@Lazarus:
Then your research was not thorough enough:
_“What did the Germans think of their Western opponents? They were diffident in expressing an opinion on this matter, but I gathered a few impressions in the course of our talks. In reference to the Allied comanders, Rundstedt said: “Montgomery and Patton were the two best that I met. Field Marshall Montgomery was very systematic. He aded: “That is alright if you have sufficient forces, and sufficent time.” Blumentritt made a similar comment. After paying tribute to the speed of Patton’s drive, he added: “Field Marshall Montgomery was the one general who never suffered a reverse. He moved like this” – Blumentritt took a series of very deliberate and short steps, putting his foot down heavily each time.” --”
The German General Talk", pp.257-58, by B.H. Liddell Hart_
The original quote above has been altered by later authors to make it look like it was about Patton alone
The Wiki article says:
_Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt summed up the predominant German view of the American general: "Patton, Rundstedt concluded simply, “he is your best.”[135]
Footnote ‘135’ states:
Hanson, Victor Davis, The Soul of Battle: From Ancient Times to the Present Day", New York: Simon & Schuster, ISBN 0684845024 (1999), p. 13_
A third rate book is used to alter history and distort Rundstedt’s quote.
Wiki is at the mercy of those with agendas and the above is a perfect example where the original interview is ignored in favour of a garbled altered account that better fits the myth perpetuated by the Patton fan boys.
.
The figures given for 3rd Army are complete fiction and Montgomery was several steps above Patton in the food chain.
One possibility is the one you seem to have embraced: that there is only one real Rundstedt about the best Allied general or generals, that Liddel Hart reported it correctly, and that the original quote was deliberately altered by the authors of third-rate history books in an effort to perpetuate “myths” favored by “Patton fan boys.”
A second possibility–one which you do not seem to have considered–is that Rundstedt may have said different things at different times. In the quote you mentioned from Liddell Hart, Rundstedt described Patton and Montgomery as the “two best” he’d met. But in that quote, he did not indicate whether he thought those two were equally good, or whether he felt one was better than the other. His remark that Montgomery’s approach was “alright if you have sufficient forces, and sufficent time,” seems to leave the door wide open to concluding that Patton was the more flexible and the better of the two generals. While he did not make such a remark in the quote from Liddell Hart’s book, it’s entirely possible he said as much at some other time.
But for the sake of argument, let’s suppose that the quote from Liddell Hart’s work is the only recorded comparison Rundstedt made between Patton and Montgomery. According to the quote you provided, Liddell Hart wrote that the German generals were “diffident in expressing an opinion on this matter.” The quote from Bumentritt which followed did not contain any comparison between Patton and Montgomery. Instead, he simply praised the things Patton did well (the speed of his advance) and the things Montgomery did well (advancing methodically and never suffering a reverse). Not even the quote from von Rundstedt indicated that he thought Montgomery was Patton’s equal–merely that he was among the two best generals the Allies had. (Which very well could have been the case.)
The Wikipedia quote which mentioned praise for Patton among the German generals cited five sources: Carlo D’Este, Martin Blumenson, Brian Sobel, Tim McNesse, and Victor David Hanson. D’Este is the source for:
General Fritz Bayerlein opined that “I do not think that General Patton would let us get away so easily.”[131]
Blumenson is the source for:
Oberstleutnant Horst Freiheer von Wangenheim, operations officer of the 277th Volksgrenadier Division, stated that “General Patton is the most feared general on all fronts. [His] tactics are daring and unpredictable…He is the most modern general and the best commander of [combined] armored and infantry forces.”.[132]
Sobel is the source for:
After the war, General der Infanterie Günther Blumentritt revealed that “We regarded Patton extremely highly, as the most aggressive Panzer-General of the Allies. A man of incredible initiative and lightning-like action.”[133]
McNesse is the source for:
General der Panzertruppen Hasso von Manteuffel, who had fought both Soviet and Anglo-American tank commanders, agreed: “Patton! No doubt about this. He was a brilliant panzer army commander.”[134]
Victor Davis Hanson is the source for the fifth quote–the one from von Runstedt, which you claimed was deliberately altered. You’ve already described Hanson’s book as a “third rate history book.” Do you intend to similarly attack the other four sources in order to support your claims about German generals, Patton, and Montgomery?
You also wrote, “The figures given for 3rd Army are complete fiction and Montgomery was several steps above Patton in the food chain.” You seem to be asserting as fact that of which you have no actual knowledge. Patton’s Third Army consisted of both tank and infantry units; making a 13:1 ratio more credible than would have been the case had it been infantry-only. If you have actual data from a credible source to refute the figures for the 3rd Army, please provide it.
Your statement that Montgomery was “several steps above Patton in the food chain,” is ambiguous. If it’s a claim that Montgomery was a better general than Patton, it’s simply false, and almost not worth debating. (Especially not when you employ emotion-laden labels–such as “Patton fanboys” in an effort to discredit those who disagree with you.) If your intention was merely to point out that Montgomery had more rank/clout than Patton, your statement would be correct, but of dubious relevance. How does the question of the two generals’ respective ranks tie into your claim that the figures given for the 3rd Army are “complete fiction”?
