|
Post by trisha on Oct 16, 2013 16:31:03 GMT -6
thank you all I didn't know he was ordered to testify I suppose newspapers paid good money for stories and if he was short of money it was easy way to get some.find it very hard to form an opinion of him.there are so many different views given of him.as to his military skills I have to leave that to you guys and his biographers as my knowledge of military campaign tactics are zero.my sympathy is for those poor guys on 13 dollars a month suffering awful conditions and knowing if the N.A.caught them what fate awaited them.Heros everyone in my opinion.best wishes.Trisha.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 16, 2013 17:19:46 GMT -6
QC, I'll grant you integrity, but don't men have bad days with bad decisions (50-50 calls that all come in wrong) and at other times they can't make a mistake. Lee at Gettysburg did not shine. Stuart neither. But they had enough good days to be icons. Just saying, isn't competence being right often and not always? Washington can be graded badly, and has been, but he made the big political decisions on the nose and kept the faith with his men. It's the day that's focused on, rather than a career, that makes it often unfair.
Again, I agree with you more than not about Custer, but in my case it's because I despise those who seek to elevate themselves on destroying Reno and especially Benteen. If you judge the three by the same criteria, any criteria relevant, Custer loses every time. Major failure is the deciding factor.
Reno has issues and he isn't really likeable, but I think we have to give him benefit of the doubt because he was there and whatever he did saved most of his men. Benteen did the right things for the right reasons and oozes competence. You can feel the regard for him reading others, and you can feel the fear of Lee at the RCOI, who was not coming within a mile of taking him on or making him angry because he knew he's be hammered in the court and forever after. Suspect Benteen was scary when angry, verbally and physically.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 16, 2013 17:37:35 GMT -6
Reno has issues and he isn't really likeable, but I think we have to give him benefit of the doubt because he was there and whatever he did saved most of his men. Benteen did the right things for the right reasons and oozes competence. You can feel the regard for him reading others, and you can feel the fear of Lee at the RCOI, who was not coming within a mile of taking him on or making him angry because he knew he's be hammered in the court and forever after. Suspect Benteen was scary when angry, verbally and physically. Best short description of Benteen I have ever read. With your permission, I am going to use it. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 16, 2013 18:39:33 GMT -6
DC: The thing that marks Washington, Lee, and Stuart is that all three had integrity. Washington and Lee made many mistakes throughout their wars. Washington learned from his and tried never to repeat them. Lee could do no wrong from the Seven Days to Chancellorsville, discounting Malvern Hill. At Gettysburg and thereafter it did not matter if he did it right or not. He was beaten, and beaten by factors and events far from the battlefield. Stuart made two gross errors that I know of, Viedersville, and Ox Hill. He got a bad rap in the Gettysburg Campaign, and took the blame like a man. All three exhibited a high degree of integrity win, lose, or draw. No whining. No pissing or moaning.
Custer had nothing but bad days when he operated independently or semi-independently. When you give Custer the keys to your shiny new car, you had better ride with him if you want your car back. He was a piss poor soldier, and an even more piss poor human being.
