Author |
Topic |
Dark Horse
Private
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2006 : 08:43:45 AM
|
I believe Terri is basically correct. Custer was defeated because he under estimated the native American Indian. He was warned of the hugh gathering of Indians that lay ahead and dispite this, decided to split his command. What Custer ran into that day was on an although different scale from anything he had seen before. However a good commander will always make allowances which Custer did not do. Another example of Custers lack of responsibility and leadership qualities was once on the bluffs and seeing for himself what lay ahead , seeing that Reno was engaged, he simply sent a message to Benteen (Big Village, a slight under-estimation).Custer hadnt the slightest idea how far away Benteen's troops were and he dashed head long into battle. If he had realised just how far behind Benteen was he may had thought twice. |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2006 : 09:50:46 AM
|
quote: I believe Terri is basically correct.
OK point by point
quote: if he gave weight to his scouts warnings, he chose not to alter his tactics
Custer argued with some of the scouts and wanted to wait. Those scouts told him that they believed the village would break up and leave. Custer changed his tactics partially based upon these scout's warnings.
quote: he was out numbered due to splitting his force
Custer was outnumbered without splitting his Regiment not due to splitting his force.
quote: out gunned by Native American firepower.
Vern Humphrey's position is that it was the lack of getting more than 3 companies engaged at any one. I probably didn't state it exactly as he does but I believe it to be a valid point. That was Custer's fault in my opinion.
quote: he was out fought by a determined enemy
On this point everyone has to agree more or less. It states the Indians won the battle at LSH. This is the obvious and no one has argued that Custer won. If this is what you mean by that "Terri is basically correct" that the Indians won and Custer lost at LSH then I would agree.
I just basically happen to disagree with all the other points I listed above and the some of the points that started this thread by Terri.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 11 2006 : 1:13:30 PM
|
Custer was a willing dupe for Terry. Terry has no experience of Indian fighting.If he can get Custer on the campaign he has nothing to lose and everything to gain.If it goes well he can share in the reflected glory if not then it can be put down to the glory hunter Custer.Thus his oh so gallant letter stating that Custer's services would be of great value. Further reading between the lines it is obvious that Custer's force is to be the main strike force.This suits Terry .He even offers Custer the 2nd calvary and Gatling detachment.This would have left Terry with a handful of infantry.Just enough to escort him up the LBH to congratulate Custer on a job well done or as turned out as a burial detail. |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 11 2006 : 2:22:05 PM
|
Terry was no poseur or fraud, and didn't view Custer as his dupe or ticket to fame. He was already up where Custer lusted to be. He cheerfully admitted in writing he had no such experience and wanted Custer because of it. He treated everyone decently. What controversy arose was due to the writings of his brother-in-law (?) (Major Hughes? Parker?), who defended him - possibly lied to do so - when Terry came under attack.
Terry made it into Grant's memoirs for his on field combat services during the CW, so he was no desk jockey but a good officer. He was well regarded and genuinely liked by virtually everyone. It's a little sleazy to imply otherwise, one of the things so common in Custerland. |
Dark Cloud copyright RL MacLeod darkcloud@darkendeavors.com www.darkendeavors.com www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
terri
Private
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 11 2006 : 9:15:14 PM
|
AZ Ranger - OK point by point -
Terri - I CAN'T HELP BUT OFFER SOME RESPONSE TO YOUR ASSERATIONS.
quote: if he gave weight to his scouts warnings, he chose not to alter his tactics
Custer argued with some of the scouts and wanted to wait. Those scouts told him that they believed the village would break up and leave. Custer changed his tactics partially based upon these scout's warnings.
Boyer specifically told him that if they attacked they would be killed. The scouts on the crows nest saw swarms of horses and likened them to worms on the prairie; Custer did not or could not see anything. Several scouts painted and sang their death song which Custer overhead and reportedly did not care for. As for the notion that the village would flee, it was, prior to LBH a standard US army POV regarding Native American behavior when confronted. I don't have the time to list all souces for this but they are out there.
