quote:

---

Originally posted by joe wiggs

contrary to your often excessive,inexcusable,boorish,and immature need to label statements contrary to what you believe a "lie" I will not follow suit in my response. The acts I described were, obviously, above "standard" performances. To say that there were "no outstanding performances by officers that day" implies one or two things:

a. you were unaware of the actions I described when you posted;

b. you were aware of the actions but, decided that they were insufficient to be regarded as exceptional actions;

c. that saving the command, jumping off your horse to save another's life, etc. is merely standard behavior;

d. you don't read what you write.

Personally,I choose a.

As for the second paragraph, "insufficient funds" was not a true answer as well you know it. Just as it would have been impossible to find a source for the Grinch Who Stole Christmas, it was also a truism for your attempt to find a source to substantiate what you wrote.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by AZ Ranger

quote:

---

Originally posted by joe wiggs

contrary to your often excessive,inexcusable,boorish,and immature need to label statements contrary to what you believe a "lie" I will not follow suit in my response. The acts I described were, obviously, above "standard" performances. To say that there were "no outstanding performances by officers that day" implies one or two things:

a. you were unaware of the actions I described when you posted;

b. you were aware of the actions but, decided that they were insufficient to be regarded as exceptional actions;

c. That saving the command, jumping off your horse to save another's life, etc. is merely standard behavior;

d. you don't read what you write.

Personally,I choose d.

As for the second paragraph, "insufficient funds" was not a true answer as well you know it. Just as it would have been impossible to find a source for the Grinch Who Stole Christmas, it was also a truism for your attempt to find a source to substantiate what you wrote.

---

Well at least you have backed your false misrepresentation of my statement that's a start. I think you are confusing individual behavior with my point of an officer making outstanding leadership decisions that effect the outcome of the engagement. Military relies on decisions of officer to accomplish the mission.

quote:

---

In your example of Godfrey covering the retreat do you think its expected of company commanders to cover a retreat? Is it for example in the textbooks on how to preform a retreat when the enemy is coming from the rear only? Which company left a trooper to his fate in the retreat?

---

quote:

---

Organized "coverage" when pursued by the enemy is standard procedure. Any "retreat" without coverage is detrimental to "organization" which is the essence of the term organized movement. I'm astounded that you, apparently, are not aware of this vital information as you seem to be so opinionated in these areas on a regular and sustained basis.

---

So look again at my statement.
Sounds fair enough to me. There were no outstanding performances for officers that day. At the same token I believed they acted within acceptable ranges for officers.

quote:

---

Godfrey's actions were outstanding as he prevented a second fiasco of the type initiated by Reno whose failure of leadership resulted in chaos and lost of command. The fact that you are unwilling to appreciate this point does not devalue its worth.

---

If you can not see it is relative to their total performances rather then any single individual act then I can't help you with that. I don't know how to make it any clearer for you on what I meant.

quote:

---

The clarity of your thought is so muddy with inaccuracies that a rational comprehension by me is impossible. The reality is that you make a completely erroneous statement, got caught with your pants down, and attempted to counter with a puzzling, non-comprehensive response that defies logic to all others but you.

---

So if it confused you than I am sorry for that but it does not change my point. Following you view you would have to say Reno did an outstanding job of riding in the front of his battalion as they approached the village look at Private Peter Thompson's account of how outstanding that was in his narrative.

quote:

---

b]Astoundingly, your summation of my "view" is the opposite of what I have written and that point is obvious to any and all who have read this post other than yourself.

---

It appears that you sole purpose when one does not agree with you is to misrepresent what they state and then have and idiotic multiple choice question or some other diatribe. Joe you are the one keeping people from posting with your antics.

quote:

---

Again, I must admit that you have numbed my senses with the addition of yet another unbalanced conclusion as I have perceived your responses as doing just that, keeping others off the board. Doesn't,t say much for either one of us does it?[/b]

---

Joe my statement is about total performances of officers in making officer decisions and not some individual act that is why it includes the wording acceptable ranges. If you want to argue with what I meant you lose since it also keeps others from wanting to post.

quote:

---

b]The total performance of the officers were poor at best and, in some cases, criminal at worst. That you see the Reno enclave antics as acceptable explains everything.[/b]

---

AZ Ranger

---