Talk:George S. Patton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Military work group.
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
This article is part of WikiProject Homeschooling, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of homeschooling-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to "featured" and "good article" standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details. [View this template]
Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject California This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Archive
Archives
1


Contents

[edit] This article is a disgrace

It is filled with libel of Gen. Patton. 'Didn't have a sense of humor', one of his most famous jokes were "the Germans must run out of armor unless they have reproducing tanks" Racist? He was the first to integrate colored and white GIs when he needed more manpower, and this before any of the other US generals of WWII. Anti-semite? Yes, his remarks on Jews are not pretty. They were common at the time though. But, in "Patton a genius for war" he deliberately used a Jewish GI as translator when questioning an SS man and had a famous contempt for the SS because of their crimes. Let's not forget that Truman and Nixon said some pretty nasty things about Jews, but are the two US presidents who saved Israel in its most critical hours. With anti-Semitism, deeds and not words are what really counts. By that count, Patton "the most dangerous enemy general", as rated by the Nazi high command, was one of the Jews greatest friends ever. And "Eisenhower greatly liked by the men"...come on!!! I have never heard of a Third Army man who didn't consider himself Patton's, and not "Ike" or FDRs, man. Patton anticipated the Ardennes offensive, and, with Operation Cobra (his brainchild, NOT Bradleys) that would place him as perhaps THE greatest field commander of WWII, rivalled only by Zhukov, Manstein and perhaps Rommel, but not by anyother US general. I shall edit this article when I have the time. Jan Morup janmorup2@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.53.231.109 (talk) 22:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


Err....basically supplimenting his forces with colored gunfodder isn't rasist? And as for humor...well, that 'joke' was just HILARIOUS. Or not. Noting a book written 40 years after the fact, and noting one single case from that book, does not show any great appreciation of the jewish people. Was Patton a great general? Maybe. Probably, even. Was he a great PERSON. Not so much, perhaps. But, that is not necessarily a bad thing. The time needed a person like Patton. But don't make him out to be more than he was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.113.252.41 (talk) 00:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
The fact that you used so many theoreticals in your argument lends more credence to the preceding, perhaps more favorable portrait of General Patton, which I am more inclined to believe. As was said this article could use a little cultural relativism... General Patton was a product of his time period, and even at that time remarkably forward thinking and progressive. He was the product of a conservative, wealthy white upbringing, which let's not forget was of the early twentieth century - the fact that he requested the use of African American units (who were hardly gunfodder; I find that comment to be more offensive, relatively speaking, than anything Patton said of them) is significantly worth noting as well as his well-known disgust and outrage during the liberation of Buchenwald. His refusal to remove Nazis from government positions is also widely sensationalized; most Nazi officials were in fact removed, but on the other hand many government workers were retained in order to provide basic services, not to mention the Allied de-Nazification effort was reminiscent of the disastrous de-Baathification of Iraq in the wake of the removal of Hussein. In terms of his strategic capabilities as a commander, I would go even further than the proceeding argument and say that he was definitively THE greatest commander of World War II, and would be remembered more favorably in that aspect had he not been consistently held back by an American effort that was far too pliant to the demands of the British (who constantly preferred Montgomery with disastrous results, a la Op Market Garden) and the clamor of the press.

209.244.30.41 (talk) 02:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] another patton anecdote

whilst watching a documentary on the aftermath of WWII. The story goes something like this: During the Berlin victory parade all the allies were showing off their latest and greatest weapons. The western allies parading their medium tanks (but the models have sliped my mind) the soviets had insisted that their vehicles came last in the procession. At the podium where all the senior officers were observing a british officer became quite alarmed by a rumbling of the earth, as a division of IS-III tanks drove past the British officer turned quite pale and looked very faint. It was at this point Patton apparently leaned in and whispered in his (the officer's) ear: "Dont worry, we're still on your side" Im not sure how much truth there is to the story but perhaps someone wiser has more information on the subject?

Tyler

Chalky17 23:10, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The way I heard it, Marshall Zhukov was bragging about the range of the gun on one of their tanks, wher Patton replied, 'If any of my men fired on you people before they had closed to 700 yards, I would have him courtmartialed for cowardice.' One observer remarked it was the first time he had seen a Russian officer stunned into silence. If I ever get the citiation, I will post. Jokem 01:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] patton anecdote

I remember hearing something about an instance where patton became frustrated and fired his pistol at a luftwaffe aircraft. I can't find any information on it anywhere..

