|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 12, 2014 18:48:37 GMT -6
Getting back to some semblance of reality, and reading Will's post very carefully, does anyone think that a non Custer in command would have, first gone up onto that ridge, and having done so, knowing the boss had just been whacked, make the ill advised decision to move further north once reaching Calhoun Hill. That move north was pure Custer. It was a movement made by a man who was deploying a division not five woefully understrength companies. The natural reaction to such an event, the soldiers reaction would be to consolidate what forces you had available, and then access the situation. I have a great deal of respect for DC, but this picture he paints just flies in the face of everything I know about an army, and the way that units and the people that make them up react to sudden crisis. There was not a damned thing wrong with what Custer did the entire day, had he been in the van of a three thousand man division. There was everything wrong with what he did while in the van of a 600 man regiment. Wow, tell me how you really feel, talk about regurgitation. Your last statement makes a great deal of sense, if he was not wounded. Warriors describe Custer's horse as the horse of the officer who was shot. How much credence you give warrior's statements is up to you.
As stated, I am new here, and a major flaw in my thinking is that, I may tend to pay more attention to what the "hostiles" say than I should.
Regards, Tom
P.S. I would love to see that rifle I read about on one of the other theads!
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 12, 2014 18:53:24 GMT -6
Tom: Were you with them when they flew the Carabous, or later when they had the 130's. Flew out of Middle River in one of the former once to Fort Drum in January and liked to freeze my ass off. 135th is now gone and both the flying squadrons are part of the 175th Wing. Ted Warfield was a good guy. Sorry to say, I' so old that they had HU/SA16's O-2'c then C-7 Caribou, then C-130. 1969- 1994 Ret. E-7
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 12, 2014 19:04:12 GMT -6
If you do not pay attention to what the Indians had to say, I believe you would be ill advised. As long as you realize what they had to say was filtered through translators, who most probably put their spin on things, out of necessity in most cases, and without intentional distortion. But they are distorted, and that is why it has taken Fred nearly ten years to sift through these accounts so that he might present an accurate picture of events (in so far as possible) and not taking sides that favor one or the other.
It is just as wrong to take what Army participants say at face value. Those too must be sorted and sifted. Benteen's "It was a rout. They were scattered like corn" Very true. It was and they were, but that does not mean it was a rout from start to finish, only finish, and that also does not mean they started scattered.
It is also well not to take the statements of later Army observers who opine woulda, coulda, shoulda. They are all without exception crap. None of them were there, and while I can opine on the Bulge or the early days of Korea or Guadalcanal, I was not there, I was not subject to the same stress of battle. I was not subject to any of the events that shaped the decision making process.
You go ahead and believe anything you wish. You can neither prove you are correct, nor can I prove you wrong. Just talk to Scott on or off board and have him tell you all about gunshot trauma, and apply logic based upon that conversation.
My wife flew out of Middle River on one of those C130s. Down to Bragg/Pope I think. That was before we were married.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 12, 2014 21:28:52 GMT -6
I' so old that they had ... C-7 Caribou, then C-130. "Old"? You call that "old"? I flew from Tan Son Nhut to Di-An in a Caribou when the army still flew them just prior to turning them over to the Air Force. "Old," my ass! You're a young pup. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 12, 2014 21:41:54 GMT -6
... but this picture he paints just flies in the face of everything I know about an army, and the way that units and the people that make them up react to sudden crisis. I agree with you completely and I think DC is in error here. By the way, someone made the comment or alluded to a belief TWC would have assumed command were GAC incapacitated. I disagree completely. First of all, he was the 7th-ranking captain in the command, ranking only McDougall, and he had been a captain for less than seven months. Second, Keogh was the ranking officer, followed by Yates, and the latter rode with GAC and TWC. Yates was no shrinking violet and had been a captain for nine years. In my mind, there isn't a chance either Keogh-- or Yates, if the command split-- would have abrogated either their authority or responsibility had GAC been hit. If anything, Tom would have been sent back to his company as soon as Big Brother had been hit and someone else took over. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 12, 2014 21:50:42 GMT -6
Fred: I am not as sure on this matter as you. It is rare, but not without precedent that the commander can designate the chain of command, and without regard to rank or date of rank. As I said it is rare. I think you are correct though, but still hold it open as a possibility.
