Did Patton's June 5, 1944 Speech Include Blood and Guts Language?

  • Context: Lingusitics 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert Zaleski
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Blood
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

George Patton's June 5, 1944 speech to the Third Army is characterized by its aggressive and motivational language, emphasizing the brutal realities of war. The speech includes phrases such as "murder those lousy Hun cock suckers" and "shoot them in the guts," which reflect Patton's straightforward and earthy communication style aimed at boosting troop morale. Critics argue that such language is inappropriate, while supporters assert that it effectively inspired soldiers to perform exceptionally in battle. The nickname "Blood and Guts" is attributed to both his speech and his leadership style, which some interpret as a reflection of the casualties incurred under his command.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of World War II history and key figures, particularly General George Patton.
  • Familiarity with military communication styles and their impact on troop morale.
  • Knowledge of the context of warfare and the psychological aspects of leadership in combat.
  • Awareness of the historical significance of Patton's strategies and their outcomes.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the impact of motivational speeches on military performance, focusing on historical examples.
  • Examine the leadership styles of World War II generals, particularly contrasting Patton with Eisenhower.
  • Investigate the historical context of the term "Blood and Guts" and its implications in military discourse.
  • Explore the psychological effects of wartime rhetoric on soldiers' morale and combat effectiveness.
USEFUL FOR

Military historians, psychology professionals studying leadership in high-stress environments, and anyone interested in the dynamics of communication in warfare will benefit from this discussion.

Robert Zaleski
George Patton's speech to Third Army, June 5, 1944 (Warning Language)
www.lizmichael.com/patton.htm[/URL] - 36k
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Science news on Phys.org
Hightlights...
Americans love to fight, traditionally. All real Americans love the sting and clash of battle.

Third, you are here because you are real men and all real men like to fight.

We have the finest food, the finest equipment, the best spirit, and the best men in the world.

My men don't dig foxholes. I don't want them to. Foxholes only slow up an offensive.

We're going to murder those lousy Hun cock suckers by the bushel-****ing-basket.

War is a bloody, killing business. You've got to spill their blood, or they will spill yours. Rip them up the belly. Shoot them in the guts.
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.
 
Adam said:
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.

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.
 
Phatmonky – If you spent your life inverted, your thought processes would be screwed up also.
 
GENIERE said:
Phatmonky – If you spent your life inverted, your thought processes would be screwed up also.

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.
 
Phatmonky - Hmm! My comment was meant to be in full agreement with you.
 
GENIERE said:
Phatmonky - Hmm! My comment was meant to be in full agreement with you.

Perhaps I missed that - whoops :)
 
I would say that anyone who bought into that speech, anyone who truly believed it had problems...
 
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:
  • #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.
 
  • #11
And no, watching cheesy Hollywood movies will not give you a decent idea of history.
 
  • #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.
 
  • #13
Robert Zaleski said:
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.

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.
 
  • #14
Adam said:
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.
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)
 
  • #15
Adam said:
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.
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 going to 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
 
  • #16
Adam said:
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.
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 successful 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.
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.
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.
 
  • #17
"An undisciplined army always has the greatest casualties. A general who disciplines his troops until he gets spontaneous, automatic reaction to his commands will have the lowest rate of casualties."


- General George Patton, US Army, WWII
 
  • #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 by a moderator:
  • #19
Robert Zaleski said:
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.

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.
 
  • #20
phatmonky said:
They loved him for it, and responded with some of the best soldiering the world had/has ever seen.
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?

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.
No. You are assuming.

His speech is spot on, and is the type of required dialogue needed to make a successful military in battle.
Training, discipline, and intelligence are required.
 
  • #21
olde drunk said:
Adam: if you're going to war you want all your generals to be Pattons.
Why? For the losses? The wins? The times he was shut away for being an embarrassment? The people he ordered to charge, who died? Or simply for nostalgia, feelings for "the good old days" which were never as good as people assume, for a chap who wasn't what the publicity made him out to be?

i was in an armor brigade and patton was something of a hero. he was a man for the time. if you're going to fight - FIGHT!
If you're going to fight - think!

now, as a pacifist, i am amazed that so many people expect war - combat to be fought according to some sort of rules, ethics.
As a former soldier, I expect soldiers to abide by the rules their nations have signed on to. I expect soldiers to never even put a finger on the trigger until the target is confirmed. I expect officers to maintain order. I expect humans to be humane, as much as possible. And I do not accept the excuses of weak-willed slugs who try to rationalise their crimes by saying "War is hell, accept it and move on".

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*$%#!
Politicians send soldiers to die.
 
  • #22
kat said:
I don't think the nickname came from this particular speech.
No, it came from the people who died due to his "Charge!" idea of tactics.

This is an absolute falsification. Patton was extremely concerned with reducing the casualities of his soldiers.
Hence his orders to charge forward, leaving behind their supplies?
 
  • #23
Adam said:
I recall another leader from the time who was also a very charismatic and inspiring public speaker.

Well said.

The speeches were very probably very awe inspiring, but I don't like the fact that he is depicting the Germans as "fascists" and "Hun". Less than 10% of the population were Nazi's and wanted that regime, especially around 1944. In fact most of the German soldiers were fighting because they had to NOT because they believed what they were doing was right. Very hate-filling, but at the end of the day, it won battles.
 
  • #24
Adam said:
No, it came from the people who died due to his "Charge!" idea of tactics.

Again, your assertion.
Show me a ratio that his tactics were more deadly to his men than other armies.
It's simply not true.
 
  • #25
jimmy p said:
Well said.

The speeches were very probably very awe inspiring, but I don't like the fact that he is depicting the Germans as "fascists" and "Hun". Less than 10% of the population were Nazi's and wanted that regime, especially around 1944. In fact most of the German soldiers were fighting because they had to NOT because they believed what they were doing was right. Very hate-filling, but at the end of the day, it won battles.

War is not the time to be Politically correct. If you are going to shoot at someone, then you have to hate them.
I don't see how you can not like it, when you understand the reason for it, and know that it was effective.
 
  • #26
phatmonky said:
War is not the time to be Politically correct. If you are going to shoot at someone, then you have to hate them.
I don't see how you can not like it, when you understand the reason for it, and know that it was effective.


Yes you are right. Look at how this current war is going. For the most part of it the coalition is being politically correct.
 
  • #27
What a peaceful world it would be if the pacifists disappeared.
 
  • #28
yeah, if I kill everyone and end up along, won't I have eternal peace?
 
  • #29
Phatmonky, please just read SOMETHING about Patton. Anything.
 
  • #30
Adam said:
Phatmonky, please just read SOMETHING about Patton. Anything.

HA, can't provide any proof can you? I already searched. CAn't find something that doesn't exist.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
8K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
11K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K