Also, this article is really sloppy and needs a rewrite or cleanup or whatever... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.227.253.198 (talk) 19:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC).

The pistol incident was in the film. Don't know if it is true, but the incident preceding it was documented. Where the RAF officers assured him there would be no more German planes, then the meeting was bombed by the Germans. Infortunately I cannot find the reference. Jokem 01:33, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bonus Army

In the biography that I read on General Patton (ISBN: 0060009829), it stated an interesting piece of irony during the cavalry charge against the bonus army. One of the members of the bonus army was the soldier who carried him to a medic (and saving his life) after he was wounded in World War I. I cannot recall the soldier's name and I do not have the book anymore, maybe someone else does and can help. Perhaps this should be added to the interwar years. notyouravgjoe 10:23, 18MAR06

            • Soldier who saved Patton´s life in WWI was Joseph T. Angelo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.103.92.56 (talk) 08:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

The best information on GSP's involvement with the Bonus March I have taken from Volume of the GSP Papers, and you will find it here: Bonus Army. SSG Cornelius Seon (Retired) 04:26, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

The "bonus army".

There were casualities on both police and "bonus army" sides before the military took over. Some of the people involved in the "bonus army" were not World War One vets, and (most importantly) the army (under the command of MacArthur) managed (after it took over) to defeat the "bonus army" without killing any of them.

The Communist party accounts of all these events (which seem to be treated as if they were unbiased history) have no connection with the truth.

Paul Marks.

Oh please. The generally accepted order of events is that most of the casualties happened because of the Army attack on the protestors, not prior to the attack. (There also was at least one death--a baby overcome by Army tear gas.) And even if some of the protestors were not WWI vets, so what? This is, after all, the just fight that led directly to the formation of the Veterans Administration and the GI Bill--both considered good outcomes by pretty much any vet you talk to to this day. And are you saying that any accounts critical of government actions against the Bonus Army are "communist party accounts?" Looking over the historians that have researched the event, while it is true some are on the broad left, only a few have actually been communists, and the rest span the political spectrum. Whatever their political views, they either do good research or not. It's fairly easy to seperate straight opinion from balanced reportage. There is voluminous documentary evidence and oral history on hand for this particular incident. MacArthur's attack was widely criticised from all quarters, and the Hoover administration's handling of the affair is considered to have contributed to its downfall in the 1932 elections. So save the sweaty-palmed cold war rhetoric. Jpramas 1 December 2006

[edit] Eh??

some Generals like Patton were totally ignorant of the fact, many forms of battle trauma were not known at the time and described as cowardice

This sentence doesn't make sense... How could he be ignorant of something that wasn't known in those days... To be ignorant of something you must at least know that it exists... 62.235.149.179 19:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

One should remember it was a much different time with a VERY different mindset amongst both the leaders and the troops.

My father was in Third Army and served in the US Army for 30 years. 

His first duty in the army was caring for mules.

( Stateside, Hawaii, North Africa, Sicily, Normandy, The Bulge, Occupation of Germany, Korea,

Stateside again ).

He never suffered combat fatigue DURING combat. It would have never entered his mind at the time.

During the Battle of the Bulge, his jeep hit a land mine. The officer in the jeep with him was killed. My father was thrown through the windshield and had his middle right finger mostly blown off and hanging. When the got him to an aid station, he had his finger sewn back on and they gave him apc ( aspirin with caffeine in it) for the pain. He went back on the line immediately. He was too cold and busy to have combat fatigue. He later served in Korea. The effects of combat upon him did not show up until years later. He was proud to have served " with Patton ". He remarked to me once that compared to the cold in the mountains of Korea, the Bulge was positively warm.

Near Candlestick Park in San Francisco ( I REFUSE to call it Monster Park ), a private home has a sign on its porch honoring General Patton.

The veterans who meet regularly in the house are all black veterans and honor the General and were also proud to have served under Patton.

George Senda Martinez, Ca.

[edit] Quote

Before I add it, is the quote "As I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I have no fear, because I am the meanest and biggest US Marine in the entire damn valley" acceptable?CityPride 10:23, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

King George VI of Great Britain: "General Patton, how many men have you killed in war?" Gen. Patton: "Seven, sir." Eisenhower: "How many did you say, General Patton?" Gen. Patton: "Three, sir." Eisenhower: "Ok George, we'll let you get away with that."

[edit] Dates of rank vs. Rank comparison to Eisenhower

It seems to me that these two sections really display the same information in two different formats. Are both really necessary? Thoughts? MikeMullins 03:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

They're not completely redundant, but it seems likely that they could easily be merged. --Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 06:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] George Smith Patton Jr?