Additionally, how did Custer change his tactics when he did not so much as share his battle plan with his officers(that we know of)? And my goodness why send Benteen further south away from Reno's initial attack when he knew or had a good idea of enemy strength? Custer planned to attack, that much we know due to Reno's orders and his asseration that he would back Reno up. Archaeology has determined, thanks to the 1984 grass fire, that Custer, once he approached the village, did not flee or go to a defensive position but did in fact go back up the hill (Which hill I can't remember) and set up skirmish lines - thus still on attack thereby NOT changing any tactic that I'm aware of prior to Reno's orders. Still, where was Benteen? Why didn't Custer wait for Benteen and those packs?
quote: he was out numbered due to splitting his force
Custer was outnumbered without splitting his Regiment not due to splitting his force.
Company, Regiment, force - Custer split his fighting power by sending Benteen south-with the packs I might add; he ordered Reno to attack from the bottom of the village, and he went further north to attack. And this was when he had knowledge of enemy strength. Furthermore, it's my understanding Custer further split his group of men as they approached their target of attack.
However the question I'm really asking is why did he do this in the first place? Why,in the face of enemy strength, did he split his command-force-company-regiment(whatever the proper term)? Logic says if you are out numbered 3 to one, then it makes no sense whatsoever to further deplet your strength thereby making the odds outrageously in the enemy's favor. This was wrong on sooooooo many levels. BTW, Semper Fi (My kid is a Navy Corpsman with the 3rd Marines)
quote: out gunned by Native American firepower.
YES, YES AND YES AGAIN. The man was out gunned by Native American firepower. This has been proven by the same Archaeological team who excavated LBH after 1984. They did a documentary on it which aired not one week ago on the Discovery Times network. The US Cav had the better arms, but their weapons against the Henry repeater were not a great deal of help. An Indian could shoot numerous bullets to a trooper's one.
quote: he was out fought by a determined enemy
On this point everyone has to agree more or less.
MORE OR LESS!! Oh come on now. When in the history of any tribe of Native Americans have they so united and so engaged a battle? (Maybe the Seminols in Florida.) These Plains Indians were fighting for their very existence. They realized the rammifacations of Mannifest Destiny and what it's success meant to their homes and families. The US military failed to take that into any account. And we more or less agree?
I just basically happen to disagree with all the other points I listed above and the some of the points that started this thread by Terri.
Fair enough, and I do appreciate your views and hope to continue learning about LBH and the battle. Gosh, I don't possess a military background like some here, and I do respect those who have served and engage this process from a military frame of reference. I also appreciate the learned on this site who have studied this topic for years and those who have published books and articles on the subject. Yet, as I've previously stated: We can delve into these deep, intellectual musings of why and how till doom cracks. When you chase a long complicated theory around and around, most times it arrives right back where it started; the simple, outmoded, nerdy solution. That's my argument right or wrong. [/quote] |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 11 2006 : 10:14:55 PM
|
How in the world can you quantify the enthusiasm of various tribes in battle? Metacom and Wamsutta and those guys came darn close to wiping out New England, the Miamis wiped out St. Claire, nobody fought harder than the Apache or, man for man, as effectively. Twenty Apache led by a seventy year old on foot kept the Army scared to death for years.
The Sioux amd all the tribes were not fighting for their very existence; they were fighting to continue a patriarchal warrior society on land they could no longer defend or control. By the standards of their civilization, they had lost to the stronger tribe and normally would have to deal with it. gemerally by absorption into the winners households as slaves. Only under written law did they have some indiginous rights and protections, however illegally enforced and subjectively inflicted. Guilt wasn't a big part of their mental landscape, but they sure knew how to play the Americans'. With reason, but still.
