Landships II

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Patton - A Little Help Here?


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3874
Date:
Patton - A Little Help Here?
Permalink   


I have become embroiled in a prolonged debate on Wikipedia on the question of Patton and Cambrai. It seems to me that no U.S. forces or Tanks could possibly have taken part in the battle and that Patton's presence in any capacity is so doubtful as to be not worth mentioning.

Unfortunately, I have encountered two opponents: one a keyboard loudmouth who writes in that clumsily sarcastic style that can be so depressing; the other, apparently, an editor whose reasoning I cannot agree with. However, it seems that the latter has the power to disallow the amendments I propose.

His view is that if a lot of books say something it must be true. If it is discovered not to be true, the majority still rules.

I do hope the fact that this gent appears to be from North Carolina is not influencing in any way his determination to maintain an American presence at the battle.

If you can assist, either with powerful argument or with concrete evidence, the exchange is taking place here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:George_S._Patton


My suspicion is that the editor bloke will prove to be rather anal about this matter. All the signs are there. But if we surround him, who knows?



__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.

Pat


Commander in Chief

Status: Offline
Posts: 600
Date:
Permalink   

At least he didn't claim Berry-au-Bac for Patton thus far. Courage! On les aura.


__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

Hi James, According to Fuller in this book Tanks in the great war, 1914-1918  Patton isnt mention untill pg 279 well after Cambrai...

"By February 1918, 500 volunteers from various branches
of the American Army were assembled at Bourg for instruc-
tion. On March 27, 10 Renault machines were taken over
from the French, another 15 being sent to Bourg in June.
In August, 144 Renault tanks arrived, and 2 light bat-
talions were at once mobilised under the command of Colonel
G. S. Patten and were railed to the St. Mihiel area, where
they operated with the First American Army, which attacked
the famous salient on September 12."


He also makes a point of mentioning the lack of tanks previously...

Cheerswink





-- Edited by Ironsides on Friday 28th of January 2011 08:15:02 PM

__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3874
Date:
Permalink   

Thanks, Ivor, but with the greatest respect (as we say In England on occasions such as this), it's not me that needs convincing. I'm bloody certain Patton didn't lead his non-existent men into battle in their non-existent Tanks. This pillock seems reluctant even to accept that.

More troublesome is the 'observer' theory. His reasoning is that he has twelve books that say Patton was at Cambrai. Never mind that the claims are unsupported and remarkably similar and that it is not unthinkable that they might be clones. Patton's biographer tells you where he was instead, but that, apparently, is only one opinion. "You can talk about the earth going round the sun all you like, Mr. Copernicus, but I've got a dozen archbishops who'll tell you different. We've got a consensus."

J***s C****t!

__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.

PDA


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1486
Date:
Permalink   

I can't see a way of winning this one, mate. And I'd hate to see the CIA make up some bogus charges against you, like they did with Assange when he disagreed.



-- Edited by PDA on Saturday 29th of January 2011 12:41:41 AM

__________________
PDA


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1486
Date:
Permalink   

sorry - mistakio!



-- Edited by PDA on Saturday 29th of January 2011 12:38:14 AM

-- Edited by PDA on Saturday 29th of January 2011 12:38:35 AM

Attachments
__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3874
Date:
Permalink   

Trouble is, I've got Dale Wilson's book (I always have to stop myself from thinking of Dale Winton), and he only quotes from Martin Blumenson's book, which isn't good enough for the berk at Wikipedia. (And DW does include a lot of misspelt place names, which is worrying)

I suspect Blumenson's book actually quotes from Patton's diary, which would make it a primary source. It'll take me weeks to get a copy, but if anyone happens to have
The Patton Papers: 1885-1940 there is a reference to Cambrai in the index. With any luck, they will be Patton's own words. Not to be confused with the 1940-45 Volume. I've put out a few feelers elsewhere.

BTW, I gather that Patton's grammar and spelling were atrocious.

__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.

PDA


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1486
Date:
Permalink   

You are aware that John Wayne was with Patton when they invented the tank and then singlehandedly defeated Germany?






