Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Should we have listened to Patton?

“I understand the situation. Their (the Soviet) supply system is inadequate to maintain them in a serious action such as I could put to them. They have chickens in the coop and cattle on the hoof — that’s their supply system. They could probably maintain themselves in the type of fighting I could give them for five days. After that it would make no difference how many million men they have, and if you wanted Moscow I could give it to you. They lived on the land coming down. There is insufficient left for them to maintain themselves going back. Let’s not give them time to build up their supplies. If we do, then . . . we have had a victory over the Germans and disarmed them, but we have failed in the liberation of Europe; we have lost the war!”

George S. Patton
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
wildbill83 · 41-45, M
yep, Churchill and Roosevelt never should've allied with Stalin to begin with. Would've been better off in the long run to take Russia after Germany wore them down (Germany was within 50 miles of taking Moscow before Hitlers incompetence slowed them down)
irishmolly72 · 56-60, F
@wildbill83 That reminds me of what Mao did. He let Chiang Kai Shek do the fighting against Japan, then took over China by 1949. It was a catastrophe for the Chinese people, but an absolute stroke of genius.