Commander in Chief Patton

We might get a new war with the USSR, unless Churchill and Roosevelt can hold him back. If that'll be the case, then unless the Allies can produce enough a-bombs to nuke half of Europe it'll be a bloody conflict that'll last for years. Otherwise, D-day will be slightly different, and the Allies might find themselves having a more aggressive and buoyant approach. Things like Market Garden might turn out differently.
 
Who the devil would appoint possibly the most undiplomatic general in the history of warfare to such a diplomatically sensitive position, and why?
 
Who the devil would appoint possibly the most undiplomatic general in the history of warafare to such a diplomatically sensitive position, and why?
Let us suppose that Patton never slapped that soldier. Let us also suppose that Ike was killed, matters little how (Car accidnet, lucky German aircraft, etc)
Patton already looks better in this scenario.
 

mowque

Banned
Let us suppose that Patton never slapped that soldier. Let us also suppose that Ike was killed, matters little how (Car accidnet, lucky German aircraft, etc)
Patton already looks better in this scenario.

Anyone...ANYONE would be better then Patton. The English would never accept him as C-in-C.
 
Anyone...ANYONE would be better then Patton. The English would never accept him as C-in-C.
Well, then we make the English situation worse, details to be determined. If the English were in a weaker position, they might njot be able to say no.
 

MacCaulay

Banned
Let us suppose that Patton never slapped that soldier. Let us also suppose that Ike was killed, matters little how (Car accidnet, lucky German aircraft, etc)
Patton already looks better in this scenario.

Well, I'd almost say that George C. Marshall would be the one to put up.

The British weren't so hot on Patton, and the Americans weren't so hot on Montgomery.
And Marshall was originally supposed to be the D-Day commander, anyway.

But for the sake of the thread, I'm gonna have to go with...more strained relations with the British and the Soviet Union. He had a real bad habit of stepping on Monty's toes, and that was as a Corps and Army Group commander.

I don't know if there would be a war with the Soviets, since this would put him in the limelight too much. Perhaps Roosevelt and Churchill might tailor the post to fit Patton's...eccentricities. You know...make sure that as soon as Germany surrendered, it was passed to the occupation forces so he didn't even get the chance to be tempted to do something rash, as well as put more power in the hands of his Army Group commanders.
 
Anyone...ANYONE would be better then Patton. The English would never accept him as C-in-C.

The English would have no choice if he ever came up as the choice, by this stage of the war, Great Britian did not have the leverage to force the Americans to accept their choice. I do agree, however, that it is more likely someone else would be made CinC instead of Patton, it's too delicate a position for his 'bull in a china shop' mentality.
 
Agreed, the Brits didnt have the leverage to force the Americans to do anything from about 43 onwards, however, Eisenhower wasn't just dealing with the British, what about the French, Czechs, Poles and Canadians to name but a few. The allied forces in europe were a truly multi-national force of which the British were just the largest of the minor partners.

How would Patton deal with someone like DeGaulle for example. If Patton were running the show it is conceivable that the allies would have devolved from a relatively smooth running alliance to a fractious group of bickering factions.

Whilst being a good/excellent field commander (depending on your viewpoint) Patton would have been a disaster as head of SHAEF and the ramifications of such a disastrous mistake could be huge.
 

MacCaulay

Banned
Agreed, the Brits didnt have the leverage to force the Americans to do anything from about 43 onwards, however, Eisenhower wasn't just dealing with the British, what about the French, Czechs, Poles and Canadians to name but a few. The allied forces in europe were a truly multi-national force of which the British were just the largest of the minor partners.

How would Patton deal with someone like DeGaulle for example. If Patton were running the show it is conceivable that the allies would have devolved from a relatively smooth running alliance to a fractious group of bickering factions.

Whilst being a good/excellent field commander (depending on your viewpoint) Patton would have been a disaster as head of SHAEF and the ramifications of such a disastrous mistake could be huge.

It's interesting how the Canadians came last on the list.

Anyway, you raise an interesting point with DeGaulle. Eisenhower was very diplomatic when dealing with the French forces in North Africa during 1942 and '43. If Patton was put into that position at any time...those French might just hunker down and fight everyone, like they did at Oran and a few other places, instead of just playing both sides of the field until the Allies got there.

I will have to disagree with the whole "the British didn't have any sway after '43" argument. If they didn't have any sway after '43, then Monty wouldn't have been able to push through Market Garden. That was his plan, and no one else's.
 
Would Patton have wanted to be Allied CiC in any case? It may be the top slot but it would have taken him away from commanding operations in the field.
 
Agreed, the Brits didnt have the leverage to force the Americans to do anything from about 43 onwards, however, Eisenhower wasn't just dealing with the British, what about the French, Czechs, Poles and Canadians to name but a few. The allied forces in europe were a truly multi-national force of which the British were just the largest of the minor partners.

How would Patton deal with someone like DeGaulle for example. If Patton were running the show it is conceivable that the allies would have devolved from a relatively smooth running alliance to a fractious group of bickering factions.

Whilst being a good/excellent field commander (depending on your viewpoint) Patton would have been a disaster as head of SHAEF and the ramifications of such a disastrous mistake could be huge.

I agree. I just cannot see Army Chief of Staff George C. Marshall appointing George S. Patton as the head of SHAEF. Patton wouldn't have been able to hide how intensely he disliked Montgomery and he probably would have intensely disliked DeGaulle as well. There would have been discord in the alliance until Roosevelt or Marshall would have stepped in and replaced Patton. I presume that in this scenario Eisenhower is deceased, so probably Omar Bradley or perhaps Marshall could convince Roosevelt to let him leave Washington DC to command SHAEF.

If the United States had insisted on Patton, it probably would have broken the alliance.
 
Patton did not have many kind words for any Brit not just Monty. If the impossible happened and he was chosen as CiC then expect an end to the broad front strategy. That wont go anywhere near Patton. Patton would favour US forces and rile up London. Eisenhower always was aware about trying to keep everyone happy. Patton is not that kind of personality and if Monty is selected as head of Commonwealth Forces then it’s going to be a rocky road.
 
Leaving aside the question of Pattons's capabilities as a general (that is a completly different debate), you would be hard pressed to find a worse Allied general for this position. The whole point of the position was not so much as a high-ranking commander (Ike had less sway over events at the front than is commonly believed), but to provide overall strategic direction and to keep the alliance from fragmenting. Patton in overall command is going to be a mixed bag from a military perspective, but diplomatically it would be a disaster.
 
Would Patton have wanted to be Allied CiC in any case? It may be the top slot but it would have taken him away from commanding operations in the field.

My thoughts exactly. Patton was a field commander, he'd be the first to tell you he wasn't a politician. The Commander-in-chief's main job is making sure everyone does their job and gets along (to some degree). Even if Patton had the job, he'd probably still be at the front lines.
 
Top