What would Patton Think?

[HankB]

I'd also not characterize Ike as a "lesser man" either. He was obviously much more of a balanced personality, and IMO, Patton any level higher than he was may well have been a disaster.

Ike was, first and foremost, a politician. Though with his rank Ike qualified as a man of the military, Patton was a man of war.

On the other hand, Patton did hold Bradley in high regard - at one time, it was up to Patton to fill out Bradley's fitness report; he rated him "Number 1" among all generals of that rank, and recommended he command "an army."

[roo_ster]

Ike was, first and foremost, a politician. Though with his rank Ike qualified as a man of the military, Patton was a man of war.

On the other hand, Patton did hold Bradley in high regard - at one time, it was up to Patton to fill out Bradley's fitness report; he rated him "Number 1" among all generals of that rank, and recommended he command "an army."

True.

I think some of Bradley's subsequent actions tarnished his star quite a bit.

[K Frame]

"As strange as it may seem at first glance, I posit that based on, among other things, his redesign of the US Army cavalry saber in 1917 from a cutting instrument into a skewer with no meaningful edge.  Even the Polish Cavalry in WWII knew that you needed to slice with a saber."

The Patton saber was the M1913, not the M1917.

Funny, then, that the British and Americans redesigned their cavalry swords at roughly the same time, independent of each other, and all adopting the same principal. All apparently understood that it's a lot more accurate, and exposes you a lot less, to use the sabre as a spear instead of a slashing weapon, especially against ground targets, which is how cavalry was evolving, as the last leg of shock troops against infantry before introduction of the tank.  

The French understood the utility of the point far before the British or Americans did. French cavalry sabers were evolving towards edgeless thrusting weapons as late as the 1700s under Napoleon. His emphasis was on the charge, eliminate the target in front of you, don't stop to have a classic sword/sabre battle, and get into your enemy's rear.

Testing of the Patton Sabre also showed that the straight blade allowed a MUCH more forceful strike if it was used as a slashing weapon.

The Polish in World War II aren't a very good example. There were no setpiece cavalry battles between the Polish and Germans. The Polish were fighting the Franco-Prussian War 75 years too late. Their cavalry was almost completely ineffectual against the Germans, especially when they sent cavalry against armor. The only thing they didn't lack was bravery.

[K Frame]

" it's also pretty obvious to me considering Patton's well-documented personality, that any logistical supply less than 100% of what he desired would be taken as a personal insult, whether that was the intention or not."

Largely, it was.

The flip side of that coin was that Montgomery felt exactly the same way.

Both agitated to be the leader of the primary drive in Europe. Eisenhower, in part to keep both men under control, adopted the broad front war strategy.

The one time that he allowed a narrow front strategy, Market Garden, Montgomery's Plan, it was a major disaster. It resulted in the loss of many thousands of troops (the British paratroop corps was particularly badly mauled) and took supplies away from other fronts where operations against the Germans were going well, forcing a stand down.

The flip side of that, Montgomery was right to propose a Market Garden-style operation. Had it succeeded, it likely would have shortened the war by several months at least in that it would have forced the Germans out of the low Countries and back across the Rhine and it would have liberated the major Dutch deep-water ports, which the Allies desperately needed.

At the time of the Battle of the Bulge the negative impact to supplies on the Allied center and right still had not been completely rectfied, which only intensified problems early in the battle. The 101st Airborne, 82nd Airborne, and 10th Armor going into the Bastogne region did so with insufficient supplies of just about everying. For the 101st that was partly because they were in rear area resting, but also because the supply situation hadn't sorted itself out.

I think it's very telling, though, that when, during the Ardennes offensive, Patton said that he could turn his Army on its axis and attack at roughly a 90 degree angle from its previous axis, just about everyone, Montgomery included (and very vociferously) claimed that it simply could not be done and that anyone who said it could be was a fool.

It should also be noted that of all the Allied Generals, the Germans feared Patton the most. In Europe he was, by far, the most successful Allied ground commander in the West, far more successful than Montgomery or Bradley.

[tokugawa]

Was not Monty the guy who decided to push back the balloon into the bottle instead of cutting it off at the neck? (the Bulge) Seems that cost a hell of a lot of American lives. I don't really know much about the guy, but the impression I have is one of extreme over caution and huge ego. Please correct me? 
 
 M1 vs M16?  My Garand will put all eight rounds of Greek surplus into 2" at 100 yards, with a scout scope mounted. (no matter what I shoot, with iron sights the best I can do these days is 3-4") And it will keep doing it . This took some minor work on the muzzle crown, stock fit and gas cylinder peening- not what I would consider "gunsmith" work.

  I have shot about 5 or six AR 15's-never had one that was reliable- always some tiny glitch that jammed it up. Guess I am just unlucky.

[AJ Dual]

The French understood the utility of the point far before the British or Americans did. French cavalry sabers were evolving towards edgeless thrusting weapons as late as the 1700s under Napoleon. His emphasis was on the charge, eliminate the target in front of you, don't stop to have a classic sword/sabre battle, and get into your enemy's rear.

Wouldn't using the point while on a full-speed charge leave you more prone to getting it hung up, or twisting it out of the rider's hand completely?

I'm sure they trained to recover the blade or lance whether slashing or stabbing, it's just how the physics of the thing seem to me intuitively. You stab someone on horseback at full gallop, now you've got the full mass of their body on your blade, all bearing at your wrist. You chop or slash, and the blade at least isn't completely buried and has a direction of egress.

Although, OTOH, I do see how the slash would be less lethal or miss/glance completely more often on average than a full-on stab.

[K Frame]

"Wouldn't using the point while on a full-speed charge leave you more prone to getting it hung up, or twisting it out of the rider's hand completely?"

Apparently no more so than doing a full slash at passing speed with a curved sabre.

The grip and hilt of the Patton Sabre are also apparently specifically designed to help prevent that from happening and help the rider maintain his grip.

Judging by what I have seen of re-enactment cavalry tactics, losing one's sabre in the target doesn't present much of a concern unless you manage to hit something unyielding, like a tree.

[K Frame]

"Was not Monty the guy who decided to push back the balloon into the bottle instead of cutting it off at the neck?"

Yes, and I'm no so certain that that wasn't the right decision.

Barring Patton's forces, which in relieving Bastogne had largely exhaused what supplies they had available to them, there were no other Allied forces capable of forming the other side of the pincer right at that time. 

Patton's forces also didn't have to penetrate very deeply into the salient to relieve Bastogne, it was that close to the southern edge.

To advance farther, the terrain and roads would have forced a very long, narrow approach towards Houffalize (sp?), the next major road junction in the area at that time. That would have resulted in a very exposed American position and could have resulted in Patton's forces being cut off.

[Bigjake]

That being said, I do seem to remember a thread some time back that was talking about a bunch of guys in Iraq who mounted a bayonet charge.  Can't remember if they were US or Brit.  Anyone remember that?

Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, actually, not Royal Marines.

[HankB]

The French understood the utility of the point far before the British or Americans did.

Racial memory . . . Gauls vs. the Romans and their short swords.

[K Frame]

"Racial memory . . . Gauls vs. the Romans and their short swords."

The Britons spent quite a bit of time facing off against the Gladius, too.