Talk:George S. Patton

Master of the Sword

You are invited to join the discussion at WT:MILHIST#MoS & GEN Patton. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:09, 24 March 2012 (UTC)Template:Z48

Controversy over Patton's death

The article presents the official account of Patton's death as though it were historical fact. It has been alleged that he was murdered, to suppress his opposition to the Morgenthau Plan ( http://www.rense.com/general63/patton.htm has references to published sources ). I have no idea what the truth is in this matter but it seems to me that the allegations should at least be mentioned. They seem inherently plausible. Barbacana (talk) 13:32, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

This has been discussed here before (search for "Wilcox" in the archive search box above). Adding to the article would probably require addressing the issues discussed there to a (new) consensus here on the talk page. --John (User:Jwy/talk) 16:55, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Jwy, how about the claims in Target Patton stating that the Patton Cadillac in Fort Knox was not the actual Cadillac in the accident? Can it be included? --Eaglestorm (talk) 03:43, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not the (only) judge here, but since the objection is generally to the reliability of the source, I would suggest we shouldn't include it unless it is supported in another (acceptable) source. --John (User:Jwy/talk) 15:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Suggested edit to Section 10 - Patton as viewed by his comtemporaries

3rd Para. relates Bradley's negative opinion of Patton, and Patton's alleged resentment of Bradley taking credit for his ideas.

However it is interesting to note Patton's high opinion of Bradley as a General Officer. Patton's Efficiency Report on Bradley dated 12th September 1943, made while the latter was his subordinate, is striking. Patton rates Bradley's performance as "Superior" across the board, and recommends him for command of an Army. To the question "Of all general officers of his grade personally known to you, what number would you give him on this list, and how many comprise your list," Patton's response reads, "Number 1. I know all of them."

This Efficiency Report can be viewed at http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/CFAWC/Contemporary_Studies/2008/2008-May/2008-05-14_Efficiency_Report_Lieutenant_General_Omar_Bradley_1943.pdf

--204.244.252.65 (talk) 18:28, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Patton in El Paso August 1914?

I have a question about the photograph showing Pershing, Villa and Obregón. I am very knowledgeable about the Mexican Revolution (1910-1920) and this photograph is in a great many books about the Revolution. I have doubts that the tall young man to the side of Pershing is Patton. I have 13 books on the Revolution, and this photograph is in four. In Eisenhower’s Intervention, he has the photo on page 194, but he does not identify the tall young man. In McLynn’s Villa and Zapata he has the photo between pages 304 and 305, but he does not identify the tall young man. In Hall’s Álvaro Obregón she has the photo between pages 82 and 83, and she identifies the young man as Patton. And in Peterson and Knoles’ Pancho Villa they have the photo between pages 128 and 129, and they identify the young man as 1st Lieutenant James Collins, father of astronaut Michael Collins.

I have only read one biography of Patton, Stanley Hirshson’s General. Patton: A Soldier’s Life. He does not have this photograph in his book, and he makes no mention of Patton being in El Paso around August 1914. Hirshson says 2nd Lt. Patton reported to Fort Riley, Kansas in October 1913 (pg 63) where he was an instructor on cavalry sword fighting techniques. Hirshson details Patton’s life at Fort Riley, but he makes no mention of a trip to El Paso, and makes no mention of being familiar with General Pershing at this time. It appears he remained in Fort Riley until August 1915 (pg 69), when he was transferred to Fort Bliss, El Paso. Once he arrived in El Paso, Hirshson says, “Exactly when he met Brigadier General John J. Pershing, soon to command Fort Bliss, is uncertain, but it must have been early in the fall of 1915.”

I’m thinking Patton did not know Pershing in August 1914, and so the tall young man next to Pershing could not be Patton. I think the photograph should be removed from the article, or at the very least, the photo caption should indicate ‘that the tall young man next to Pershing is often identified as Patton.’ Ramon4 (talk) 21:59, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

The Library of Congress entry does not say that Patton is in the picture. Also, the guy looks nothing like Patton, and the photo is reversed, so I'm going to remove it. Good catch, Ramon4. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:13, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

good faith, but bad catch actually.

1) the LOC only identifies three people in the front row in that crowded picture. no one in the second row is identified. that doesn't change who is there.