-- Edited by PDA on Saturday 29th of January 2011 01:59:34 AM

__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

Hi James this might help...

The George S. Patton Papers were brought together by Sereno Elmer Brett, Patton's second in command during World War I. Brett organized and took command of the 345th (327th) Battalion, Tank Corps in June, 1918. In the St. Mihiel Offensive of September, 1918, he led the first American tank attack in World War I, along with the 344th (326th) Battalion. He assumed command of the 304th (1st) Tank Brigade after Patton was wounded in late September, 1918, during the Meuse-Argonne Offensive.



http://www.library.und.edu/Collections/og1360.html  the original papers I think...

Patton Papers the book

Cheerswink

-- Edited by Ironsides on Saturday 29th of January 2011 02:22:51 AM

__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Hero

Status: Offline
Posts: 870
Date:
Permalink   

http://www.history.com/topics/battle-of-cambrai

No mention of the wee b****r on that page

__________________

 The finest stories of the Great War are those that will never be told.



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1152
Date:
Permalink   

Oh dear - even if the elusive Patton Papers (and if those are based largely on the man's diaries) are consulted, one wonders at their value as a linear account of the facts when considering:George S. Patton's life was one of affluence and class consciousness. During his formative years he was fascinated with stories of his ancestors. He absorbed recitations by family members about great military leaders and historical events because he suffered from dyslexia, an unknown reading disorder at the time. These frequent lessons in military history, both from an ancestral and scholarly perspective, instilled in Patton a belief in déja vu, telepathy and reincarnation that continued throughout his
life. He believed "that he had lived before in other historical periods, always as a soldier - a Greek hoplite, a Roman legionnaire, a cavalryman with Belisarius, a highlander with the House of Stuart, a trooper with Napoleon and Murat." He expressed his feelings on the subject in a rambling poem entitled "Through a Glass, Darkly," written in 1922 when he was 37-years old. The first stanza encapsulates his personal belief in reincarnation.

Through the travail of the ages,
Midst the pomp and toil of war
Have I fought and strove and perished
Countless times upon this star.
- from http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/Olympika/Olympika_1997/olympika0601h.pdf which is on the thesis:This study examines Patton's Olympic participation and the extent of his deception to improve his lot in the military. It also examines to what lengths he would go to gain an edge over the competition, both in his chosen profession and in the Olympic competitions in which he participated. Some of these would have near fatal consequences. Tangentially, it is also an example of how the lack of diligent research can literally change history.

Anyone defending assertions as to the general's stellar career ignores the man behind the stars at their peril. Yet how to convince a "true believer" of this? I think you are on a hiding to nothing James and you have perhaps rediscovered the reason Wikipedia is held in some contempt by scholars. No doubt the truth will emerge in time but in the interim perhaps, in that venue, all you can do is lay the foundations for it. It is the sort of project that requires very substantial resources (as an assessment based on 10 minute's worth of evaluation :))

__________________
Facimus et Frangimus


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3874
Date:
Permalink   

Paul: Quite so. On the Wiki page about Cambrai, a puzzled punter who has obviously read the Patton page enquires as to why the USA is therefore not mentioned amongst the combatants. Should I quote the Cambrai article to the editor in support of my case?

Of course Patton isn't mentioned on history.com - he couldn't possibly be - but the editor takes the (quite correct) view that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. However, he also believes that writers who talk with confidence about events that never took place have more authoriy than a man who spent half his life researching Patton.

Rect: Oh, yes. I gather GSP was unusual, to say the least. He and J.F.C. Fuller probably got on famously when they met on Alpha Centauri (Source:Wikipedia). However, if Patton's diary turns out to say, "Tuesday: Went to watch tanks at Cambrai," I think we may take that at face value. Even if he claims that he went on the back of one of Hannibal's elephants.

With no disrespect to our valued American contributors, I do hope that the editor's determination to cling on to this dubious and trivial claim is not a result of the hubris that we sometimes come across.

