I probably should have phrased it differently. However, I do think that it was Patton that stated something similar. It is my opinion that you cannot win any battle with an over reliance on any one discipline. Tank against tank is not effective unless you have an obvious advantage in power projection. But against something like the tiger and panther, the sherman is out gunned. There is no reason to go tank on tank in a confrontation from the allied perspective. Sometimes you have no choice, but winners take advantage of their strengths and protect their weakness.

As ex-military, I have a preference for the strengths of the infantry. After the artillery, tanks, and air forces have pounded a target, it is the grunts that finish. No matter how much they punish a target, it is rare that there is not a force left capable of resistance. Ground pounders can get into places that no other weapon can reach. And they have much better ability to react and hide as circumstances dictate.

__________________
Lord, let me be the person my dog thinks I am.