2) the LOC image is the 'reversed' one: note it is a glass plate negative. that's one thing LOC *does* specify about this image. notice how pershing's campaign ribbon bar is on the 'wrong' side in the LOE image. the WP one has been reversed (or de-reversed i suppose), but that is what makes it more 'correct'.

Cramyourspam (talk) 14:26, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

D'Este agrees with the above. Patton would have been in Ft. Bliss in Kansas in the fall of 1914, not at Ft. Bliss near El Paso, where this photo was taken. Patton did not make it to his Ft. Bliss "border protection" assignment until Sept. 1915 (as noted above), and one presumes (though have not read it anywhere) that this was where he first met Pershing, who had commanded Ft. Bliss since April 1914. BTW, for the same time reasons I would guess that the photo in question was not taken in 1913, but 1914 after April 1914 when Pershing arrived in Texas. And probably in August. D'Este notes that Pershing's wife and children (his entire family) died in an unfortunate housefire in the Presidio in San Francisco, just before going to join Pershing at Ft. Bliss, on Aug. 27, 1915. Among the letters of condolence to Pershing was one from Villa, suggesting that the two men had just met. Anyway, we should fix the caption to remove Patton, and somebody needs to come up with a photo date to fix the 1913 date it has affixed to it the Library of Congress (supposedly). SBHarris 20:13, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

So you do agree that there's no convincing proof that it's Patton? Also, while I'm not familiar with LOC practices, I would expect it to identify someone as famous as Patton, regardless of how crowded the photo is. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:43, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

The original photo is held by the Regents of the University of California. http://content.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/hb3c6008kp/?layout=metadata&brand=calisphere The photo is well documented to have been taken on 27 August, 1914. Villa and Obregón were Constitutionalist generals, and they had just driven Victoriano Huerta into exile. However, the victorious Constitutionalist began quarreling among themselves. First Chief Carranza ordered Villa and Obregón to the state of Sonora to see if they could defuse a quarrel there. The easiest way to Nogalas, Sonora was to travel north up the central rail to Ciudad Juárez and El Paso, and from there, on an American train to Nogalas, Arizona. Diplomatic protocol required that Villa and Obregón check-in with the military authorities at Ft. Bliss before they continue on their travels. This is well documented in books about the Mexican Revolution.

I think that unless someone can document that Patton was in El Paso at this time, the photo should be removed from this article. Does this photo appear in any biography of Patton? Does any biography of Patton indicate he was visiting El Paso at this time? The only biography I have read indicates Patton was an instructor at Ft. Riley, Kansas, and that he did not become acquainted with Pershing until the fall of 1915. Therefore, the tall young man to the side of Pershing is not Patton.

Incidentally, my readings indicate while Pershing was the commanding general residing at Ft. Bliss, his command also included Ft. Riley, so Patton would have been a subordinate of Pershing. It is entirely possible that Patton was on a temporary assignment at Ft. Bliss just as Villa and Obregón were passing through, but where is the documentation?Ramon4 (talk) 22:18, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah. So the photo was taken in Texas Aug 27, 1914, a year to the day before Pershing's entire family died by fire in the Bay Area in California, Aug 27, 1915. Which explains why Pershing still looks happy. And still why Villa sends him condolences a year latter.

Anyway, I'm going to be bold an remove the comment that Patton (who won't arrive for more than another 12 months) is in the photo. But since the paragraph talks about Ft. Bliss, and Pershing and Villa, I think it should be left in the article as illustration for the same reason the cars are. It's hard to imagine these people without photos of them. I'll fix the timeline. Patton arrives at Bliss Sept, 1915, but it's not until he shows his trademark "already packed" enthusiasm about the punitive raid in March, 1916 that Pershing not only allows him to go on the raid, but takes him on as his personal aide to help organize it. That's 6 months after Patton arrived at Ft. Bliss. SBHarris 23:06, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Possible plagiarism.

I noticed that this passage:

"...insisted on the presence of some black officers as judges of military tribunals involving black defendants; and spent more time with his African-American aide, Sergeant Meeks, than with almost anyone else while in Europe, developing a relationship of mutual respect that transcended that of a general and his valet. Patton hated the British, but in fact was more appreciative of Montgomery's organizational talents than was either Bradley or Eisenhower."

corresponds almost exactly to the relevant passage on its source page. Is this considered plagiarism? After clicking the link, you may have to elide "%7C" from the end of the URL.