Tam mentioned him after sorta reviewing the Brad Pitt move Fury, about a fictional tank battle in WWII. She said "It is apparent that Belton Cooper's work is now the accepted pop history narrative." and that made me want to get Mr. Cooper's book to see what he was on about.
Cooper was a JO in the ETO, and was charged with the support of the armored forced of the 3rd. In this role he saw how tanks from both sides fared in battle.
And man did he dislike Patton. He attribute to Patton the prioritizing of the M4 Sherman over a the M26 Pershing that was being developed late in the war. To sum up both sides, Patton wanted quantity right away not a promise of quality next month. Cooper wanted the best tool possible for the Armored Warfare job, even if it meant delays, as the Sherman was inadequate for the task. It seems to me that that was what Cooper was getting at.
I guess he was getting on about "oh woe is the poor armored soldiers in crappy equipment." And that is the narrative. Cooper thought everything else was top notch. Vehicles, artillery, aircraft, supply system, our Ma Deuce... Just the tanks and tank guns were the problem.
Here is another online review.
And of course, there is heated debate on which version of history is the 'truth'.
But I read it because of the Tam reference and I didn't want to remain culturally ignorant on what seemed, and is, a major bit of contention in WWII history buff circles. Which I try to be. But I am of the 3rd camp. The point of victory wasn't from Shermans or Pershings tanks. Not metal tracks, but the long logistical tail on rubber tires and steel ships and aluminum aircraft overhead. Plus similar aircraft doing a lot of the heavy lifting in the anti-armor department. But that's me.
I recommend Stephen J. Zaloga's Armored Fist as the definitive layperson's Sherman work right now.
ReplyDeleteMy bad, the title is Armored Thunderbolt.
ReplyDeleteArmored THUNDERBOLT?...
ReplyDeleteThe Jug could lay down a world of hurt on a tank or locomotive.
ReplyDeleteThe German's loved the Sherman. And no, not just because it was easy to blow up. They respected the speed and mobility. The later Shermans with the long 75, such as in Fury (M4A3E8, dah Easy Eight and the British Firefly), were decent tanks. Not able to take on a Tiger 1 or Panther head on, but on about equal terms with the later Panzer IV.
ReplyDeleteMy very humble opinion, Patton was right. New weapons systems always have teething issues. Waiting for what "could" be instead of keeping the Germans on the ropes by overwhelming them was the correct way to go.
And dang it Tam, every time you recommend a book I get in trouble for ordering from Amazon again. :-)
ReplyDeleteThere are 3 books in the series Tam mentioned. They all look very good.
ReplyDelete