 modern fighters originally meant for Singapore would have been there...but were in Russia.

a. Roosevelt: "I would rather lose New Zealand, Australia or anything else than have the Russian front collapse." Robert Dallek, "Franklin D. Roosevelt and American Foreign Policy, 1932-1945," p. 338.


When one begins to consider FDR's 'Russia Uber Alles' policy, evidence form KGB archived, opened in 1991, and the Venona Papers, sheds dispositive light on the reasons for said policy.


2. In July, 1942, a supply convoy called PQ-17 was sent to supply the USSR at Murmansk. Only 11 of the 35 merchant ships in the convoy survived German attacks. Robert Sherwood, "The White House Papers of Harry L. Hopkins: An Intimate History," vol.2, p.634-645.

Could an attempt to supply MacArthur have cost more men and material?
Why were Russian lives more important to Hopkins/FDR than American?

The explanation: an unnoticed, unimagined crime of Communist penetration and influence on American policy, not only during the war....but after.


3. Even before Bataan fell, MacArthur had bulldozers working around the clock to build 4 airstrips in the Philippines, and 9 on Mindanao...he believed Roosevelt would send help.

Generald Hap Arnold told an RAF commander that if 80 B-17s and two hundred p-40s could get to the islands, he believed 'we could regain superiority of the air in the theater.'
"American Caesar: Douglas MacArthur 1880 - 1964," William Manchester

OK, so know you have given up on the sending 200 aircraft to Singapore nonsense and switched over to the Philippines. What do you think they would have done with 80 high altitude bombers being protected by 200 low altitude fighters? How would Mac have protected those aircraft from destruction? If he did it the same way as he protected the ones he already had, he would have lost all of them on the ground.

 

[westwall]

What most armchair generals don't know is the Japanese, when they first contacted the defenders of Singapore were there to negotiate the Japanese surrender! The British commander though, who is one of the most colossal idiots ever to be in military service offered to surrender first! Before he had heard anything!

..............................................

My Brit uncle was on the last ship into Singapore and died on the River Kwai. He would say that RW Yanks were always a big PIA on EVERYTHING 1919-41, and they still are full of shytte.

And yet, it's been the Yanks on two separate occasions that have pulled the Brit bollocks out of the fire.

 

[Sunni Man]

What most armchair generals don't know is the Japanese, when they first contacted the defenders of Singapore were there to negotiate the Japanese surrender! The British commander though, who is one of the most colossal idiots ever to be in military service offered to surrender first! Before he had heard anything!

The Japanese had defeated the Brits and Aussies across all of Malaysia; and the only part that remained unconquered was the small enclave of Singapore.

To say the Japs were there to surrender is pure nonsense. ......

 

[francoHFW]

What most armchair generals don't know is the Japanese, when they first contacted the defenders of Singapore were there to negotiate the Japanese surrender! The British commander though, who is one of the most colossal idiots ever to be in military service offered to surrender first! Before he had heard anything!

..............................................

My Brit uncle was on the last ship into Singapore and died on the River Kwai. He would say that RW Yanks were always a big PIA on EVERYTHING 1919-41, and they still are full of shytte.

And yet, it's been the Yanks on two separate occasions that have pulled the Brit bollocks out of the fire.

And twice sat on their asses for years while the world went to hell, mainly due to RWers, who also wrecked the League of Nations, the world with the FIRST corrupt Pub world depression, the chaos of which led to the rise of militarists in Germany and Japan, and allowed them to run wild for years before we were finally attacked ourselves. Great, job as always, a-holes and dingbats! The Brits bled themselves dry and had more men in combat than us until after D-Day. I'm sick of your ugly American claptrap.

 

[westwall]

What most armchair generals don't know is the Japanese, when they first contacted the defenders of Singapore were there to negotiate the Japanese surrender! The British commander though, who is one of the most colossal idiots ever to be in military service offered to surrender first! Before he had heard anything!

..............................................

My Brit uncle was on the last ship into Singapore and died on the River Kwai. He would say that RW Yanks were always a big PIA on EVERYTHING 1919-41, and they still are full of shytte.

