Re: Custer's

Posted by Don on November 06, 1999 at 10:00:52:

In Reply to: Re: Custer's posted by Don on November 06, 1999 at 07:59:55:

: What "worked well" on the Washi-ta was slaughter! What a horrible way to express what you were trying to say! I think we can rule out the possibility of you having American Indian relatives, right? (No, in answer to your question, I'm a white boy.) Cavalry tactics, whether on horseback or in the cockpit of a Huey Cobra, rely on accurate intelligence (info), and then USING what intelligence you have to make wise decisions. No person who has never seen battle conditions can say for sure what he/she would do, but Custer was NOT being attacked nor pursued, and he WAS being advised by all those with him, both red and white, NOT to attack. His men and horses were fatigued, and he was being told that there was a greater number of "enemy" on his front than previously reported. Bearing all this in mind, he chose to not "let them scatter", by jumping headlong into the enemy's face. He knew of other cav columns approaching (even though one of them had been turned back at the Rosebud), but his sense of invulnerability and desire for glory ruled the moment. Yes, it could be argued that certain things Custer did would have been considered standard operating procedure for cav units in 1876, but ignoring reliable intelligence in favor of personal gain is not SOP, nor indigenous to the 19th or 20th Centuries. Even though we can find examples of that kind of behavior in any century in which history was recorded, it was, is, and always will be, foolish and potentially deadly. Obviously not being able to prove my next op/ed comment, I will still say that the vast majority of cav officers, subordinate or superior to a Lieutenant Colonel, would NOT have taken Custer's steps. So it can not be successfully implied that my view of his actions are biased by 20th Century thinking. They are biased by rational thinking.

: I do agree, however, with your last comment. The root of all evil is greed, which is manifested by increasingly hurtful levels of behavior through covetousness, theft, and murder.

Follow Ups:

• Regulars vs irregulars -- SOP of 1876 - not of today Beecher 06:39:51 11/11/99 (0)

Post a Followup

Name    : 
E-Mail  : 
Subject : 

Comments:
: : What "worked well" on the Washi-ta was slaughter!  What a horrible way to express what you were trying to say!  I think we can rule out the possibility of you having American Indian relatives, right?  (No, in answer to your question, I'm a white boy.)  Cavalry tactics, whether on horseback or in the cockpit of a Huey Cobra, rely on accurate intelligence (info), and then USING what intelligence you have to make wise decisions.  No person who has never seen battle conditions can say for sure what he/she would do, but Custer was NOT being attacked nor pursued, and he WAS being advised by all those with him, both red and white, NOT to attack.  His men and horses were fatigued, and he was being told that there was a greater number of "enemy" on his front than previously reported.  Bearing all this in mind, he chose to not "let them scatter", by jumping headlong into the enemy's face.  He knew of other cav columns approaching (even though one of them had been turned back at the Rosebud), but his sense of invulnerability and desire for glory ruled the moment.  Yes, it could be argued that certain things Custer did would have been considered standard operating procedure for cav units in 1876, but ignoring reliable intelligence in favor of personal gain is not SOP, nor indigenous to the 19th or 20th Centuries.  Even though we can find examples of that kind of behavior in any century in which history was recorded, it was, is, and always will be, foolish and potentially deadly.  Obviously not being able to prove my next op/ed comment, I will still say that the vast majority of cav officers, subordinate or superior to a Lieutenant Colonel, would NOT have taken Custer's steps.  So it can not be successfully implied that my view of his actions are biased by 20th Century thinking.  They are biased by rational thinking.

: : I do agree, however, with your last comment.  The root of all evil is greed, which is manifested by increasingly hurtful levels of behavior through covetousness, theft, and murder.



Optional Link URL:  
Link Title:         
Optional Image URL: