Gerry
Junior Member
Peter
Posts: 63
|
Post by Gerry on May 6, 2012 18:36:10 GMT -6
Peter Thompson was shot in the hand and arm early morning of the 26th while performing his duty by taking the hill alongside Private Meador H Co during Benteen’s first charge. While retrieving water he was shot in the head. Private Tim Jordan made a sling for his arm before Thompson went for water. Sgt Knipe told Thompson he”will never make it back alive”. Pvt Thompson was not part of the volunteer water carriers protected by riflemen, he was alone. In his case his MOH was not in the performance of his duties but was in action with an enemy, as he distinguished himself conspicuously at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty for his fellow soldiers. Susan Thompson spoke and wrote of her father’s deep furrow about 3 inches long in his scalp. As I said before, that all medals awarded pre 1918 did not fit today’s standards. There are still many of the soldier’s actions that would fit. I used Thompson as an example. Each other individual I have not studied. During two days of battle at the LBH many men fought and many died, each in their own way, in their own time. I will not agree with the statement of no one deserves a metal. Most all of us are not worthy, and will hardly understand what is in a man in those situations. Most recipients are very humble people and did what they thought were right. There are many reasons each of us believe or disbelieve. End result is it our own believe and that’s all it is. Slaper…Everyone loves Slaper for calling Thompson a liar. Since Slaper believes, thus it is so. Of course Slaper never said what Thompson was lying about. That fight happened 50 years after the battle at the anniversary. Does that make Slaper more or less credible since it took place 50 years after? Thompson was critical on Reno and Slaper was with Reno in the valley and Slaper disagreed with Thompson’s words. Then to top it off Slaper claimed he was with the water carriers and was not given a metal and thus he never received his stipend. In 1930 Slaper was still complaining about it in a letter to Windolph. What I will take away from this exercise is: Today’s society is very cynical and is willing to tromp upon all aspects of history. Everything is up for discussion and noting is to believed, nothing. Each person is suspect and it is alright to walk upon their graves. No one is exempt. These pro-boards prove it, and I too participate. Gerry
|
|
|
Post by benteen on May 6, 2012 19:01:56 GMT -6
I believe there are 2 parts to Peter Thompson. One as a story teller, the other as a soldier. Often times they are mixed together.
As a story teller, I dont believe him and his story.
But as a soldier I believe he was a fine one. This man risked his life for his wounded comrades. Not once but twice even after he had been wounded the first time.Try convincing someone that has been wounded doing something that it isnt dangerous. Thompson knew full well that he may very well be killed going for this water, but went again anyway. That is a brave man. That we may debate which medal he would have been awarded today is a fair statement. But although I have a problem with "Dugout Doug" being awarded the MOH, have have no problem at all for this brave man recieving our nations highest award
Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on May 6, 2012 19:57:10 GMT -6
I believe in Slapper's case the Company Commander wanted MOH for everyone or none.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on May 6, 2012 20:08:55 GMT -6
Gerry now you have confused me. Purple hearts are for being wounded are you saying they are equivalent to MOH in Thompson's time.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 6, 2012 20:30:52 GMT -6
Gerry: Post the citation if you have it. If Thompson did not deserve the Medal by 1917 standards it would most likely have been withdrawn.
With the citation, it can be looked at with today's standards in mind and we may be able to decide based on the written narative what medal if any would be awarded for similar actions today.
It is a fairly simple process. If he was written up for something other than as a water carrier, and his particular action was seperate, but lumped into the water carriers as a matter of policy or convienience, I would think you would wish to know it. If on the other hand he was written up only on the basis of carrying water, it still seems questionable if that alone would be worthy of award of the Medal of Honor by the standards that exist today. That is why we now have degrees of awards. It is no longer one or nothing. That is also why the standards must be very high, and only those select few receive our nations highest honor. People like MacArthur and others awarded the Medal of Honor for homefront morale and publicity cheapens the award for those that truely deserve.
You must also realize that for every award of the Medal there are probably a hundred actions that were equally deserving and of which no notice was taken, no one observed, or some lazy bum did not take the trouble to write up. Mitchell Red Cloud is one of my personal heroes,but if no one went back up on that hill no one would have ever known what he did.
Now read Red Cloud's citation, especially the part about being tied to a tree because he could no longer stand, being wounded eight times, and providing time for the evacuation of wounded soldiers, and then look at Thompson's, compare the two and I believe you will see the difference in standards.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on May 6, 2012 20:51:51 GMT -6
Well, that's not "through the head", but the citation is quoted as saying it. And the go-to source for the surety here is......Knipe? Sgt. Kanipe? And there could well have been a furrow in Thompson's head, but that's from his daughter, not a coldly objective source and, in any case, not a witness to how obtained. The Wiki says he could write after his hand healed two years later, but no mention of the scalp. Of course, the Wiki also says his name is Peter Thomas in the capsule.
I'm also now suspicious of the MOH citation. Is that how it was written when first issued, or a helpful summation by another source later on? I do not know, and I do not doubt he was wounded and deserved a medal, but it is wrong to allow people to think it was for actions it would be awarded for today. It was not through the head, but through the hand, but once it appeared as such he could ride it for a while.
