| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Heavyrunner |
Posted - June 15 2005 : 4:05:36 PM
I would have expected that this question might have been asked before. Perhaps not, but what do you folks think? Could he have gotten out of there with any semblance of his command, retreating back toward Weir Point and eventually joining Reno?
All speculation is welcomed.
|
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - February 08 2007 : 08:49:45 AM
They certainly weren't trained to the level that would be required for a high stress battle. |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - February 03 2007 : 2:04:53 PM
Unfortunately, at the time of this battle, Upton and the army's "beliefs" were not adhered to. A significant amount of Custer's troops were "recruits"who firearms training had been woefully neglected by Reno during Custer's absence. |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - October 10 2006 : 08:44:33 AM
There were two different armies. One composed primarily of motivated soldiers that had a job and spoke English before entering the service. The cavalry at that time believed in teaching horsemanship along with maneuvers. After Upton's manual the Army left out horsemanship. I wasn't till much latter that it was put back in the training. Godfrey was instrumental in seeing that horsemanship was taught. He had first hand experience of the lack of such training. |
| shadymist |
Posted - October 09 2006 : 10:36:26 AM
Custer had two careers: His CW career and his Indian Fighting Career.
The first was full of victories, advancement, and glory. He was the darling of the media and the nation.
His second career was another story: Limited success at first, ordering deserters shot then he himself going AWOL and suspended from service, then disaster.
His only major victory over Indians was at the W-a-s-h-i-t-a which at that was controversial and planted the seeds of feud and conflict among officers and enlisted men of the 7th.
By the mid-1870s he was making charges against President Grant's brother over scandals thereby earning the President's rath. He was removed from going on the LBH campaign, was refused admittance to Grant, and pleaded with Terry to intercede. He was reinstated only to say to a friend that he would cut lose from Terry at the first opportunity.
Two careers with different results. However he will always be remembered for the LBH disaster. |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - October 08 2006 : 12:04:35 AM
You ignore the rest of career. I also believe he had more than two engagements with Indians. Does a surrender of a village make 1-1-1. |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - October 07 2006 : 9:13:35 PM
Ironic isn't it? The great Indian fighter was 1 and 1. The first battle concluded in the deaths of a great many women and children. The second battle completely destroyed his command. Batting .500 never looked more deplorable, has it. |
| shadymist |
Posted - October 02 2006 : 2:43:23 PM
Custer had only one major victory over Indians which was at the W-a-s-h-i-t-a. All other "battles" were minor and resulted in few deaths. Custer had more "battles" with the bureaucracy of the government than with the Indians.
He used the same tactics at the LBH except it was not Winter, it was not dawn, and the exact location and size of the village was not fully known.
And it was not Black Kettle's village, but a village containing the majority of all free (hostile) Indians on the Northern Plains and their reservation relatives who were probably fed up with the treatment by whites while in "captivity" and were looking for payback.
Too many Indians, not enough intel, and the "elite forces" of Crazy Horse & Sitting Bull's "hostiles" made sure it was the destiny of the Indians to win the largest battle on the Plains against the most famous Indian fighter the Army had.
Custer's destiny was to go down as he wanted, to be remembered. However, it was for the wrong reason! |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - October 02 2006 : 12:13:31 AM
Is it your choice or your actions? |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - October 01 2006 : 7:30:49 PM
I agree, it does sound very much like free choice. Free choice that, ultimately, determines your Karma. Your choices create force/energy that will determine your involvement in the cycle of deaths and rebirths. |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - October 01 2006 : 7:04:41 PM
Sounds like free choice to me rather than destiny. |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - October 01 2006 : 6:37:27 PM
The greatest indicator of future, personal actions are past, personal actions. Undoubtedly Custer's past prompted him to believe that he could win. He may have believed so until the very end. There are those who believe in a pre-ordained destiny that can not be altered or averted by human hands. There are others who believe that destiny is the result of a series critical decisions at critical points in time. Rightly or wrongly, my choice is the latter. |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - September 26 2006 : 09:51:40 AM
quote:
Perhaps it would behoove us all if we embraced the concept of "destiny"and make strenuous efforts to ensure that our destiny, the final result is desirable.
If you can shape it then it is not destiny.
quote:
P.S. Custer could have escaped after entering MTC if he desired to so so. He did not. He accepted his "destiny."
