Hi everyone. I’m new to this forum but have been looking at posts for a couple of years now and finally have a question of my own. Patton is one of my favorite movies of all time but there’s always been this one question I’ve had that’s been killing me. It’s about the strategy that British General Montgomery imposed for the Allied invasion of Sicily. In the movie, Montgomery states that if Gen. Patton’s plan is followed then it’ll lead to an absolute disaster. He then famously fogs up the bathroom mirror and states that if he lands at Syracuse and Patton lands in Palermo (like Patton wants) then things will fall apart because their forces would be separated and chopped up. However, if everyone follows his plan which calls for Montgomery to land in Syracuse as planned and Patton to land at Gala and protect his flank as they both drive North to Messina then their forces could be closer together to provide support and things would run more smoothly. However, my question is this: why does Montgomery even mention that the American and British forces will be chopped up if they follow Patton’s plan? It seems to me that their forces can be chopped up just as bad if Montgomery’s plan is followed, the only difference being that their forces would be closer together. After all, this is war, and forces just don’t travel all together in a straight line from point A to point B. They get into battles, ambushes, etc. and most of the time parts of a force will be separated from the main flank. That’s how you get MIA’s and such and that’s where stories like Saving Private Ryan (another one of my all-time favorite WW2 movies) come from. So why does Montgomery even mention that forces will get chopped up if they follow Patton’s plan and implicitly imply that they won’t if they follow his? I know this is getting a little in depth but this has been really bugging me for some time and I figured that you guys might be able to shed some light on this for me. I thank you for reading and appreciate any reply I can get.