Politics & News

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 [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 »

Human1000 · 51-55, M

The Red Army in 1945 was a colossuses. For comparison, the Americans had about 200,000 soldiers at the Battle of the Bulge. The Red Army entered the Battle of Berlin with about 2,000,000. The Americans could never have defeated the Red Army, and don't forget, the Soviet Union had troops in the East, too.

The soldiers of the Red Army were battle hardened rapists who had fought the Wehrmacht for 1000 miles. Good luck.

1-25 of 38

ChipmunkErnie · 70-79, M

@Human1000 But at the time the USSR did not have atomic weapons, and I have a feeling Patton would have had no problem dropping as many as needed.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@Human1000 Rapists? A bit hyperbolic.

But the rest is accurate. Russia lost more people in Stalingrad than all US casualties combined. And it would have been a route.

irishmolly72 · 56-60, F

@Human1000 They were spent. The US and Britain had utter dominance of the air. The Arsenal of Democracy was invincible. Russia only existed because we propped up their economy with massive financial aid.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@irishmolly72 Lol. That is some very very creative propaganda historical fiction writing.

You should become a novelist.

irishmolly72 · 56-60, F

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow Rapists is actually quite accurate. History books are replete with documented, verified accounts.

Human1000 · 51-55, M

@ChipmunkErnie Well, they weren't available in May (July was the first test), but it wouldn't have been Patton's call. There were limited bombs and they were headed for Japan, first. Remember, Germany would already have been defeated.

irishmolly72 · 56-60, F

@Human1000 Thank you, FuckFace. (I just like saying that! 😆)

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@irishmolly72 Pretending only one side in any conflict did bad things is hyperbole and deliberate demonization.

Human1000 · 51-55, M

@irishmolly72 lol, my pleasure!

irishmolly72 · 56-60, F

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I didn't say the Nazis were not doing it. It's well known the horrific things the Nazis did.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@Human1000 Am I the only sane person who sees how insane it would be to fight another war that would have gotten millions more killed just so America can have a bigger empire?

irishmolly72 · 56-60, F

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow You mean an empire like Germany and Japan which have among the highest standards of living in the world, and levels of personal freedom that have never before been attained in history? Not a bad deal, I say. Bring on Pax Americana!

Human1000 · 51-55, M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow @irishmolly72 America was pretty tired too, and they had the very mediocre Sherman tank which was basically only usable as movable cannon. The Soviets had fought to victory at Kursk and could repair their tanks with spit. They used men as cannon fodder. Britain was broke. France just occupied. But most importantly, the American public would never had gone for it. Ike would have resigned before doing it.

Human1000 · 51-55, M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow Lol, well we agree on it being an impossible and unrealistic goal.

sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow And the 51st star is Germany, and the 52nd star is Italy, and the 53rd star is Japan, and the 54th star is Holland, and the 55th star is Denmark, and the 56th star is Luxemburg, and the 57th star is the Philippines, and the 58th star is Morocco, and the 59th star is New Zealand, and the 60th star is South Korea...

LeopoldBloom · M

@sunsporter1649 LOL as if you would have wanted those furriners as fellow citizens. You still haven’t recovered from a Black guy being president, imagine a Muslim from Morocco.

sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M

@LeopoldBloom I could care less if barry big ears was green with blue stripes, his agenda sucked hind tit

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@sunsporter1649 Well all know you are an imperialist dumbass.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@sunsporter1649 [quote] barry big ears[/quote]

That just screams racist triggered snowflake. Usually white and very fragile.

ChipmunkErnie · 70-79, M

@Human1000 We would have had more bombs, plus I have heard in a military history lecture that prior to Hiroshima, when we weren't sure if the bombs would work, the US was starting to ship chemical weapons to the Pacific for use in an invasion of Japan. I assume we could/would have used them against the USSR if needed. The US already had some poison gas in Europe, as shown by the accidental release of gas in an Italian port city which was covered up.

sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow You are not black, and your agenda sucks hind tit as much as barry big ears'

Human1000 · 51-55, M

@ChipmunkErnie You’re assuming we would use those weapons tactically in Europe which is not really the case even if they were available. They were “perfect” for Japan because they were used strategically, not tactically.

The first atomic bombs were big, hard to get to their target, and if used tactically in Europe would destroy allied troops and civilians in the process. Atomic weapons were fitted for artillery more than 10 years after the war. They are really too much bomb to use on the battlefield in 1945. Only two were available by August, both slated for Japan, and the war ended in Europe in May.

When were you planning on invading East Germany, Poland, etc!

Also, keep in mind, the “Iron Curtain” took a few months to develop. In 1945 Stalin was still “Uncle Joe.”

ChipmunkErnie · 70-79, M

@Human1000 We used them in Japan, no reason we wouldn't use them on Russian cities. And in Japan we didn't use them "on the battlefield" -- we dropped them on civilian targets to tell Japan it was surrender or get wiped off the face of the earth. As to "Uncle Joe", I think that was pretty much of a joke, not taken seriously.

sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M

@Human1000 He was not uncle joe to Patton

Human1000 · 51-55, M

@sunsporter1649 True, but in terms of the American public, it’s more mixed.

In January 1945, Fortune asked “Thinking back for a moment to our relations with Russia a few years before the war, do you think that we shall get along better with Russia in the future than we did in the past, not so well, or about the same?”

48.3% of those who responded said they believed the US and Russia would definitely get along better. 22% thought the opposite and 20.1% thought the relationship would stay the same.

1-25 of 38