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 »

graphite · 61-69, M

Didn't Patton say we defeated the wrong enemy and needed to beat the Russians, instead?

whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M

@graphite Patton was like Churchill, a man of his time and suited for war. Eisenhower was the "diplomat" who held the Allies glued together and went on to become President. That takes nothing away from Patton as a great general and leader in war.. But he would have fallen for the same trap Napoleon and Hitler did with Russia. You can fight an Army.. But you cant fight the land itself.😷

graphite · 61-69, M

@whowasthatmaskedman Yep. Invade Russia, watch the Russians head east and then watch your own troops get caught freezing to death in Siberia, hundreds of miles from your supply lines.

whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M

@graphite Exactly. The only option to bring down a nation like Russia or China is the nuclear option. And fortunately thats unthinkable. I hope..😷

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@graphite I would argue it is also attitude. In alot of countries when war comes to their country they flee. Russians seem to just dig in and say "bring it." One of the more interesting stories I came across was a woman who bought a tank after her husband was killed by the Germans and one of the most decorated snipers in history was a Russian farm girl.

graphite · 61-69, M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow Wasn't there this Russian general in WWII who would just throw waves and waves of soldiers at the enemy, knowing they were going to die? Then throw more waves afterward. A whole generation of Russian men killed. 24 million Soviet dead in the war, vs. 418,000 for the US.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@graphite That is pretty much a bullshit myth that was repeated during the cold war. There is very little evidence to support that cliche though. They lost alot of people but it was not because of some stupid "you will run out of bullets before we run out of cannon fodder nonsense." Interestingly that was a Japanese tactic during the war which is probably where the propaganda came from or the inspiration for it.

if the American homeland had been ivaded directly it probably would have been very devastating to the US too. The best the Germans managed was a few harassing subs.

Don't forget in places like Leningrad they were cut off and basically starved by the German army. Apparently there were no strays by the end of the siege.

graphite · 61-69, M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I think this was the guy. Lived long after the war was over. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Georgy-Zhukov

QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M

@graphite The whole human wave thing was just a myth, a frequent “alibi” for Germans losing on the Eastern Front. Zhukov was responsible for the Japanese defeat at Khalkin Gol which left the Japanese too afraid to engage the Soviets for the rest of the war, oversaw defense of Moscow and Leningrad, the battle of Kursk, etc. Reducing him to the idea of endless human waves is just a caricature.

Much of the Western views on Soviet performance in the war comes from defeated German brass, who were never reliable, and consistently bitter.

graphite · 61-69, M

@QuixoticSoul Interesting perspective. But 24 million dead is a lot of people.

QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M

@graphite Vast majority of those are civilians, you know.

graphite · 61-69, M

@QuixoticSoul This just lists the total. https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/research-starters-worldwide-deaths-world-war