Poems

Basically, Caitlyn, you see Patton as an extremely capable military man. There is no denying that his accomplishments are admirable and that he is a larger-than-life historical figure, respected and feared by many. However, there is, in my mind, at least, no denying also that he was an inhuman monster, driven to the extreme--an example of what happens to people who take militarism to the extreme. This was a man who shamelessly glorified war--not just the dubious glamor and glory of war, but the ugliest and most offensive dimensions of war. In the speech I quoted above, which you interpret as a motivational speech, Patton actually glorifies completely annihilating the enemy--"cut out their living guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks". There are ways of motivating soldiers short of turning them into inhuman monsters by glorifying the most profane dimensions of war and short of utterly dehumanizing the enemy. All I'm saying is that one doesn't have to turn into a raving lunatic, foaming at the mouth, to have a successful military career--take Eisenhower, Montgomery, and others, for example. Patton was promoted to 4-star generalship for his successful campaigns, but was reprimanded by his C.O., Dwight D. Eisenhower for his words and actions, and subsequently removed from command. Eisenhower went on the become one of the most successful Presidents in US history, while Patton went on to become one of the most controversial personages in US history. Maybe he was never court-martialled--which would have made him an explicit war criminal. But he was reprimanded and removed from command. For a man of his seniority, it doesn't get more serious than that, especially at the very climax of WWII!

Give me one good reason why I should equate trash-talk with genocide. Just one.


Don't you see how ridiculous it is to on one side babble about how horrible and brutal war is, yet try to pretend that rough language like Patton's is somehow out of place in it? Have some perspective. See my truck analogy again.


"Yelling mean things in the heat of war is not the same thing as murdering civilians." -- Yoda

Well, Hitler never actually killed anyone. He only made the speeches. But that's taking it to the extreme, really.

Fact is that Patton was a very capable soldier, but also a very ruthless soldier. I presume that that's what led Eisenhower to reprimand him and remove him from command at the height of the Normandy Invasion in WWII. I don't know exactly what happened--I will have to research that historical period more fully--maybe watch the movie again and read up on Patton, Rommel, Eisenhower and the rest of them.

But, to slightly divert from the topic, I mentioned above that the use of "excessive force" was a Nazi concept. Well, that's only partly true, as the use of excessive force dates back at least to the Middle Ages--to the time of Vlad the Impaler, a.k.a. Count Dracula, the Rumanian warlord who impaled his enemies (the barbaric Ottoman Turks) on spikes and feasted on their remains--eating their flesh and drinking their blood. Makes you think a little bit about Patton's speech, doesn't it?

No, not really.

Let me rephrase that: "It makes you think twice about Patton's speech, doesn't it?"

I'm referring, of course, to the evils of "excessive force".

No, it doesn't make me think twice about it at all. Patton did not use Nazi guts to grease the treads of his tanks. He talked tashed to motivate his soldiers. This isn't even in the rough vicinity of the atrocities you're speaking of.

As I've stated several times before, both plainly and in a completely ignored (but highly applicable) analogy: show some freakin' perspective. If words were deeds, you might have a point, but they aren't, and therefore you don't.

This is obviously not just a question of trash-talk. I used the speech as an example of Patton's mentality. His deeds reflected his words, though I can't give you specific examples offhand--I will have to research the man's life. But Patton did do some pretty atrocious things, obviously, enough to lose his command at the high tide of the Normandy Invasion.

Then you've no one to blame but yourself. I've asked you many times to demonstrate why he's in the same league with the men you listed, and all you've given me is a few harsh words in a speech, roughly. That simply doesn't cut it.

The fact that have to do more research to continue shows that you simply said something without thinking. You're HOPING to find that he committed an act which will justify your claim, but you don't know offhand, which means you didn't know when you wrote it. Which means you originally made him out to be a heinous murder over -- you guessed it -- simple trash talking.

