For Lt. Gen. George S. Patton, Jr., the battle for Lorraine during the fall and winter of 1944 was a frustrating and grueling experience of static warfare. Plagued by supply shortages, critical interference from superiors, flooded rivers, fortified cities, and the highly determined German army, Patton had little opportunity to wage the type of fast armored campaign of which he was so enamored. Author John Rickard examines Patton’s generalship during these bitter battles and suggests that Patton was unable to adapt to the new realities of the campaign, thereby failing to wage the most effective warfare possible. Relying on a broad range of historical sources, including personal papers and division after-action reports, this treatment of Patton’s operational performance in Lorraine goes beyond the official history. It describes Patton’s philosophy of war and explains why it failed him in Lorraine. Supplemented by full orders of battle, casualty and equipment loses, and excellent maps based on Hugh M. Cole’s official U.S. Army history of the campaign, Patton at Bay,/i> is a penetrating study of one of America’s best fighting generals.
A fascinating study of the link between personality and command style. No human is perfect and Patton was among the most human of generals, despite his clear talents.
It does tend to underestimate the logistical problems created by the Allied race across Europe, but they were inevitable and a product of success. Patton did a fine job of preparing his troops for breakthrough and pursuit. But for the infantry siege they were less well prepared, though the role of his subordinate commanders is minimized in the text. Still, Patton was in charge, so it was his battle that allowed the obsolescent fortifications at Metz to hold him up.
Patton has remained one of my heroes since childhood, flaws and all. Here's one on one of his more difficult campaigns. This book tries to probe his generalship, as well as that of his opponents and subordinates, but it doesn't go too deeply.
Second read: I was able to see the analysis better this time around, so I'm bumping it up to 4 stars from 3.