What is the "long complicated theory" at issue here? |
Dark Cloud copyright RL MacLeod darkcloud@darkendeavors.com www.darkendeavors.com www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 11 2006 : 11:31:29 PM
|
Terri
I believe a scouts role is to supply details about the best routes to travel and location of the enemy. They can provide other information if they like or are asked but the ultimate decision is up to the officer in charge. If all the scouts said the same thing then you would be correct that he ignored his scouts warnings. They didn't though. If any of the scouts thought that they could detour Custer from getting into a fight they were sadly mistaken. Terry let Custer go knowing full well he would bring the Indians to battle if at all possible.
quote: Additionally, how did Custer change his tactics
Attacking at noon is a different tactic than in the dark of the night or early morning.
quote: As for the notion that the village would flee, it was, prior to LBH a standard US army POV regarding Native American behavior when confronted. I don't have the time to list all sources for this but they are out there.
Here is one of my previous posts regarding scouts. I agree that the army thought the Indians would run in most cases. My point was some scouts advised on June 25th 1876 that the Village would pack up and leave because they were discovered.
quote: Such as White Man Runs Him - "If we had not seen the two Sioux scouts earlier in the morning, I would have advised Custer to hide at this point all day, and then surprise the camp at night, but since since these scouts had seen his soldiers it was no use to wait longer. I was one of the oldest of the scouts and did most of the advance scouting."
.... "Custer said :"This camp has not seen our army, none of their scouts have seen us." Big Belly replied: "You say we have not been seen. These Sioux we have seen at the foot of the hill, two going one way, and four the other, are good scouts, they have seen the smoke of our camp." Custer said speaking angrily: "I say again we have not been seen. That camp has not seen us, I am going ahead to carry out what I think. I want to wait until it is dark and then , we will march, we will place our army around the Sioux camp." Big Belly replied: " That plan is bad, it should not be carried out." Custer said: "I want to wait until it is dark and then go ahead with my plan".
The Crow scouts insisted that the Dakota scouts had already seen the army and would report its coming and that they would attack Custer's army. They wanted him to attack at once, that day and capture the horses of the Dakotas and leave them unable to move rapidly. Custer replied: " Yes, it shall be as you say."
This was taken from Graham. If true, then maybe Custer should have stuck with his plan and not listen to his scouts.
quote: Archaeology has determined, thanks to the 1984 grass fire, that Custer, once he approached the village, did not flee or go to a defensive position but did in fact go back up the hill (Which hill I can't remember) and set up skirmish lines - thus still on attack thereby NOT changing any tactic that I'm aware of prior to Reno's orders. Still, where was Benteen? Why didn't Custer wait for Benteen and those packs?
Some of us have been looking at a new book out Where Custer Fell. I am not sure after looking at the photos one would draw the same conclusions. It looks like to me after MTC that near the end there was a "fleeing" to LSH and the troopers were killed along the way and maybe running back on foot.
quote: However the question I'm really asking is why did he do this in the first place? Why,in the face of enemy strength, did he split his command-force-company-regiment(whatever the proper term)? Logic says if you are out numbered 3 to one, then it makes no sense whatsoever to further deplet your strength thereby making the odds outrageously in the enemy's favor. This was wrong on sooooooo many levels. BTW, Semper Fi (My kid is a Navy Corpsman with the 3rd Marines)
I will defer to others on Custer's choice of military tactics but the one employed by Custer was a common tactic. I have visions of pincer movements and envelopments both single and double. Splitting the Regiment doesn't give you any less troopers unless you fail to get them engaged in the battle.
quote: YES, YES AND YES AGAIN. The man was out gunned by Native American firepower. This has been proven by the same Archaeological team who excavated LBH after 1984. They did a documentary on it which aired not one week ago on the Discovery Times network. The US Cav had the better arms, but their weapons against the Henry repeater were not a great deal of help. An Indian could shoot numerous bullets to a trooper's one.
Out-gunned means something different to me than just the cyclic rate of the firearm. On a sustained rate of fire the Springfield is not as bad off as some say when compared with the Henry. Once you exceed the capacity of the Henry reloading takes a longer time. The ballistics of the the Henry are pathetic compared to the Springfield. There were enough expended Springfield cartridges found to indicate the troopers were not all killed before getting off many shots. Training probably played a bigger role than the difference between a Springfield and a Henry. Out-numbered to me was more important than any weapon employed by either side. Especially when all the troopers are not engaged in the battle at the same time.
quote: quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- he was out fought by a determined enemy --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MORE OR LESS!! Oh come on now.