If looking to Custer's past is any indication he wasn't accepting a "destiny" to die at LBH. He probably believed he could still win. |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - September 18 2006 : 9:40:00 PM
I so much believe in "souls";the true essence of what we are and will be. The soul, I believe, is the ultimate transition from the temporal, secular body to the perfection of unlimited, blessed, "gaseous" energy that constitutes the essence of what we truly are; the aforementioned energy. Energy that can be transformed but, never destroyed. Thus man transcends physical reality and, upon death, ascends to the stars. Without this belief, we are left holding the bag of abject reality:war, death, Man's inhumanity to Man,evil, lust, deprivation, hunger, disease and limited hope of a brighter future.
Perhaps destiny is the final episode of a life long aspiration of humanity's desire to achieve goals, good or bad. You need not "slap" a gorilla to achieve destiny. You may only need to love one another, treat your neighbor with dignity and understanding, and understand that existence does not necessarily end with the termination of physicality.
Perhaps it would behoove us all if we embraced the concept of "destiny"and make strenuous efforts to ensure that our destiny, the final result is desirable.
P.S. Custer could have escaped after entering MTC if he desired to so so. He did not. He accepted his "destiny." |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - September 18 2006 : 3:36:36 PM
AZ,
Possibly.
Wiggs,
Despite the gaseous wording, Custer could have escaped at any point previous to MTC. Whether souls, destinies, or such claptrap exists is dubious. Destiny has nothing to do, and goes against the concept, one's desires. If it exists, it exists despite anything you can do and overrides all. Your examples are not true. Increasing probability is not the same as destiny, which will happen no matter what decisions you make to avoid it. That's what makes it destiny. Destiny would mandate you drink, drive recklessly, bitch slap gorillas because it is the trigger for a prearranged fate. If you are not destined to die by those means, those actions won't kill you.
That's if you believe in destiny. |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - September 17 2006 : 7:56:12 PM
In any critical situation, escape is an option open to the individual or group; being one of several: to fight, to run, slow retreat, charge, dig in,etc. Reviewing the personality, desire for recognition,ego,abundance of confidence/arrogance of General Custer, one may safely assume that escape did not factor into the General's thought process. How do I know this? I don't. However, by utilizing the possible/probable theorem we may reach such a conclusion. Is it possible that Custer sought to escape from the mess he get himself and his men into? Certainly, all things are possible. Knowing what we do about the man, however, it is probable? I don't think so.
At a critical point in time, moments before eternal darkness descended upon the last of the living souls on Last Stand Hill, abrupt,impending doom must have weighted heavily upon the soul of the General. Along with the final realization that escape was indeed impossible.
To surmise that the General could have escaped, "till he crossed MTC and left the field" encompasses an unsubstantiated assertion that he desired to do so. Destiny is fate, future, or fortune It is usually brought about by one's personal choices in life. If I consume alcohol abundantly, I am destined to be an alcoholic. If I foolishly engage in a sport of dodging fast moving cars, I am destined to be struck and killed by one. If I feverishly pursue an unknown number of "hostiles" into their hearths and homes with an insufficient military force I can not escape my destiny of being skewered by feathered arrows. This premise is not an "elevation" of any sort, it's a harsh reality. Don't you think? |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - September 17 2006 : 2:39:20 PM
quote:
"Destiny" is a handy way of blaming an exterior force for your own mistakes or inability to change.
Is inability to change the same as predictable behavior? |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - September 17 2006 : 2:24:39 PM
Custer could have turned around at any point till he crossed MTC and left the field. "Destiny" is a handy way of blaming an exterior force for your own mistakes or inability to change. If you believe that destiny exists, you have to believe that the current state of Indians is their destiny as well, their demise clearly recorded in alcoholism, poverty, and dependence upon the culture they feign to despise. If you only apply "destiny" when it elevates yourself, you're a hypocrite. |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - September 08 2006 : 8:01:29 PM
Custer could not have escaped from any portion of this battle at any given point in time. Neither the beginning, the middle, or the end of this engagement could have enabled him to escape his destiny; death at the hands of aboriginals. Addicted to fame garnered by an illustrious Civil War career, the subsequent settlement between the "States" depleted the American Beau Geste of any possibility of additional conquests and potential avenues of fame and glory.
Thus his attempt to achieve continued fame and status through the dangerous subjugation of the Native Americans(the only enemy left to count "Coup" upon)is understandable. That is why, I believe, he was strenuously committed to seeking, locating, then destroying the Indian village (if necessary) with every fiber of his being. Therefore, he was trapped in a final and fatal karma of his own choosing; glory or death.