I had two interesting conversations with a board member this weekend. During the second it occurred to me that despite what other ramifications you discover, in the new book has to how we see this battle, I believe it will be absolute proof that the move north was a deliberate act as opposed to one forced by circumstance. You think about that and let me know by PM.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 12, 2014 22:22:48 GMT -6
It is rare, but not without precedent that the commander can designate the chain of command, and without regard to rank or date of rank. I agree with you; it happened a few times during the Civil War, but out of the ordinary and in a couple of cases, there was the weeping and gnashing of teeth prior. In one case, I seem to remember General Logan-- an aggressive commander, but a politician not a West Pointer-- was sent home to campaign for Lincoln rather than being passed over for command by a junior general. There were one or two other cases, as well. I just don't think that would have happened here, especially knowing GAC's penchant for protocol, wounded or not. Not sure what you mean here.... I do believe-- and don't need the "new book" to first state it, Custer's move north was clearly deliberate and not forced by circumstances. Too much evidence: anecdotal, archaeological, and circumstantial to be otherwise. PM me if I mis-read what you mean. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by trisha on Jan 13, 2014 4:27:00 GMT -6
Gentleman where did this theory of Custer being wounded originate? best wishes Trisha.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 13, 2014 5:34:29 GMT -6
Gentleman where did this theory of Custer being wounded originate? best wishes Trisha. First let me say that I am rarely referred to as a gentleman, you were probably speaking to the others. With that in mind, I will give you a short version of one of the stories I have read. Warrior at the ford, White Bull says "the officer on the sorrel horse four white stockings" was one of those shot while crossing the Little Bighorn River. He goes on to state that this officer "fell in the river". This event was also witnessed by warrior Pretty Shield. The description of the horse fits Vic.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 13, 2014 6:15:35 GMT -6
I' so old that they had ... C-7 Caribou, then C-130. "Old"? You call that "old"? I flew from Tan Son Nhut to Di-An in a Caribou when the army still flew them just prior to turning them over to the Air Force. "Old," my ass! You're a young pup. Best wishes, Fred. Fred, you allude to the time long, long ago, in a land far, far away. I never put my toe in those waters. I have two(now passed) friends one an original Navy Seal, the other USAF officer(Silver Star) who did however. On different occasions we discussed chains of command much like you and Quincannon are now. Officers and enlisted are often no more than tools in your tool box. One needs to select the correct tool for the job. Problems arise when relationships and politics come into play. Witness the whole Vietnam structure, political at the top allowing the war to be run from Washington and by once fine officers corrupted by politics (Taylor and Westmoreland). I stop as here as it will become regurgitation, and a rant, and I am getting off point. Sorry
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jan 13, 2014 6:25:11 GMT -6
The command had to navigate the ford at the gallop.If Custer went down, the command could not be brought to a halt Key Stone cops fashion.The first troop at least would have had cross and there would have been a pile up of the troops further back.All in all a much more significant event than a horse's stockings. But the battle is jam packed with such unproveable trivia.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 13, 2014 6:44:21 GMT -6
Fred, speaking of that land far away, on this date in 1951 The First Indochina War began with The Battle of Vinh Yen, which the French won. As we know it was all down hill from there.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 13, 2014 7:41:43 GMT -6
Tom: Let me refer you to the opening chapter of Bernard Fall's Street Without Joy where he has the opening of the Indo China War in 1946, and goes on to elaborate on that.
Do you really want to base your entire view of this battle on such a very thin threat of evidence? Which ford crossing the river? How does White Bull determine an officer? How does he determine that "officer" was Custer? Can you conclusively state that there was no other horse on that battlefield that did not match that discretion? Has it ever been known for an Indian to puff his chest and brag of his military achievements and have it later discovered that he has somewhat overstated his case in the interests of storytelling. On the other hand it could just a goddamned lie.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 13, 2014 9:05:28 GMT -6
Witness the whole Vietnam structure, political at the top allowing the war to be run from Washington and by once fine officers corrupted by politics (Taylor and Westmoreland). Tom, I agree with you completely. And by the way, I know about that interference first hand. We were on an operation-- I believe it was in Tay Ninh Province-- when a unit of one of those Light Infantry Brigades was either ambushed or came under heavy attack. I was a company commander in the First Infantry Division running convoys in support of Tropic Lightning (the 25th Inf. Div.) and as such had dual radios on my jeep. I could switch channels back and forth and wound up monitoring either division or some such unit and heard bits and pieces of the battle raging not terribly far from us. It was at night I seem to remember. Anyway, unless I am compressing time here-- after all, this was 1966-- the LIB-- the 199th ??-- was taking a beating, but I heard some senior officer saying something about being "on the line," directly with the White House!!!!! Whether he meant that literally or he was being directed by the Pentagon, I have no idea, but someone in the U. S. was directing certain flows of the battle. It may have even involved border crossing, since I believe we were very close to Cambodia. Some how, Bill DePuy got involved; took command, fired the brigadier general who was CG of the LIB because wounded or dead were left on the field... and on and on and on. Memory is too vague here to be definitive, but I do remember that business about the White House. It may have even been sarcasm for all I know, but it was interesting none the less. The tragedy of that whole night-- to me, my driver, and a couple of my lieutenants as we were listening-- was that we actually heard on the radio a young lieutenant die. Not much bothers me about having been there, but I will never forget what I believe to be his last words. What a tragedy.... Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 13, 2014 9:07:22 GMT -6
... where did this theory of Custer being wounded originate? I do not know, Trisha. But it has really thrown things off, and as I have said many times, I find no basis for it. It is mere speculation. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|