When you have been on this board just a little longer you will understand why I said that. Nothing is an absolute here. Someone finds a way to bring about a view point that I never thought of or considered. For example you used the word determined yet they left Reno and Benteen. Did they lose their determination after Custer? So I stand by the more or less which is an expression, even if I think everyone would agree I would not be so bold as to speak for everyone.
quote: These Plains Indians were fighting for their very existence. They realized the rammifacations of Mannifest Destiny and what it's success meant to their homes and families. The US military failed to take that into any account. And we more or less agree?
I believe you are giving them more credit about thinking this through than they did during and after the battle. Why did they quit and leave Reno and Benteen on the hill. They had enough fighting for the day. Why not wipe out Terry when he showed up. Manifest Destiny wasn't going to end because Custer's 5 Companies were wiped out. In fact one could argue that what they did at LBH lead to the assurance of Manifest Destiny coming about quicker more or less.
Semper Fi to your son. I appreciated the Corpsman I met in Viet Nam and the job they do. I will enjoy learning right along with you.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
terri
Private
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 12 2006 : 10:50:25 AM
|
quote: Originally posted by AZ Ranger
Terri
I believe a scouts role is to supply details about the best routes to travel and location of the enemy. They can provide other information if they like or are asked but the ultimate decision is up to the officer in charge. If all the scouts said the same thing then you would be correct that he ignored his scouts warnings. They didn't though. If any of the scouts thought that they could detour Custer from getting into a fight they were sadly mistaken. Terry let Custer go knowing full well he would bring the Indians to battle if at all possible.
quote: Additionally, how did Custer change his tactics
Attacking at noon is a different tactic than in the dark of the night or early morning.
quote: As for the notion that the village would flee, it was, prior to LBH a standard US army POV regarding Native American behavior when confronted. I don't have the time to list all sources for this but they are out there.
Here is one of my previous posts regarding scouts. I agree that the army thought the Indians would run in most cases. My point was some scouts advised on June 25th 1876 that the Village would pack up and leave because they were discovered.
quote: Such as White Man Runs Him - "If we had not seen the two Sioux scouts earlier in the morning, I would have advised Custer to hide at this point all day, and then surprise the camp at night, but since since these scouts had seen his soldiers it was no use to wait longer. I was one of the oldest of the scouts and did most of the advance scouting."
.... "Custer said :"This camp has not seen our army, none of their scouts have seen us." Big Belly replied: "You say we have not been seen. These Sioux we have seen at the foot of the hill, two going one way, and four the other, are good scouts, they have seen the smoke of our camp." Custer said speaking angrily: "I say again we have not been seen. That camp has not seen us, I am going ahead to carry out what I think. I want to wait until it is dark and then , we will march, we will place our army around the Sioux camp." Big Belly replied: " That plan is bad, it should not be carried out." Custer said: "I want to wait until it is dark and then go ahead with my plan".
The Crow scouts insisted that the Dakota scouts had already seen the army and would report its coming and that they would attack Custer's army. They wanted him to attack at once, that day and capture the horses of the Dakotas and leave them unable to move rapidly. Custer replied: " Yes, it shall be as you say."
This was taken from Graham. If true, then maybe Custer should have stuck with his plan and not listen to his scouts.
quote: Archaeology has determined, thanks to the 1984 grass fire, that Custer, once he approached the village, did not flee or go to a defensive position but did in fact go back up the hill (Which hill I can't remember) and set up skirmish lines - thus still on attack thereby NOT changing any tactic that I'm aware of prior to Reno's orders. Still, where was Benteen? Why didn't Custer wait for Benteen and those packs?
Some of us have been looking at a new book out Where Custer Fell. I am not sure after looking at the photos one would draw the same conclusions. It looks like to me after MTC that near the end there was a "fleeing" to LSH and the troopers were killed along the way and maybe running back on foot.
quote: However the question I'm really asking is why did he do this in the first place? Why,in the face of enemy strength, did he split his command-force-company-regiment(whatever the proper term)? Logic says if you are out numbered 3 to one, then it makes no sense whatsoever to further deplet your strength thereby making the odds outrageously in the enemy's favor. This was wrong on sooooooo many levels. BTW, Semper Fi (My kid is a Navy Corpsman with the 3rd Marines)
I will defer to others on Custer's choice of military tactics but the one employed by Custer was a common tactic. I have visions of pincer movements and envelopments both single and double. Splitting the Regiment doesn't give you any less troopers unless you fail to get them engaged in the battle.
quote: YES, YES AND YES AGAIN. The man was out gunned by Native American firepower. This has been proven by the same Archaeological team who excavated LBH after 1984. They did a documentary on it which aired not one week ago on the Discovery Times network. The US Cav had the better arms, but their weapons against the Henry repeater were not a great deal of help. An Indian could shoot numerous bullets to a trooper's one.
Out-gunned means something different to me than just the cyclic rate of the firearm. On a sustained rate of fire the Springfield is not as bad off as some say when compared with the Henry. Once you exceed the capacity of the Henry reloading takes a longer time. The ballistics of the the Henry are pathetic compared to the Springfield. There were enough expended Springfield cartridges found to indicate the troopers were not all killed before getting off many shots. Training probably played a bigger role than the difference between a Springfield and a Henry. Out-numbered to me was more important than any weapon employed by either side. Especially when all the troopers are not engaged in the battle at the same time.
quote: quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- he was out fought by a determined enemy --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MORE OR LESS!! Oh come on now.
When you have been on this board just a little longer you will understand why I said that. Nothing is an absolute here. Someone finds a way to bring about a view point that I never thought of or considered. For example you used the word determined yet they left Reno and Benteen. Did they lose their determination after Custer? So I stand by the more or less which is an expression, even if I think everyone would agree I would not be so bold as to speak for everyone.
quote: These Plains Indians were fighting for their very existence. They realized the rammifacations of Mannifest Destiny and what it's success meant to their homes and families. The US military failed to take that into any account. And we more or less agree?
I believe you are giving them more credit about thinking this through than they did during and after the battle. Why did they quit and leave Reno and Benteen on the hill. They had enough fighting for the day. Why not wipe out Terry when he showed up. Manifest Destiny wasn't going to end because Custer's 5 Companies were wiped out. In fact one could argue that what they did at LBH lead to the assurance of Manifest Destiny coming about quicker more or less.
Semper Fi to your son. I appreciated the Corpsman I met in Viet Nam and the job they do. I will enjoy learning right along with you.
Great food for thought. I appreciate it and the kind words for my son, Jason. I'll be looking for the book, Where Custer Fell. Seems I get get enough reading regarding LBH. Sort of like an addiction. |
|
|
terri
Private
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 12 2006 : 10:58:49 AM
|
quote: Originally posted by Dark Cloud
How in the world can you quantify the enthusiasm of various tribes in battle? Metacom and Wamsutta and those guys came darn close to wiping out New England, the Miamis wiped out St. Claire, nobody fought harder than the Apache or, man for man, as effectively. Twenty Apache led by a seventy year old on foot kept the Army scared to death for years.
The Sioux amd all the tribes were not fighting for their very existence; they were fighting to continue a patriarchal warrior society on land they could no longer defend or control. By the standards of their civilization, they had lost to the stronger tribe and normally would have to deal with it. gemerally by absorption into the winners households as slaves. Only under written law did they have some indiginous rights and protections, however illegally enforced and subjectively inflicted. Guilt wasn't a big part of their mental landscape, but they sure knew how to play the Americans'. With reason, but still.
I guess I'm looking at it through "their eyes". In every documentary or POV book I've read, the distinct impression is that these people felt they were fighting for their way of life. And if that is the case, if they truly believed that, then their actions in 1876 make overwhelming sense.