Anyway, I might have had a hit on the WFA Forum. Stand by. I'll have this b*****d.

__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.



Commander in Chief

Status: Offline
Posts: 531
Date:
Permalink   

PDA wrote:

You are aware that John Wayne was with Patton when they invented the tank and then singlehandedly defeated Germany?






-- Edited by PDA on Saturday 29th of January 2011 01:59:34 AM



Sorry Phil, but I'm loosing track now, are you refering to WW1 or WW2?

 



__________________
ChrisG


The cure for boredom is curiosity. There is no cure for curiosity (Dorothy Parker)
cdr


Lieutenant

Status: Offline
Posts: 59
Date:
Permalink   

I just looked up my copy of patton The man behind the Legend by Martin Blumenson. Page 98 ....Patton spent two weeks at the French tank training center near Compičgne ..... While he was there the first real tank battle took place at Cambrai...He visited the British near Cambrai, spoke with the brigtade commander and his chief of staff (JFC. Fuller) and gained insight into tank procedures....

Well I do no read that to say he was present at Cambrai

__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3874
Date:
Permalink   

OMG. This editor has now altered the Cambrai page to include the Americans. An unarmed detachment of the 11th Engineering (Railroad) Battalion, to be exact, who were studying engine shunting. They were captured by the Germans, thus becoming the first U.S. troops to see action in WWI. So Cambrai is now officially an Anglo-American show.

What a force for good the Internet is.

__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.

PDA


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1486
Date:
Permalink   

I think we should start inventing stuff of our own.

How about the British Scientist Captain Nemo invented a Submarine Dreadnought that transported Alan Quatermain, Dorian Gray, Mina Harker, Dr Jekyll...

__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3874
Date:
Permalink   

I thought I should tidy up a few details.You know what sticklers Wikipedia are.

Attachments
__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.

PDA


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1486
Date:
Permalink   

Tee hee. I like this tactic.

It has crossed my mind, that in changing the Cambrai entry to show that a couple of Americans were nearby, the omniscient editor did not write that Patton was present (in any capacity). Is that an admission that the man and legend weren't actually there? Or just another unfortunate consequence of poor language skills?

__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1152
Date:
Permalink   

James H wrote:

...if Patton's diary turns out to say, "Tuesday: Went to watch tanks at Cambrai," I think we may take that at face value. ...


Well, you may take it at face value but I certainly wouldn't - there is a body of evidence to say the man was apparently perfectly capable of duplicity, misdirection and the inflation of his achievements in order to further his career and diminish the relative stature of his competitors. But I don't think I would be accepting any of that without question either.

Anyway the Wikipedia article on Patton seems to presently back-pedal on the Cambrai connection.

__________________
Facimus et Frangimus


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 2291
Date:
Permalink   


The thing about Wikipedia is that they do a ratshit job crosschecking:

From the Wikipedia article on George Patton:

"Depending on the source, he either led the U.S. tanks or was an observer at the 1917 Battle of Cambrai, where tanks were first used in significant numbers.[10][11][12] As the U.S. Tank Corps did not take part in this battle, the role of observer is the more likely. However, in The Patton Papers: 18851940, author Martin Blumenson makes no mention of Patton being at Cambrai, stating only that on December 1, Patton went to Albert, not too far from Cambrai, to discuss the ongoing battle with the chief of staff of the British Tank Corps, Colonel J. F. C. Fuller.[13] Patton received his first ten tanks on March 23, 1918 at the Tank School and Centre, which he commanded, at Langres, Haute-Marne department."


Having set up the lie about US Tanks at Cambrai the author proceeds to demolish it and introduces an authoritative source to show Patton wasn't at Cambrai.

Regards,

Charlie







__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   


I have to say the whole thing is all rather bizarre, Ive come across refrences to Us Engineers at Cambrai.. As the US Tank corps seems to have been formed from Engineer units is it possible that this is where the "error" has occured re the US Tanks at Cambrai...

