| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Benteen |
Posted - November 13 2009 : 10:08:51 AM
In looking back over the threads, I don't believe this one has been individually addressed. Can it be for certain known when, and perhaps even where, Custer's fight began? This in relation to other known battle events. Most of this of course will be left to "interpretation" of events through the eyes and ears of the participants themselves, and who may have been the most reliable of sources. The when and where should aid in other questions under present consideration, choose wisely.
Benteen |
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| joe wiggs |
Posted - December 05 2009 : 10:02:07 PM
hey Buddy, thats not a bad idea. I got some manuscripts around the house that have been laying about for years. let me dig them up and share them with you. Instead of posting so much free information perhaps we could collaborate together!g |
| Benteen |
Posted - November 28 2009 : 9:00:08 PM
Only would do it, if you co-author it Joe.  |
| joe wiggs |
Posted - November 28 2009 : 7:04:10 PM
Wonderful job. You should be writing books. I swear you absolutely amaze me. |
| Benteen |
Posted - November 28 2009 : 12:57:26 PM
Glad to have been of some help Joe. Jung was always one of my favorites. I don't remember how old I was when I read Frazer's "The Golden Bough", which led me to Jung. I believe still in the teen's though, and I was impressed with Frazer's work, still am. |
| joe wiggs |
Posted - November 28 2009 : 12:34:38 PM
WOW! Benteen your psychoanalysis is off the chart!!! Identification with the material world stifles the soul and, slowly stifles any possibility of spirituality. In my fifties, I knew something was wrong. Didn't know what;just something. Now I realize what it was;the death of my materialism. Afraid to exist without the crutch of all things that are impressive in the physical world, I longed for the spiritual but could not overcome my fear of the unknown.
What I did know was this growing and,un-abating disgust with the pompous, arrogant,and cruel entities of the physical world. Their inability to stretch out their perspectives and their seemingly unrealistic anger (hate?)towards any who disagree with them.
We may have to start a whole new thread for further analysis. Unbelievable work, thanks!
tr |
| Benteen |
Posted - November 28 2009 : 11:35:53 AM
Joe,
They simply must come to terms with their shadow. Whether the shadow is some kind of spirit possession, as the bible claims can be, or whether it is some manifestation yet unknown to science, it exists. And sadly, for most, it usually happens at mid-life. Most people reject or deny they have a problem and when they do this, some form of derangement happens. Only when a person confronts the shadow will they discover or perhaps rediscover their own real life’s purpose.
Real life, not merely the image one wants to see of “life”; means embracing all the uncertainty of one’s unconsciousness, acceptance of one’s weaknesses, and a full commitment to believe, hope and trust in something far better than what one judge‘s themselves to be.
This full commitment to that cause is what they fear the most, because they fear a psychological death. They are addicted as any addict is to the substance of their shadow. Their greatest fear is in sharing and being honest with others about their psychological problems, and loosing their identity in the process. And that somehow a fear that the truth will come out, that hidden truth, that secret truth will somehow burst forth the identity they really are. That their entire mind, body and spirit with shadow in tow, will be caught up defending in prejudice what they are most afraid to loose. But what they do not realize is that as long as they gain their identity from the world around them, only then, do they have to be concerned about loosing it and the loneliness that comes with it; and the point of true healing sadly missed.
They must realize that all fantasies must be understood in the light of what they represent in their deep unconsciousness, and must resolve these conflicts for the sake of their health. And to do this they must take a step into reality and the real world or it will only lead to other fears and other fantasies and greater loneliness. The first step is to realize that all identities are a fraud in the first place, and to embrace and take the first steps towards reality that one’s fantasies envision.
Why change reality as you know it? Try to understand the soul, the life’s essence, those basic things that gives us all life. And then the painful reality of death. And then to further this, the fantasy of changing one’s personal meaning contains some mysterious secret that will release one from the hard facts of this life, this death and/or this social void. Many of those afflicted with this mental instability feel out of place because they don’t fit into society’s image of how they should speak or act, the problem may not be with how we stereotype human behavior but with their self image and identity, which is almost always the case when they cannot, will not confront their fears and take a good look in a mirror, because the reflection isn’t the person standing there.
|
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - November 28 2009 : 09:05:15 AM
joe wiggs
Lt. Colonel
USA
361 Posts
Sent - June 06 2008 : 8:31:31 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good to hear from you again buddy!
