Comments on: Patton: The German View http://www.historynet.com/patton-the-german-view.htm From the World's Largest History Magazine Publisher Sat, 18 May 2013 23:40:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: David http://www.historynet.com/patton-the-german-view.htm#comment-844090 David Thu, 24 Jan 2013 20:12:10 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13684857#comment-844090 Interesting and informative article. I agree that Patton's myth in some aspects goes beyond the actual facts. I highly doubt that German commanders held Patton is such awe that the fact alone he opposed them on the battle field caused them to greatly doubt in their chance for success. I also find it quite reasonable to conclude that "The Germans did not track Patton's movements as the KEY [emphasis added] to Allied intentions” – though that doesn't necessarily mean that the Germans didn't view Patton's command of a particular operation as entirely meaningless either. Still, I find it difficult to understand how the author can state "the Germans offered Patton faint praise during and immediately after the war" in light of Jodl's and Guidarian’s (who I consider one of the, if not the, best armor field commanders and strategist of WWII) comments during US interrogation. Their comments do not strike me as "faint praise", and I would think that such interrogations would occur at the latest "immediately after the war.” Even if the Germans "just' considered him a great Panzer General, that's certainly goes beyond "faint praise" in my opinion. The author concludes that "The Germans considered Patton a hesitant commanding general in the scrum of position warfare." Clearly some did – understandably so during the North African campaign and even later on specific occasion. However, for every Lieutenant General Hermann Balck, there's a Hans-Gustav Felber or Rudolf Freiherr von Gersdorff. Patton is widely considered to have been the most aggressive Allied field commander in the ETO. So aggressive that on more than one occasion, he was restrained by Eisenhower and Bradley. Of course, the German's didn’t know that at the time (as Mr. Yeide notes). Still, I find it difficult to believe that the bulk of German High Command & field commanders considered Patton a "hesitant” commanding general by the end of the war after viewing his command in the aggregate. While I think the Mr. Yeide has some valid points and find the article worthwhile reading, I find his conclusions overreaching. Rather than a “hesitant commanding general”, a commanding general “who on occasion was needlessly [uncharacteristically?] hesitant” would be more accurate in my opinion. After all, how can a "Great Panzer" general be hesitant? The article raises some interesting questions. If the German viewed Patton as a "hesitant commander", one can only imagine what they thought of Montgomery (Hemingway's 15:1 ratio "Monty" martini joke springs to mind). Bradley and Eisenhower were also more cautious or “hesitant” than Patton - though not to the same degree as Monty IMO. Perhaps beyond the scope of the article, but I would have found it helpful to have additional information on the German viewpoint of other Allied commanders. If not Patton, then which Allied commander did the German’s respect (or even “fear”) the most? Is it the case that the German’s simply didn’t have much regard for their opponent’s skills (i.e. the Allies won on a material basis rather than superior strategy/tactics), or that the simply saw other as more competent than Patton? Interesting and informative article. I agree that Patton's myth in some aspects goes beyond the actual facts. I highly doubt that German commanders held Patton is such awe that the fact alone he opposed them on the battle field caused them to greatly doubt in their chance for success. I also find it quite reasonable to conclude that "The Germans did not track Patton's movements as the KEY [emphasis added] to Allied intentions” – though that doesn't necessarily mean that the Germans didn't view Patton's command of a particular operation as entirely meaningless either.

Still, I find it difficult to understand how the author can state "the Germans offered Patton faint praise during and immediately after the war" in light of Jodl's and Guidarian’s (who I consider one of the, if not the, best armor field commanders and strategist of WWII) comments during US interrogation. Their comments do not strike me as "faint praise", and I would think that such interrogations would occur at the latest "immediately after the war.” Even if the Germans "just' considered him a great Panzer General, that's certainly goes beyond "faint praise" in my opinion.

The author concludes that "The Germans considered Patton a hesitant commanding general in the scrum of position warfare." Clearly some did – understandably so during the North African campaign and even later on specific occasion. However, for every Lieutenant General Hermann Balck, there's a Hans-Gustav Felber or Rudolf Freiherr von Gersdorff. Patton is widely considered to have been the most aggressive Allied field commander in the ETO. So aggressive that on more than one occasion, he was restrained by Eisenhower and Bradley. Of course, the German's didn’t know that at the time (as Mr. Yeide notes). Still, I find it difficult to believe that the bulk of German High Command & field commanders considered Patton a "hesitant” commanding general by the end of the war after viewing his command in the aggregate.

While I think the Mr. Yeide has some valid points and find the article worthwhile reading, I find his conclusions overreaching. Rather than a “hesitant commanding general”, a commanding general “who on occasion was needlessly [uncharacteristically?] hesitant” would be more accurate in my opinion. After all, how can a "Great Panzer" general be hesitant?

The article raises some interesting questions. If the German viewed Patton as a "hesitant commander", one can only imagine what they thought of Montgomery (Hemingway's 15:1 ratio "Monty" martini joke springs to mind). Bradley and Eisenhower were also more cautious or “hesitant” than Patton – though not to the same degree as Monty IMO.

