Super Grover

4th Dec 2019

Patton (1970)

Question: Did George Patton really change the time which the mess hall was open and closed like he does in the movie?

Answer: Yes, Patton did change the mess hall times. Chester B. Hansen, who was General Omar Bradley's aide, kept a detailed personal wartime diary. In it he wrote about Patton, and regarding the mess hall Hansen described it this way, "When Fredendall was the corps commander, the II Corps people generally went to breakfast at about 9 o'clock in the morning. When Patton came, however, he changed all that, and in Fairlana they stopped serving breakfast at 6 o'clock in the morning. Therefore it was necessary for us to stumble out of bed at about 5, hurry down and grab a breakfast. It was quite cold at that time in the morning..." After the war, because of his detailed diary Hansen was the ghostwriter of Bradley's war memoir, A Soldier's Story, which was one of the resources for the movie's screenwriters.

Super Grover

Did Patton change the mess hall times in order to discipline his troops?

In short, yes, it was part of Patton's stern discipline and strictly enforced regulations, which he believed essential. Following the disastrous defeat at Kasserine Pass, when Eisenhower had Patton promoted and appointed the new commander of II Corps, it was because Patton was the perfect choice. Just as Scott215 mentioned Patton's helmet requirement and the wearing of shirt and tie, this was all part of one of Patton's top priorities - the dress code and the strict adherence to it, and the strengthening of morale and fighting spirit. Eisenhower himself had later written, "morale in II Corps was shaken and the troops had to be picked up quickly. For such a job Patton has no superior in the Army... General Patton's buoyant leadership and strict insistence upon discipline rapidly rejuvenated the II Corps and brought it up to fighting pitch...the troops...had a much higher appreciation of the value of training, discipline, and speed in action."

Super Grover

Answer: As the commanding Corps General, Patton did, indeed, have the authority to change not only the opening and closing times of the mess hall, but many other areas under his command, like the helmet requirement. He even required his officers to wear shirt and tie while in combat zones, so he did call the shots. His command, his rules.

Scott215

23rd Nov 2018

Patton (1970)

Question: When Patton arrives at corps headquarters, a lieutenant says they have a new commander due. What is he talking about? Was their previous commanding general fired?

Answer: Due to his poor performance at Kasserine, General Eisenhower sacked Major General Lloyd Fredendal (Patton's predecessor), and he was sent back home in disgrace, never to command combat troops ever again.

stiiggy

Answer: Patton was put in charge of the American II Corps in North Africa after the Americans were badly defeated at the 1943 Battle of the Kasserine Pass. The lieutenant apparently does not realise that Patton has been sent to replace the previous commander and will begin enforcing strict discipline into the troops.

raywest

OK, but what about the other part of the question? Was their previous commanding general fired?

The previous commanding general was not "fired" he was replaced. It was Major General Lloyd Fredendall who was in command of the II Corps, at the Battle of Kasserine Pass. He was reassigned stateside, then about three months later was promoted to lieutenant general. For the rest of the war he was in command of training assignments in the US.

Super Grover

He was effectively "fired", as in removed, from his commanding position, due to his weak leadership, but that did not mean to say he was fired from the U.S. Army. The term "fired" is relative here.

raywest

I feel the need to clarify the point that my original reply was to the person who asked this question: "OK, but what about the other part of the question? Was their previous commanding general fired? " Please know that my reply was not meant to come off as butting heads with your answer, raywest, I was merely answering the submitter's question and acknowledging their use of the word "fired" within their question. But since you responded directly to my original reply, I'll respond. You state in your reply to me, "He was effectively "fired", as in removed, from his commanding position, due to his weak leadership, but that did not mean to say he was fired from the U.S. Army. The term "fired" is relative here." Okay, well I really don't agree with that, because I can't see the term "fired" as being relative here, IMO. In civilian life, when a civvie is "fired" from their job it means getting laid-off, being unemployed. To say a servicemember is "fired" from the military, it would basically mean being dishonorably discharged. The OP's question was regarding Lloyd Fredendall. After his reassignment, Major General Fredendall even received a promotion and became Lieutenant General Fredendall within a few months. Anyway, those are my personal thoughts on the matter. :) Be well, raywest. With warm regards, Rikki.

Super Grover

Not fired, just relieved of command and transferred elsewhere.

Yes, he was removed (fired) from his post because his troops were so badly defeated in the battle. Patton was assigned to take over.

raywest

Join the mailing list

Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.