And yet, it's been the Yanks on two separate occasions that have pulled the Brit bollocks out of the fire.

And twice sat on their asses for years while the world went to hell, mainly due to RWers, who also wrecked the League of Nations, the world with the FIRST corrupt Pub world depression, the chaos of which led to the rise of militarists in Germany and Japan, and allowed them to run wild for years before we were finally attacked ourselves. Great, job as always, a-holes and dingbats! The Brits bled themselves dry and had more men in combat than us until after D-Day. I'm sick of your ugly American claptrap.

Wow. I never expected to hear you support British Imperialism.

Who knew!

 

[francoHFW]

My father the doctor from Buffalo joined the British Army in May 1941, and they weren't in it for imperialism, dingbat lol. They were already in the process of freeing colonies before the war, no matter what Churchill and other CONSERVATIVES wanted.

 

[westwall]

My father the doctor from Buffalo joined the British Army in May 1941, and they weren't in it for imperialism, dingbat lol. They were already in the process of freeing colonies before the war, no matter what Churchill and other CONSERVATIVES wanted.

Really? Where exactly was that? The British only promised an independent India to the Indian National Congress in 1941 to garner their support in the war. The British still crushed them when they tried to get the Brits to "quit India" in 1942 however. WWII was the end of Imperial rule because Britain was broke. There was no real effort (at least in the UK) to end Imperial rule before that.

The Battle of the Somme though can rightfully be called the beginning of the end of the Empire however. They lost so many of their best and brightest that the ability to rule the Empire was failing after the end of the war. The will was there, just not the capability.

Just more of your progressive alternate reality rearing its silly head.

 

[francoHFW]

My father the doctor from Buffalo joined the British Army in May 1941, and they weren't in it for imperialism, dingbat lol. They were already in the process of freeing colonies before the war, no matter what Churchill and other CONSERVATIVES wanted.

Really? Where exactly was that? The British only promised an independent India to the Indian National Congress in 1941 to garner their support in the war. The British still crushed them when they tried to get the Brits to "quit India" in 1942 however. WWII was the end of Imperial rule because Britain was broke. There was no real effort (at least in the UK) to end Imperial rule before that.

The Battle of the Somme though can rightfully be called the beginning of the end of the Empire however. They lost so many of their best and brightest that the ability to rule the Empire was failing after the end of the war. The will was there, just not the capability.

Just more of your progressive alternate reality rearing its silly head.

It was going that way, especially when CONSERVATIVES were not in office- see 1935 law giving some self government and voting.
The British Raj Colonial India

The earlier Government of India Act (1935) had provided for the establishment of provincial legislatures across the colony. The Act also created an umbrella federal government for the provinces and princely states, and granted the vote to about 10% of India's male population.

These moves toward limited self-governance only made India impatient for true self-rule.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

My father the doctor from Buffalo joined the British Army in May 1941, and they weren't in it for imperialism, dingbat lol. They were already in the process of freeing colonies before the war, no matter what Churchill and other CONSERVATIVES wanted.

dear, modern conservatives do not want colonies so we are not offended that Churchill did under another definition of conservatism in the last century. How slow are you?

FYI modern conservatives want freedom like Aristotle Locke Jefferson and Madison did.

 

[westwall]

My father the doctor from Buffalo joined the British Army in May 1941, and they weren't in it for imperialism, dingbat lol. They were already in the process of freeing colonies before the war, no matter what Churchill and other CONSERVATIVES wanted.

Really? Where exactly was that? The British only promised an independent India to the Indian National Congress in 1941 to garner their support in the war. The British still crushed them when they tried to get the Brits to "quit India" in 1942 however. WWII was the end of Imperial rule because Britain was broke. There was no real effort (at least in the UK) to end Imperial rule before that.

The Battle of the Somme though can rightfully be called the beginning of the end of the Empire however. They lost so many of their best and brightest that the ability to rule the Empire was failing after the end of the war. The will was there, just not the capability.

Just more of your progressive alternate reality rearing its silly head.

It was going that way, especially when CONSERVATIVES were not in office- see 1935 law giving some self government and voting.
The British Raj Colonial India

The earlier Government of India Act (1935) had provided for the establishment of provincial legislatures across the colony. The Act also created an umbrella federal government for the provinces and princely states, and granted the vote to about 10% of India's male population.

