| Author |
 Topic  |
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
 Posted - October 21 2005 : 10:25:46 PM
|
DC, Joe, MW, Benteen, HR, and the many others are also all valuable assets to this site and just because I am in total disagreement with some of them sometimes, doesn't mean I don't have respect for them or their opinions. It is not that one has an opinion but that he or she has the right to state it, as we all know. Hope you have a great day, wILD I.
[/quote]
You have captured the very essence of what this forum should be about, and often is. No one opinion has more weight than another. Each opinion should be respected and appreciated, regardless of its content. Disagreement is essential to discussion as it promotes intellectual exchange. Disagreement reduced to personal "barbs" is the antithesis of discussion and accomplishes nothing of real value. Thanks WB for a valid and honest summation. |
  |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - October 22 2005 : 3:06:17 PM
|
| I think civility is what is required,respect must be earned.This board will only retain some semblance of seriousness if we robustly confront and refute the kind of nonsensical waffle which is all too often inflicted on us. |
|
|
|
whistlingboy
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 27 2005 : 11:08:03 AM
|
Joe: You have always treated my posts and my right to post them with utmost respect and I appreciate that more than anything that will ever be said here. I realize that much of my opinion is 'hogwash' to the astute and much more experienced students of this subject and that makes it difficult for them to dismiss my opinions in a civil manner for fear that someone might, at least, half-heartedly agree with them. Their only recourse, to bring more attention to their opinions, is to severely criticize such contrary opinions instead of diplomatically dismissing them as not very likely to be the case. I continue to submit opinion on this subject because it is simply that--opinion. Just because eight people believe that Bouyer said such-and-such to Custer doesn't mean the other two, who disagree, in the sample are clearly wrong. All writers have motive and purpose and discerning these traits in them is difficult and subjective. Ostracizing any 'post-er' on opinion is truly unfair, uncomfortable and not worthy of the objectives of the format of this site.
You have almost always been the 'even keel'.....the 'balance' on this site. Many people can't stand any criticism but I look forward to your constructive criticism because I know you will present it without antagonistic words, cheap shots and intelligently because you care what people think of you as a human being. Maybe we have all been raised differently, had bad dreams, bad breaks in life or other manifestations of grief that make us feel different and antagonistic in our treatment of the world but every man and woman who are here for the same reason--their interest in this subject--should be accorded the utmost respect for their participation. I run out of superlatives to use in your behalf but like Mr. Lincoln said, you can please some of the people some of the time; part of the people part of the time but you can't please all of the people, all of the time. Have a blessed day, sir. |
|
|
|
PonyBobReno
Recruit
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 18 2005 : 05:28:59 AM
|
Greetings,
Great Posts-Obviously Custer made some of the
battle mistakes we still make today-
The most critical error is underestimating
the enemy's tenacity on their home turf.
70 years after LBH, we got caught with our pants
down at the Battle of The Bulge in WW2.
Though on a much larger scale, the US military
ignored all intelligence pointing
to German strength building in the Ardennes,
and the Germans called their whole battle
plan "The Watch on the Rhine"...In addition the Germans
even pulled a couple armored divisions from the
Eastern front to help in the attack, a fact the
Soviets had conveyed to us...
We placed 2 understaffed and new divisions right at the
main spearhead of the German armored attack,,,
US Scouts reported the revving of motors and other
prep noises 4-5 hours before the attack began,
but they were ignored.
Look at Pearl Harbor-same problem-ignoring intelligence,
and being overconfident...
Custer ignored his Crow scouts, and went into battle overconfident.
We have done the same thing today in Iraq-anyone who
says otherwise is unrealistic...
Armies tend to fight much better on their home turf.
Custer was outgunned and outthought by the Indians...
|
Edited by - PonyBobReno on December 18 2005 05:33:32 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 18 2005 : 1:44:13 PM
|
quote:
Custer was outgunned and outthought by the Indians...
Out-numbered was the most important "out" |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Dark Horse
Private
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - December 26 2005 : 8:38:22 PM
|
| Custer was outgunned and outthought by the Indians in one respect, unless the land is in your favour (Rourkes Drift) then you our on a loser. Custer due to plain and utter stupidity, lost his complete command. He took his command of 200 plus men into a hornets nest, and was stung. If he had kept his head, listened to his scouts, responded to the threat, reacted as he should have, then we could have had a different result, just as Reno did. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2005 : 09:16:22 AM
|
quote:
If he had kept his head, listened to his scouts
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."
Or Red Star? "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. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2005 : 09:21:06 AM
|
quote:
Custer was outgunned and outthought by the Indians in one respect, unless the land is in your favour (Rourkes Drift) then you our on a loser.
I still maintain that out-numbered was the most important "out". A few tactically smart thinking Indians with repeating rifles would not win. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Dark Horse
Private
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - December 28 2005 : 1:26:47 PM
|
| The out numbering of Custers command by the Indians only became an issue because Custer allowed it to. This resulted purely as a result of Custers bad decision making on the day. On another day, he may not have split his command and if he had not attacked the village in such a haphazard way then he may have and probably would have achieved a major victory. |
|
|
|
Heavyrunner
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 28 2005 : 7:41:00 PM
|
Dark Horse,
Are you suggesting that Custer could have won had he kept his command in one unit? Oh, brother... What he more likely would have done was gotten all the rest killed, although it probably would have taken an extra half hour. |
Bob Bostwick |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 28 2005 : 9:48:58 PM
|
quote:
Dark Horse,Are you suggesting that Custer could have won had he kept his command in one unit? Oh, brother... What he more likely would have done was gotten all the rest killed, although it probably would have taken an extra half hour.
