|
Post by crzhrs on Dec 6, 2020 9:00:57 GMT -6
I don't think anyone can question GAC's bravery or "enthusiasm".
He may be considered someone you would want in a fight but not someone you want to hang out with!
However, there is a difference between being brave and being a fool!
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Dec 8, 2020 3:04:57 GMT -6
He may be considered someone you would want in a fight but not someone you want to hang out with! I think he might have had some interesting stories from the CW and his days at West Point. But I`d rather not serve under him as my regimental commander :S Noggy
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Dec 9, 2020 14:48:51 GMT -6
There were a number of better qualified officers that are overlooked by history that had better records fighting Indians AND survived:
Ranald McKenzie had overwhelming success not only against the Cheyenne (Dull Knife Fight) after the LBH but basically ended the Comanche Wars with his attack at Palo Duro Canyon during the Red River War, aka Buffalo War of 1874.
Unfortunately for McKenzie he suffered mental "issues" due possibly from a head injury when he fell from a wagon, had to retire from the military and later died at age 50 virtually forgotten.
Custer on the other hand suffered the most famous defeat in US history and lives on.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Dec 13, 2020 9:22:20 GMT -6
I wonder if it the most famous defeat among our young people.
Regards
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Dec 14, 2020 11:35:18 GMT -6
Depends on what defeat we are talking about.
Super Bowl
Presidential Election
Unfortunately history is not a strong topic not only among young people but older people as well.
This saying is something that should be a wake up call to everyone:
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it! (George Santayana-1905). In a 1948 speech to the House of Commons, Winston Churchill changed the quote slightly when he said (paraphrased), “those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.”
Our society just never learns anything from history. Study history if we don't want to keep making the same mistakes over and over again!
Of course those who make the decisions (politicians) only care about their personal agendas rather than what's good for society!
|
|
|
Post by wild on Dec 15, 2020 14:03:06 GMT -6
The problem is; history is written by the victors so you get a distorted view. best
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Dec 17, 2020 9:41:09 GMT -6
That's why it is imperative that you look at ALL sources not just those who have an agenda.
History always has two sides of the story. You don't learn anything by studying just one side!
|
|
|
Post by 1ralph on Jun 12, 2022 13:46:41 GMT -6
I'm sure this is not original and may have already been discussed here, but I couldn't find it if it was. I wonder... Suppose Benteen had done what Custer's message said and was "quick." Suppose he came at the gallop, with no long watering stop at the marsh? Would he have arrived at the bluffs overlooking the west side of the stream in time to see Reno being hard pressed, but before the retreat had begun? And if he had, would he not have changed course and gone down there in support of Reno, who obviously needed help, instead of going on to Custer, who apparently wanted reinforcements rather than "help" of the kind that Reno obviously needed? If the timing works, and had this transpired it might have been a decisive game-changer. Reno would have perhaps then had the muscle to keep many Indians south of the village and maybe even enough to press forward with his attack (or what would have probably become Benteen's attack considering Reno's probably state of mind at the time) and much pressure would have been removed from Custer who might have been able to complete the pincer. I know: What if? What if? What if? What if Terry sent a flight of A-10s down the valley on a gun run? Useless ponderings, perhaps, but I do find a Benteen-Reno link-up an interesting supposition and would enjoy reading what others might have to say about it, if anything.
|
|
|
Post by 1ralph on Jun 12, 2022 14:10:50 GMT -6
I think in my last post I mentioned that "dawdled" (quotation marks used there as well) was someone else's word. If I used it myself I would have to plead quilty to putting some onus on Benteen and that I had meant it. I did not and do not. I simply don't know. I don't come here as a Custer fan. Far from it. I have spent most of my adult life despising the man. But the more I read about LBH the more my judgment becomes somewhat tempered. I have no idea where that will end up. I may decide to despise him still. I don't think he will care one way or the other. I think that Custer was overrated after the Civil War as a Indian fighter. What I see is a decline of Custer and his officers from maintaining the same rank without promotion. I think that they were suffering from burnout. Their recruits prior to the Big Horn were conscripts who were malnourished as a result of the U.S. being in a depression that occurred as a result of the rail road. I found it surprising that the Army choose the Springfield for the calvary instead of the Winchester Rifle for the war with the Indians. Perhaps this choice was about saving money by going with a single shot weapon. I also think that Benteen got a bum rap. He should have been included with the Reno attack on the village. I think with these two men together in the attack on the village. Reno would have stayed in the fight long enough for Custer strategy to work. But once Reno disengaged from the fight, it allowed the Indians focus their resources on Custer directly, but had Benteen went directly to aid Custer, he would have done it without the supply trains carrying the ammo. Without this ammo you couldn't maintain long-term engagement with the Indians. Benteen like Custer would have been slaughter. A hundred rounds with green troops last a very short time to up to 30 minutes of intense firefight.
|
|
|
Post by 1ralph on Jun 12, 2022 14:30:15 GMT -6
You have to water your horse. June is summer time and hot. If you lose your horse, you lose your ride. Custer was seen by his peers as being invincible always having good luck. Plus, many of the officers of this period looked down at the Indians as fighting men. Custer was often quoted that one troop of cavalry can take out any village no matter the size. That's why he was comfortable sending Benteen south to keep him out of the fight and glory. Plus the other officers under Benteen were likely on Custer crap list. For those who were under Custer's good side were rewarded. If Benteen rushed to link up with Custer the whole outfit would have been wipeout.
As for Custer Hill, I believe Custer occupied that position first when he deployed his wing. Once his wing came under attack which occurred after the center of the village was attack. The village deployed their warriors to attack and out flank Custer troops. Once they went into the defense under intense firefight with green troop with no fire discipline. Their ammo would be used up within 30 minutes of continues fire. After that they would bunch up with those who still had ammo. Thus, it cause their skirmish lines to shrink and be overwhelmed and destroyed. With this result Benteen would have arrived to Custer aid to wittiness their destruction and his.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jun 13, 2022 4:40:05 GMT -6
Jesus, it is too early here to drink. Benteen was sent left for a good reason. Maybe supplied to Custer by Herendeen as he and others fought these same Indians in 1874 in several locations (at the Divide and in South Fork Reno Creek, among others) the South Fork of Reno Creek would have been in a direct line of the Benteen movement. Oh, and by the way Tom Weir was one of Custer's suck ups and he was with Benteen.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by Nape Sintekiya Mani on Jun 25, 2022 5:42:03 GMT -6
I think in my last post I mentioned that "dawdled" (quotation marks used there as well) was someone else's word. If I used it myself I would have to plead quilty to putting some onus on Benteen and that I had meant it. I did not and do not. I simply don't know. I don't come here as a Custer fan. Far from it. I have spent most of my adult life despising the man. But the more I read about LBH the more my judgment becomes somewhat tempered. I have no idea where that will end up. I may decide to despise him still. I don't think he will care one way or the other. I also think that Benteen got a bum rap. He should have been included with the Reno attack on the village. I think with these two men together in the attack on the village. Reno would have stayed in the fight long enough for Custer strategy to work. Reno and Benteen together might have kept the warriors in the valley occupied longer. But would Custer have had time to cross the river? And what would have happened to the mule train if he was left unprotected? With Reno and Benteen fighting down in the valley, Custer to the north trying to cross the Little Bighorn, the mule train was left high up with little protection. If the warriors had captured the train, the disaster could have been even greater. Of course they are only guesses after 146 years with more shadows than lights
|
|