These moves toward limited self-governance only made India impatient for true self-rule.

And they were only implemented because of the losses of WWI. This is old news, and once again the goal was to have India run itself while still being a member of the Commonwealth instead of outright independance.

 

[francoHFW]

Only Tories rival the GOP for arrogant douchebag status among major parties in the modern world, and for loudmouth racist ignorant dingbats.

 

[francoHFW]

My father the doctor from Buffalo joined the British Army in May 1941, and they weren't in it for imperialism, dingbat lol. They were already in the process of freeing colonies before the war, no matter what Churchill and other CONSERVATIVES wanted.

dear, modern conservatives do not want colonies so we are not offended that Churchill did under another definition of conservatism in the last century. How slow are you?

FYI modern conservatives want freedom like Aristotle Locke Jefferson and Madison did.

Debatable lol.

B) You're in the bs chump wing of the greedy idiot mega rich GOP is all lol.

 

[francoHFW]

My father the doctor from Buffalo joined the British Army in May 1941, and they weren't in it for imperialism, dingbat lol. They were already in the process of freeing colonies before the war, no matter what Churchill and other CONSERVATIVES wanted.

Really? Where exactly was that? The British only promised an independent India to the Indian National Congress in 1941 to garner their support in the war. The British still crushed them when they tried to get the Brits to "quit India" in 1942 however. WWII was the end of Imperial rule because Britain was broke. There was no real effort (at least in the UK) to end Imperial rule before that.

The Battle of the Somme though can rightfully be called the beginning of the end of the Empire however. They lost so many of their best and brightest that the ability to rule the Empire was failing after the end of the war. The will was there, just not the capability.

Just more of your progressive alternate reality rearing its silly head.

It was going that way, especially when CONSERVATIVES were not in office- see 1935 law giving some self government and voting.
The British Raj Colonial India

The earlier Government of India Act (1935) had provided for the establishment of provincial legislatures across the colony. The Act also created an umbrella federal government for the provinces and princely states, and granted the vote to about 10% of India's male population.

These moves toward limited self-governance only made India impatient for true self-rule.

And they were only implemented because of the losses of WWI. This is old news, and once again the goal was to have India run itself while still being a member of the Commonwealth instead of outright independance.

Like Canada, Ausralia, and NZ? Give it up. And bs.

 

[westwall]

My father the doctor from Buffalo joined the British Army in May 1941, and they weren't in it for imperialism, dingbat lol. They were already in the process of freeing colonies before the war, no matter what Churchill and other CONSERVATIVES wanted.

Really? Where exactly was that? The British only promised an independent India to the Indian National Congress in 1941 to garner their support in the war. The British still crushed them when they tried to get the Brits to "quit India" in 1942 however. WWII was the end of Imperial rule because Britain was broke. There was no real effort (at least in the UK) to end Imperial rule before that.

The Battle of the Somme though can rightfully be called the beginning of the end of the Empire however. They lost so many of their best and brightest that the ability to rule the Empire was failing after the end of the war. The will was there, just not the capability.

Just more of your progressive alternate reality rearing its silly head.

It was going that way, especially when CONSERVATIVES were not in office- see 1935 law giving some self government and voting.
The British Raj Colonial India

The earlier Government of India Act (1935) had provided for the establishment of provincial legislatures across the colony. The Act also created an umbrella federal government for the provinces and princely states, and granted the vote to about 10% of India's male population.

These moves toward limited self-governance only made India impatient for true self-rule.

And they were only implemented because of the losses of WWI. This is old news, and once again the goal was to have India run itself while still being a member of the Commonwealth instead of outright independance.

Like Canada, Ausralia, and NZ? Give it up. And bs.

Yes. That was the goal. And yes, you should give it up. You're one of the more clueless progs on here.

 

[francoHFW]

My father the doctor from Buffalo joined the British Army in May 1941, and they weren't in it for imperialism, dingbat lol. They were already in the process of freeing colonies before the war, no matter what Churchill and other CONSERVATIVES wanted.