Why isn't there an explanation for his name? His grandfather & father are named George Smith Patton. Wouldn't the General be George Smith Patton III. An explanation should be on this article. My guess is he was born after his grandfather's death & his father had a name change (George S. Jr to George S. Sr). GoodDay 20:58, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

There was an explanation in the article but it was removed. See a quick discussion here on an old talk page. I'm looking into it and will try to get it back in the article. MikeMullins 13:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Patton's Lineage

Several California museums historical archives cite the Yorba family of Alta California, and how Ramona Yorba married Benjamin Wilson, who was from Tennessee, became prosperous in early California partially by marring into the Yorba family...who were granted 200,000 acres of land in the 1700's, which is now Orange County Calif.

Benjamin Wilson and Ramona Yorba had a daughter, Ruth Wilson...who was George S. Patton's mother. That means the famous American general was 1/4 Mexican. DonDeigo 15:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

No, Ruth Wilson was daughter of Wilson's second wife, Margaret Hereford (see Benjamin Wilson link) But you could say the Wilson's money was 100% Mexican —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.159.133.255 (talk • contribs)

Negative....everything I have read in Wikipedia makes reference to Ramona Yorba as being Ruth Wilson's mother..only in this article is this distinct reference to the housekeeper as being his mother ...the Benjamin Wilson articles are clear about Ramona Yorba being Patton's Grand mother.....I think we need some citation DonDeigo 17:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The timeline below can be constructed from Patton A Genius For War (Carlo D'Este):

  • 1844 Benjamin Wilson marries Ramona Yorba
  • 1849 Ramona dies
  • 1853 Wilson marries Margaret Hereford
  • 1861 Ruth Wilson born

Ramona was not living when Ruth Wilson was born

[edit] What?

Can anyone else see that weird line of text in "the Patton sabre"? After the Olympics, Lt. Patton was made the Army's youngest-ever Master of the Sword. While Master of the Sword, Patton improved and modernized the Army's Cavalry Saber fencing techniques and designed the M1913 Cavalry Saber. TIME 4 BED! It had a large, basket-shaped hilt mounting a straight, double-edged, thrusting blade designed for use by heavy cavalry. Now known as the “Patton” saber, it was heavily influenced by the 1908 and 1912 Pattern British Army Cavalry Swords. It odesn't appear in the source...

[edit] Family expansion

I've expanded the family section because I think it is important background to show what influenced him growing up. He had great military tradition in his family and he spent his career trying to live up to it. Also, it's reasonable to mention he had kids. MikeMullins 15:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speculation

"Patton actually had the utmost respect for the men serving in his command..." (under "Patton's problems with humor, his image, and the press") - This seems slightly speculative. Is there any evidence to prove that Patton had the utmost respect for his men? Not that I doubt Patton's integrity, in fact I greatly admire him, but this doesn't really seem to be backed up by anything. Of course, if I've missed something, please tell me. James JCG Taylor 20:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

uh maybe the fact that he insited on being buried besides the "brave men that fought besides him at the battle of the bulge" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.89.183.250 (talk • contribs)

I remember reading that somewhere but I can't put my finger on it. I've added a {{fact}} tag to it. -- Mufka (user) (talk)

(contribs) 22:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ike?

Is it really appropriate for an encyclopedia article to refer to a former president as "ike". (see: "... But after consulting with George Marshall, Ike decided to keep Patton, but without a major command.")84.152.107.95 12:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, this is appropriate. "Ike" was the nickname for President Eisenhower. It was common usage in newspapers and news magazines during his administration.Head MMoid 06:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

As well as during his presidential campaign. Jokem 01:51, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese Campaign

The following apparent vandalism was added on 29 April.

Chinese Campaign George S Patton died heroicly on the battlefield in Northern China after his fearless leader, Ted Kennedy, allowed his army to become encircled by the Nationalists. Head MMoid 06:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] "Last Mounted Charge"

This is wholey incorrect, as the last mounted charge conducted by a US Cavalry unit was conducted on the Bataan Peninsula by an element of the 26th Cavalry Regiment. This unit, all be it, a part of the US Army Philippine Scouts, was still a US Army unit, and thus diserves the credit of this statement. Can someone please correct this eroneous statement.

