| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - August 27 2005 : 1:42:22 PM
|
It's Reconnaissance-in-Force, not surveillance. Surveillance is static, you see. Reconnaissance-in-Force is pretty self descriptive, I'd think, but in any case it was no product of the 19th century; been going on forever. Further, although the term isn't used, by telling Benteen to scout and attack what, if anything, he found along the way, that pretty much suggests Custer's wishes. No mystery in that. If there has to be a mystery it's why Custer was unable to clearly state this without the need to send further couriers. Or, most odd, why scouts couldn't have accomplished everything faster. Custer was not at all forced into that tactic.
Custer didn't utter memorial words, however appropriate that would be. He uttered memorable words. Or, so we're told. Acts weren't being 'portrayed.' They were being done for real displayed before him.
Again. If hostages were the sure thing, why was Custer worried enough at the Wa****a to have to utilize Ben Arnold's fake? He had hostages. Do you think Gall - who'd lost wife and children - would be slowed down for a second because Custer had some Cheyenne hostages? If ALL the women and children were heading north, then who was, according to some stories, taking down the lodges and packing up? That's a big job. It's about two miles from Sharpshooter to the center of the village through a lot of dust. How would you distinguish gender and age, much less intent, through all that? People were running to get their horses, children, to alert friends, to get ready.
Of what benefit is it for the civvies to leave their worldly goods and huddle in plain sight on foot a short distance away while cavalry torches your village? If Custer burned the village and ran off the horses, wouldn't the tribes HAVE to return to the rez? This hostage theory keeps getting repeated as if it were fact, or made total sense. It could be true, but the evidence seems iffy, and other explanations exist, simpler and that don't violate what's known. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
  |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - August 27 2005 : 3:16:46 PM
|
The exact opposite. At the Crow's Nest they advanced on the village because Custer thought they'd been seen and the village would be alerted and run. He certainly was not under the impression he was approaching a napping village.
Once Custer was within sight of the village then the Village that is the women,children,old and impedimenta and probably a fair slice of the pony herd were his for the taking.The question is would the warriors have fled as well.I don't think so.I dont think breaking up into small groups and trying to out run Custer was an option.
Surveillance is static,
Depends on whether the object under surveillance was stationery or moving would you not think DC? And It's Reconnaissance-in-Force, not surveillance.Reconnaissance means you are looking for something.Surveillance is the study of what you have found.So I think Joe is right. |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - August 27 2005 : 8:34:27 PM
|
D.c.,if you disagree with an individuals thread, post the rationale for your disagreement and be done with it. If your information is credible you may alter the perceptions of others as a result of substantial evidence. Veiled innuendos designed to ridicule a perspective by implying an inability to use words are patently obvious in its intent. It also exemplifies substantial immaturity.
I chose the definition "memorial" to describe Custer's hopelessly erroneous statement because that sad, and inappropriate remark "serves to help people remember" that history may hold people of note accountable for what they say at a critical point in time. Your preference of "memorable" is understandable and, I have no problem with your usage of it. You realize,of course, that your thoughts are not mine.
Contrary to your personal position,there is nothing "static" about surveying aboriginals whom some classified as the "greatest light Calvary" the world has ever known. You follow them,catch up to them, gather intelligence, then you act upon that intelligence at an appropriate point in time; much of what Custer did. Thus, my usage of my term is valid.
Last but certainly not least,recent events wherein personal assaults resulted in the expulsion of one of our valued members have taught us all a viable lesson, has it not? Every member of this board is well acquainted with your opinion of me;liar, idiot, and pretender. The problem is, that over a year later, we are all tired of you voicing this tired opinion or wasting valuable time hinting at it. Impress new members with your vast intelligence, not your propensity to ridicule others. You will be perceived all the better for it. |
Edited by - joseph wiggs on August 27 2005 8:40:47 PM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - August 29 2005 : 1:43:58 PM
|
Wild,
Even Wiggs doesn't agree with you. He said: "I believe Custer's three prong movement, which did,eventually, evolved into an attack, was in the beginning a Surveillance-in-Force. A military tactic of the nineteenth century utilized to gather intelligence while affording minimal protection for each unit. A tactic used when the disposition and exact location of the enemy(read INDIANS HERE)in unknown." See? The exact opposite of what you claim for him. In any event, I've never heard of a Surveillance in Force, much less as a well known miliary term of the 19th century. But then, I've never heard that Ireland was the academic backbone of Africa (where again?), or that selling gas and landing rights was "wetnursing." Perhaps someone can provide proof for either, like the ones who claimed it?
Wiggs,
What in the world is "memorial" about "Hurrah, boys, we've caught them napping!" I have no preference, but after years of reading your madeup resume and hearing about your neighborhood children and your refusal to admit you lied about your Benteen comments, it's always a safe bet you screwed up. Plus, all the times you clearly posted the exact opposite of what you thought you'd said.