Really? Where exactly was that? The British only promised an independent India to the Indian National Congress in 1941 to garner their support in the war. The British still crushed them when they tried to get the Brits to "quit India" in 1942 however. WWII was the end of Imperial rule because Britain was broke. There was no real effort (at least in the UK) to end Imperial rule before that.

The Battle of the Somme though can rightfully be called the beginning of the end of the Empire however. They lost so many of their best and brightest that the ability to rule the Empire was failing after the end of the war. The will was there, just not the capability.

Just more of your progressive alternate reality rearing its silly head.

It was going that way, especially when CONSERVATIVES were not in office- see 1935 law giving some self government and voting.
The British Raj Colonial India

The earlier Government of India Act (1935) had provided for the establishment of provincial legislatures across the colony. The Act also created an umbrella federal government for the provinces and princely states, and granted the vote to about 10% of India's male population.

These moves toward limited self-governance only made India impatient for true self-rule.

And they were only implemented because of the losses of WWI. This is old news, and once again the goal was to have India run itself while still being a member of the Commonwealth instead of outright independance.

Like Canada, Ausralia, and NZ? Give it up. And bs.

Yes. That was the goal. And yes, you should give it up. You're one of the more clueless progs on here.

Sure, dingbat. You said it yourself- Commonwealth status, which IS independence. And the point of the article was that India DIDN'T get it from WWI sacrifice, but later struggle for rights. DUH.

 

[Discombobulated]

Patton wanted to team up with willing elements of the Nazi Wehrmacht against the Soviets? Am I getting that right?

And he wanted to do that right at the time when the full scope of the Nazi holocaust was reaching the rest of world?

lol, good luck.

I believe that is correct, his idea was to rearm the Germans and go to war with the Soviet Union.

Yup. The Germans themselves wanted to surrender to the Western Allies. They would have handed over everyone we wanted, they just wanted to be able to continue the war against the Soviets, and this was offered in the middle of 1944.

By the end of the war, the Soviets had been bled dry. They no longer had the huge advantage in people they had enjoyed at the beginning of the war. Had the US gone to war with them, with German help. I have no doubt we would have won. It would however certainly have been a very bloody affair.

The Soviet tanks were far better than ours. No question. They weren't as good as the Panther, but they were orders of magnitude better than ours. Even the Pershing was no match for a JSU-152 or JS-2. But, our air power would absolutely have ruled the sky's after about three to four months.

That would negate the Soviet advantage in artillery and in men. We were a fully mobile army, they weren't. They were only as mobile as they were because we gave them 600,000 trucks through lend lease. The US gave the Soviets millions of tons of munitions, food, weapons, and medicine. Had that been taken away the Soviet armies would have collapsed after a few months of combat.

The problem would have been in administering that huge area. We can't control Iraq, there is no way we could have controlled the vastly larger Soviet Union. We would still have troops there, and we would still be actively fighting partisans to this day had we attacked.

Pretty much what the Germans thought in 1941.......they were wrong.

The US was at full war production for less than two years. We began cancelling production towards the end of 1943. That's when we knew we were going to win. We out produced the entire world in that short period. We would have done to the Soviets, what they had done to the Germans, only we wouldn't have suffered the massive losses that they did.

However, the "victory" would still be being fought for today against partisans. That much is very clear.

I don't think Patton was serious about invading the Soviet Union; you'd have to be completely ******* crazy to imagine a fantasy scenario like that would have any chance of success.

 

[regent]

I think Patton just liked war, and he wanted to keep the war going for another ten years or so and then he would retire. Not a bad plan.

 

[Discombobulated]

I think Patton just liked war, and he wanted to keep the war going for another ten years or so and then he would retire. Not a bad plan.

Patton would have been just as happy fighting anyone, politics didn't really matter much for a man like that.

 

[Camp]

Patton may have been playing a role similar to the one he played for the D-Day invasion. There was another race going in. The USA wanted to end the war with Japan before Russia could enter the war with them in a way that would entitle them to spoils. Patton's grumbling may have slowed down Russia's readiness to transfer troops the the battle lines with Japan for a serious campaign.