| Author |
 Topic  |
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - November 08 2009 : 10:48:36 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
I don't agree. This does not make you wrong but, I just don't agree. Custer had nothing to gain by disobeying Terry's orders except a court-martial. Besides, the discretion that Terry afforded Custer was extraordinarily huge.
No commander plans a battle then "plan" to leave a major proportion out of the battle, that would be insanity. Custer's Civil War record was that of an outstanding cavalry officer and, the youngest person to achieve brigadier General in the civil War.
His experience as an Indian fighter was not extraordinary but, more extensive then most. Why then did he suddenly become a "madman and Idiot" at the battle of the Little Big Horn. He didn't!
the Army sold Custer's soul down the river to prevent public knowledge of the deplorable, drunken actions of Reno and a few other officers as well.
Anyone familiar with the Armed Forces understand that no mere mortal exceeds the reputation of the corps.
Custer was to approach the Indians by coming down the LBH. Instead he chose to cross and hit the LBH without assurance the south was blocked. He moved close and was discovered forcing him to move quickly. Benteen was sent to the left to make sure there was not southern escape.
Custer disobeyed Terry's orders. He could argue that he had cause but he could not argue that Terry expected him to move down the LBH and not Reno Creek. It is OK to disobey orders if you can defend your reasons. Court Martials do not always mean guilty.
A victory would have negated any attempt to state he disobeyed orders. In Terry's plan the whole 7th would be coming down the LBH toward the village.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 08 2009 10:49:20 AM |
  |
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 12:13:13 PM
|
Joe, your alot closer to the truth than you realize.
Ranger,
quote:
Custer was to approach the Indians by coming down the LBH. Instead he chose to cross and hit the LBH without assurance the south was blocked. He moved close and was discovered forcing him to move quickly. Benteen was sent to the left to make sure there was not southern escape.
Custer disobeyed Terry's orders. He could argue that he had cause but he could not argue that Terry expected him to move down the LBH and not Reno Creek. It is OK to disobey orders if you can defend your reasons. Court Martials do not always mean guilty.
A victory would have negated any attempt to state he disobeyed orders. In Terry's plan the whole 7th would be coming down the LBH toward the village.
This quite simply is the same song 2nd verse crap that has been put out there every since 1876.
quote:
Custer was to approach the Indians by coming down the LBH. Instead he chose to cross and hit the LBH without assurance the south was blocked.
This simply is untrue. Go back to what Custer was telling one of the Indian guides, that he was through with the scouts, and that he would send Reno's battalion south, [paraphrazing] "should the Indians go that way." Custer did assure that the south was secured, and this was done by Custer's direct orders to Reno.
quote:
Benteen was sent to the left to make sure there was not southern escape.
And pray tell us what 'direction' was 'left'? Why if Custer had already had it in his mind to send Reno to the South "should the Indians go that way", would he then send Benteen that same general direction? What purpose would, should this have served?
quote:
Custer disobeyed Terry's orders.
Prove it. What 'intent' did he, Custer disobey? What "loopholes" were there in Terry's origional order, no not the one generally published, but the real one.
Where 'proper recon' is always brought up, there seems to be no lack of evidence to support this. This lack of evidence is only within Wallace's demented mind. And his times are the reason for this confusion.
And then of course one has the ever present 'division of the regiment' and in that same breath, those who state this, say verbatim the same damn thing Reno and Benteen said, which was unfounded: "Custer had NO PLAN" Or your classic, Ranger: "There was no plan to have all 12 companies engaged at one time."
YET, what exactly did you say? You contradicted yourself as others continually do. If he 'divided the regiment' he did that for a purpose, A PLAN, and he had to have had a lot more 'intelligence' both physically on the ground and in his own mind than you or anyone else gives him credit for.
|
Edited by - Benteen on November 08 2009 12:15:25 PM |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 12:31:08 PM
|
Again, I disagree. Too much discretion was given by Terry to Custer to necessitate any disobedience. Custer literally had a "Carte Blanche" as long as her located and forced the recalcitrant Indians back to the reservations.
"He thinks you should proceed up to the Rosebud until you ascertain definitely in which trail above spoken leads. Should it be found (as it appears almost certain that it will be found) to turn towards the Little Horn, he thinks you should still proceed southward, perhaps as far as the headwaters of the Tongue, and then toward the Little Horn, feeling constantly, however. to your left, so as to preclude the possibility of the escape of the Indians to the south or southeast by passing around your left Flank."
the only directive (should) is used to instruct Custer to not allow the Indians escape. On June 24, at 7:45 PM. the command camped on the right bank of Busby. Up to that point Custer had followed orders explicit. However, there "the valley was heavily marked with lodge poles trails and pony tracks."
The 64,000 question, at this point was, did the Sioux continue south up the Rosebud, turn west to the Little Big Horn, or north down Tullock's Fork?
At 9PM., the same night, Custer received his answer. The scouts sent ahead to determine which branch of the stream the Indians had followed returned. They reported that the Indians turned west.
Contrary to Terry's expectations,(and this is critical) the Sioux were in an area of the lower, rather than the upper reaches of the Little Big Horn. Custer was now approximately 24 miles from the hostiles he was seeking. To proceed to the head waters of the Tongue River would have carried him further away from the village and the "hot" trail he had been seeking.
For some reason, some students of the battle seem to forget that no one (including Terry) knew the location of the Indians, only the approximate area. That intelligence was the ultimate responsibility of Custer. All military personnel from the top to the very bottom were concerned with one thing;escape. it never entered their consciousness that any portion of the military prongs could be defeated. such an idea only became prevalent in hindsight when a scape goat was needed.
.
Should the Indians have moved on from that location, (which they had planned on doing) while Custer moved fifty miles away from the know target two things may have occurred. Custer would have received a Court Martial when those very same Indians ran into Terry's weaker force sometime on the eve of the 26th. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 3:24:30 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
Joe, your alot closer to the truth than you realize.
Ranger,
quote:
Custer was to approach the Indians by coming down the LBH. Instead he chose to cross and hit the LBH without assurance the south was blocked. He moved close and was discovered forcing him to move quickly. Benteen was sent to the left to make sure there was not southern escape.
Custer disobeyed Terry's orders. He could argue that he had cause but he could not argue that Terry expected him to move down the LBH and not Reno Creek. It is OK to disobey orders if you can defend your reasons. Court Martials do not always mean guilty.
A victory would have negated any attempt to state he disobeyed orders. In Terry's plan the whole 7th would be coming down the LBH toward the village.
This quite simply is the same song 2nd verse crap that has been put out there every since 1876.
quote:
Custer was to approach the Indians by coming down the LBH. Instead he chose to cross and hit the LBH without assurance the south was blocked.
This simply is untrue. Go back to what Custer was telling one of the Indian guides, that he was through with the scouts, and that he would send Reno's battalion south, [paraphrazing] "should the Indians go that way." Custer did assure that the south was secured, and this was done by Custer's direct orders to Reno.
quote:
Benteen was sent to the left to make sure there was not southern escape.
And pray tell us what 'direction' was 'left'? Why if Custer had already had it in his mind to send Reno to the South "should the Indians go that way", would he then send Benteen that same general direction? What purpose would, should this have served?
quote:
Custer disobeyed Terry's orders.
Prove it. What 'intent' did he, Custer disobey? What "loopholes" were there in Terry's origional order, no not the one generally published, but the real one.
Where 'proper recon' is always brought up, there seems to be no lack of evidence to support this. This lack of evidence is only within Wallace's demented mind. And his times are the reason for this confusion.
And then of course one has the ever present 'division of the regiment' and in that same breath, those who state this, say verbatim the same damn thing Reno and Benteen said, which was unfounded: "Custer had NO PLAN" Or your classic, Ranger: "There was no plan to have all 12 companies engaged at one time."
YET, what exactly did you say? You contradicted yourself as others continually do. If he 'divided the regiment' he did that for a purpose, A PLAN, and he had to have had a lot more 'intelligence' both physically on the ground and in his own mind than you or anyone else gives him credit for.