I have added a "Citation Needed" tag, although I do not believe this claim is verifiable. [Edwin Ramsey]'s charge clearly deserves the title as written. If Patton's is a "last" of some sort, it should at least be written more specifically. --Jnik (talk) 18:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Can't vouch for its accuracy, but here's an online statement detailing the Philippine Scouts cavalry charge of 1942: [1] Jack Bethune (talk) 20:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 600 Miles - Normandy?

Under the Normandy section it says...

Patton used Germany's own blitzkrieg tactics against them, covering 600 miles in just two weeks, from Avranches to Argentan.

600 miles did not sound right to me and using a map I am guessing it is supposed to say 60 miles but I'm still not sure and confirmation of this would be nice. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.68.36.81 (talk) 20:29, 13 May 2007 (UTC).


No, it's 600 miles. It's really quite easy to verify if you take a few minutes and look it up. To only cover 60 miles in two weeks for a WWII armored division in a breakout on flat open terrain would be....unimpressive to say the least. I don't know where anyone would get that number as being realistic. Abalu (talk) 11:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)Abalu
Yes, I did verify this. It's about 60 miles straight line from Avranches to Argentan. 600 miles would take one to PRAGUE!
The terrain of northern France is hardly flat and open. 60 miles in 2 weeks against German opposition is still an impressive feat. Gouveia2 (talk) 19:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Name

Shouldn't we move it to "George Patton"? - PatricknoddyTALK (reply here)|HISTORY 16:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Origin of nickname?

anyone know where he got the nickname "Old blood and guts", or what it means? thanks. Sahuagin 00:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

How about asking that at the WP:RD? - Patricknoddyontheroad 14:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nixon?

Definitely needs a citation for the factoid about Nixon watching the film before deciding to bomb Cambodia. ~~

[edit] What a crock!

Given his popularity with the American people and the respect in which he was held by his men, it is entirely possible he could have won the same nomination his erstwhile friend accepted.

Not a chance! Patton would never have lasted on the political scene. Career politicians and the press would have eaten him alive. He often had difficulty dealing with the press or anyone else who was not required to obey him. His opinions were too radical and he was too quick to shoot his mouth off. I doubt he would have been able to curb his lanquage, and the American public in 1945 would have never stood for him cutting loose with a blue streak on live TV. I think they would have grown weary of him really quick. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beetfarm Louie (talk • contribs) 01:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I am not so sure. He was a controversial figure, true, but so was MacArthur, and sacking MacArthur cost Truman his job. I am not so sure Patton wanted a career in politics, anyway. Jokem 01:26, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] U.S. Third Army battle performance

Aren't the casualty figures public knowlege now that the war is over? Surely the Germans kept accurate records and can be researched by someone vigorous enough? Our own records ought to be accurate enough also. Jokem 01:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Firing Ward

The Orlando Ward page makes Patton's firing sound unprovoked, while this page says that it was "after repeated warnings." Which is true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.105.162.16 (talk) 03:24, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Report that led to his dismissal?

Any info on the report mentioned here [2]? --Stor stark7 Talk 22:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit to Interwar Years

I changed "won" to "received" in front of "Distinguished Service Cross"; it is an award, not the lottery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.159.222.240 (talk) 13:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rumor regarding his death

I recently heard a rumor from someone I have no reason to doubt that the circumstances around Patton's death were suspicious. In particular that he may have been murdered because he intended to prosecute certain officers under his command for looting. I'm curious if there has ever been any scholarship on this topic? Ronnotel (talk) 12:24, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

There was even a film about the conspiracy theory made in 1978 called Brass Target --rogerd (talk) 13:47, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
A movie and scholarship are two different things. . . (John User:Jwy talk) 21:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Oh, absolutely. I wasn't trying to imply that this work of fiction was a reliable source about his cause of death. I was just letting Ronnotel know that there had been so much talk about this conspiracy theory that they even made a film about it. The only place where this film should possibly be mentioned is on the "Legacy" section or perhaps a "Other films" section after the section about the 1969 film. He was asking why the other two Hollywood productions weren't mentioned in the article, and perhaps they should. I am sure there is no reliable source that backs up this theory. --rogerd (talk) 23:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. How come no mention on the article then? Seems like the movie itself would be notable enough to merit a sentence or two. Ronnotel (talk) 13:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
The film wasn't very well received by the critics or the box office. There was another film about Patton, called The Last Days of Patton, a made for TV film with George C. Scott reprising his role. If you want to add them to the article, then go ahead. --rogerd (talk) 14:03, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I went to IMDB.com, went to the search page and entered "George S. Patton". Patton, The Last Days of Patton and Brass Target seem to be the only films where Patton was more than a minor character. It might be a good idea to add the other two films to article. --rogerd (talk) 17:12, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