Heavyrunner I agree with you. On that day large numbers of Indians were willing to fight. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Heavyrunner
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 2:35:03 PM
|
AZ,
It's always grated on me when suggestions come along about how Custer could have won. He couldn't have. Not against a highly motivated, highly skilled, highly mobile, well-armed bunch that outnumbered him 10- or 20-to-one--all the while defending their families. Even if he had waited and hooked up with Gibbon on the 26th, the soldiers likely couldn't have won a tactical victory. They might have survived as a command, but that's about all... |
Bob Bostwick |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 11:10:23 PM
|
Heavyrunner,
I agree and if combined on the 26th they probably would have done as Crook-engaged and retreated thinking to many Indians. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Dark Horse
Private
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 01 2006 : 12:50:52 PM
|
| No I never meant to suggust Custer could have defeated the Indians on this occasion. What I am suggesting is that he may have saved his command if he had not split it into three columns. If custer had attacked the village as one unit , he may have been able to organise some sort of tactical withdrawal once he realised that the Indian force was too great. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 01 2006 : 2:29:44 PM
|
quote:
No I never meant to suggust Custer could have defeated the Indians on this occasion. What I am suggesting is that he may have saved his command if he had not split it into three columns. If custer had attacked the village as one unit , he may have been able to organise some sort of tactical withdrawal once he realised that the Indian force was too great.
The quote below of yours is where I got that impression.
quote:
The out numbering of Custers command by the Indians only became an issue because Custer allowed it to. This resulted purely as a result of Custers bad decision making on the day. On another day, he may not have split his command and if he had not attacked the village in such a haphazard way then he may have and probably would have achieved a major victory.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Dark Horse
Private
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 05 2006 : 2:20:42 PM
|
| Ok you got me on that one |
|
|
|
Dark Horse
Private
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 05 2006 : 4:05:38 PM
|
| Lads, it is actually not beyond the bounds of possibility that Custer may have won the battle. If he had choosen the attack the village with his complete command of 500 odd men then it is just possible. For example if the command had stayed together, dismounted some distance from the village and approached as skirmishers and held the line as the Indians attacked then I believe the Indians would have suffered heavylosses from sustained volley fire and they would probably have hightailed it. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 06 2006 : 09:10:26 AM
|
quote:
Lads, it is actually not beyond the bounds of possibility that Custer may have won the battle. If he had choosen the attack the village with his complete command of 500 odd men then it is just possible. For example if the command had stayed together, dismounted some distance from the village and approached as skirmishers and held the line as the Indians attacked then I believe the Indians would have suffered heavylosses from sustained volley fire and they would probably have hightailed it.
If the Indians "hightailed it" then Custer would have been charged with bungling the mission. The Army's mission was to get them back on the reservation. If hightailing it was acceptable then they didn't need to go in the first place. The Indians had all ready hightailed the reservation. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Dark Horse
Private
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 06 2006 : 10:18:13 AM
|
| No custers troop would have trailed the Indians, defeating the warriors and rounding up the women and children, mission accomplished |
|
|
|
Heavyrunner
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 06 2006 : 4:08:32 PM
|
| Custer could have won---with some cruise missiles and an MI-AI Abrams tank... |
Bob Bostwick |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 06 2006 : 4:30:11 PM
|
I think that delusional, Dark Horse. Look at the Wa****a. Surprise attack, at freezing dawn, outnumbered the village, and even so took the 7th all day, while they were able to kill few warriors. Although taking hostages they were still afraid of being attacked, certainly instructive to the LBH. The 7th may have lost as many or more actual men of warrior age than the Cheyenne. This was Custer's most impressive victory against Indians.
The 7th really wasn't up to the task, and I think frankly the Army wasn't up to it. Although Custer and some of the pros were very good soldiers, they were poor shots overall, iffy horsemen, with a history of desertion. Look at the attitude towards the pack train: punishment detail. That says a lot, I think. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Heavyrunner
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 06 2006 : 6:53:10 PM
|
Not only did it take him all day, he was lucky as well. Had Indians camped up and down the river rallied to Black Kettle, Sioux and Northern Cheyenne at LBH might have been saved the trouble.
|
Bob Bostwick |
|
|
|
Dark Horse
Private
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2006 : 05:28:37 AM
|
| I agree Custers command was not up to the job. The 7th was made up of poorly trained and ill-equipped men. A large section of the 7th was made of emigrants from Europe who joined up as the Army was the only chance they had of making a living. However there was a core group of hardened soldiers and officers who may just have held the command together if Custer had taken the correct decisions. If he had not split the command into three sections when he had a fair idea of what faced him then he may have been able to save the 7th. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2006 : 09:03:30 AM
|
quote:
However there was a core group of hardened soldiers and officers who may just have held the command together if Custer had taken the correct decisions. If he had not split the command into three sections when he had a fair idea of what faced him then he may have been able to save the 7th.
The mission was never to save the 7th. The mission was to punish the Indians for leaving the reservation. As far as correct decisions making, someone put Custer in charge which allowed him to have the decision making choices. I don't think anyone higher up was surprised on how Custer made decisions. They had plenty of time to observe and get rid of him if the wanted too. The size of the village might have concerned other officers and their decision making process might have been different. I believe it disingenuous for higher ups to try and cover up their choice of Custer by implying they didn't think he would do something like that at LBH. I believe it played out that day predictably up till MTC.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 15 2006 : 4:48:14 PM
|
quote:
If he had not split the command into three sections when he had a fair idea of what faced him then he may have been able to save the 7th.
It was the not getting all companies engaged at the same time rather than the splitting of the Regiment that was main tactical error in my opinion. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Responsibility At Little Bighorn
