|
|
Post by mac on Jul 8, 2013 4:38:38 GMT -6
When Custer leaves Reno and moves off to launch his flank attack on the Indians he must have some idea of the terrain ahead of him from his scouts. He must know there are nemerous fords for example. He must eventually see this is not good terrain for him. Is it reasonable (theoretically cause I know what happened to him) for him to go forward expecting to make a quick passage through this terrain in order to gain the valley floor behind the village. I can imagine his proximity to the enemy makes a difference but surely there are other example of risks taken by crossing dangerous terrain to gain an advantage on better ground.
Again, I know he didn't go quickly through but, would it be an acceptable risk in this situation if he had?
Cheers
|
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Jul 8, 2013 5:19:52 GMT -6
Mac; I would have thought that Custer placed himself in the hands of Mitch Bouyer, I suppose that was what he was there for, the speed that he travelled was supposed to be pretty quick, I am not sure if it was Kanipe that said ‘’we went on the jump all the way’’, plus I have heard it mentioned either here or on the other board that Custer may have halted for a while, there are reports that he watered his horses around the area were Martini met Benteen and that the Command stopped again while Custer viewed the situation fro point 3411, so I reckon one of the seniors players will confirm and add to my post (that is when they wake up, probably when you are just about to go to bed).
Ian.
|
|
jag
Full Member
Caption: IRAQI PHOTO'S -- (arrow to gun port) LOOK HERE -- SMILE -- WAIT FOR -- FLASH
Posts: 245
|
Post by jag on Jul 8, 2013 12:17:32 GMT -6
Mac; I would have thought that Custer placed himself in the hands of Mitch Bouyer, I suppose that was what he was there for, the speed that he travelled was supposed to be pretty quick, I am not sure if it was Kanipe that said ‘’we went on the jump all the way’’, plus I have heard it mentioned either here or on the other board that Custer may have halted for a while, there are reports that he watered his horses around the area were Martini met Benteen and that the Command stopped again while Custer viewed the situation fro point 3411, so I reckon one of the seniors players will confirm and add to my post (that is when they wake up, probably when you are just about to go to bed). Ian. mac, Ian, There's very little evidence, in fact none, that Custer 'stopped' anywhere on his journey downstream after departing Reno. Even Martin was the only one who mentioned anything about watering, and that one is taken to the bank, spinned and spent as the gospel truth. Yet, the same one's who say Custer did as Martin made claim to concerning the 'ye olde watering pond' are also the first to discredit other statements he made, again, because someone else or some other event made that the lie he told. Ye old pick and chose crap again. Lie about one thing and tell the gospel truth about another. In fact every man who rode downstream with Custer, to include Martin, stated emphatically that they always moved "at a gallop", "on the jump ALL the way" (Curly) etc... without any hint in their statements that they or Custer 'stopped' at any time. Yeah, they discredit Custer for being silly stupid about other things he should have done, but wont claim that same silly stupid for him to have sought a certain amount of stealth in his traipse down the right bank. And not go to the mountain to see what he already knew was there. Stupid is as stupid does. I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Jul 8, 2013 12:35:35 GMT -6
A good day to you Jag and it is nice to see you posting, to be honest old chap I mentioned the notion of the stops because I have heard these stories about Custer hanging on somewhere I am not saying that they are true but they have been floating about (probably over yonder), but the story about him watering his horses came from you, I remember you sent PM stating what Martini said about meeting Benteen, and the other stopping point I mentioned was when Custer went to see what Reno was up to in the valley, he must of stopped his Battalion before he left.
I think he did go to 3411 to view the valley and the village, and it would make good military sense to do so, didn’t Kanipe relate to this halt?
P.S. was it Curly who mentioned about on the jump all the way, if so I apologise.
Ian.
|
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Jul 8, 2013 12:52:10 GMT -6
Gentlemen,
I don't know about Custer stopping to water his horses, but in the research and review article by Capt Fred, he states according to time lines that Custer watched the valley fight for about 8 minutes from hill 3411. Does that constitute a stop or are we just discussing stopping to water horses.
Be Well
Dan
PS....Congratulation Ian on the first Englishman to win in 70 years
|
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Jul 8, 2013 12:55:31 GMT -6
Hi Dan, he was Scottish not English, my god they would cut off your Haggis’s if you said that north of the border; yes I would say that the eight minutes would count as a halt along with the watering.
Ian.
|
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Jul 8, 2013 13:46:20 GMT -6
Hi Dan, he was Scottish not English, my god they would cut off your Haggis’s if you said that north of the border; yes I would say that the eight minutes would count as a halt along with the watering. Ian. Ian, I apologize. Was going to blame the newspaper for careless reporting, but it was me who was careless. The article states that after losing the title match at the All England Club, Mr Murray became the first British man to win Wimbledon in 77 years. Be Well Dan PS....Rest assured I will NEVER go North of the border  |
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jul 8, 2013 15:53:54 GMT -6
When Custer leaves Reno and moves off to launch his flank attack on the Indians he must have some idea of the terrain ahead of him from his scouts. He must know there are nemerous fords for example. He must eventually see this is not good terrain for him. Is it reasonable (theoretically cause I know what happened to him) for him to go forward expecting to make a quick passage through this terrain in order to gain the valley floor behind the village. I can imagine his proximity to the enemy makes a difference but surely there are other example of risks taken by crossing dangerous terrain to gain an advantage on better ground. Again, I know he didn't go quickly through but, would it be an acceptable risk in this situation if he had? Cheers You may have something there mac. Hannibal crossing the Alps,The Japs attacking Singapore through the jungle,The Vietmin taking the heights around Dien Bien Phu.History is littered with examples of armies using difficult ground to gain an advantage. There can be little doubt that Custer knew what the terrain was like ahead of him.The entire landscape of Montana is a moonscape with the exception of the 2.5 acres along the LBH occupied by Indians, |
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jul 9, 2013 1:41:42 GMT -6
The point has been made by DC that no sane commander would take his troops into such a landscape.Of course the purpose of the exercise was not to take position here but to cross the river and engage the Indians on the flats.