"THIRTEEN BATTLES.
American troops saw service on practically every stretch of the
western front from British lines in Belgium to inactive sectors in the
Vosges. On October 21, 1917, Americans entered the line in the quiet
Toul sector. From that date to the armistice American units were
somewhere in line almost continuously.

It is difficult to cut up the year and 22 days which intervened into
well-defined battles, for in a sense the entire war on the western front
was a single battle. It is possible, however, to distinguish certain
major operations or phases of the greater struggle. Thirteen such
operations have been recognized in which American units were en-
gaged, of which 12 took place on the western front and 1 in Italy.
Battle clasps will be awarded to the officers and men who participated
in these engagements. These battles are named and the number of
Americans engaged is shown in table 7, on this page."

Table: 7. Thirteen major operations in which Americans participated.

Operation.                                                   Approximate number of Americans

West frontCampaign of 1917:

Cambrai, Nov. 20 to Dec. 4                                              2,500


"The first major operation in which American troops were en-
gaged was the Cambrai battle at the end of the campaign of 1917,
Scattered medical and engineering detachments, serving with the
British, were present during the action but sustained no serious
casualties."

From:pg 105-6

The War with Germany, a statistical summary 1919
Second Edition with data revised to August 1, 1919

LEONARD P. AYRES
Colonel, General Staff
CHIEF OF THE STATISTICS BRANCH OF THE GENERAL STAFF



This means that 2500 American servicemen in the area were entitled to the "Cambrai" battle clasp presumably even if they were non combatants or were not involved in action including medical staff.. anyone awarded this could rightly claim they were at cambrai 1917...

As far as Patton taking part in the Battle of Cambrai Ive yet to see any evidence...


US Victory Medal with Cambrai Battle Clasp...

May 20, to December 4,1917
198 days of combat

3 US Regiments participated

11th,12th & 14th Engineer Regiments

Cambrai
Defensive Sector


Cheerswink

-- Edited by Ironsides on Saturday 29th of January 2011 03:51:21 PM

Attachments
__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3874
Date:
Permalink   

Excellent, Ivor. I wonder if the editor would accept that, or has he got half-a-dozen potboilers and the testimony of a vagrant that contradict you?

We could always wear him down by sleep deprivation. I didn't get away with these for long. They've been deleted on the grounds of sarcasm.



Attachments
__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

Hi James, I would say if Patton had a battle clasp for Cambrai then he was officially there, if not then he was'nt... even if he visited the area before or after the official date and proof is available, does anyone know what Pattons five battle clasps for WW1 were? I'm having trouble finding them...


Cheerswink

__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

This will interest many light railway fans...

12th Engineers at Cambrai Citations

.Captain R. B. Albaugh.

"Captain R. B. Albaugh, Twelfth Engineers, D. L. R., for exceptional
meritorious and conspicuous services at Cambrai, France, American Expedtionary Forces. In testimony thereof, and as an expression of appreciationthese services, I award him this citation."

"Awarded 19, April, 1919."

Signed John J. Pershing,
Commander-in-Chief.

Sergeant Elliot Beebe.

"Sergeant Elliot Beebe, Company "E," Twelfth Engineers, for ex-
ceptionally meritorious and conspicuous services at Cambrai, France, American
Expeditionary Forces. In testimony thereof, and as an expression of appreci-
ation of these services, I award him this citation."
"Awarded 19, April, 1919."

Signed John J. Pershing,
Commander-in-Chief.

pg 62 History of the Twelfth engineers, U.S. Army (1919)

"Thus it was, that the first Americans fought in the world
war. Caught without arms, they fought with whatever they
had at hand, where possible, picking up a fallen British com-
rade's rifle, or getting one from a dead Hun.
The Twelfth's poet, Private Hubert W. Kelly of Company
"D," most ably pictures the scenes of that day before Cambrai
in his verses dedicated to our comrades in arms, the Eleventh
Engineers, entitled, "The American Engineers who Fought at
Cambrai." The Eleventh suffered heavily in killed, wounded
and captured."

the book is heavily illustratedwith photos including tanks

Further reading

The fighting engineers  1918 

Cheerswink

-- Edited by Ironsides on Saturday 29th of January 2011 06:44:17 PM

__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3874
Date:
Permalink   

I shall have a good look at that, Ivor. Ta.