Consensus implies the majority share that opinion… would you please post the source for your information that says the majority of people and not just you believe that General George Smith Patton was a major league psycho…

What I see is an American who became a human shield standing in front of innocent human beings doing everything in his power to protect each and every one of them by stopping an evil that threatened their very existence… a man who was willing to die to preserve the very freedoms you profess to admire so much…

No… it doesn’t make me think about Patton’s speech at all… it does however make me think about an account I read about the Nazis placing heads on poles and laughing while they washed their faces in the dripping blood… it also reminds me of the pictures I saw of Nazis holding their guns in the air with babies impaled on their bayonets…

You have no idea what Patton’s mentality was and you have no idea what you are even talking about… if you did, you would know that the Normandy Invasion took place on June 6, 1944 and that Patton was in Normandy at the time in command of the 3rd Army… he did not lose his command “at the high tide of the Normandy Invasion” and had you bothered to read my previous post, you would know what he was reprimanded for and when… and if you know anything about the years following WWII, you would know that Patton was apparently smarter then the men who reprimanded him…

The bottom line is that General George Smith Patton is a decorated American war hero and all your delusional accusations are not going to change that fact…

__________________

Hey, I don't have to prove anything! The FACTS are that, after being promoted to 4-star generalship, Patton was reprimanded by his C.O. and removed from command--at the climax of the Normandy Invasion. This is not exactly a trivial thing. I won't pretend to know exactly what happened. Not everything is necessarily documented. I'll try to dig up some solid information when I find the time. But the facts of what happened remain--Patton, an extremely ruthless, though successful, military commander, was removed from command by his C.O., Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower at the climax of WWII. Why, exactly? I'm not sure, but it must have been serious to warrant that kind of serious course of action.

Just thought everyone should see this again.

Most people I have come across seem to share my opinion.

I don't deny that Patton did many things that are unquestionably commendable. But you make him out to be some kind of martyr, when he was hardly that. He was a ruthless warmonger who thrived--exulted--on war. He went to war not to serve some higher cause or to fight the Nazis. He went to war because he believed that "compared to war, all other forms of human endeavor shrink to insignificance"--he actually enjoyed fighting and murdering people. That was his calling in life--to be a ruthless warmonger, to fight in wars for no other reason except that he enjoyed it. That's what made him so feared and successful--he took pleasure in killing the enemy and in terrorizing the crap out of him. His terror tactics made him a terrorist, arguably, and, consequently, as feared and terrible as he was. Fact is, Patton got a kick out of going to war and kicking the enemy's butt--not just that, but totally annihilating the enemy and grinding him to a powder. Does that make him a hero? I would argue--no. It makes him a seriously deranged psychotic--a murderous madman. I think Eisenhower thought so too, which is why he removed Patton from command.

Again, I don't deny that the Nazis were brutal, inhuman bastards. I'm saying that Patton did some things that places him close to their level, if not entirely on their level

True, I can only conjecture about Patton's mentality based on the evidence I have before me. There's no way to be certain.
Point is that Patton lost his command at the very climax of WWII.
Patton was smarter than Dwight D. Eisenhower? Not so sure about that.

Hardly delusional. I am simply stating the facts and my personal opinions based on the facts. Decorated he may have been, but he was also a major league whacko. Patton was in the war for no other reason than that he enjoyed it. It was fun for him. That makes him a serious fruitcake in my book.

I love this line of reasoning. Patton must have done something wrong (but you don't know what it is) to lose his command around the end of the war, and therefore he's in the same league as Hitler.

See if you can spot the leap in logic.

That's a major oversimplification of what I said. My comments are based on all the evidence I have pertaining to the life of Patton, from which I attempt to sketch out the kind of man he must have been. Based on the evidence at my disposal, he comes across, to me, as a ruthless warmonger who lost his humanity somewhere along the way.

Yoda, what you are doing is facetious! You're using linear logic to justify your lame stand. Try looking at the big picture, for a change--assess the facts a little more holistically instead of sticking with a linear approach, which gets pretty tedious after awhile, to tell you the truth.

Oh my God! I haven't been to this thread for a while! I expected to read a few poems but noooooooooo another django argument.

__________________
instrumental rock band that I am in.

LOL! Sorry to upset you minion! But I wasn't the one to start it! You have to blame it on the almighty Yoda and his argumentative nature!

Hey, maybe Yoda could edit this argument into another thread, so as not to spoil the poetry thread!

shhhhhhhhh shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh be quiet Djangooo!!!!

You mean, I shouldn't be giving Yoda ideas?

no, i just meant (and i don't mean this a bad way) that everytime you say something other people interpret it very badly like here, you are speaking directly about Yoda and so forcing him to join this debate.