Jump to content

An Objective Look At Patton?


Recommended Posts

It seems to me that Patton's high profile causes some problems of the student of history. Most analysis that I read either fawns over him or absolutely trashes him. Maybe one or the other is right, but I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle. Does anyone know of a good source for an objective look at his work?

Just wonderin'

Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read alot of books on the guy and I think you're right, he must have actually fallen in the middle. He was certainly an incredible leader and a very interesting man, but was he as great as the legends portend? No. Was he the greatest tank leader the US has yet produced? Defiantly. He pretty much created the US tank corps single handedly. I still think he was our nations most spirited commander of the war, and must disagree whole-heartedly with our esteemed colleagues here who think Marshall, Eisenhower or Bradley, or heaven forbid, MacArthur, should hold the title. Granted, I will concede that Patton would possibly have floundered in any of the posts those gentlemen had. However I think the obverse is also true. Patton's genius was for combat in the attack. Which is exactly where he performed best and where he stayed. Perhaps a perfect example of the "Peter principle" at work.

I see there is a new book out now that applies his lessons and maxims towards success in the business world. Neat idea.

I think "Patton: A Genius for War" may be your best bet. It is critical of the man where warrented and praises him where he shown. Great guy to study. How complex the man? How resolute the legend?

Zamo

Really hoping this doesn't turn into another "greatest general thread"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can definitely recommend "Patton: A Genius for War". Plenty of info (didn't know he was horribly dyslexic, for instance) and what seems to be a fair treatment of his strengths and weaknesses as a commander.

For a lot of really good brief summaries of U.S. WWII generals I also HIGHLY recommend Perret's "There's a War to be Won: The U.S. Army in WWII". This is my favorite WWII book by far. Not only because it's the first I'd read to give an honest and forthright study of the U.S. Army in WWII, but it also has good campaign and battle descriptions. And it doesn't pull any punches - it points out both the successes and failures and speculates on the reasons for each.

For example, Patton is shown to suffer from a poor understanding of the logistics of running anything larger than a division in actual combat.

HIGHLY recomended reading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Patton almost single-handedly developed the Tank Corps, why is Adna Romanza Chaffee Jr. remembered as "The Father of the Armored Branch"?

It's hard to find objective works on any single personality. People with flamboyant personalities have admirers and detractors. My suggestion would be to read several books by different writers and try to link the common threads.

------------------

Floreat Jerboa !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remembered by whom? smile.gif

Patton organized the first American tank units during WWI under Pershing while Chaffee was still in infantry. He also drafted education and training procedures for a tank corps long before Chaffee got into it. Not to belittle Gen. Chaffee's contribution, but he wasn't first, and shouldn't be credited as the "Father of the Armored branch", at least historically speaking. I suppose it has to due with the fact that the Armored corps was disbanded after the First World War, and then re-created during the later part of the 1920's.

Zamo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...