Don't forget, Kermit Roosevelt was in Mesopotamia, so we'd better set the record straight on that Anglo-American campaign.

I am pondering something. I wonder if, by any chance, these ****wits are getting confused with Second Cambrai, Sept 27th 1918, in which the U.S. 301st took part. That might explain a lot.

__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

Hi James, my thoughts entirely... Im not certain on those citations above as theres no date with them.. there are many Historys of US engineer units on the archive 27th 301st etc it would take an age to wade through, some good stuff though..

I thought Kermit was a Muppet whats he doing in mesopotamia? looking for sesame street....

Cheerswink

__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1152
Date:
Permalink   

Ironsides wrote:

...I thought Kermit was a Muppet whats he doing in mesopotamia? looking for sesame street....



Earning the MC (as a British officer) actually. A fascinating character, who stood out even in an era of great and improbable deeds. As Molly Meldrum would say, "Do yourself a favour," look it up.

__________________
Facimus et Frangimus


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

From: THE  AMERICAN  EXPEDITIONARY  FORCES  TANK  CORPS IN  WORLD  WAR  I:
FROM  CREATION  TO  COMBAT by Captain  (P)  Dale  E.  Wilson. Thesis

"Whatever  their  individual  strengths.  Patton  and  Braine  knew  little
or  nothing  about  tanks,  so,  on  19  November,  the  two  officers  were
ordered  to  report  for  two  weeks  of  instruction  at  the  French  Light  Tank
Training  Center  at  Chamlieu  near  Paris  to  prepare  them  for  their
duties. ."

"During  the  first week  at  Chamlieu,  Patton  had  time  to become
thoroughly  acquainted  with  the  Renault  tank.  He  drove  the  vehicle,
noting  its ease  of  handling  and  surprising  comfort  in  contrast  to  the
heavier  British  tanks.  Although  noisy,  it  could  move  at  the  pace  of  a
running  man,  had  a  remarkably  short  turning  radius,  bucked  and  reared
like  a  horse,  and  could  easily  bulldoze  small  trees.  All  of  this
greatly  pleased  Patton,  the  cavalryman.  The  vehicle's  only  major
drawback  was  visibility.  When  "buttoned  up"  (driving with  all  the
hatches  closed.),  the  driver  had  only  three  small  s]its  through  which  to
observe  the  terrain  in  front  of  him.  The  gunner's  visibility  from  the
turret  was  little  better.
In  addition  to  driving  tanks,  Patton  fired  their  guns,  observed  a
maneuver,  worked  on  tactical  problems.  toured  the  repair  shops  and  tank
park,  and  spent  long  hours  discussing  how  best  to  employ  tanks  in  com-
bat."

"Braine  joined  Patton  at  Chamlieu  on  Tuesday,  27  November,  for  the
second  week  of  training.  Patton  thought  this  training  was  even  more
interesting  than  that  conducted  during  the  first week. "

"On  20  November,  while  Patton  was  at  Chamlieu,  the  British  launched
a  major  offensive  at  Cambrai.  At  6  a.m.,  Major  General  Hugh  Elles
kicked  off  the  attack with  a  force  of  350  heavy  tanks. "

"Patton  left Chamlieu  on  1 December  bound  for  Paris  and  the  Renault
Tank  Works  .,  Billancourt.  While  en  route,  he  stopped  at  Albert with Colonel  Frank  Parker  to meet  with  Fuller.  The  trio discussed  the  attack on  Cambrai.  tank  doctrine,  and  tactics.*
On  3  December.  Patton  and  Braine  toured  the  Renault  factory.  They
were  able  to  examine  the  light  tank's  design  and  construction  and,
during  the  course  of  their  tour,  recommended  four  minor  improvements  to
the  tank  that  the  French  later  adopted."