Do your own research and read Terry's order. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 3:27:52 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
Again, I disagree. Too much discretion was given by Terry to Custer to necessitate any disobedience. Custer literally had a "Carte Blanche" as long as her located and forced the recalcitrant Indians back to the reservations.
"He thinks you should proceed up to the Rosebud until you ascertain definitely in which trail above spoken leads. Should it be found (as it appears almost certain that it will be found) to turn towards the Little Horn, he thinks you should still proceed southward, perhaps as far as the headwaters of the Tongue, and then toward the Little Horn, feeling constantly, however. to your left, so as to preclude the possibility of the escape of the Indians to the south or southeast by passing around your left Flank."
the only directive (should) is used to instruct Custer to not allow the Indians escape. On June 24, at 7:45 PM. the command camped on the right bank of Busby. Up to that point Custer had followed orders explicit. However, there "the valley was heavily marked with lodge poles trails and pony tracks."
The 64,000 question, at this point was, did the Sioux continue south up the Rosebud, turn west to the Little Big Horn, or north down Tullock's Fork?
At 9PM., the same night, Custer received his answer. The scouts sent ahead to determine which branch of the stream the Indians had followed returned. They reported that the Indians turned west.
Contrary to Terry's expectations,(and this is critical) the Sioux were in an area of the lower, rather than the upper reaches of the Little Big Horn. Custer was now approximately 24 miles from the hostiles he was seeking. To proceed to the head waters of the Tongue River would have carried him further away from the village and the "hot" trail he had been seeking.
For some reason, some students of the battle seem to forget that no one (including Terry) knew the location of the Indians, only the approximate area. That intelligence was the ultimate responsibility of Custer. All military personnel from the top to the very bottom were concerned with one thing;escape. it never entered their consciousness that any portion of the military prongs could be defeated. such an idea only became prevalent in hindsight when a scape goat was needed.
.
Should the Indians have moved on from that location, (which they had planned on doing) while Custer moved fifty miles away from the know target two things may have occurred. Custer would have received a Court Martial when those very same Indians ran into Terry's weaker force sometime on the eve of the 26th.
If Custer followed the letter of Terry's order where would he be on the LBH? South of the village? In order to exercise his judgment he would have to disobey the order. This is understood by military officers sorry if you guys can not.
I understand what Custer did but it was not sucessful. If you do not follow the order than your choice must result in a positive outcome.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 08 2009 3:31:32 PM |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 5:37:14 PM
|
Benteen, I am glad to say that we are both on the same page as usual. To allege mysterious "loopholes" without presenting any substantiating evidence for such a claim is certainly not helpful.
az requests that i read Terry's orders when he refuses to do so. a report so fraught with personal discretion that Custer was given free rein to do what was necessary at any given time because, in order to be successful. leeway had to be given.
To insist that Custer evaded strict rules when no rules were given, save the one which he obeyed, is truly incomprehensible. |
Edited by - joe wiggs on November 08 2009 5:39:28 PM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 7:27:43 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
Benteen, I am glad to say that we are both on the same page as usual. To allege mysterious "loopholes" without presenting any substantiating evidence for such a claim is certainly not helpful.
az requests that i read Terry's orders when he refuses to do so. a report so fraught with personal discretion that Custer was given free rein to do what was necessary at any given time because, in order to be successful. leeway had to be given.
To insist that Custer evaded strict rules when no rules were given, save the one which he obeyed, is truly incomprehensible.
Most things are incomprehensible for you glad you admit it. Either you don't understand that a desire by your commanding officer is a an order or you haven't read it lately if at all.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 8:55:24 PM
|
Ranger, Custer's supposed orders was more a "letter of instruction" than an iron clad set of orders. Terry knew that once Custer left, he would indeed be on his own and have to make some difficult choices in pursueing the Indians. One phrase in particular, more than any other exemplified Terry's thoughts about this, [paraphrasing] "when nearly in contact with the enemy". This one phrase let Custer determine what his course should be. Because Terry knew that he could not bind Custer to something that would have gotten that whole command in serious jeopardy because of unforeseen circumstances. He, Terry quite simply would have been incompetent to have done so.
Indeed Joe, "To insist that Custer evaded strict rules when no rules were given, save the one which he obeyed, is truly incomprehensible." |
Edited by - Benteen on November 08 2009 8:57:12 PM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 9:47:07 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
Ranger, Custer's supposed orders was more a "letter of instruction" than an iron clad set of orders. Terry knew that once Custer left, he would indeed be on his own and have to make some difficult choices in pursueing the Indians. One phrase in particular, more than any other exemplified Terry's thoughts about this, [paraphrasing] "when nearly in contact with the enemy". This one phrase let Custer determine what his course should be. Because Terry knew that he could not bind Custer to something that would have gotten that whole command in serious jeopardy because of unforeseen circumstances. He, Terry quite simply would have been incompetent to have done so.
Indeed Joe, "To insist that Custer evaded strict rules when no rules were given, save the one which he obeyed, is truly incomprehensible."
No orders are iron clad if an alternative results in accomplishing the mission. Only you and Joe pretend that I have stated Iron clad strict rules. I would suggest that Terry did not want Custer to follow the trail to the LBH and continue further up before crossing over to the LBH.
My opinion is that Terry gave Custer his desires which was a common form of order construction of the time. In order to deviate from them Custer had to have a reason and it should result in accomplishing the mission. Instead by following the trail it lead to his early discovery, an aborted plan of what was to be the attack on the village the next morning. Since the Indians were thought to be on the run the regiment was divided and spread out further than horseback communications could be made in a timely manner.
Custer could have stayed on the Rosebud instead of moving at night. He could have rested the men and horses and then traveled to the hiding location. That may have not worked either but it is another way to accomplish the same thing without a night march. At least on the Rosebud if discovered it would be within the desires of Terry.
In order to be successful in not obeying orders you must have a reason, which Custer believed he did, and also complete the mission which Custer did not do. Its OK to deviate if your right and complete the mission.
It doesn't matter which part you use in deciding if you have the reason to deviate if you fail at the mission. I don't buy the close proximity if the deviation creates the proximity. I have argued that Custer didn't disobey in the past but it is my opinion now that the results are included if one deviates from the orders.
Could you explain "that would have gotten that whole command in serious jeopardy" considering the battle outcome? How would following the Rosebud a little further jeopardized the regiment. If anything it might have jeopardized Terry's command.
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 08 2009 9:53:46 PM |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 11:03:18 PM
|
Through the years these very orders have been hashed over and over; and re-hashed into something that they were not!
In Graham’s, Custer Myth, pg 156 he states that he received a “certified copy” of Terry’s orders to Custer from Fort Snelling, Minnesota. And further comments that it showed, “his letter of instructions to Custer to have been exactly and precisely identical with the instructions set out in Terry’s official report of 27 June 1876...“ Except this sentence “in whole or in part”! “He will, however, indicate to you his own views of what your action should be, and he desires that you should conform to them unless you shall see sufficient reason for departing from them.” In other words this sentence, or any other like it “in whole or in part“, does not appear in that official report! This official, “certified copy” then read as follows:
The Brigadier General Commanding directs that, as soon as your regiment can be made ready for the march, you proceed up the Rosebud in pursuit of the Indians whose trail was discovered by Major Reno a few days since. It is, of course, impossible to give you any definite instructions in regard to this movement; and were it not impossible to do so, the Department Commander places too much confidence in your zeal, energy and ability to wish to impose upon you precise orders which might hamper your actions when nearly in contact with the enemy. He thinks that you should proceed up the Rosebud until you ascertain definitely the direction in which the trail above spoken leads. Should it be found (as it appears to be almost certain that it will be found) to turn toward the Little Horn, he thinks that you should still proceed southward, perhaps as far as the headwaters of the Tongue, and then turn toward the Little Horn, felling constantly, however, to your left, so as to preclude the possibility of the escape of the Indians to the south or southeast by passing around your left flank.
The column of Colonel Gibbon is now in motion for the mouth of the Big Horn. As soon as it reaches that point it will cross the Yellowstone and move up at least as far as the forks of the Big and Little Horns. Of course, its future movements must be controlled by circumstances as they arise: but it is hoped that the Indians, if upon the Little Horn, may be so nearly enclosed by the two columns that their escape will be impossible….
