|
Post by dave on May 27, 2015 16:58:29 GMT -6
jaguar Custer was 1) A martinet that could not discipline himself 2) A self promoter who was indifferent to the needs of others 3) Suspended from duty in 1867 after being found guilty of very serious charges...see 1) above and 2) above 4) An arrogant leader who provided little if any of his plans/intentions to his subordinates...poor communications 5) Not able to refrain from embroiling himself in politics in 1876 6) A narcissist who lacked empathy for others including Libbie as indicated by association with his "lady friends"
I find it difficult to ignore the influence of Custer's character flaws as they impacted his leadership abilities. With the exception of number 5 above, all of these attributes were present and affected his behavior during the War. Custer was teachable and able to follow orders under close supervision far better than he performed on his own as witnessed by his actions post war. The whole intent of this post was to note that George Custer was a flawed human who was not a super man or great military leader in my opinion. Regards Dave
|
|
jaguar
Junior Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by jaguar on May 27, 2015 17:09:41 GMT -6
I have to take issue with nearly everything said on this thread. Tubman13 rightfully references Trevilian Station as an example where Custer almost got caught in a debacle but loses all credibility when he then goes on to accuse him of cowardace. Really? Quincannon objects to him as a commander on moral grounds but forgets one of the greatest cavalry commanders ever was Murat who led Napolean's cavalry and who suffered from each of the flaws Quincannon tallies rightfully, wrongfully or with exageration for the sake of emphasis against Custer. Even the great Jeb Stuart got shot in the chest chasing some NA's but lived to tell about it. If you are going to attack Custer as a commander keep it to LBH not the Civil War or be prepared to explain how in each action Custer fought in during the Civil War he errored and why Philip Sheridan was wrong to present Custer's wife with the table the terms of the Confederate surrender was written on. Jaguar, I am speaking only for myself but perhaps you would find the other Little Bighorn group more to your liking. The URL is thelbha.proboards.com/Both boards discuss Little Bighorn but we have different approaches and views of the battle and Custer. This group tends to be less pro Custer than you might be comfortable with. You are welcome to stay of course but be aware this is not a Custer Fan Club. We are also very military heavy having a number of retired officers who take part in this board who bring a unique perspective to any military action. Beth
|
|
|
Post by Beth on May 27, 2015 17:17:10 GMT -6
I think sometimes it is easy to confuse the ability to inspire troops into action, like Custer could or bravery which Custer had in excess, with command and tactical ability. I readily admit that I could be wrong but I can't really think of any CW battle that Custer was responsible for the tactical planning. If I am wrong, I would love to be educated.
|
|
rebcav
Junior Member
Posts: 56
|
Post by rebcav on May 27, 2015 17:23:57 GMT -6
Custer was an un-disciplined captain wearing silver oak leaves. A brave man to be sure, but a man who needed command and control being exercised above him. Never a big picture man, if he had been told to capture a hill or hold it, my guess he would have been a bulldog. If I am not mistaken he commanded many better officers than himself. Even Mathey retired a retired a COL. in 1904. If he had trusted those officers, or even his yes men to be a part of a planning we might have seen a somewhat different outcome. Maybe not. Somewhere in a movie I remember a line "a man has to know his limitations," I was a decent NCO, often times my ideas were used as part of a plan, sometimes my idea became the plan, but someone above me probably singed off. Once a plan is written, an order give you had best stay on script or have a very valid reason for divergence. I was a damn good regional sales manager for a fortune 100 food company, ran a topflight region, hit my targets, hired good people, fired bad ones. Did I have capacity for more? Maybe, maybe not. We all think we can do more, but one thing is certain at any level of command, ego has to be taken out of the plan, structure and limits must be put in. Enough BS. Regards, Tom Clint Eastwood to Hal Holbrook in "Magnum Force": "A man's got to know his limitations."..... Respectfully Submitted, Duane
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on May 27, 2015 17:29:10 GMT -6
