Was Patton right?
Everyone knew the Soviets were going to be a problem. Patton was the general on the field and knew we could take out the Soviets. We had the bomb and if we had defeated the soviets we would have prevented the cold war, an arms race, and isolated communism to basically just China and maybe North Korea. America would have been the dominant superpower on earth after WWII and much of ongoing conflicts in the world supported by the soviets and now russians would never have happened. Though everybody hates America I would say the world would be a better place under american control than soviet/russian.
- Stone KLv 61 decade agoFavorite Answer
Patton was 100% right, he understood the threat, but unfortunately people were tired of war and wrongly thought it would be possible to talk though the issues and the Soviet union would yield.
It didn't and Patton would be vindicated (but not openly) sadly he never lived to see it come to pass.
A lot of People see Patton as nothing more than a war monger, no he was a realist and understood governments like the Soviet union only understood force, not words.
- michinoku2001Lv 71 decade ago
In the strategic sense Patton was correct. However, he was deaf to political concerns. There was just no political will whatsoever to proceed with a hot war with the USSR at the time. Aside from the American people being sick of war, there was still a lot of residual goodwill towards the Soviets based on the wartime partnership. The sometimes lackluster effort by the US/UN Forces in the Korean conflict reflected the war weariness of the times.
If folks back then were enthusiastic about a wider war with communism, then the firing of MacArthur would have been met with widespread opposition. Instead; even though he was a hero of the war with Japan and the Inchon landing, he faded away.
- 1 decade ago
Patton may indeed have been correct: he foresaw that Russia would be the enemy. But just having the bomb wasn't enough. We were able to use the bomb on Japan pretty much as we wanted because Japan's defenses were virtually nil in the summer of 1945. Russia had a huge army and a large air force in 1945. Allied casualties (minus the Russians, of course) would have been enormous. Russia would not have laid down and quit - and realistically, the bomb could not have been used in Europe with the British, Ameican, Canadian and Russian troops in such close proximity. An attack on Moscow would have sent the Red Army westward, and America's battle deaths would have skyrocketed.
And from the American point of view, the Americans were damn sick of that stinking war. They had slogged across Europe, dying in France, Belgium, Holland and Germany. They wanted peace and they wanted their young men home. The British had sacrificed even more in terms of losses and their support would have been tenuous.
And, in the end, we defeated the USSR. It just took a little longer.
- 1 decade ago
you are actually asking several questions to begin with the first. yes Patton knew the Russians where gonna be a problem long before anyone else saw it but was silenced in the name of politics. for the second: we can not be sure if things would be beter if there was no arms race and or cold war, it is generally known that during ww2 a lot of things where improved fast because there was a need for it like for instance anti biotic which saved many many lives during and after the war and still keep saving lives. and last you say the world would be better of under American rule than under sovietrussian. i would say the world would be better of under no rule at all. who is to say that if America rules the world they would keep it democratic?people with very much power tend to do strange things. and since the cald war is over we can now look further to the next problems like Iran and north Vietnam and some more countries that feel the need to endanger world peace.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 1 decade ago
America could have taken over the world after WWII. All the other strong countries were weakened or broken.* Why would we want to though? We shouldn't conquer nations that don't attack us. All we had against Soviet Russia were opposing ideologies. If we attacked them we would be wrong.
It also would lead to a much more unstable world. I believe no evil can rule the world no matter how powerful they are. We would eventually go down, and deservedly so. If we wanted to stay on top we would have to become a military state, which would force us to lose some of our freedoms.
*Canada would have posed a problem, they were still very strong.
- meatheadLv 51 decade ago
Sounds like Patton and George Bush have something in common. The world does not have the stomach for eliminating evil because of the ramifications to politics.
- 1 decade ago
he was right, but after just getting out of the horrors of world war two nobody had any more left in them to condemn millions of more men and women to die in another conflict
- Anonymous1 decade ago