Posted on 12/19/2010 12:17:44 PM PST by ConservativeStatement
Sixty-five years ago this month, Gen. George S. Patton Jr., hero of World War II and an outspoken critic of the Soviets, was en route to a Sunday hunting trip, a day before permanently leaving Europe, when he was critically injured in a vehicle accident on a deserted two lane highway near Mannheim, Germany.
A large US army truck that Patton’s driver later said was waiting for them, suddenly — and without signaling — abruptly turned into his limousine’s path, causing a head-on crash. Even though Patton had an aide with him and the driver of the truck had one or two passengers in the cab, no one but Patton was hurt. He suffered a paralyzing broken neck.
Despite it being early on a no-work day, a horde of military personnel, including a brigadier general, quickly arrived at the scene. And although there were facilities in Mannheim, he was taken to a hospital 20 miles away where, when he arrived, the prognosis was bad. They expected him to die.
But the tough general, vowing to go home and tell “block-busting secrets,” rallied. And in a little over a week he was fit enough to be readied for a grueling trans-Atlantic flight home. On the eve of that flight, he had a sudden relapse. Blood embolisms choked his breathing. Within 24 hours he was dead.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
The chair Lincoln was sitting in when he was shot is on display at (you guessed it) Henry Ford museum’s Greenfield village like some kind of grisly trophy.
The answer is obvious, the car companies were behind his assassination.
Ping.
Let’s start at square one. Has anyone actually seen Patton’s birth certificate?
Well, yes and no. I admire his aggressive use of shock and speed. I admire his 'American-ness'. I admire him seeing through the Soviets.
I don't admire his insistence on neckties and shined boots and fresh shaves and the rest of the drill-field BS that he forced on his men. Field hygiene yes, by all means- but Patton took it into the realm of the absurd.
You’re right. It was murder. The President should resign his post immediately.
That premise is easy to accept if you also accept, which I do, that our government we see or are allowed to see is like the 10% of an iceberg above the water.
The part we see gives us just enough not to create waves and make us feel good about our "way of life" while the ruling, not governing, and self enrichment is done out of sight and hearing from all except the select members of the inner circle.
Anyone threatening the inner circle becomes a member of the expendable list.
How can you possibly know that? Have you read this guy's book? Have you spoken to someone who was there?
So what, he hit the plexi-glass partition that didn’t exist at that time?
Stuff it, not funny.
Perfectly said.
Truman didn’t give China away. Chaing Kai-shek did.
Yes.
he won battles that way ...
If there is no hard evidence available and, after six and a half decades have passed, no one left alive to corroborate even the rumors and suspicions regarding the possible assassination of General Patton - which I do not rule out as a possibility - I cannot see the point of attempting to pursue this very cold case. However, I do see the value of understanding the unseen but active forces at work that you refer to as "the war above the war".
I believe that, on a practical basis, attempting to generate interest in such an old, virtually unprovable case of possible assassination of an American hero by either the U.S.and/or Soviet government is basically futile. Still, I understand the interest and do not reject the premise of assassination, only the reality of ever finding the truth after all this time. Investigations such as this need to be performed close to the actual act, not decades later. Because investigations of this (and other) suspicious deaths of American heroes were often successfully 'controlled' and/or thwarted at the time they occurred, making further investigation ineffective, attempting to re-start an investigation into General Patton's untimely, accidental death seems like a Sisyphean task that I can't see bearing any real conclusions.
I can't see how taking time away from much-needed weapon and equipment maintenance was anything other than a hindrance. I think that he won battles in spite of the drill-field spit-shine-in-combat BS, not because of it.
No one was more surprised than me. I was in Patton's army for about 3 weeks in 1944. He always seemed to be 'on the edge' of something. I think it was an accident. Patton lived only for war. He died on active duty, in uniform, no doubt wearing his pearl handled pistols. War was over, peace reigned, Patton was no more. Let it be.
I agree. To some Patton was a pain in the ass because he had the audacity to observe that the king wore no clothes. In other words he spoke openly about things he didn’t agree with.
That said, from everything I’ve read most of the heat to get rid of Patton came from the press (sound familiar) which for one reason or another had taken a disliking to him. I suspect it was because he didn’t treat them like WWII was all about them. The media dogged him for “gotcha” moments or created them out of thin air.
Patton was America’s best fighting general and, despite the “Blood and Guts” label hung on him his units took far fewer casualties than did Bradley’s—or any other general’s— units. Moreover, soldiers who served under Patton come across as being proud of the man and their accomplishments when interviewed.
But Bradley was a politician first and a soldier second. Because of his sycophant association with the media, the scribblers awarded him the title of a “Soldiers General”. Interestingly, I’ve not observed the same level of enthusiasm for Bradley from folks who served under him.
I’m sure there was plenty of envy from other generals because Patton’s skills as a leader, tactician and fighter were so much better than theirs. I’ve always wondered whether or not the Ardennes (Battle of the Bulge) would have happened if Patton was in charge and not Bradley.
In anyh case, I don’t believe that envy or his criticisms would have been sufficient to have him murdered. That’s a big step.
More to the point, he would have been relentless about the threat of Communism, he would have found out about the extent of Communist infiltration under FDR, and if he spoke out the common people would have listened to him. He was a threat to the Communists in the US, and to the Dem party.
he was responsible for giving China to the Communists.
>>>
Right. And the massive battlefield incompetence, the corruption, and the utter social decay of “Republican” China and Cash-My-Check (Chaing Kai-Shek) had nothing to do with it.
Please spare us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.