|
|
|
Post by bc on Oct 16, 2013 19:11:12 GMT -6
Mustang is used, as stated in the naval service. Never heard it used in the Army. Murphy was given a battlefield commission and remained assigned to Company B, 15th Infantry, the same unit he served in as an enlisted man, an exception to policy. After the war he served in the 36th Infantry Division, Texas Army National Guard, and later in the USAR. He never got above Major, I think. My room mate, one of them anyway, at Benning taking the Basic Course received a battlefield commission in Vietnam, while serving in the 1st ID. He completed that tour as an officer as a platoon leader, then came to Benning to learn to be a platoon leader. He was riffed in 74, reverted to his enlisted rank and rose to become first a battalion, then a brigade, then a division Command Sergeant Major. Chuck, I suspect he did more teaching at Benning than learning. What did he get riffed for unless you mean reduction in force. 74 is when I got out and most everyone coming back from Nam were given early outs as they didn't really have a place for them except for the airborne qualified ones needed in the 82nd and 101st as they were the USARSTRIKE units being kept at 115% so they could hopefully field a 100% unit in a fight. Except for the true professional soldiers, the rest coming back from Nam were really struggling when they had to adapt down to the peace time army level. The daily structure was so much different to deal with. In a way that probably hasn't changed much over time. Daily camp life was much harder for soldiers than when they were on campaign as the 7th was. bc
|
|
|
Post by bc on Oct 16, 2013 19:16:11 GMT -6
DC: The thing that marks Washington, Lee, and Stuart is that all three had integrity. Washington and Lee made many mistakes throughout their wars. Washington learned from his and tried never to repeat them. Lee could do no wrong from the Seven Days to Chancellorsville, discounting Malvern Hill. At Gettysburg and thereafter it did not matter if he did it right or not. He was beaten, and beaten by factors and events far from the battlefield. Stuart made two gross errors that I know of, Viedersville, and Ox Hill. He got a bad rap in the Gettysburg Campaign, and took the blame like a man. All three exhibited a high degree of integrity win, lose, or draw. No whining. No pissing or moaning. Custer had nothing but bad days when he operated independently or semi-independently. When you give Custer the keys to your shiny new car, you had better ride with him if you want your car back. He was a piss poor soldier, and an even more piss poor human being. Stuart also made one big fatal error and it was his last error. Custer made a big fatal error as well or perhaps 210 of them. bc
|
|
|
Post by bc on Oct 16, 2013 19:27:01 GMT -6
LTC Custer had closely allied himself with the Democratic party. In 1875 he promised he could deliver proof of corruption of the Grant administration. The New York Herald sent a reporter to work directly for Custer for about 6 months. No evidence were found, since the allegations were false. This did not prevent the Herald from publishing false allegations anyway. There was corruption in the War Department. Belknap was receiving bribes through his wives. These bribes did not have any link to the Custer accusations. The critical element for Clymer and his allies was not just to take out Belknap, but link it to Grant. Custer said he could deliver this link. He failed. His testimony is riddled with lies and distortions. It was denounced by his entire chain of command. Note that Custer also made time during his trip to DC to also cast false accusations and slander against Merritt. These charges had been previously investigated, and were known to be false at the time he made them. Custer had been involved in several shady, unethical business deals that went bust. He was desperate for money. He kept trying to extend his leave that winter to deal with his political and business deals. He finally was denied by Terry, Sheridan and Sherman and ordered to return to duty. He then met with the Herald, and Clymer's staff. The testimony order immediately followed. Custer's extended absence from his command (Sep-May) was no accident, or twist of fate. He planned and fought for it. He put his own interests ahead of that of his unit, the Army, and the Nation; as he had done every moment of his life. Will, they had a speaker at the LBHA conference who got into all the inner workings with the wives, girlfriends, and the affairs between congressman and administration officials. Belknap ended up broke but his wife made off with a boatload of cash. The scandals between them were very intriguing so Linda had to buy the book. None of them could get away with such a scandal today. The subject matter of a Belknap hearing today would take a back seat to the stuff that was going on with the women. That was the first I had heard of it and one of these days I'd like to read that book. bc
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 16, 2013 19:30:08 GMT -6
Britt: Yes reduction in force. Those battlefield commissions were USAR not RA. The only way you could stay on active duty is to resume enlisted status. Your other option was to take your commission and go inactive in the NG or USAR. If you had fourteen or fifteen under your belt as many of these guys did you would be crazy not to go back. You are going to be given the option upon retirement to either retire at highest rank held or highest pay grade, whichever is to your advantage. Heaviest hits were in the Infantry and Field Artillery. Lot of WO helicopter pilots were given their walking papers as well. That was one of the reasons that National Guard aviation units were so good for twenty or more years. They had such a high density of combat experienced pilots.
I suppose you are referring to Yellow Tavern. By that time the Confederate Cavalry were a sand lot team competing against the yankees, the New York Yankees.