Unfortunatly some of the document is unreadable but
* he seems to quoting here from:   Baine.  "Personal  Experience  Report."

Cheerswink


-- Edited by Ironsides on Sunday 30th of January 2011 03:05:27 PM

-- Edited by Ironsides on Sunday 30th of January 2011 03:30:16 PM

__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1152
Date:
Permalink   

Great material Ivor. I think that part is "end note" 31 - Blumenson Patton Papers 446

__________________
Facimus et Frangimus


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

From this Document:  United States Army in the World War, 1917-1919: organization of the American Expeditionary Forces. PDF


On November 30, the Germans counterattacked in force and recaptured most of the ground that the British had won.
The American troops involved played a minor and impromptu part in the battle. For
three months before the operation, three American engineer regiments had been constructing railroads in the vicinity of Cambrai. On November 30, when the German counteroffensive began on the southern face of the Cambrai salient, the 11th Engineer Regiment came under fire in the villages of Fins and Gouzeaucourt. The American groups in Fins joined the British 20th Division and served with it to the end of the operation. The 12th Railway Engineer Regiment delivered ammunition to British artillery. The 14th Railway Engineer Regiment operated light railways in the area of the British VI Corps and delivered ammuni­tion to front line units. Marshal Haig, in his "Despatches," characterized the work of
these American regiments as "prompt and valuable assistance."

Cheerswink
 


-- Edited by Ironsides on Sunday 30th of January 2011 04:33:10 PM

__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

Final Word....

American Casualties Cambrai During the German counter attack 30th November 1917

 *11th Engineers, 2 killed 13 wounded 15 missing( captured?)

**12th Engineers, 1 wounded (from regimental history)

 *14th Engineers, no casualties as far as I can see

Attached to *3rd and **5th armies BEF

from Historical report of the chief engineer AEF 1917-19


Cheerswink

__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3874
Date:
Permalink   

Ivor - even by your standards, that is out of this world. I like it when you warm to a subject; it invariably produces remarkable results.

So do you think that this butcher's bill earns the USA a place among the "belligerents" at Cambrai? I hear that a Chinese labourer was crushed by a fascine. What do we about him?

Stop Press! The USA has disappeared from the list of belligerents at Cambrai!

-- Edited by James H on Monday 31st of January 2011 04:41:30 AM

__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1152
Date:
Permalink   

I think it is important for US Mil history to record the presence of the US Engineers there but that is, of course, a far cry from claiming any sort of pivotal role in the battle for a man who wasn't there, leading a force that wasn't formed.

The AIF has a vaguely similar situation with early actions in relation to Al Qantarah (Egyptian Canal Zone) where the sappers of Number 3 Section, 3rd Field Company, Australian Engineers, AIF came under fire from the Turks on 3 February 1915 - months before the Gallipoli landings. And long before even that the (non-AIF) combined Australian Military and Naval Expeditionary Force saw action against German colonial forces and suffered losses in the Pacific islands. These events are of importance only in terms of "opening shots", through which they (ought to) have a deep national significance however insignificant they may have been in the larger scheme of things. As it happens, they have been largely ignored until now.

Be appropriately merciful James.

__________________
Facimus et Frangimus


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

Thanks James I try to do best with the available resources, for me this means mostly the Internet, I guess its lucky that such imformation is out there to be found at all....wink

"So do you think that this butcher's bill earns the USA a place among the "belligerents" at Cambrai?"

I think Technically the answer is yes, The USA offically recognised their contribution in the Battle...
The American presence had their own command structure for administrative and organisational purposes and the men were directly commanded by their own Officers and NCOs, their duties were mostly logistical, railways, light railways, roads, movement and unloading of supplys and war material, tanks, ammo etc the reports would suggest they were effective in  this regard...
However as far as I can make out they were not combat trained and most were unarmed, although there is some conflict there.... 

Question, would you leave out a part of your army, even non combatants are entitled to recongnition in a particular operation and these were more then that.. Or so it seems to me.