Now, I've heard other auguments, Louis Lamour for instance made the comment that the Sioux pushed out the Pawnee and took over the Black Hills; so who in the world do we give the Black Hills too? Not the Sioux. And that is a terrific argument.
It was survival of the toughest. Perhaps my own bias touched my remarks - to some extent, I find myself on the Native American side of this conflict and probably because I trace my ancestry back to the Cherokee and the Seven Civilized Tribes. Thanks for the response. |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 12 2006 : 11:13:52 AM
|
Terry was no poseur or fraud, and didn't view Custer as his dupe or ticket to fame. Custer in his letter to the Adj General requesting reinstatement makes a reference to himself as commander of the expedition.Now not only does Terry ask for his services but puts practically the entire force at his disposal.This and his failure to accompany the main strike force is tantamount to abdication of his responsibility as force commander. In all organisations there is the offical system and the unoffical system.As you have often pointed out here it was the unoffical family line of command which opperated in the 7th.Terry's offical line was that Custer and Gibbon should maneuvre in concert so as to arrive on the LBH together.But unoffically it was accepted that Custer would strike the blow.In common or garden language Terry would hold Custer's coat while he got stuck in. Grant said of Terry "He is a man who makes friends of those under him by his consideration of their wants and their dues"I suppose this characteristic led to the unfortunate marrage of Custer's wants and his needs.
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 12 2006 : 2:23:52 PM
|
You understand that Custer and not Terry was the original commander of all forces not under Crook? Terry only became commander as part of the deal that allowed Custer to return to his regiment at all, and that's why Custer thought of himself as commander: he probably still was at the time of the letter. Terry was in an awkward position, and he handled it well. What in God's name would benefit anyone for Terry to go with Custer? The whole expedition was top heavy with brass, many of whom had commanded units bigger than Terry's combined command, and the brevet rank and seniority issues were bound to rub wrong.
Nothing Custer did was 'wrong' till MTC. Till then, a lot of 50-50 calls that would have looked like genius in slightly different circumstances. I still think the need to 'prove' guilt or find truth at the LBH is a more interestesting study than the battle itself. |
Dark Cloud copyright RL MacLeod darkcloud@darkendeavors.com www.darkendeavors.com www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 13 2006 : 10:07:29 AM
|
You understand that Custer and not Terry was the original commander of all forces not under Crook? I have to admit that a little revision of the period was required but instead of changing my opinion it has reinforced it.
Bear with me-------Over the last few days it has come to light that an airliner of one of our airlines was nearly involved in a fatal crash during its approach to Rome airport.It had run into a storm and heavy turbulence.The captain became disorientated and failed to heed the warnings in the cockpit and the promptings of his copilot.The aircraft was flying into the ground.The copilot took over and managed to save the plane.In the investigation which followed it was found that the pilot had just recently suffered a great personal loss.A young child of his had died tragically and instead of taking compassionate leave he had returned to work immediatly.The unfortunate man was in turmoil when called on to deal with a difficult situation and his mind just could not cope. Meanwhile back in Washington our hero has publically hung himself.He is a laughting stock and has been treated in the most appaling humilating manner.His evidence to the committee dealing with the charges against Belknap has been found to be no more that vicious gossip except in the case of one piece of evidence dealing with what appeared to be a dodgy delivery of corn. Terry in the mean time finds himself in the s***.His list of alternate commanders has been rejected and he has been ordered to command the column himself.You can still hear his expletives echo down the years.But he has friends in Washington and he coaches Custer with his begging letter. The humilated Custer is relieved to be out of Washington and back with his regiment.And now for the last cut which is delivered by his mentor and savior Terry and proves to be the deepest.Bye the Bye says Terry that dodgy delivery of corn which you thought was ordered by Belknap was in fact ordered by me.You can hear Custer's silent scream. Fastforward to the Indian trail and Custer can't wait to follow it."To hell with Washington and nice General Terry I'll show those bastards."His mental state must have been one of turmoil.Not the right frame of mind to face the unexpected with. It is said that the battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eaton.Well the battle of the LBH was lost in the waiting rooms of the White House.
