I happen to agree about the diversion of support on Market Garden, but on the other hand you could argue that had Patton, not Horrocks, been in charge of the tank units, that would have been successful as well.
And the stories of vets, while inspiring, aren't always accurate. However, "Men Against Fire," which was written by a WW II combat historian, was based extensively on those who were serving at the time, mainly so that the Army could address training problems after the war. I don't think you could call him a "Germanophile" either. I'm not wrong. Wish I was in this case.
You are mistaking after action analysis that is used to find where errors in tactics, techniques, and procedures were in specific operations - so we can improve - with unit diaries and after action reports, which record the day-by-day combat actions in detail.
All combat operations contain errors by individuals, units, commanders but in examining the record, we did very well. Objectives were attained, the speed of advance maintained, and the German defenses crumbled. For a true citizen army, it was really inspiring. As a professional officer, I am deeply proud that the US army in Western Europe was a world beater. I can easily believe that Patton and the Third Army could have driven on to Moscow.
There seems to be a cottage industry in apologia, papers and books deriding our draftee army of WWII. It’s just a fad. The truth is that they refined and perfected combined arms maneuver warfare against the best the Germans had and rolled right over them.
Success is the ultimate arbiter.