Joe |
| Benteen |
Posted - November 27 2009 : 9:37:44 PM
Sure thing, but I would imagine that it would involve intensive psycho-therapy at least 4 times a week. Get back to you on that... |
| joe wiggs |
Posted - November 27 2009 : 1:40:57 PM
Oh Hell, this whole thing sounds like someone I actually know! "The shadow is being projected by the hater onto the hated" has a significant significance. It explains so much including.
Ergo, the intense anger for "normal people."
"All seeing & all knowing" is a monumental testimony to a monumental ego whose appetite for Majesty (where none exist)includes the media which (according to Indian lore)like land and the sky can never be really owned by anyone. One thing is for sure, Mother Earth was better off when this lore was true.
Despising "innovation because it pushes their buttons" has been so apparent and obvious on this forum at to be absolutely stunning.
Benteen, could you do some additional research and ascertain if their is any hope for people like you described. I kinda feel sorry for people who are trapped in such a dismal,cloudy,absolute zone of inequity |
| joe wiggs |
Posted - November 27 2009 : 1:38:24 PM
Oh Hell, this whole thing sounds like someone I actually know! "The shadow is being projected by the hater onto the hated" has a significant significance. It explains so much including issues that have come before us. Ergo, the intense anger for "normal people."
"All seeing & all knowing" is a monumental testimony to a monumental ego whose appetite for Majesty (where none exist)includes the media which (according to Indian lore)like land and the sky can never be really owned by anyone. One thing is for sure, Mother Earth was better off when this lore was true.
Despising "innovation because it pushes their buttons" has been so apparent and obvious on this forum at to be absolutely stunning.
Benteen, could you do some additional research and ascertain if their is any hope for people like you described. I kinda feel sorry for people who are trapped in such a dismal,cloudy,absolute zone of inequity |
| Benteen |
Posted - November 27 2009 : 12:32:11 PM
DC,
Carl Gustav Jung (b.1875-d.1961) was a Swiss psychiatrist who forged a link between psychology and spirituality. Jung’s idealism in psychiatry and his search within spirituality led him to believe in a force within ourselves he called the “shadow”. Jung’s commitment to the idea, portrayed this shadow as those inferior aspects of the human spirit or soul that we are ashamed of, or not honored to admit. Quite often these are represented within one’s soul as a desire of conscience guilt or of an overwhelming desire to be frowned upon by their peers. These by long evolution, involving known and unknown inferior aspects of one’s own self, produces the ego of that individual. The repression or expression within the environment of the unconscious mind all playing an equal role. Usually this shadow ego takes on bizarre and/or unhealthy interest & pursuits in all forms and manifestations of incivility. When this persons ego is challenged; repressed thoughts, memories, feelings and ideas of the shadow rises to the surface through the crevices of the imaginative sense, and manifests itself in demented and tormented ways. The mind’s hidden part: that part of the mind which contains memories, thoughts, feelings, and ideas that the person is not usually aware of in a conscious state, manifest themselves in dreams and dissociated acts and is then absorbed into consciousness, and for some who are quite deranged, they recognize the nature of their own evil, and only would admit to backing down, recanting or even seek absolution in the face of “absolute evil”.
These people who let their shadow guide their every thought, word and deed feel the overwhelming desire and need to project their mental instability upon others. Usually this manifest itself in various unorthodox issues of morality and civility. They despise innovative idealism because it pushes their buttons: They feel it distorts and fragments the subject portrayed by any new innovative idealism simply because it threatens their own deranged mind. The Shadow grips their persona, and they are not even remotely aware of its entranced hold upon them. Their perverse impulses are all truth and righteousness for them, it is their religion. In their mind they are the Majestic Leader of “anything” & “everything” - “all seeing & all knowing”: And any other who does not believe the same as they do, & does not act or speak the same as they do needs to be “eradicated” as they are adjudged by him as being “evil“, ie. has committed some “evil act“ by word or deed. Jung knew that these “alleged evils” that those possessed with the shadow, observed in other normal people, were nothing more than their own evil impulses of their deranged mind. They arbitrate the power of the shadow with an unhinged charisma that sways a great many otherwise ordinary normal people into committing morally unthinkable, ethically unspeakable acts, words and deeds on those they project. “Whenever self-righteousness and hate combine“, Jung said, “the shadow is being projected by the hater onto the hated.”
|
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - November 27 2009 : 11:27:37 AM
It's fairly silly to value Rosser's comments much above Julia Grant's. He wasn't there, he didn't know squat about what happened, and as any number of incidents proved and remarks by veteran civilian scouts illustrated, experience in the Civil War wasn't all that helpful in the West against the Sioux, anyway. People who insist upon Sioux flanks and command structure and all that do nothing but misinform so they can pose as an authority to someone and discuss a mob action as if it were as precise as Cannae, with Indian units behaving under crisp command.
Rosser was a combat vet on a losing side in a traditional war and knew Custer at the Point, is all. Did he ever see the field? If he referenced the MaGuire map, his uselessness as even a pundit is unmatched.
It's helpful, I would contend, for people to get a sense from reading up on other incidents beyond the LBH to see the normal level of contradictory stories and confusion that attends virtually all of them. Common. What percentage above that adheres to the LBH to justify these often absurd theories of conspiracy and failure to support? Cherry picked testimony (as AZ proves above when he includes Rosser's caveats that render their initial, dubious value utter ether) atop wishful thinking for conversation topics to inflate the poster's self image from the shards of his slander against combat vets. |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - November 27 2009 : 08:07:59 AM
Rosser instantly knew, as a veteran of the Civil War, that what occurred to Custer had to be the result of portions of his command to come to his aid.
Rosser's first letter page 225 The Custer Myth
"It is not safe at this distance, and in the absence of full details,to criticize too closely the conduct of any officer of his command, but I think it quite certain that Gen. Custer had agreed with Reno upon a place of junction in case of repulse of either or both detachments, and instead of a effort being made by Reno for such a junction he took refuge in the hills, and abandoned Custer and his gallant comrades to their fate."
Rosser, Custer's friend, did not instantly know Joe as you write. " Rosser instantly knew, as a veteran of the Civil War, that what occurred to Custer had to be the result of portions of his command to come to his aid" Rosser actually stated "It is not safe at this distance, and in the absence of full details,to criticize too closely the conduct of any officer of his command,"
Then Rosser continues of what he thinks happened. It seems as if Rosser believed at the time the roles were reversed. That Custer was the advance guard and Reno had the main body with 7 companies. He states that "Gen. Custer had agreed with Reno a place of junction in case of repulse of either or both detachments". We all know that Custer had the main body and Reno had only a single battalion. There were two other independent detachments. Benteen on his recon in force blocking the south escape and the pack train with the rear guard. We know that there was no planned junction or there would be no need to for Kanipe or Martin or the messages would be to go the planned junction place.
Reno with the advanced guard had only 3 companies. It is interesting that Rosser does state he thinks there should have been a plan of what to do when repulsed. Did he point out an error on Custer's part or was there a vast conspiracy. That Benteen had to be recalled with his 3 companies and the pack train plus McDougall and the rear guard needed to ordered would indicate to me that the majority of troopers after Reno was repulsed were under no plan by their immediate commanders of a junction point.
Rosser a great civil war officer was thinking as one in my opinion in regards to a junction place. At the time of Reno being sent as the advance guard to bring the warriors to battle the size and exact location was not known.
Even if Custer had chose a junction place does anyone think it would not have been on the same side of the river as the village?
Under what military theory does the advance guard have an obligation to rescue the main body?
AZ Ranger |
| Benteen |
Posted - November 27 2009 : 07:57:27 AM
Joe,
quote:
The irony is that I think Custer would have disdained any thoughts of retreat. His goal was to break the backs of the recalcitrant Sioux. Certainly during the last minutes of his life he would have given anything to get his men out of there.
This is where Curley's comments do come in. They do explain this retrograde move, and it happened fairly quickly once the arrived at the river bank.
"unless we consider the failure of Reno and Benteen to respond to his orders an unanticipated part of the equation that spell doom for his command" Then getting trapped, obviously wasn't anticipated either in so short a space of time, or was Benteen's failure greater than we know?
quote:
Rosser instantly knew, as a veteran of the Civil War, that what occurred to Custer had to be the result of portions of his command to come to his aid.
Rosser recognized a great many things from the map that he observed a few days prior to sending that letter. But the greatest achievement was that he did recognize that some of the companies were as he stated it "trying to get back to him" or his position. And if they were trying to do that, then they had to have known where Reno's position was, and vice-versa.
quote:
I believe that is was absolutely possible and probable that a combined charge of Benteens' command and Renos' command (sans the wounded and guard for them) would have enabled Custer to charge down the valley and reign havoc on the valley floor.
I believe that had Reno been in a "brave state of mind" and had let Benteen go on with his orders from Custer, some of Custer's men would have been spared. |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - November 27 2009 : 07:19:37 AM
Custer did not have to go past where he observed the big village. That was his choice based upon his observations. I believe he did not see the full extent of the village and may have thought that the majority of warriors were engaged with Reno or helping the rest to prepare to flee.
I suspect there were many warriors that could not have been ready in a short time for Reno and they went to bring Custer to battle on the other side of the river away from the village once the got their war gear ready.
On the Custer Battlefield I do not see a retreat by the main body toward the other battalions. It does appear to me that Custer was driven back by the Indians but I don't think it was Custer retreating in an organized retreat of 5 companies.
In a good defensive position the main body with all 5 companies in mutual support of each other should have been able to hold out against the Indians. |
| joe wiggs |
Posted - November 26 2009 : 10:24:19 PM
The irony is that I think Custer would have disdained any thoughts of retreat. His goal was to break the backs of the recalcitrant Sioux. Certainly during the last minutes of his life he would have given anything to get his men out of there.
Getting trapped on ground unfavorable for a calvary charge is mystifying for a man of his Civil War astuteness unless we consider the failure of Reno and Benteen to respond to his orders an unanticipated part of the equation that spell doom for his command.
Rosser instantly knew, as a veteran of the Civil War, that what occurred to Custer had to be the result of portions of his command to come to his aid. I believe that is was absolutely possible and probable that a combined charge of Benteens' command and Renos' command (sans the wounded and guard for them) would have enabled Custer to charge down the valley and reign havoc on the valley floor. |
| Benteen |
Posted - November 26 2009 : 12:05:57 PM
Joe, yours of November 22 2009 : 12:21:37 PM
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Heavyrunner
Thinking hard about it, there must have been multiple reasons for the scattered remains of the 7th, the proposed wounding of Custer perhaps being the first.
Maybe we should start a thread on whether a different battle plan, one that did not divide the forces, could have resulted in a different outcome. Or what might have happened had Benteen been available.
I think Custer, et. al, were on their way to being whupped pretty good,regardless, that coming from a healthy respect for Indian numbers,fighting skills, riding skills, armament and their incredibly pissed off attitude. However, there might have been considerably more survivors via retreat.
The best case scenario would have been an organized retreat. More importantly, i wonder, if there were plans that were ignored or disrregared under pressure.
Entering the battle in a combined unit would have made a difference in which way I'm not sure. I'm going to sit down and completate the possibilities. Let's get this thread started folks. Thanks Heavyrunner for suggesting it!
Actually Heavyrunner’s observation about the “scattered remains of Custer’s 7th” and Joe’s observations about a “best case scenario would have been an organized retreat”; sound more and more like what Custer was trying to accomplish. From what one can gather from Curley’s observations and Rosser’s statements, as few as they were, some of those companies were trying to get back to Reno’s position. This requires a little thought that would preclude knowing ’first’ where Reno would be retreating to, and/or ‘2nd’ where Benteen was or should have been by the orders given to him. Rosser’s statement places the burden squarely upon Reno’s shoulders, not Benteens, however I’m not one to let Benteen off that hook so easily, simply because of the position Benteen thinks he found himself in when confronting Reno on the hill…’two birds of a feather…’ There were more statements that confirmed Rosser’s statements than would deny, and these came from Benteen’s men and not Reno’s, so the lion’s share here would also have to be equal in nature when it came to the blame game as far as whether Custer and or his men was trying to get back to Reno and/or Benteen.
Finally the reason for the ’blame game’ that went on right after the battle, and Rosser’s being one of the first, exemplifies the fact that, as Joe puts it, “there were plans that were ignored or disregarded under pressure”, one of which was Custer’s very last order to Benteen by Martin. Were there other’s? Of that, one can only state this at this time. If there were orders to Reno to expedite as quickly as possible any junction with Custer downriver, he clearly did not do it. And the last consideration of this would be? If he could not do it, then what should he have done? At no time was Reno in any danger on the bluffs, at no time, until the Indians “came back”. He should have told Benteen to continue, not ’stop’ and ’help’ him, which he clearly did not need at that time any ’help’ whatsoever. And if he did, the pack train and it’s detail were only minutes away, not the hour or two some try to tell us that it was. And there would have been ample help there to assist him, and he could have easily, had he been of a brave state of mind, assisted in extracting some of Custer’s men to safety by sending Benteen and his men on.
|
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - November 26 2009 : 10:28:35 AM
quote:
"but I feel my plan must have been successful had it been carried out
You would have to argue that it was not Terry's intent to have his orders carried out. You are so far off from my position that I am not sure you understand my point. Custer could deviate at any time he chose and so can other officers. If an officer decides his personal observations have sufficient cause to change the plan they can do it but they must be successful. Notice Terry's uses the word successful.