The Chinese I thought of them too, but havent followed it up I think it depends on the circumstances and the command structure... but I dought that Asian labourers would have been recognised for anything at the time, but could be wrong.... as Civilian contractors to the British Forces on the Western Front? but not specifically Cambrai....

Question, does every group of different nationality need a mention in a specific battle or Operation, there must have been many more?
Eg a man serving in the British Army regardless of original or present nationality is surely a British Soldier first and formost...

In regards to Patton and the US Tank Corps at Cambrai... Ive been this route before  some years ago, but it took a while to jog my memory...

None of the sources Ive quoted  mention any contribution by US Armour at Cambrai 1917... conclusion: there is no basis in Fact.....

Cheerswink


-- Edited by Ironsides on Monday 31st of January 2011 01:08:47 PM

__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3874
Date:
Permalink   

Things are slowly improving. We are edging towards a version of events that might be considered acceptable.

I have evaluated the impressive list of sources that the editor put forward to support the theory of Patton's presence. The result is most interesting. Please scroll down here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:George_S._Patton

__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 2291
Date:
Permalink   


Astonishing exchange - concensus among the marginally informed is more valuable than an analysis of the evidence and sources? The previous comment about Copernicus and the Bishops was quite prescient.

Regards,

Charlie


__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

Hi James I found this NYT article 1918 that briefly mentions Patton being wounded the headline is somewhat misleading and makes no mentions of any part he may have had at Camrai 1917, which on the face of it is suprising as any search of Cambrai will find many articles on the americans who were involved there.

An article from 4th april 1943 states this "He attended the French tank school and was present at Cambrai" unfortunatly I am not able to access the full article....

which I believe then became this "He attended the French Tank School and then saw action at the battle of Cambrai, where the British first used tanks on a large scale." which I understand is from his NYT obituary "on this day" 22 oct 1945

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70916FA345D167B93C6A9178FD85F478485F9&scp=4&sq=cambrai%20patton&st=cse

http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/1111.html?scp=1&sq=cambrai%20patton&st=cse

Cheerswink

-- Edited by Ironsides on Tuesday 8th of February 2011 02:58:53 AM

Attachments
__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 

PDA


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1486
Date:
Permalink   

This is not as good as the stuff Ironsides is finding, but anyway:

The History Channel (where, it seems, many people get their 'facts') has a series called "Patton 360". It has been given various time slots in the few years I've lived here, but it is always on at some time in the week. Therefore, it has probably had quite an effect (one way or another) on all of the armchair generals.

To give you a taste, yesterday they stated how Patton knew more than Eisenhower, and if only the Allies had listened to Patton, WW2 would have been over in a flash, because Patton would have crossed the Rhine 5 minutes after the USA joined in with the war.

It strikes me that, as the program relishes in tall tales, if Patton had indeed invented the tank, and then led the 7th Cavalry to England's rescue in the World's first ever tank battle at Cambrai, the program would probably have mentioned it in every episode (just like they do everything else the great man "did").

The program is a factual documentary, watched by 100s of thousands, if not millions, so that might out-number the several cloned books Wikipedia is using. Episode one, is probably available on youtube; but if it isn't, you could just make it up. After all, that's all Wikipedia is doing.

__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

Hi PDA, Patton couldnt have invented the Tank because I have "absolute" proof it was "invented" by Kitchenerbiggrin


Cheerswink


-- Edited by Ironsides on Tuesday 8th of February 2011 08:55:42 PM

__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 

PDA


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1486
Date:
Permalink   

I've seen this in the A-team. Colonel Hannibal Smith (in this case, George S. Blood and Guts Patton) was always wearing disguises. So, it was Patton, dressed up with a false moustache, who won the Battle of Omdurman and thus infiltrated British Society, becoming the Secretary of State for War, and inventing the tank, under the pseudonym Kitchener. (Come to think of it, it might not have been the A-team, it could have been Scooby Doo).





-- Edited by PDA on Wednesday 9th of February 2011 03:23:24 AM

__________________
1 2  >  Last»  | Page of 2  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard