KILLING PATTON

chief38

Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
21,159
Reaction score
35,632
I just finished reading "Killing Patton" by Bill O'Reilly. Only took a few days ands was quite well written. I have always been sort of a WWll Buff and have watched, read and studied most of what is commonly out there.

The book is not just about Patton, but also includes the others (Eisenhower, Churchill, Monty, FDR, Truman, Bradley, etc.) whom he interacted with during the War Years. I did learn some interesting things that I did not know before and really enjoyed reading it.

I would highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in this time in US History as well as Patton himself. It opens up new thoughts on how Patton might have met his demise. Just thought I'd mention it.
 
On the waiting list at my library, looking forward to it, my dad was in 3rd Army under Patton and held him in high regard as a general.
 
Have wanted to read this also, but was wondering how "salty" it could be? Most writings pertaining to military can get somewhat raunchy and I don't want to plow through a bunch of four letter words for some history lessons. How was it on that perspective?
 
Uh, well I'm reading it right now and am near the end. I don't think it's "salty" at all. Nothing is said that would be considered inappropriate as I recall. It's a pretty good book.

I've just read a pile of Max Hasting's books on World War II and had just finished "Berlin" when I started "Killing Patton". They all seem to run together. But it's a good book.
 
I was disappointed in the book. I didn't learn anything that I hadn't learned by reading earlier books.

O'Reilly and his co-author make several posits, but don't really make a case for murder. The accident was investigated as just that, an accident. There was absolutely no justification for anything else. At the time, there were hundreds of vehicles of all types being driven on German roads by GI's, both with and without permission. The MP's were probably more concerned with getting General Patton treated.

Patton has already been relieved as Commander 1st Army. He had been relegated to a largely ceremonial position with the 15th Army, and that was a "paper" army, charged with documenting the European war.

The folks who disappeared and never resurfaced in the U.S. weren't uncommon. Lots of men either deserted or took their discharge and remained in Europe, especially after VJ day. So, the fact that a few "suspects" disappeared, shouldn't have surprised anyone. Documentation for whatever reason, was often lost, and records which had no future use were often destroyed either by accident or on purpose. There's no smoking gun in writing.

Patton's unpopularity among "allied" officers, especially Montgomery, was not even an open secret. He and Montgomery despised each other. Eisenhower had rid himself of Patton, and Patton would have been stateside within the next few months.

Patton's injuries can't be viewed through modern medicine. Spinal injuries were difficult to treat with the limits of medicine of the day. Patients confined to near total immobility developed pneumonia at a very high rate. And the antibiotic of the day was penicillin, hardly potent enough for bacterial pneumonia.

O'Reilly uses the shotgun for his premise, and never tapers down to any real conclusion, except unprovable allegations.
 
I have since loaned out my copy of K/P,but somewhere near the end of the
book it is stated that Patton picks up a rifle to go goose hunting with a friend.I'm sure it should have read (shotgun).I'm guessing this is due to
O'Rielly's ignorance of hunting and or firearms.---Sid V.
 
I haven't read it, but I think Dennis The B put his finger on what is wrong with many conspiracy theories. Evidence subject to ambiguous interpretation, parsed to sinister but unproven conclusions.

It sells books.

It also seems to encourage Oliver Stone to take obscene liberties with history, but that's another pet peeve.

Sorry, as I've gotten old I've become more and more cynical about conspiracy theories and theorists.
 
Last edited:
I have since loaned out my copy of K/P,but somewhere near the end of the
book it is stated that Patton picks up a rifle to go goose hunting with a friend.I'm sure it should have read (shotgun).I'm guessing this is due to
O'Rielly's ignorance of hunting and or firearms.---Sid V.

I lost a great deal of respect for O'Reilly after his repeated rants that anyone could go into a gun show and buy a machine gun or a bazooka after the Conn. shootings a few years ago.
I emailed him repeatedly, and I'm sure many others had also done so, pointing out he was completely wrong in these assertions and never received a response nor saw him refute this B.S. on his program.
His ignorance in regard to firearms is a danger to all of us considering the size of his audience.
Additionally; After 50 + years Not one shred of hard evidence has surfaced to refute the conclusion that Lee Harvy Oswald was the sole shooter that assassinated JFK. However millions has been made by conspirator theorists.
Jim
 
Last edited:
Killing Patton is an interesting history book. That said, it provides no significant evidence of anything to do with killing Patton----leaving that to your imagination. When I finished, my first thought was of fishing tackle. Many folks will tell you fishing tackle is made to catch fish. I will tell you it's made to sell to fishermen.