I still think the need to 'prove' guilt or find truth at the LBH is a more interestesting study than the battle itself. The problem is that in this tragedy fact is stranger than fiction.Shakespheare could not have written better. |
|
|
terri
Private
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 13 2006 : 10:49:42 AM
|
quote:
The problem is that in this tragedy fact is stranger than fiction.Shakespheare could not have written better.
How about Henry V? |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 13 2006 : 12:09:26 PM
|
You are of course right Terri.You can't beat a classical education. Agincourt the same odds but this time victory is with the outnumbered. |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 14 2006 : 09:29:39 AM
|
Hi Terri
quote: Rightous anger. Hard fuel to beat when its channeled correctly. In June 1876, the Plains Indians channeled it correctly.
I am not sure being angry helps to win a battle. I would rather have fully trained and disciplined troopers than untrained angry ones. The best individuals to be in a combat situation with are calm and maintain control over themselves. Easier to say then done. Training and more practical application of the training in preparation for battle would be much better than a pep talk to get you mad.
Anger led to the Indians killing 5 companies to the last man and mutilating their bodies. Maybe if they were less angry and took prisoners it could allow them to negotiate some terms and they would have been better off. Custer captured by Crazy horse would have been a better headline for the Indians than Custer massacred.
It takes a lot more than anger to win the war. Their display of anger helped to solidify their enemy. I would guess it was hard to find large numbers of vocal persons sympathetic to their cause in July of 1876. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 14 2006 : 1:29:18 PM
|
"The problem is that in this tragedy fact is stranger than fiction.Shakespheare could not have written better."
YEAH, he could and yeah he did. Don't think for a moment that Shakespeare's various historical plays didn't influence the tale of the LBH, as they had most events for centuries, allowing various fiascos to be patted into majestic shape for 'history." The literary template of the English language in spades.
What in the world do you find so strange? The only thing odd about the battle is the intense emotion it stirs up, almost entirely about issues unrelated to the battle. |
Dark Cloud copyright RL MacLeod darkcloud@darkendeavors.com www.darkendeavors.com www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 14 2006 : 5:35:20 PM
|
What in the world do you find so strange? The only thing odd about the battle is the intense emotion it stirs up, almost entirely about issues unrelated to the battle. The unbeliveable happenstance of it all.The slings and arrows outragious fortune which wound our hero. The commedy of errors which leads to the irony of Custer's savior being responsible for his shuffling off this mortal coil which in turn bestowed imortality on him. But as you say it's much ado about nothing.But for the merry wives was it to be or not to be all's well that ends well. |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 15 2006 : 4:39:03 PM
|
quote: What in the world do you find so strange? The only thing odd about the battle is the intense emotion it stirs up, almost entirely about issues unrelated to the battle.
DC, WILD, Terri - Do you think in retrospect if the Indians had left one one officer to tell the other side in eye witness detail that there would be as much made of LBH? |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 16 2006 : 12:22:01 PM
|
DC, WILD, Terri - Do you think in retrospect if the Indians had left one one officer to tell the other side in eye witness detail that there would be as much made of LBH? If it had been a gallant last stand then it would have ranked alongside the Alamo if it was the walk over which it seems to have been then Mi Lai might just outrank.