My position is that a problem developed by being discovered after "The proposed route was not taken but as soon as the trail was struck it was followed" which Terry points out.
Terry accepted responsibility since Custer was dead and it would serve no purpose. Custer could have defended himself for the choices he made but it left the door open when he followed the trail. I don't blame him but it was not the only alternative and was his choice. I see the logic in what he did just not the success.
If success is not a factor in the determination of following orders then the officers I have spoken with our incorrect in their opinions.
Do you think Terry would have written the same thing if Custer succeeded. I think not. I think he would have pointed the leeway that he gave Custer in the order to succeed in the mission.
AZ Ranger
So Joe here is my post and let's look at yours following it.
joe wiggs Posted - November 22 2009 : 5:50:56 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
az, we all possess at least one dictionary in our homes. Please cease ans desist your juvenile and unnecssary habit of giving definitions. Again, when are you going to act like a 61 year old adult and post credible information on this forum?
joe wiggs Posted - November 24 2009 : 9:56:58 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How can you be taken seriously. We are dealing with issue of critical importance regarding the battle. Your teen-age insistence on personalizing every comment is boorish.
If you can't keep up with the big boys, jump off the bus. BUS B-U-S!
joe wiggs Posted - Yesterday : 2:37:57 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have confirmed your inability to post with dignity and decorum. From this point I will respond only adult posts. My time is too important and valuable to waste with children.
So Joe what exactly is your point again?
AZ Ranger |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - November 26 2009 : 10:22:46 AM
Are you saying you are not posting any more? |
| joe wiggs |
Posted - November 25 2009 : 2:37:57 PM
You have confirmed your inability to post with dignity and decorum. From this point I will respond only adult posts. My time is too important and valuable to waste with children. |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - November 25 2009 : 08:30:30 AM
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
How can you be taken seriously. We are dealing with issue of critical importance regarding the battle. Your teen-age insistence on personalizing every comment is boorish.
If you can't keep up with the big boys, jump off the bus. BUS B-U-S!
Your teen-age insistence on personalizing every comment is boorish.
If you can't keep up with the big boys, jump off the bus. BUS B-U-S!
Benteen, methinks you hit a sore spot. az
No buses here - 3 horses, 3 4WD trucks, 1 quad, 2 boats, personal watercraft
You can have the bus Joe - the short yellow one
AZ Ranger |
| joe wiggs |
Posted - November 24 2009 : 9:56:58 PM
How can you be taken seriously. We are dealing with issue of critical importance regarding the battle. Your teen-age insistence on personalizing every comment is boorish.
If you can't keep up with the big boys, jump off the bus. BUS B-U-S! |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - November 22 2009 : 8:41:22 PM
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
az, we all possess at least one dictionary in our homes. Please cease ans desist your juvenile and unnecssary habit of giving definitions. Again, when are you going to act like a 61 year old adult and post credible information on this forum?
Please use your dictionary to look up
ans
unnecssary
|
| joe wiggs |
Posted - November 22 2009 : 5:50:56 PM
az, we all possess at least one dictionary in our homes. Please cease ans desist your juvenile and unnecssary habit of giving definitions. Again, when are you going to act like a 61 year old adult and post credible information on this forum? |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - November 22 2009 : 3:01:33 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
Did he say anything about Custer disobeying the intent of his orders? NOPE, not one word.
"but I feel my plan must have been successful had it been carried out
You would have to argue that it was not Terry's intent to have his orders carried out. You are so far off from my position that I am not sure you understand my point. Custer could deviate at any time he chose and so can other officers. If an officer decides his personal observations have sufficient cause to change the plan they can do it but they must be successful. Notice Terry's uses the word successful.
My position is that a problem developed by being discovered after "The proposed route was not taken but as soon as the trail was struck it was followed" which Terry points out.
Terry accepted responsibility since Custer was dead and it would serve no purpose. Custer could have defended himself for the choices he made but it left the door open when he followed the trail. I don't blame him but it was not the only alternative and was his choice. I see the logic in what he did just not the success.
If success is not a factor in the determination of following orders then the officers I have spoken with our incorrect in their opinions.
Do you think Terry would have written the same thing if Custer succeeded. I think not. I think he would have pointed the leeway that he gave Custer in the order to succeed in the mission.
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
