Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Blood and Guts Speech

  1. Jun 5, 2004 #1
    George Patton's speech to Third Army, June 5, 1944 (Warning Language)
    www.lizmichael.com/patton.htm - 36k
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 5, 2004 #2
    Hightlights...
    If Patton really said any of this, he was a complete moron, an utterly retarded crapmonkey, and deserves to go down in history as one of the worst leaders ever. I pity any lackwit who thinks the man is in any way a good soldier.
     
  4. Jun 5, 2004 #3
    That sounds like Patton. And if you really mean what you posted, you are a complete moron, an utterly retarded crapmonky, and deserbe to go down in history as one of the worst poster ever.

    I guess you pitied much of the German force, for they feared Patton's leadership more than any other General at the time. Patton was a fine leader, a great general, but he didn't do politics well. He didn't kiss ass, he understood that war is not something to be made into soft talk - war is a brash bloody hell. He spoke to his men like it, and they returned a response of almost mechanised fighting ability. The speech was a morale booster to break down the fear the men had. It apparently worked.
     
  5. Jun 5, 2004 #4

    GENIERE

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Phatmonky – If you spent your life inverted, your thought processes would be screwed up also.
     
  6. Jun 5, 2004 #5
    Well, my thought processes aren't screwed up. And Patton's were not screwed up, in context, either. He was made for war. His speeches were made for war. He won wars. His men won wars.
    When in the context of war, nothing he said in that speech is in anyway wrong or inappropriate, but rather fully illustrates the mindset that one must have to survive such a hell.
     
  7. Jun 5, 2004 #6

    GENIERE

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Phatmonky - Hmm! My comment was meant to be in full agreement with you.
     
  8. Jun 5, 2004 #7
    Perhaps I missed that - whoops :)
     
  9. Jun 5, 2004 #8
    I would say that anyone who bought into that speech, anyone who truly believed it had problems...
     
  10. Jun 5, 2004 #9
    Patton is a great general and a brilliant strategist but he's also known for his eccentricities. He kicked the Desert Fox's ass. Enough said.


    War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

    - John Stuart Mill

    There are times when war is necessary...
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2004
  11. Jun 6, 2004 #10
    Okay, for those who have no idea of history, the nickname "Blood & Guts" for Patton was more a play on words than anything else. It was mentioned in his speech. It was also a reference to the number of troops (including his own) who died because of his attitude that guts and glory was what a "real man" was all about.
     
  12. Jun 6, 2004 #11
    And no, watching cheesy Hollywood movies will not give you a decent idea of history.
     
  13. Jun 6, 2004 #12
    Patton talked to his troops in the vernacular readily understood by the common soldier; earthy and to the point. His troops loved him for it.
     
  14. Jun 6, 2004 #13
    They loved him for it, and responded with some of the best soldiering the world had/has ever seen.
    All of you who are TRYING to find a problem with Patton's speech continue to make the same mistake of thinking about his words outside of the context of war. His speech is spot on, and is the type of required dialogue needed to make a successful military in battle.
     
  15. Jun 6, 2004 #14
    No where have I found a general belief that the name blood and guts comes from the number of his own men who died.
    To prove yoru assertion, which is one only held by you at this point, I'd like to see somewhere that shows Patton lost a greater ratio of men, to the one's he killed, than the average other American, or allied, army.
    A search shows no such ratios, but instead consistent talk of how effective his moves were (particulary with the famous southern flank with the very same third army this speech was given to)
     
  16. Jun 6, 2004 #15
    Adam: if you're going to war you want all your generals to be Pattons. i was in an armor brigade and patton was something of a hero. he was a man for the time. if you're gonna fight - FIGHT!

    now, as a pacifist, i am amazed that so many people expect war - combat to be fought according to some sort of rules, ethics. that's the joke. civilians are hiding their heads in the sand, sending men to die and they expect them to wait till the other guy draws his gun - BULL*$%#!

    rather than talk about war and it's horrors why aren't we OR why haven't we talked about the beauty of peace??? somehow we are affraid that admitting we want peace comes from a weak place and our enemies will take advantage of us. they can't unless we allow them. the world is a small economic comunity at this point. it may be slower, but economic and social restirictions will work.

    love&peace,
    olde drunk
     
  17. Jun 6, 2004 #16

    kat

    User Avatar

    I don't think the nickname came from this particular speech. It's actually thought that was a mistatement from a reporter and that in his speech given to officers of the 2nd armored divison, he origionally said "blood and brains" in regards to what was needed to have a succesful armored division. However, when the story was picked up by a news reporter he reported the statement incorrectly as "blood & guts" and from there the nickname developed.
    This is an absolute falsification. Patton was extremely concerned with reducing the casualities of his soldiers. As can be seen by the high kill ratios of his enemies as compared to the low death ratios of his own soldiers. If anything the nickname relates more to his "colorful language" then any callousness towards the wellbeing of his soldiers.
     
  18. Jun 6, 2004 #17

    kat

    User Avatar



    - General George Patton, US Army, WWII
     
  19. Jun 7, 2004 #18
    While Patton was obviously rather aggressive, it's certainly a good thing that he was no cowering pansy, & he inspired his men to fight and die in order to subjugate fascism and liberate the people of Europe. But it took an even greater man-- Eiesenhower-- to reign in and control Patton, lest the liberators become like the oppressors that they were fighting.

    "your duty is not to die for your country-- it is to make the fascists die for theirs!" Patton
     
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2004
  20. Jun 7, 2004 #19
    And his "balls will win the day" heroic bollocks speech got people killed. I recall another leader from the time who was also a very charismatic and inspiring public speaker.
     
  21. Jun 7, 2004 #20
    Are you referring to the times he got his arse kicked? Or the times he was shut away as an embarrassment to the military? Or the times he simply ordered a human wave, because "charge" was his favourite word, and he got many of his own people killed?

    No. You are assuming.

    Training, discipline, and intelligence are required.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Blood and Guts Speech
  1. Freedom Of Speech (Replies: 6)

  2. Freedom of speech (Replies: 9)

  3. Freedom of speech (Replies: 55)

  4. Great speech by Obama (Replies: 102)

Loading...