General George S. Patton Summary

1601 Words 7 Pages
Introduction Throughout the Second World War, one of the most highly praised and revered generals on the side of the Allies was General George S. Patton. He was among the first to institute effective tank warfare, utilizing effective intellectual resources to improve his battlefield strategy. Over time, Patton developed a complex system of beliefs that allowed him to focus upon particular strategies and learn how to best implement them. The first system regarded how battles should be fought, particularly in regards to which strategies worked and which did not. The second system displays which command systems work and which did not. The third correlates to how soldiers should set up their demeanor, and which qualities they should display. To …show more content…
Patton found fault with the modern war of attrition seen in World War I. From his point of view, the most common strategies utilized by the army at the time allowed too many soldiers to be killed, and never provided an advantage to either side in order to take over the enemy. When writing about General Bradley and Hodges’ efforts to fight along the western front, he claimed “I could break through [the enemy defenses] in three days if I commanded. They try to push all along the front and have no power anywhere.” In order to win in modern warfare, Patton realized that an armored fighting force would be needed to break through the enemy defenses and flank from behind. He began to study and further elaborate upon such strategies during the inter-war years which were to …show more content…
Command is essentially a term for the commander’s ability to exert their will upon their subordinates due to rank or their assignment. It is granted to commanders based on their management skills, the ability to make decisions, and motivate soldiers. On the other hand, control is the commander’s influence over the troops. The command gives the leader the authority to lead, while control is the power they exert upon subordinates.
Due to his own experience, Patton realized that it was incredibly important for his subordinates to have some degree of control over the situation. He once stated that one should not “tell people how to do things, [but] tell them what to do and let them surprise [them] with their results.” This belief largely rejects the idea that the staff must complete every task through direct orders from their commanding officers. He often briefed his commanders of any operation plans he had made, allowing them to directly make suggestions regarding the plan. While the staff could not make direct decisions, they could make recommendations. This method of giving his commanders input allowed the Third Army to work toward a common goal and give commanders a sense of ownership over the plan, resulting in more substantial control within the

Related Documents