No, Custer could not escape death on this, his final adventure. His demise was as certain as the rising sun that shone upon the hot and grisly battlefield on that fateful day. |
| kenny |
Posted - February 16 2006 : 12:05:04 AM
Custer could have escape only at the beginning of the battle.But when Gall and Crazy Horse join the battle.There was no way for Custer to escape. |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - July 01 2005 : 10:05:25 PM
No! |
| whistlingboy |
Posted - June 16 2005 : 3:35:41 PM
Even though we have all read that the U.S. forces, for the most part, believed that the Indians would run in battle when confronted by them, it is fallacious reasoning in that most of those "battles" were probably mere run-ins. If, in fact, General Custer believed that the Indians would run once under attack by his 7th Cavalry only shows that General Custer had no idea he was confronting a 2000-plus warrior force capable of annililating him. I agree with those who blame the break down in communication as a major factor in U.S. losses late in the day. But, more importantly, the misinformation given Custer by his scouts prior to the assault by Reno looms big. Their ability to 'sell' Custer on what they thought were the strengths of the foe left him with little doubt of what he felt he had to do. Their underestimates of the warrior force propelled the future of the 7th to their destiny. |
| wILD I |
Posted - June 16 2005 : 07:19:39 AM
In a word no.
The point of no return came when Custer descended MTC.Can anyone imagine Custer doing a 180 degree turn with the HQ group racing back up along the column with the Indians in hot pursuit?The command would have disintegrated very much as it did on its via della croce to LSH.
As I have said before the fact that Custer ordered Benteen and Reno to attack independently and unsupported gives some insight into Custer's state of mind.He thought that it was going to be another turkey shoot like the Wa****a.Once committed there was no going back for this egoistical nutter but at least he saved the honor of the 7th by doing the decent thing,he stood still while the Indians delivered the coup de grace.Thus giving American history the last stand rather than the LBH races. |
| movingrobewoman |
Posted - June 15 2005 : 11:49:28 PM
Paul,
The place where MTC runs into the Little Bighorn River is a large, wide confluence; tall, brilliant, crimson rocks mark one valley as it meets the river. I have seen MTC from both the battlefield side (which is from the east) as well as from the Realbirds' land (from the west). Depending on how many columns (in fours or twos) went to the river, there is, in my quite unknowledgeable opinion, plenty of room for your proposed 180, back along Cedar Coulee to Weir Point or Sharpshooters' Ridge. BUT ... we must also consider whether both L and I troops (Keogh's Battalion) were already deployed by GAC BEFORE E and F's, if not HQ's trek to the river. If that action happened, how were they to know to turn back? Wouldn't that (meaning Keogh's) battalion serve as firm evidence for Custer's continuing offense to the north?
I really haven't any answers. I'm just glad I've resolved DR in my imagination!
Hoka hey! |
| hunkpapa7 |
Posted - June 15 2005 : 5:44:26 PM
Bob,
as far as the cavalry horses are concerned,they must have been at the end of there lot.
The mileage,lack of water,rest,proper care etc.
Below is a tactical study by Colonel T.M.Couglan.
from the Cavalry Journal,dated January-February,1934.
http://www.rootsweb.com/~nalakota/wotw/military/tacticalstudy_wotw033034.htm |
| movingrobewoman |
Posted - June 15 2005 : 5:28:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Bob:
I have never been able to study the terrain at the MTC, perhaps you have?
I would have thought if the the column could have done a 180 around and run like hell for Weir Ridge they might have had a chance? But it is really hard to tell because the indians might have been pinching that escape route off somehow. Retreating north was suicidal! It makes you wonder what was going through GAC's mind? This appears to be the last tactical decision, "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory"!
I think there are some determining factors in the question. One--who was in command of the battalion after the feignt/attack at MTC? The other is whether you believe a move to the north was a retreat by less able captains after their LTC has gotten injured/offed or a continuation of the offensive--leading Custer to have E troop go after hostiles/captives at Ford D. There is also another theory regarding the move to the north--that the battalion was making some desperate attempt meet up with Terry and Gibbon (considering no one really knows where they are)?
Paul, MTC leads quite far into the eastern country, bisecting the ridges and I think Cedar Coulee leads into it. But what happens to Custer's battalion when it meets up with Reno at the entrenchment site? Perhaps the entire regiment would have gone down?
Just some thoughts, but I think Custer's goose was cooked. It was just a matter of how many he'd take with him. Perhaps 211 others offer the best scenario? Yikes!
Hoka hey! |
|
|
