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 [b]we have failed in the liberation of Europe[/b]; 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 »

QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M

Patton is off his rocker, Soviet logistics were on point in 1945 and Russians would have tore him a new one. Easily.

jackjjackson · 61-69, M

If he had nuked a few Soviet cities. That would have prevented the Soviet’s from being a nuclear power for a long long time. This may interest you:

https://similarworlds.com/news/4240583-I-wonder-how-things-would-have-turned-out-if

@QuixoticSoul

irishmolly72 · 56-60, F

@QuixoticSoul The war in Japan was over. Eastern Europe would have fought on our side. They absolutely hated the Soviets as much as they did the Nazis (even more in 1940).

jackjjackson · 61-69, M

You know it ma’am. Q has a blind spot when it comes to anything remotely Russian. He drives a Volga if that gives you a clue. @irishmolly72

QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M

@irishmolly72 The war with Japan was not over - this was May 1945, and the only people capable of fighting in Eastern Europe at this point were the Soviets.

@jackjjackson He didn’t have the nukes.

jackjjackson · 61-69, M

He knew where to get ‘em. @QuixoticSoul

irishmolly72 · 56-60, F

@QuixoticSoul We can agree to disagree. The Soviets would have had to fight the Americans, the Brits, the French, the Germans, the Poles, the Slovaks, the Ukranians, the Hungarians.... the list goes on and on. The Soviets murdered and raped their way through the counties they conquered. There would have been guerilla warfare everywhere.

jackjjackson · 61-69, M

I agree. Q is flat out wrong on this one. @irishmolly72

QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M

@irishmolly72 @jackjjackson Soviets had overwhelming superiority in Europe at that point, which is why nobody tried anything. Iirc the British even did a study. Patton would have been crushed - at that point Soviets were much better at his own bread and butter.

One of my family members was a Ukrainian guerrilla fighter - guess whose side he fought on.

jackjjackson · 61-69, M

Japan? @QuixoticSoul

QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M

@jackjjackson You got it :)

irishmolly72 · 56-60, F

@QuixoticSoul There were also Russians who fought for the Nazis. It's never a monolith.

QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M

@irishmolly72 How did that go for them?

irishmolly72 · 56-60, F

@QuixoticSoul They murdered and raped just like the Russian army did. Some of them even paid the price for it.