The Generals

Patton, MacArthur, Marshall, and the Winning of World War II

By Winston Groom

For a hundred years historians, politicians, and military scholars have debated the causes of World War I. But one thing generally agreed upon is that the long and tortuous path began in 1871, when Germany organized itself into a nation.

Previously, Greater Germany had been a menagerie of twenty-five principalities and quasi-kingdoms governed loosely by the state of Prussia, which was ruled by the emperor, or kaiser, Frederick William III.In the 1860s, on the advice of the distinguished German statesman Prince Otto von Bismarck, the kaiser began to absorb this collection of domains into the Empire of Germany, thus making it the largest and most powerful country in Europe.

She then immediately began attacking and subduing her neighbors— Denmark (1864), Austria (1866), and France (1871). It was the conquest of France that caused the discontent. In the Franco-Prussian War, after laying siege to Paris and reducing its inhabitants to a diet of cat meat, the Germans demanded two French provinces along the Franco-German border: Alsace, rich in coal and iron ore, and Lorraine, an agricultural breadbasket. This humiliation vexed the entire French nation, whatever their class or political affiliation, and spawned a resentful and bitter animosity lasting for generations. It figures prominently among the bitter chemistry that ignited World War I.

(Groom 2015, 117-118)

After months of studying and analyzing new criteria for the military academy and its cadets, MacArthur determined that “Improvisation will be the watchword.” The changed conditions in warfare demonstrated by the First World War required a “modification of the type of officer (that West Point produced), a type possessing all the cardinal military virtues as of yore, but possessing an intimate understanding of his fellows, a comprehensive grasp of world and national affairs, and a liberalization of conception which amounts to a change in his psychology of command.”

(Groom 2015, 206)

The rock soup plan was a Patton invention based on a Depression-era scam that worked roughly as follows. A hobo with a tin can containing several polished stones goes to the back door of a residence and asks the lady of the house if she will give him some water so he can make “rock soup.” She complies, but inquires as to the recipe for rock soup. The hobo then asks if she might give him a carrot or two and a potato, then proceeds to light a fire and boil the soup, which he describes as delicious. When she comes back out to see about the soup, the hobo tells her all that is needed is a piece of meat to put in the soup, and so on, until the hobo has acquired from her all the ingredients he needs for a proper soup.

Patton’s version of the rock soup plan was to start a battle, and then tell headquarters it looked like a big breakthrough if only he could have reinforcements and supplies. He did just that, and as the battle expanded Patton continued to go back to headquarters with tempting promises and lengthy lists of requests—air strikes, gasoline, ammunition, more men, more guns, and so on. Patton’s idea was based in the knowledge that superior officers are naturally reluctant to deny an engaged commander the resources he needs to win a battle.

(Groom 2015, 371-372)

Any commanding general , MacArthur perhaps more than most, realizes that men under his command will die, and he has to do everything he can to keep the cost low. George Patton’s method was to keep moving fast and hit hard on the theory that a slow, drawn-out battle will cause more casualties than a swift, fatal strike. MacArthur’s approach was different; he liked carefully planned, methodically executed attacks along paths of least resistance to maneuver the enemy where he could best.