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 [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 »
Roadsterrider · 56-60, M
Hindsight is 20/20, if Patton had engaged the USSR in 1945, and won, would we have avoided Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan? Would we be worrying about China? Would Croatia and Ukraine still seem to be the opening gambit of WW3?
@Roadsterrider Thinking the US would have won is a very very big assumption and most likely a false assumption. Patton was a nutjob.
Roadsterrider · 56-60, M
@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow It isn't a forgone conclusion that it would have been successful but with war production in full swing, the public being behind the war effort, I think the odds would have been pretty good. Regardless, it is very true that Patton was right. He foresaw the USSR coming to power and the problems their policy would bring up.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
Likely the Soviets would have gotten the Japan treatment in the end and that would have prevented a LOT of the problems the world faces today. @Roadsterrider @PicturesOfABetterTomorrow
@Roadsterrider Lol. Maybe in 2022, but the logistics of it in 1945 was not in the favor of the US. The reason the US didn't get bombed is because getting a plane across the Atlantic with a payload that was not a joke was basically bordering on impossible. Same applied to supplies.

And he was just spouting the same anti communist bullshit that lasted for decades after.

A more accurate assessment of America's position was Smedley Butler's take.


"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”
Roadsterrider · 56-60, M
@jackjjackson Not sure if they would not have had the same power before it could be wrapped up. I don't think they could have reached the US with a bomb, but they could have wreaked havoc in Europe.
@jackjjackson You are just as delusional as the rest of the nationalist cliches here.
@Roadsterrider Lol. You think the USSR could not get to American airspace with a single bomb but seem completely oblivious to the fact the same problem makes the logisitics for a 1940s war with the USSR basically a non starter.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
US planes would hypothetically operated out of the farthest Eastern European point controlled by the west and possibly out of Japan and to its west and perhaps India. @PicturesOfABetterTomorrow
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
If they bombed Japan they hypothetically could nuked the interior USSR. @PicturesOfABetterTomorrow
@jackjjackson The US didn't have enough bombs to make a difference beyond more war crimes and a war is not won by just dropping bombs on it.


And more hypothetical that completely ignores the technological limitations of the day.
Roadsterrider · 56-60, M
@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow As a former Marine, I have the utmost respect for Gen. Butler, but looking at wars fought long ago, it is easy to place an ulterior motive in the story. Protecting US interests may have been a by-product of military action in Nicaragua, China, Mexico, but it wasn't the mission. For most of the time the US was involved in the country of Nicaragua, it was under a treaty, Bryan-Chamarro treaty, assistance from the US was welcomed. It wasn't about oil, it was about democratic control of a canal.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
@Roadsterrider Fun fact, a professional army going back as far as Rome has only ever had one purpose, conquest and empire building. That is literally why professional armies were invented.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
Never heard of Smedley and found what I read about him interesting and just ordered a biography. Thanks! @PicturesOfABetterTomorrow
@jackjjackson I am surprised he would appeal to you given your posts here but I hope you enjoy it and learn a few things.

You might come out the other side wondering how he did 33 years in the Marine Corps and came out with politics similar to my own.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
I agree with that which the proviso that sometimes the military does other things for other reasons. The fact that it’s used a lot to protect US business interests while not hidden isn’t publicized at all. It falls under the what’s good for business is good for America umbrella. If business had to hire mercenaries or create their own armies for these purposes. The the prices of goods bought by the public would be more expensive with that cost built into the price. Overall it’s probably cheaper to have one government controlled military do this work. @PicturesOfABetterTomorrow
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
There is also the protection of the empire once created. @PicturesOfABetterTomorrow
Roadsterrider · 56-60, M
@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow Aircraft that could traverse the Atlantic, coast watchers in place, radar, the US was producing 2/3 of all military equipment used by the Allies during WW2. The US was sending planes, trucks, tanks, rifles and bombs all over the world to support the Allies, the "Lend-Lease Program".
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
I’m a man of varied interests Pics. Seems as though as he thought about it what we saw disgusted Smedley and he felt the need to share informationrarely brought to the attention of the public. You usually scoff at this type of thing as a nutso conspiracy theory. It appears you’re a man of varied interests underneath that veneer. @PicturesOfABetterTomorrow
@Roadsterrider 🤦‍♂️ And pretty much zero of that equipment was transported by plane and the allies lost thousands and thousands of tons of shipping. Plus the US only showed up at the tail end after nearly 4 years of fighting.

Strategic airlift required to make it work basically didn't exist back then.

Even if you managed to get it to shore the US forces would stretch their logistics to the breaking point and would be an easy target. The exact same problem the Russians are running into now just on an even more extreme scale.
@jackjjackson Capitalism is no conspiracy theory. Butler just took 33 years to figure out what some of use figured out sooner.
Roadsterrider · 56-60, M
@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow One ship is 1000s of tons. BUt, with Germany and Japan under wraps, there wouldn't be a bunch of U-boats and the Japanese Navy sinking any ships.
@Roadsterrider So Germany was suddenly the only nation with a navy??

And once it makes land it has thousands of miles to go to get to the front, so miles and miles and miles to be bombed into the ground.
Roadsterrider · 56-60, M
@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow NO, but Japan, Italy, Germany were defeated, we were allied with the rest of the nations that had an appreciable navy and the US had twice as many subs as the soviets. They also did not have the industrial capability of the US.
@Roadsterrider Again you are thinking in 2022 terms. Industrial capacity on the wrong side of the ocean in 1945 would not have helped. And I notice because of the current situation you just assumed everyone else would automatically jump on board with whatever war the US starts. That was not a given in 45.