Show me an example of where Surveillance in Force is a common military tactic. A few mentions. Google it. Such a common phrase as you contend would show up lots of times. It's just that Reconnaissance in Force comes up a lot, and seems to mean what you thought Surveillance in Force meant.
You keep speaking as if everyone was in agreement with you, Wiggs. If anything, recent events, of which I was unaware till this past weekend, suggest the opposite, although I wouldn't particularly care. There are no posts of mine that could not be read aloud to clergy or grandchild, and that's not the case with some.
The evidence - and there is a lot - for my opinion of you is still up on this message board. If you continue to pose as what you are not, if you denigrate dead soldiers and then lie about it, if you post things not your own as if they were, if you distort quotes to fit your current theories, nothing much will change. That's all up to you. Quite simple, really. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - August 29 2005 : 3:50:44 PM
|
If I remember correctly someone said, "No firing squad"! I guess that doesn't mean for everyone here, huh...?
Terri ~ "I've been pondering what Custer could have done differently and it all is beginning to come back to Terry's initial plans for the campagin and the lack of communication with Crook, and Gibbons."...."I still don't understand the lack of communication between Crook, Terry and Gibbons. Doesn't make sense. But let me ask you this, put yourself in Custer's place. Boyer and your scouts have basically informed you that if you send the 7th against these hostiles, you won't come out of it alive. What do you do? Do you sacrifice your command? Do you send gallopers to Gibbons? He was only 24 hrs away. Do you attack without dividing your command? I mean what options under the circumstances could one take?"
Then we have the obtuse way of answering a question with a question: "But if Terry and Custer and Crook had easy communication, what were they doing there?"
No I think the real question should be: If Custer wanted easy communication, what was he doing there?! If this is answered then we can find out all about the communications problem. |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - August 29 2005 : 4:08:04 PM
|
Even Wiggs doesn't agree with you.
I was wondering why he did not acknowledge my "support".Ya can't win em all but at least your definition Surveillance is static was wrong. |
Edited by - wILD I on August 29 2005 4:09:28 PM |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - August 29 2005 : 5:59:39 PM
|
| Wild, truly think you for your support. It is, as always, appreciated. My lack of acknowledgment was an unfortunate oversight. D.c., I have been perusing other web sites the last few weeks and have been fascinated by the fact that not one of them, other then our own AAO's board, possess a pompous, effeminate, blowhard baboon like you. Why don't you apply for the position? You can use me for a reference. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - August 29 2005 : 6:55:55 PM
|
Don't feel bad, Wild, it's difficult to know what Wiggs is saying, half the time. The other half, he doesn't know.
Actually, Wiggs, I'm not the one making up terms, declaring them known terms of a certain time period, and unable to offer any evidence for the contention. I've not pretended to what I am not. That would be you.
I don't get the reference to a firing squad, Benteen. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - August 29 2005 : 7:14:34 PM
|
[quote]Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Wild,
What in the world is "memorial" about "Hurrah, boys, we've caught them napping!" I have no preference, but after years of reading your madeup resume and hearing about your neighborhood children and your refusal to admit you lied about your Benteen comments, it's always a safe bet you screwed up. Plus, all the times you clearly posted the exact opposite of what you thought you'd said.
The utilization of a statement, perspective, or action that is blantenly inappropriate may (under specific circumstances)become legendary as an example of what not to do. Looking down upon a massive village of hostile warriors and shouting, "We caught them napping" may seem, to some, bizarre at best, memorial at worst.
By the way, the kids said to tell you Hi!
|
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - August 29 2005 : 8:49:21 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
I don't get the reference to a firing squad, Benteen.
There is a great deal that you don't "get" D.c., so allow me to assist you. With the exception of you, every member of this forum would prefer to stick to issues and not be subjected to salvos of crap. You make others uncomfortable because you seem to be obsessed with uttering questionable remarks towards others that have absolutely nothing to do with anything.
An analysis of your posts reveal that you are a walking embodiment of over compensation. I don't mean to infer that there is something wrong with that although one may shudder to think which physical abnormality you are compensating for; your height?.
For those who think D.c. is being "cruel" to me, I can assure you that it is not so. We actually like each other very much. All of this back and forth banter is merely two chums having a lark. May I end this post by saying that the last year with D.c. has been a period of wonder and bliss. Which reminds me D.c., if ignorance is bliss, I'll bet you live so blissfully. |
Edited by - joseph wiggs on August 29 2005 8:58:39 PM |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - August 30 2005 : 2:20:47 PM
|
Wild, truly think you for your support. It is, as always, appreciated.
Only for the debating point Joe not the personal stuff. |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - August 30 2005 : 5:30:52 PM
|
| Quite correct Wild,debating issues only. This is certainly my preference and, will continue to be so. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Let's engage a senario