Perhaps beyond the scope of the article, but I would have found it helpful to have additional information on the German viewpoint of other Allied commanders. If not Patton, then which Allied commander did the German’s respect (or even “fear”) the most? Is it the case that the German’s simply didn’t have much regard for their opponent’s skills (i.e. the Allies won on a material basis rather than superior strategy/tactics), or that the simply saw other as more competent than Patton?

]]> By: Patrick Miano http://www.historynet.com/patton-the-german-view.htm#comment-817061 Patrick Miano Mon, 03 Sep 2012 00:19:40 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13684857#comment-817061 I'm certain many of Patton's opponents missed opportunities as well. In war the victor is often not the general with the most brilliant strategy, but the one who makes the fewest mistakes. I'm certain many of Patton's opponents missed opportunities as well. In war the victor is often not the general with the most brilliant strategy, but the one who makes the fewest mistakes.

]]> By: Most Talented Field Commander WW2 - U.S. and World, studying past, wars, presidents, language, economy - Page 6 - City-Data Forum http://www.historynet.com/patton-the-german-view.htm#comment-812401 Most Talented Field Commander WW2 - U.S. and World, studying past, wars, presidents, language, economy - Page 6 - City-Data Forum Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:05:51 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13684857#comment-812401 [...] I didn't read thru all of the posts but I'm sure someone has said Patton. Patton was sold the the American public as a hero when in actuality, he was a baffoon at best. He used up and destroyed more equipment and had more casualties than any other Allied General. I have a friend that I 4 wheel with and he was with Patton on the run to Bastogne. The men were totally exhausted by the time they got there. They expected a hot meal in the winter cold only to be told there were no supplies. Most all of the armor was either not running or about to run out of fuel because Patton had out run his supplies.....again. My friend was in charge of a mechanized automatic weapons group- half tracks with quad 50's. He said when he went to resupply his group that they handled him his ammo in a paper bag and told him to use it sparingly. He said that had the German mounted any kind of offense, they would have been over run as there was little to no ammo left. The Germans apparently thought Patton would have been smart enough to bring enough supplies with him and it would have energized the US troops, they were wrong. Here's an article written about how the Germans didn't even think about Patton until the very end of the war. He's not even on their radar screen until March 1945. Patton: The German View [...] [...] I didn't read thru all of the posts but I'm sure someone has said Patton. Patton was sold the the American public as a hero when in actuality, he was a baffoon at best. He used up and destroyed more equipment and had more casualties than any other Allied General. I have a friend that I 4 wheel with and he was with Patton on the run to Bastogne. The men were totally exhausted by the time they got there. They expected a hot meal in the winter cold only to be told there were no supplies. Most all of the armor was either not running or about to run out of fuel because Patton had out run his supplies…..again. My friend was in charge of a mechanized automatic weapons group- half tracks with quad 50's. He said when he went to resupply his group that they handled him his ammo in a paper bag and told him to use it sparingly. He said that had the German mounted any kind of offense, they would have been over run as there was little to no ammo left. The Germans apparently thought Patton would have been smart enough to bring enough supplies with him and it would have energized the US troops, they were wrong. Here's an article written about how the Germans didn't even think about Patton until the very end of the war. He's not even on their radar screen until March 1945. Patton: The German View [...]

]]> By: James http://www.historynet.com/patton-the-german-view.htm#comment-811550 James Sat, 07 Jul 2012 01:41:19 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13684857#comment-811550 The article left out the slapping incident. This put Patton at the back of line as far as Eisenhower was concerned. So, it wasn't hard for German strategist to take him out of the equation. A friendly fire/bombing incident also made Patton seem a little loose. It wasn't just that the Germans ignored him because of past defeats/missteps. The US high command had put him on the back burner until the Bulge, really. The article left out the slapping incident. This put Patton at the back of line as far as Eisenhower was concerned. So, it wasn't hard for German strategist to take him out of the equation. A friendly fire/bombing incident also made Patton seem a little loose. It wasn't just that the Germans ignored him because of past defeats/missteps. The US high command had put him on the back burner until the Bulge, really.

]]> By: Luke http://www.historynet.com/patton-the-german-view.htm#comment-808791 Luke Fri, 15 Jun 2012 03:10:33 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13684857#comment-808791 One point is that the german opinion of patton may of been he was a hesitant commander but the truth is he was commanded by Bradley and Ike who where the ones perhaps causing the slowness in some of pattons assaults. I may be wroung about this but i was under the impression pattons comments about the distance and casualties inflicted by third army where a comment on the entire compaing and not one action. One point is that the german opinion of patton may of been he was a hesitant commander but the truth is he was commanded by Bradley and Ike who where the ones perhaps causing the slowness in some of pattons assaults. I may be wroung about this but i was under the impression pattons comments about the distance and casualties inflicted by third army where a comment on the entire compaing and not one action.

]]> By: Patton Americas Greatest Modern General « finnegan2749 http://www.historynet.com/patton-the-german-view.htm#comment-792336 Patton Americas Greatest Modern General « finnegan2749 Wed, 14 Mar 2012 21:58:47 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13684857#comment-792336 [...] http://www.historynet.com/patton-the-german-view.htm [...] [...] http://www.historynet.com/patton-the-german-view.htm [...]

]]>