Several key phrases, with the exclusion of the culprit one now makes Custer’s orders more clear. This one phrase, “he thinks that you should still proceed southward, perhaps as far as the headwaters of the Tongue, and then turn toward the Little Horn” has been blown all out of proportion to what it was intended, because surely if Gibbon’s column was governed by this phrase, “its future movements must be controlled by circumstances as they arise”, then so too was Custer’s: Just as he, Terry stated, “ It is, of course, impossible to give you any definite instructions in regard to this movement;… the Department Commander… to wish to impose upon you precise orders which might hamper your actions when nearly in contact with the enemy.” Here the same meaning is extracted from Custer’s own orders, less the flourish of praise.
Terry was just suggesting that Custer go on to the headwaters of the Tongue before crossing to the Little Big Horn, not ordering it, because he knew that Custer’s column “future movements must be controlled by circumstances as they arise…when nearly in contact with the enemy.” And he didn’t and wasn’t going to hamper Custer with strict “conforming” orders that would put this operation or the lives of those men in jeopardy. So just exactly what was Custer’s orders? The first sentence says it all. “The Brigadier General Commanding directs that, as soon as your regiment can be made ready for the march, you proceed up the Rosebud in pursuit of the Indians whose trail was discovered by Major Reno a few days since….”
|
Edited by - Benteen on November 08 2009 11:05:15 PM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 09 2009 : 07:07:02 AM
|
| Should it be found (as it appears to be almost certain that it will be found) to turn toward the Little Horn, he thinks that you should still proceed southward, |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 09 2009 : 07:46:45 AM
|
As sure as it will be found. They knew, and how did they know?
"Major Reno made an error in that he crossed, going a due south course, from the forks of the Powder to the Rosebud River, where he found a fresh hostile trail. General Terry had planned to have Major Reno return to the column, marching down the valley of the Tongue River; and after he had formed the junction General Custer was to organize his regiment for a scout up the Tongue, thence across to the Rosebud, striking it near its head; thence down that valley towards General Terry, who in the meantime would move by steamer to the mouth of the Rosebud, join General Gibbon’s command, march up that valley until he met and joined General Custer. The plan was an excellent one, and but for the unfortunate movement of Major Reno the main force of the Indians, numbering 1,500 would have been bagged. As it is a new campaign is organized, and tomorrow, June 22, General Custer with twelve cavalry companies, will scout from its mouth up the valley of the Rosebud until he reaches the fresh trail discovered by Major Reno, and move on that trail with all rapidity possible in order to overhaul the Indians, whom it has been ascertained are hunting buffalo and making daily and leisurely short marches. In the meantime, General Terry will move on the steamer to the mouth of the Big Horn River, scouting Pumpkin Creek en route, with General Gibbon’s cavalry as well as infantry, which are marching toward the Big Horn valley in order to intercept the Indians if they should attempt to escape from General Custer down that avenue…."
“Of course there was but one thing to do and that was to remedy as soon as possible the effects of Reno’s blunder. Custer’s entire command, consisting of twelve companies of the Seventh Cavalry and a detachment of Indian scouts arrived at this point yesterday evening, where the steamer Far West, with General Terry and staff on board had already preceeded them, General Terry having transferred his headquarters to the Far West before her departure from the mouth of Powder River. Gibbon’s command was encamped on the left bank of the Yellowstone, opposite the mouth of the Rosebud.”
“Yesterday, Terry, Gibbon and Custer got together, and, with unanimity of opinion, decided that Custer should start with his command up the Rosebud valley to the point where Reno abandoned the trail, take up the latter and follow the Indians as long and as far as horse flesh and human endurance could carry his command. Custer takes no wagons or tents with his command, but proposes to live and travel like Indians; in this manner the command will be able to go wherever the Indians can….The Herald correspondent will accompany Custer’s column and in the event of a “fight or a foot race,” will be on the ground to make due record thereof for the benefit of the Herald readers…”
|
Edited by - Benteen on November 09 2009 07:49:15 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 09 2009 : 08:15:35 AM
|
If your arguing construction of an order then I will defer to text and manuals of the time. Terry's orders are consistent with the style of that time. If you are arguing that by exercising your own judgment you fail to accomplish the mission should not be taken into consideration then I diagree.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 09 2009 : 08:20:37 AM
|
| Those are "quotations" around those paragraphs from Custer Myth. I didn't make it up. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 09 2009 : 08:57:29 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
If your arguing construction of an order then I will defer to text and manuals of the time. Terry's orders are consistent with the style of that time. If you are arguing that by exercising your own judgment you fail to accomplish the mission should not be taken into consideration then I disagree.