I have debated every aspect of this battle over the last year or so and up until now I would have believed that Custer alone was totally responsible for the desaster.Now I'm not so sure.Perhaps if justice was to be done he is entitled to a fool's pardon.Terry must shoulder an awful lot of the blame.Terry did not want to be column commander.Custer was his last chance of dodging this detail.What matter what state of mind Custer was in.Custer's gigantic ego was holed below the water line and he was now the laughing stock of Washington.The stress he was under must have been enormous.Brisban thinks he is out of his mind and implores Terry to insist he takes the 2nd cavalry with him.But Terry will not confront him,he even ignores Custer's unauthorised scout with 4 troops.Godfrey's journal is full of remarks regarding the change in Custer's character.A gloom seems to be all pervading with officers making their wills.Boyer is convinced that Custer will get them all killed.He does not listen to his scouts.At critical points such as Reno's defeat or MTC he seems unable to respond.And one has only to look at how the regiment ended up to conclude that there was little or no response when the end came. Stress, exhaustion ,depression,hostages given to fortune[we can whip any number of indians]and then one massive village was too much for our hero and he just froze.His brain ceased to function.My sparring partner DC also holds that his brain ceased to function though for another reason. Terry knew full well what this expedition ment for Custer and he knew the state of mind he was in ,even adding to it himself with his chiding of Custer over the corn.But Terry acted in his own best interests and let Custer off the leash. |
|
|
terri
Private
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 16 2006 : 12:54:36 PM
|
quote: Originally posted by AZ Ranger
quote: What in the world do you find so strange? The only thing odd about the battle is the intense emotion it stirs up, almost entirely about issues unrelated to the battle.
DC, WILD, Terri - Do you think in retrospect if the Indians had left one one officer to tell the other side in eye witness detail that there would be as much made of LBH?
I think maybe the myth would survive. What you'd have is one loan survivor; a Romantic hero; a trooper to tend Custer's myth. I think Victorians would have eaten it up. And I believe no matter what the officer stated, it would have been twisted to fit the archtype society wanted. I doubt the officer, out of loyalty to the 7th would have painted a bleak picture of the command in regarding mistakes etc... In Victorian times, I just don't see this happening. |
|
|
Heavyrunner
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 16 2006 : 7:36:32 PM
|
June 25th, 1876.
Custer at the top of Medicine Tail Coulee:
"In blood I am stepp'd in so far that to turn back would be as tedious as go o'er."
This could get fun... |
Bob Bostwick |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 18 2006 : 11:19:55 PM
|
Terri- quote: quote: I think maybe the myth would survive. What you'd have is one loan survivor; a Romantic hero; a trooper to tend Custer's myth. I think Victorians would have eaten it up. And I believe no matter what the officer stated, it would have been twisted to fit the archtype society wanted. I doubt the officer, out of loyalty to the 7th would have painted a bleak picture of the command in regarding mistakes etc... In Victorian times, I just don't see this happening.
Then for discussion purposes leave several alive then. To me it wouldn't matter what the officer or trooper said. To have shown no mercy points to what mindset you are dealing with and how to handle them in the future. You may win the battle but unless you are truly superior you won't win the war. Buffalo Bill and Wounded Knee comes to mind. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 18 2006 : 11:29:08 PM
|
Terri- Actually there is one question that I would have liked answered and that is when was Custer wounded and where did he die. I can't see that a soldier would gain an advantage lying about that but maybe they would. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 18 2006 : 11:48:04 PM
|
Wild- quote: Stress, exhaustion ,depression,hostages given to fortune[we can whip any number of indians]and then one massive village was too much for our hero and he just froze.His brain ceased to function.My sparring partner DC also holds that his brain ceased to function though for another reason. Terry knew full well what this expedition ment for Custer and he knew the state of mind he was in ,even adding to it himself with his chiding of Custer over the corn.But Terry acted in his own best interests and let Custer off the leash.
I would agree that it appears there was some type of brain failure. I believe it would not have been cowardliness. The last we know is apparently he was not afraid after looking at the village. If he was not wounded or killed before LSH maybe a family member being killed locked up his brain. Since the officers were better mounted one expect to find them if they were running without brain power left at the lead of a stretched out line. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 21 2006 : 09:55:39 AM
|
I would agree that it appears there was some type of brain failure. Well just to reinforce this assertion and recapitulate. There's no evidence that Custer tried to support Reno There's no evidence that he made a serious attempt to attack the village. There's no evidence that he tried to withdraw towards Benteen. There's no evidence that he tried to break through to Terry. And there's no evidence of a serious attempt at defence. All consistant with lack of brain/leadership activity. |
|
|
Topic |
|