The rumor within military circles is that General Patton was going to prosecute some officers in his own former Third Army who had helped Germans abscond with Major Allgeiers Gold, ie 235m in reischmarks or 728 gold bars found near Mittenwald. Patton was unhinged at the time and under surveillance and wiretaps by the Allies for collaboration with the enemy. Supposedly this gold train ended up in Montauk, New York at the Air Force Base's underground research facility complete with some Nazi scientists who conducted mind control experiments there. Patton had been fired from the Third Army in 1945 and was put on a forced leave and was ordered to come home to United States when he met his untimly end a few months after leading the strongest US army division through Europe at the end of WW II in 1945. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.84.255.36 (talk) 13:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dyslexia

Prominent in Carlo D'Este's biography of Patton are his struggles with dyslexia. Shouldn't this be mentioned in the Wikipedia article about Patton?

Gouveia2 (talk) 18:59, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I knew it was in there, so I did some looking. It appears that it was trimmed out as "useless detail" here in February 2007. More on the subject was removed here in September 2007 with no explanation. No discussion ever took place about removing mention of dyslexia and I think it should be worked back in. Whatever is added back in should be balanced between the arguments from D'Este and Hirshon. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 19:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree. Dyslexia was an important part of Patton's life. Overcoming this handicap, however severe, further proves his dedication and talent; hardly a "useless detail". Maybe others with opposing views can chime in. Gouveia2 (talk) 20:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Quotes Regarding Anti-Semitism

This quotation may be misleading and is factually erroneous:

We entered a synagogue which was packed with the greatest stinking bunch of humanity I have ever seen. Either these Displaced Persons never had any sense of decency or else they lost it all during their period of internment by the Germans... My personal opinion is that no people could have sunk to the level of degradation these have reached in the short space of four years.[1]

– George S. Patton, "After the Holocaust: Rebuilding Jewish Lives in Post War Germany"

First of all, this quotation makes it appear that Patton was the author of the book listed, which as can be seen by the footnote is apparently not correct. Someone who is familiar with this book should correct the attribution of this quote, or barring that, the quote should be deleted as unverified.

Second, this quote attempts to equate "Displaced Person" with "Jew", a logical leap that is not supported by the quote mentioned. The location in a synagogue, of which there were many throughout Europe, does not confirm that the people mentioned were Jews. As the Jewish population had been deported from and/or exterminated in most areas of Europe at that time, many empty synagogue buildings were available, and, as empty buildings without caretakers, would seem to be logical places where homeless individuals might seek shelter. Literally millions of people were Displaced Persons by the end of the war, and the vast majority of them were not Jews. This quote may indeed be referring to Jews, or Patton may have considered them to be Jews, but the author of this section does not provide enough of a quote to allow the reader to conclusively come to that conclusion. As such, this quote may have been erroneously taken out-of-context. This quote should either be expanded to strengthen it, or else deleted.

Keeping this first quotation in mind, and especially given the redaction of significant portions of the original quotation, the subsequent quote also requires verification and clarification:

[others may believe]... that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to the Jews, who are lower than animals.[2]

Given the controversial nature of these quotes, and the sloppy way in which they are presented, these references (drawn from secondary or tertiary sources) are not, in my opinion, adequate here without specific reference to their primary source material. Although these quotations may ultimately prove to indeed be truthful and accurate, the way they are presented represents, at the very least, poor scholarship, and leads one to question the Neutral Point of View of the author(s) of this section.

NDM (talk) 19:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

The source of the anti-semetic remarks is Patton's own diary. This is reported in the March, 2008 edition of World War II Magazine, published by Weider History Group Inc, Volume 22, No. 10, page 23, written by Stephen Budiansky. The article says, 'Patton's contempt for the Jewish victims of the Nazis was ugly and notorious; he wrote in his diary, "Harrison and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to the Jews, who are lower than animals." Harrison here refers to Earl G. Harrison, a lawyer and expert on refugees who President Truman sent to investigate. Patton's diary entry apparently is in regard to a letter Harrison had written to General Eisenhower stating, "As matters now stand, we appear to be treating the the Jews as the Nazis treated them except that we do not exterminate them. They are in concentration camps in large numbers under our military guard instead of SS troops. One is led to wonder whether the gErman people, seeing this are not supposing that we are following or at least condoning Nazi policy." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.194.98.36 (talk) 03:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)