Customer Reviews

Patton & His Third Army

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The inaccuracies are certainly due to the close proximity of Gen. Wallace to Patton and the fighting instead of Eisenhower and the grand decision making. Overall, it is a quick read and very interesting. Since it was written in 1946, it definitely preserves a lot of the genuine feel of the times (Germans are referred to as Heinies) and depicts the general American attitude toward the Germans at the time of war. There are definitely more comprehensive studies out there, but this 200 page book addresses from the ground level the entire life of the Third Army and is definitely a great intro to the topic.

THIS BOOK COVERS PATTON IN DETAIL ABOUT HIS LOVE FOR HIS BELOVED 3RD ARMY.
IT SHOWS HIS KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE GERMAN ARMY.
HE KNEW THE BEST WAY INTO GERMANY.
HE HAD A GENERAL ABOVE HIM THAT WAISTED TIME ON BRITISH GENERAL MONTGOMERY.
ITS SAD THAT HE PAST AWAY SHORTLY AFTER THE WAR.
CHUCK PRIDGEN

General Wallace's memoir of Patton and the Third Army was released quickly, in early 1946.

The first edition of 1946 was published by Military Service Publishing Co: hardcover in cloth with dustjacket; 231 pp. With a fold-out map, about 9 other maps, photographic illustrations, and 7 Appendices.

This book will never pass muster as a "serious academic work" because of who wrote it [a key staff officer] and because there's no criticism of Patton. But, of course, that is also why is is so important. It's a validation of his leadership qualities, why he was the most effective field general since Grant, perhaps surpassing Grant in that category. [To those who don't know, Sherman, no slouch himself, praised Grant as Napolean's better at that level of command, and his comments are on very solid ground.]

The book is a "fresh" view, written in warm blood, just slightly cooled from battle. It's a good insight into leadership qualities and the impact and resulting response on those who were led. It's a "real" account of why the 3rd army performed so well [but doesn't pretend to be the whole story]. Clearly the author is not 'objective', NOR SHOULD HE BE. This army was one of the best in history because of one man, and to see the effect of his leadership [on this level of that army] is a valuable insight and lesson.

It's also a limited perspective on the rather mediocre strategic leadership above the 3rd Army.