Ralph Tremaine
 
So we're still at???

Did they kill Patton or not?

Who killed Kennedy??

The only fishing were doing is fishing for answers and coming up with no fish and a bare hook?

The excuse today is the illuminati controls everything that goes on in the world.

I know nothing. I could care less.
 
Last edited:
I am not a big fan of people rewriting history. Almost all the people of that time are dead so the writer is using documents everyone else has already read. It's just the spin, ORielly is spinning history. Deal is he donates the money so I can't complain there. I won't buy the book or any of his other history spinning books but each to their own. I like it you buyers are giving to a good cause.
 
I have not read too much of the "Killing" series by O'Reilly. The first three seem rather legitimate, but the whole premise of Patton being murdered seems rather out there.
 
The CIA Did It!!

I was really astounded with the conclusion that the OSS (fore runner of the CIA) was the one who did it. Every conspiracy theorist has to blame the CIA for everything. Not having read O'Rielly's book on Killing Kennedy but I'm sure the CIA played big time in it too.
 
Last edited:
Not so sure about George Patton, Jr, (my dad was on the 3d Army staff in 1945 and loved him) but I was in VII Corps in Germany when his son was the corps commander. He froze my rear off by decreeing that no VII Corps jeeps could have canvas tops, even in the winter. :)
 
A few months ago I read "Target Patton" by Wilcox.It was very interesting and had discussions included by a man who claimed he was ordered to kill Patton at the time of the wreck but was unsuccessful and Patton was finished by a Russian agent.It seems everyone feared him and was afraid he would spill the beans on wrong doing by Eisenhower and others.Much food for thought.I have O'Reilly's book in my pile to read.It could certainly been a pulmonary embolism which killed him after prolonged bed rest then beginning to increase activity.It is recognized as being one of the leading causes of in hospital deaths.
 
Oh, by the way I also read "Patton" by Stanley P. Hirshson last summer which was also a great read if you're interested. "Eisenhower" by Carlo D'este and "Warlord" (Churchill) by D'este as well.

Just started a book on Teddy Roosevelt but haven't gotten far yet.
 
I'm 117 pages into it and find it interesting reading. It's a free library book so no money out of pocket. It's entertaining me so I could give a rat's behind about O'Reilly's views on guns.
 
I'm about to start the book as my wife just read it and said it was good. It's either that or a Tom Clancy novel but might start Killing Patton first as wife says it's an easy and fast read.
Some of my Dad's buddies served under Patton and said he was hard to be under. Of course I never knew a GI that had much love for their commander either.
 
I have thought for decades that Patton’s useful time was over and our own government arranged his demise. Yes other entities could have done it, but I stand on what I said above.

Really did not learn anything much from this book but it was quite interesting, especially about the other people it gave mention to.
 
Why could Patton not have been quietly retired? Why would our government want him dead? Doesn't make sense to me. Okay, so maybe he writes a book and makes speeches criticizing the conduct of the war. Lots of our generals have done that, from the Revolution to today. It hasn't sunk the ship of state.

As I've so often said on this forum, the banner yet waves.
 
Why could Patton not have been quietly retired? Why would our government want him dead? Doesn't make sense to me. Okay, so maybe he writes a book and makes speeches criticizing the conduct of the war. Lots of our generals have done that, from the Revolution to today. It hasn't sunk the ship of state.

As I've so often said on this forum, the banner yet waves.
Someone needs a conspiracy theory. There were plenty of general and flag officers who would speak about their experiences, good and bad. Patton would have only been one more.

Patton was already preparing to retire. He'd decided not to return to Europe after coming back to the U.S. for Christmas leave. He was scheduled to leave Europe on 10 December, but the auto accident happened on 8 December. He was already aged 60, past time for most officers to retire. He was a brilliant tactical officer. With peace having broken out, retirement was inevitable.
 
Back
Top