Didn't you use as part of your posting signature that Thompson won the MOH? I'll have to look.
|
|
|
Post by benteen on May 6, 2012 21:41:53 GMT -6
Dark Cloud,
I understand what you are saying and will not argue. It is obvious he wasnt hit in the head, but he was hit. But by all accounts he did go twice to get water for his comrades why not just leave it at that, and give him credit for being a brave soldier. I agree that his stroy is bogus, but let him rest in peace as a brave soldier
Be well Danl
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 6, 2012 23:01:43 GMT -6
The Thompson citation was non-specific boiler plate. Had that been written today, by today's standards I think there would be nothing more awarded to him than an Army Achievement Medal. Other than the fact he was wounded which would merit a Purple Heart (itself a badge of honor to be very proud of), there is absolutely nothing in this citation that one can point to and say yes this was extreme bravery under fire. The bottom line here is that Thompson could have been an 1876 version of Audie Murphy and no one would have known it if one goes by the citation alone.
|
|
Reddirt
Full Member
Life is But a Dream...
Posts: 208
|
Post by Reddirt on May 11, 2012 18:58:48 GMT -6
I agree with you that this subject matter has been discussed satisfactorily. My only concern is that you suggested that the value of this prestigious award was (para-phase) "given for re-enlisting." I merely asked for an example of that and the proverbial stink hit the wall. I was afraid ole Fred was going to pop his gourd . Again, I find myself in the dilemma of not being able to ascertain an example of what you have quoted a second time (even though Quinn cannon professed that you did not make the statement, he seemed to have gotten upset as well! Could you give an example of what was not given for 'above and beyond stuff soley'. Now that's funny!!! ;D. Very good points, thank you!
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 11, 2012 19:06:42 GMT -6
RED DIRT: Multiple Choice Question. What is it that best describes your ability to post on this matter?
A- You cannot read or speak the English Language B- You have a block of cement where your brains should be C- You are a complete idiot D- All of the above
CLUE: THE ANSWER IS D ALL OF THE ABOVE
|
|
|
Post by ulan on May 18, 2012 9:21:53 GMT -6
Is that part of his story is pure fantasy?
Did Peter Thompson see Reno´s battalion fighting?
"I then looked across the river at the Indian Village, it was all in commotion. One party of Indians were dashing down the river; others were rushing toward the upper end of the village. The cause of this commotion was Major Reno with three companies of men about a mile distant from the upper end of the village, dashing along in a gallop towards them. The officers were riding in order, a little in advance of their respective companies. It was a grand sight to see those men charging down upon the village of their enemies, who outnumbered them many times. The well-trained horses were kept well in hand. There was no straggling; they went together, neck and neck, their tails streaming in the wind, and the riders arms gleaming in the sunlight. It was no wonder that the Indians were in great commotion when they beheld the bold front presented by the cavalry. But alas! How deceptive are appearances. The cavalry dashed into the village where one of the noncommissioned officers halted and struck up the company's guidon alongside of a teepee before he was shot from his horse. The halt was but for a moment, for the Indians came rushing towards them in great numbers. At this juncture the dry grass caught on fire threatening the destruction of the village, but the squaws fearless as the braves themselves fought the fire and tore down the teepees which were in danger of burning. Major Reno seeing that he was greatly outnumbered ordered an immediate retreat to a grove of cottonwood trees, which stood on the bank of the river about a mile from the upper end of the village, where they found shelter for their horses and protection for themselves..."
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 18, 2012 9:34:26 GMT -6
Fantasy - Just like a trip to Disneyland. Peter lived in his own Magic Kingdom.
|
|
|
Post by fred on May 18, 2012 10:15:12 GMT -6
Ulan,
In my opinion, the Peter Thompson story is almost entirely fanciful... hardly a word of truth. I have used it as background material, but for his tale of adventure, it is complete nonsense.
There is a fellow named "Gerry," however, who may be the world's leading expert on Thompson and you will see his posts here from time to time. Rather than take my word for it, you should discuss it with Gerry. He is a very good fellow.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by ulan on May 18, 2012 10:25:28 GMT -6
I try to imagine how Reno moved to the indian camp. Is it only Thompson who´s telling about a charge with their horses in full galopp?
If Reno just ride down near the camp and than build up a skirmish line, what kind of a attack was this?
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 18, 2012 10:44:00 GMT -6
Ulan: Strictly speaking it was a form of offensive maneuver we term - movement to contact. It is characterized by a forward movement to a point where contact is established, and then dependent upon the situation forward movement will either continue if resitance is light, or will force the moving force to stop deploy, engage in a firefight to overcome heavier resitance OR become a pivot point where follow on forces move to the left or right in hopes of determining a weak point or flank which can be assualted by them to force a decision in the matter.
In this instance there was no follow on force available in the immediate rear, and the force on Reno's right was already beside or ahead of him, out of communications with him, and unable to conduct a meaningfull supporting action.
|
|