Which of the Three Major Military Philosophies Does Gen. George S. Patton Best Personify - Essay Example

In your opinion, which of the three major military philosophies does Gen. George S. Patton best personify Of all the major military philosophies, Gen. George S. Patton can be said to personify the Political school of thought of military philosophy. This can be gleaned on many aspects of his person, being a soldier and a man. The political school of thought in military philosophy is the type of philosophy most professional soldiers hold. It is because this philosophy holds that war is a political tool of the state. It was an idea by the brilliant Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz (1780-1831) whose works permeated in American military school. This political philosophy as a doctrine of war was contained in his famous book, On War which was adopted as one of the key literature in the Naval War College, the Air War College, the Army War College. Needless to say, Clausewitz military philosophy is central at the US Military schools that even the Marines philosophical manual which is essentially a distillation of On War, and the newer Marine Corps Doctrinal Publications contained the philosophical philosophy of Clauswitz about war. Considering this circumstances, and after examination of Patton’s military career, pronouncements as a soldier, Patton indeed subscribed to political school of thought in military philosophy. In addition, Patton went to military school (Virginia Military Institute and United States Military Academy) whose course syllabus and teachings were peppered with the political philosophy of Clausewitz. Above all, US military during the Second World War already adopted the policy that is consistent to Political Doctrine of war that the military and its war, is an instrument of the state as it advances or protect its national interest. The doctrine holds that war and its soldier is subordinate to the state. It is a rational instrument of a government as it expresses its national policy. According to this doctrine, wars are being waged by state to achieve certain goals and objectives as it advance or protect its interest. This military doctrine holds that war is not to be waged for the sake of waging war or out of vain grandiosity but as an act of self-defense, assertion of national interest or both. Unlike the other military philosophy that viewed war as a bane and a source of misery, such as the cataclysmic philosophy, the political doctrine of war does not necessarily view as intrinsically evil, but rather a rational instrument that a state must be capable of. Consistent with this, political doctrine also presuppose that to become an effective state instrument, costs of war must be accounted vis-à-vis its benefits. The political philosophy of war is evident not only in Patton’s pronouncement as a military person but also as a man as what can be read from his correspondence with his wife Beatrice and son George (named after him). The three elements of Political school of thought, as a philosophy of war, which are national interest, war as an instrument of state and engaging in rational war are present in the following pronouncements of Patton. National Interest “Do your duty as you see it, and damn the consequences.”  “The soldier is the Army. No army is better than its soldiers. The Soldier is also a citizen. In fact, the highest obligation and privilege of citizenship is that of bearing arms for one’s country”  “A real man will never let his fear of death overpower his honor, his sense of duty to his country, and his innate manhood”  ...It is a proud privilege to be a soldier – a good soldier … [with] discipline, self-respect, pride in his unit and his country, a high sense of duty and obligation to comrades and to his superiors, and a self confidence born of demonstrated ability.”  The above pronouncements of Patton instrument reflects his value system as a soldier as a man to serve his country and to do his duty which is consistent with the national interest element of the political philosophy of war. Instrument of the state The following brief statement of Patton encapsulized the entire idea of a soldier’s relation to the state which is consistent with the political philosophy of war. “I am a Soldier, I fight where I am told, and I win where I fight.”  This pronouncement of Patton, although short, encapsulated the essence of a professional soldier as an instrument of the state to protect and advance its interest. The military credo of following the chain of command, of submission as an organ of the state is evident with this statement that he “fights where I am told, and win where I fight.” Rational Patton is known to be a brilliant military strategist. In fact, his German Nazi counterpart even touted him as the “best General and Commander” of the Allied Forces. For Patton wages his war not only with an astute mind and keen logic, but also factors other circumstances that win a war such as motivation and quality of his army. He is not rash, as his critic might think for his daring exploits during the WWII. Rather, when he see a fair chance in winning a battle, he seizes it and believes that the quality of his soldier will give him that extra 1% to win the war. This was evident with his correspondence with this son which reads; To win battles you do not beat weapons you beat the soul of man of the enemy man. To do that you have to destroy his weapons but that is only incidental. You must read biography and especially autobiography. If you will do it you will find that war is simple. Decide what will hurt the enemy most within the limits of your capabilities to harm him and then do it. Take calculated risks. That is quite different from being rash. My personal belief is that if you have a 50% chance take it because the superior fighting qualities of American soldiers lead by me will surely give you the extra 1% necessary. Read More