AZ Ranger
I provided my position and you have nothing in your quotes that states Custer accomplished his mission. I maintain that an officer can deviate and yet you keep trying to present evidence that Custer could deviate.
If you exercise your own judgment over the desires of the commanding officer the outcome remains the completion of the mission. It is not a good defense to an unsuccessful outcome that after you deviate that events happen that result in failure.
Could Custer deviate YES and so can any officer if circumstances change and the results of the decision are accomplishment of the mission. I suggest that disobedience is two pronged
- One must deviate
- The deviation results in failure
If Custer had succeeded do you think he would attributed the victory all to Terry's order?
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 09 2009 : 10:54:16 AM
|
Let me repeat this, Custer did NOT disobey the "intent" of his orders.
The following quote was found in the National Archives in The Secretary of War Reports, 1874-1879. This dispatch
General Terry wrote to Genreal Phil Sheridan on June 21, 1876, giving him an outline of the plan. It was also quoted by John Gray in his "Centennial Campaign" [Page 140] it reads:
"...No Indians have been met with as yet, but traces of a large and recent village have been discovered 20 or 30 miles up the Rosebud. Gibbon's column will move this morning on the north side of the Yellowstone for the mouth of the Big Horn, where it will be ferried across by the supply steamer, whence it will proceed to the mouth of the Little Horn... Custer will go up the Rosebud tomorrow with his whole regiment and thence to the headwaters of the Little Horn, thence down the Little Horn. I only hope that ONE of the two columns will find the Indians. I go personally with Gibbon."
If you are looking for a smoking gun to convict Custer of disobedience, you wont find it, because it wasn't there; and Terry's outline of that plan, directed to General Sheridan dated June 21st, 1876 proves it beyond any shadow of doubt.
|
Edited by - Benteen on November 09 2009 10:55:26 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 10 2009 : 08:16:30 AM
|
I think orders are designed to succeed at a particular mission. There is not dispute that Custer did not succeed. So when one deviates from the orders you take on the responsibility of your choices.
Implicate in orders are a desired outcome. The latitude to deviate is given in order to succeed.
Like I have stated before I held the opinion that Terry's order allowed Custer to make field decisions. If he had a successful mission we wouldn't be here and Terry and others would not have accused Custer of disobedience.
Basically the order is to win with Terry's plan to do that. Included is the latitude for Custer to insure they win.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 10 2009 : 09:12:02 AM
|
There was no deviation, Ranger, none. Read again Terry's dispatch to Sheridan. Custer didn't deviate, he was ordered to do what he did. Kellogg's rendition of these events, posted prior to this supports Terry's dispatch to Sheridan.
|
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 10 2009 : 10:00:19 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
There was no deviation, Ranger, none. Read again Terry's dispatch to Sheridan. Custer didn't deviate, he was ordered to do what he did. Kellogg's rendition of these events, posted prior to this supports Terry's dispatch to Sheridan.
So Terry's desired outcome was for Custer to be defeated?
Here is in my opinion Terry's best argument:
Taken from Did Custer Disobey at the Battle of the Little Big Horn? orders page 264 Terry's dispatch
"he should not follow it directly to the Little Big Horn"
"and keep his main force further to the south so to prevent the Indians from slipping in between himself and the mountains"
So did he follow the trail?
Did the main force approach from the south?
Did the Indians slip away?
Of these questions the mission was to prevent them from slipping away and anything that Custer did to prevent it would be OK if he succeeded.
There was more than one choice Custer could have made. For example he could have blocked the escape route across the divide area with a battalion and then approached from the south with the main body.