|
|
jag
Full Member
Caption: IRAQI PHOTO'S -- (arrow to gun port) LOOK HERE -- SMILE -- WAIT FOR -- FLASH
Posts: 245
|
Post by jag on Jul 9, 2013 6:31:54 GMT -6
The point has been made by DC that no sane commander would take his troops into such a landscape.Of course the purpose of the exercise was not to take position here but to cross the river and engage the Indians on the flats. Not to be facetious here. But I have to ask about the perceived 'purpose of the exercise'. That being what we know he, Custer, did because at some point they went there and remained there, as in dead. And what we think he was trying to do, as you suggest. One of a possible zillion others. And neither seems to match up with what he should have known from his personal helicopter ride to the tipsy tops of those bluffs, where in a repel jump and an 8 to 80 minutes or 8 day delay there that allowed more than enough time for him have seen - over, around and through the wimpy trails of dust what he needed to know, just had to have waited, no ifs, ands, or's or buts about it, and obviously had to have - to see what he wasted all that time to see, else why do it? And then only to end up dead on the dumbest ground there to fight on, over or even for. As for Ian.... "but the story about him watering his horses came from you" NO, NO, NO it did not. It came from John Martin's testimony at the Reno Court of Inquiry. I had absolutely nothing to do with it, and you can't make me, so there, take that, stuff it up your Custer engraved Meerschaum pipe and smoke it. |
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Jul 9, 2013 6:41:46 GMT -6
Jesus Mary and Joseph Jag, I don’t mean that you actually invented the story, I meant that you first brought it to my attention a few years back, I hadn’t gotten hold of a copy the RCOI then (I have now of course) and you sent me a PM (Which I still have) stating his testimony.
I have recently quit smoking by the way.
Ian.
|
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Jul 9, 2013 7:31:43 GMT -6
I see different opinions on why Custer fought over this terrain which to me all have logic. For me, I look at what Capt Benteen said. "It was a running gun fight" and "Some orders were given". Now did Benteen mean by "Some orders were given" because he saw what was LT Calhouns skirmish line and it broke down and THEN it became a running gunfight (Which I believe) or did he mean it was a running gunfight from the beginning lets say Ford B, which I believe Richard and some others believe. If the later is the case then it would explain why Custer fought where he did. He didn't have a choice, he was driven to where they died. I don't remember who it was, I think a Confederate general (Maybe Longstreet) said "The enemy has a vote in the outcome of a battle" well in this case maybe the enemy had a vote in where Custer went.Just a thought.
Be Well
Dan
|
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Jul 9, 2013 8:00:35 GMT -6
Hi Dan, I believe that a running gun fight did take place around the Keogh sector, but to have running gun fight you must first be dismounted, so that could mean that a portion or two thirds of Keogh’s men were in fact either dismounted or preparing to dismount and either in position or about to take up positions, if however all of Keogh’s men were still mounted when the warriors surged up on them then they would have done a Reno, so I think that Capt. Benteen was right in a way that ‘’some orders were given’’ and those orders were for a skirmish line (L Trp) and later a foray (C Trp) towards the river to dismount and shoot up any warriors creeping up towards the right flank.
Ian.
|
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jul 9, 2013 8:55:13 GMT -6
San Jacinto: Anyone coming on that field after the battle would be struck by two things, IF he had no previous knowledge of what transpired, and it was much to early for testimony from participants to come rolling in.
1) How could the Mexican Army be surprised by an attack that was conducted over a flat field?
2) The Mexican Army ran for their lives and the positions of the bodies show this conclusively with a trail of bodies leading from the breastwork all the way to the rear where bodies were floating face down in Peggy's Lake.
Neither of these first impressions were true. The field appears to be flat at first glance. Upon examination however there is an long slope leading upward from Buffalo Bayou to the Mexican position on the flat. The Texian advance was therefore masked by terrain until they were nearly on top of the Mexican positions. In addition the Mexicans initially fought very well, particularly those under command of Castrillon. Once Castrillon fell, there was a breakdown in leadership directly leading to what followed. The power and surprise of the Texian force, even though outnumbered on the order of two to one was so powerful and compact that it broke the Mexicans and there was no leadership that would allow them to rally.
Does any of this sound familiar? If not it should.
By the way Ian Houston modeled San Jacinto on Wellington at Waterloo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Jul 9, 2013 9:21:47 GMT -6
Chuck; the drawing below concurs with what you referred too, look at the way Lamar and Sherman use the trees on both sides to attack Santa Anna from the flanks and the ridge line mid-field to encroach his front, I don’t know about Santa Anna’s logic in how to bivouac Troops in a battle zone but to camp with a river on one flank and a lake and marsh to the rear is kind of boxing him in. Attachments:
|
|