To bad they did not have reality TV in those days. Keeping Up With The Belknaps might get very good ratings.
|
|
|
Post by bc on Oct 16, 2013 19:57:34 GMT -6
Keeping up with the Belknaps would be better than the other crap on. Lately I watch ME tv beginning at 10:30 pm. First Perry Mason and then the Untouchables. It is a little late but tonight it is Al Capone against the Purple Gang. Watched it when I was a kid. When I walked down the street in Wichita at night and a car was coming, I would run and hide behind a parked car thinking that I was going to get machine gunned by the car driving by.
bc
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 16, 2013 21:13:16 GMT -6
Britt: If you ever went to the neighborhood I grew up in you could fulfill your childhood fantasy, with real bullets. Of course it is civilized now, only one, maybe two murders a day.
|
|
|
Post by bc on Oct 16, 2013 21:30:40 GMT -6
Mustang is used, as stated in the naval service. Never heard it used in the Army. Murphy was given a battlefield commission and remained assigned to Company B, 15th Infantry, the same unit he served in as an enlisted man, an exception to policy. After the war he served in the 36th Infantry Division, Texas Army National Guard, and later in the USAR. He never got above Major, I think. My room mate, one of them anyway, at Benning taking the Basic Course received a battlefield commission in Vietnam, while serving in the 1st ID. He completed that tour as an officer as a platoon leader, then came to Benning to learn to be a platoon leader. He was riffed in 74, reverted to his enlisted rank and rose to become first a battalion, then a brigade, then a division Command Sergeant Major. I just thought of Audie Murphy just now when they showed a rather obese upbeat acting young vet on the news who was commenting about the bill passed and signed tonight to keep the gov open. Said he was glad that his VA check for PTSD would keep coming. I remember that Murphy said before he died in the plane crash that he had mental issues, flashbacks, and nightmares from the war, drank heavily, and gambled and lost till he was broke. However that is not surprising based upon what he went through. Murphy didn't go whining to the VA looking for a check. I think that for many of them claiming PTSD just for being present in country somewhere, the P stands for Pretend. It just takes away from those who truly deserve it. I could be wrong about the obese guy and maybe he has been through a hundred firefights but I doubt it. bc
|
|
|
Post by bc on Oct 16, 2013 21:33:54 GMT -6
Britt: If you ever went to the neighborhood I grew up in you could fulfill your childhood fantasy, with real bullets. Of course it is civilized now, only one, maybe two murders a day. Well we were the last white family to move from the block in NE Wichita. I think they now average a murder a week there. bc
|
|
|
Post by trisha on Oct 17, 2013 2:26:33 GMT -6
Good morning all people in UK when I was a child (60s)thought the Welsh valleys were rough we didn't have any murders though.I'm reading Walter camp at the moment the interviews all seem to be years after the battle.I know there was no official enquiry until RCOI but did General Terry conduct any interviews with participants after the Battle and if he did were they published? understand he was anxious to get wounded moved to safety but what happened when they got back? unsure what to make of N.A.accounts .best wishes Trisha.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 17, 2013 9:17:16 GMT -6
Trisha: This does not answer your question. Far from it, but it has given me an opportunity to chaw on the bone that I frequently do in relation to the army of the late 19th century.
Today we have military history detachments organized for the sole purpose of recording battle narratives, and feeding these both to the U S Army Center of Military History, and the Center for Lessons Learned as well as the various battle labs. None of this was known in the 19th century, and it is not because it was not needed. Indeed it was, for there was no organized method of finding out what happened, deriving the lessons from a particular battle or conflict at large and incorporating those lessons into doctrine so the mistakes and/or successes of the moment could be retained for the future. This is a necessary function of every army in every time, and it just indicates how very poor and unprofessional we were in those days. An action in the Lanno Estacado, could very well have saved lives and been the difference between victory and defeat on the Yellowstone, for instance, a few years later, had we had a systematic way of evaluating battle.
The Army of the late 19th century was not a military force as we have come to think of one, but rather an afterthought, kept out of sight and out of mind.
One such lesson that could have been gleaned from LBH is the urgent requirement for a relatively rapid fire repeating long arm, yet some U S Troops went into battle in the Spanish American war more than twenty years later with essentially the same long arm that was LBH vintage.
I may add to my posts from time to time today though Saturday intermittently, as I am quite tied up with painting the kitchen, and having to fend off interference from the Madam's doo dads. Pain in the butt, thy name is enamel.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Oct 18, 2013 3:19:12 GMT -6
Hi Chuck, I hope you are degreasing those walls and ceilings with sugar soap first, you don’t want you paint to split now.
Ian.
|
|