I don't attach a culpable mental state to Custer in the action he took by deviating from the plan in the orders. That is where I think I got hung up on his disobedience. I don't think he said Terry's plan sucks and I want the Indians all to myself instead it was chain reaction once he moved toward the divide from the Rosebud.
That is my current opinion and subject to change.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 10 2009 : 10:29:39 AM
|
quote:
So Terry's desired outcome was for Custer to be defeated?
Not at all. You're misinterpreting it. Remember, Custer wanted to wait until the 26th before attacking, which was a prudent thing to have done. No one at this point knows how Custer would have deployed to have taken the village. Perhaps a good "what if" exercise to see what everyone thinks.
What most still don't get is the reason's he did attack on the 25th. And it had everything to do with Varnum's and Herendeen's observations more so than it did with a lost cracker box. Custer was placed on the horns of a dilemna "when nearly in contact with the enemy". Either he trusted that they had not been observed, or that they had. Is this what you blame Custer for?
The other thing most people try to do is read into this what Wallace for so long has mis-represented. The time. When Custer caught up to the column that morning it was sometime around 9 to 9:30 am. Again, this is using Benteen and Reno's time. It would still have been possible to have carried off a successful morning attack, if he ordered it then and there.
Gen. Terry had announced on the Far West to his staff that Custer's 7th would "strike the first blow". And everything that I've presented to you so far has supported this, and there is alot more.
Gen. Terry didn't want Custer to do what Reno had done on his scout, and had told him that, and that he would rather have him attack than turn around and come back as Reno had done.
|
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 10 2009 : 4:13:42 PM
|
Benteen once again correct. What is often forgotten or, buried beneath a mountain of false allegations of bravado, glory hunting, and vainness is a little fact sorely over looked;Custer's war record.
This man was often referred to an an exemplary calvary officer, leader, and well respected by his men. He was not the youngest General in the North for naught. For four years this man FOLLOWED ORDERS through many impressive battles.
Suddenly on June 25, be became a idiot par excellence. Custer and every man of hiss command understood they we to track. locate, and throw the first blow. Shattered, discouraged, and totally vanquished, the remnants of this village would be rounded up by Gibbons and Terry, dependant upon which direction they fled.
Only after the fact, after the failure,after the shock of a Nation's disbelief, were his actions subjected to scrutiny and found wanting. A scapegoat was required and so, he was selected.
Reno's actions were deplorable, idiotic, and he was probably drunk during the entire affair. However, he was alive. A story could be woven around him, his actions mitigated, and truth slightly twisted to show that Custer's "rashness" was the cause of defeat. Only three things had to be shown:
A. Reno was no coward;
b. Custer had no plan;
c. The time factor had to be altered to show that Reno could not have rendered timely aid to Custer.
The first one was the easiest. What man of us would stand on a board and claim that your "Command Officer" was a coward Particularly in an Army where promotion from Lt. to Capt. could;d take 10 years or more. Also how could you prove it unless the rest of your command had the guts to back you? |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 10 2009 : 7:13:37 PM
|
Joe:
The first was the easiest Joe because they didn't really try. There are many discrepancies in their testimonies that when looked at from proper terrain perspective, and with proper cross examination of Wallace and Maquire would have hung both Reno and Benteen. The rest were merely playing follow the leader, and may not have remembered, but rest assured both Reno and Benteen and Wallace knew.
The "no plan" thing has bothered me for many a year. Custer was a better commander than that. I know what most say, that he was doing this stuff on the fly. But, and it's one hell of big a BUTT. When you split your Regiment, you'd damn well be sure your subordinates know what you expect them to do, without sending umpteen couriers to them. A few, sure, that's to be expected. But once he cut them loose, just like Terry did him, that "plan" had to work. And a "plan" he had to have had, and a "plan" he had to have conveyed to them. Benteen was just as much to blame if not more than Reno was in this "no plan" business. And his "no Valley, Valley hunting ad infinitum, and casting aspersions on his own orders; just added more flames to the fires of Custer's incompetence.
And the time, yes the time was altered, and it was altered by none other than Wallace himself, 6 months after the fact. And it was more for Reno's benefit that he did it; but the one who benefitted the most was Benteen.
What needed to be done, what what should have been done, a thorough investigation into Reno's whole involvement, starting with that Scouting Mission, that he so badly botched up. It was the cause of Custer's ultimate demise, and had they really wanted to know if Reno was a "coward" or not, or whether he later turned tail and ran or not, it would have came out by subpoenaing Terry, and a few others and finding out about that scouting mission.
Instead we get an "honorable" call for his actions. Benteen is seen as a hero, and so.... whose left to blame? And your correct in your assessment there, Joe... 100 percent.
|
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 11 2009 : 08:12:40 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
quote:
So Terry's desired outcome was for Custer to be defeated?
Not at all. You're misinterpreting it. Remember, Custer wanted to wait until the 26th before attacking, which was a prudent thing to have done. No one at this point knows how Custer would have deployed to have taken the village. Perhaps a good "what if" exercise to see what everyone thinks.
What most still don't get is the reason's he did attack on the 25th. And it had everything to do with Varnum's and Herendeen's observations more so than it did with a lost cracker box. Custer was placed on the horns of a dilemna "when nearly in contact with the enemy". Either he trusted that they had not been observed, or that they had. Is this what you blame Custer for?
The other thing most people try to do is read into this what Wallace for so long has mis-represented. The time. When Custer caught up to the column that morning it was sometime around 9 to 9:30 am. Again, this is using Benteen and Reno's time. It would still have been possible to have carried off a successful morning attack, if he ordered it then and there.
Gen. Terry had announced on the Far West to his staff that Custer's 7th would "strike the first blow". And everything that I've presented to you so far has supported this, and there is alot more.
Gen. Terry didn't want Custer to do what Reno had done on his scout, and had told him that, and that he would rather have him attack than turn around and come back as Reno had done.
The 26th date is a red herring. If Custer continued up the Rosebud per the order he could not make it there by then. There would be a minimum time that Terry could be in place but that is not the same as a planned date. Terry was not in place to support on the morning of the 26th.
There is no misinterpretation on my part. Terry's order would as any officers orders would include a desire for a successful mission. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 11 2009 : 08:37:44 AM
|
The first was the easiest Joe because they didn't really try. There are many discrepancies in their testimonies that when looked at from proper terrain perspective, and with proper cross examination of Wallace and Maquire would have hung both Reno and Benteen. The rest were merely playing follow the leader, and may not have remembered, but rest assured both Reno and Benteen and Wallace knew.
This goes to show that you don't understand the RCOI and it procedures. Benteen could not be hung during that process or any other. The statute of limitations ran once the RCOI had begun. The court could only focus on events that surrounded Reno.
When attempting to provide evidence of Benteen's feelings toward Custer the court properly stopped it. When trying to present evidence of Benteen's favorable behavior the court properly stopped it.
I think you guys would better understand what went on if you understood what a military court of inquiry does. In this particular case the statute of limitation had run for a court martial. So none of the participants had to worry.
Did Reno plan it that way? Maybe, I don't know but according to Joe it would be Whitaker that brought it to public light that caused Reno to ask for the court of inquiry.
What is unfair to all the other officers is that since the court of inquiry could only focus on Reno they could not present their own evidence. They could only respond to questions. Also any evidence to support good or bad behavior outside of an influence upon Reno would not be allowed.
When one uses court of inquiry rather than Reno Court of Inquiry it is my opinion Prima Face evidence that they believe the court was convened to look at everything associated with the battle.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 11 2009 : 08:52:17 AM
|
And the time, yes the time was altered, and it was altered by none other than Wallace himself, 6 months after the fact. And it was more for Reno's benefit that he did it; but the one who benefitted the most was Benteen.
Interesting theory do you have any proof that his original field book is altered? Secondly you state Wallace altered it 6 months after the fact. Have you ever had the government publish anything of yours? It was published in January of 1877 which is what they do for the previous year's information. So the question is what date was it submitted if you know?
I doubt Wallace altered it Christmas of 1876 and had it published by January.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 11 2009 08:55:29 AM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Custer's Plan