I have to take issue with nearly everything said on this thread. Tubman13 rightfully references Trevilian Station as an example where Custer almost got caught in a debacle but loses all credibility when he then goes on to accuse him of cowardace. Really? Quincannon objects to him as a commander on moral grounds but forgets one of the greatest cavalry commanders ever was Murat who led Napolean's cavalry and who suffered from each of the flaws Quincannon tallies rightfully, wrongfully or with exageration for the sake of emphasis against Custer. Even the great Jeb Stuart got shot in the chest chasing some NA's but lived to tell about it. If you are going to attack Custer as a commander keep it to LBH not the Civil War or be prepared to explain how in each action Custer fought in during the Civil War he errored and why Philip Sheridan was wrong to present Custer's wife with the table the terms of the Confederate surrender was written on. Mosby backed him down. Custer thought he could hang people with impunity, Mosby simply threatened to do the same to Custer's men and George blinked. Situational cowardness, you make a threat you had better be willing to back it up, or your threats ring hollow. Yellow Tavern is often spoken of as a fine moment for Custer, he was part of a much larger engagement, true one of his privates did shoot Stuart. Custer did handle himself well at Yellow Tavern, so did Merritt, Devin, and Gibbs. The Union cavalry held about a 10/3 advantage in manpower. He did not plan the engagements he participated in in the ACW. Gettysburg, another fine outing for George. The Valley Campaign, he could burn barns and crops with the best of them, while the ANV was bottled up in Richmond/Petersburg. He took orders and for the most part carried them out.
Custer had some problems after the war, you may wish to look them up. I think the Army gave him an unpaid leave for about a year. Sheridan not only gave the Custer's a chair, but a crutch.
I have given a table to my neighbors wife when I was still in Maryland, I gave my son a Rolex SM, I own a chair that was used by Andrew Jackson while in the White House. Sheridan helped carry Custer for the rest of his life. I am not impressed.
You pick the Custer engagement during the ACW we can discuss, maybe others will join in.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by montrose on May 27, 2015 17:31:14 GMT -6
|
|
jaguar
Junior Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by jaguar on May 27, 2015 17:36:09 GMT -6
Beth: I visited this site to obtain others opinions about a subject (LBH) I am not that well versed in. Now it is because of what I have learned about Custer's battles and Union cavalry tactics in general that I thought I should gain more insight into his defeat at LBH, thereby understanding him better. The fact that there are retired military who contribute here lends a unique and welcomed perspective to the discussion. I would however suggest that unless they retired 2 centuries ago or have studied after action reports of union cavalry engagements extensively they would probably not know the reason for a saber charge or pistol charge by Union cavalry (CSA always seemed to prefer pistols under any circumstance). So there are some things that others can bring to the table. I do not wish to visit a Custer Fan Club because I do not need my opinions to be reinforced but challenged by facts. Am I in the right place for that or are opinions here so hardened that discussion is unwelcome?
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on May 27, 2015 17:36:39 GMT -6
Jaguar, Having said all of the above, I am not a Custer hater, but if it were not for a day in June of 1876, he would be nothing more than a footnote. Pick up Boatner's Civil War Dictionary. There were many who did much more for the Union during the ACW.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on May 27, 2015 17:38:14 GMT -6
Beth: I visited this site to obtain others opinions about a subject (LBH) I am not that well versed in. Now it is because of what I have learned about Custer's battles and Union cavalry tactics in general that I thought I should gain more insight into his defeat at LBH, thereby understanding him better. The fact that there are retired military who contribute here lends a unique and welcomed perspective to the discussion. I would however suggest that unless they retired 2 centuries ago or have studied after action reports of union cavalry engagements extensively they would probably not know the reason for a saber charge or pistol charge by Union cavalry (CSA always seemed to prefer pistols under any circumstance). So there are some things that others can bring to the table. I do not wish to visit a Custer Fan Club because I do not need my opinions to be reinforced but challenged by facts. Am I in the right place for that or are opinions here so hardened that discussion is unwelcome? No. Discussion is most welcome.
Regards, Tom
|
|
jaguar
Junior Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by jaguar on May 27, 2015 17:42:00 GMT -6
I have to take issue with nearly everything said on this thread. Tubman13 rightfully references Trevilian Station as an example where Custer almost got caught in a debacle but loses all credibility when he then goes on to accuse him of cowardace. Really? Quincannon objects to him as a commander on moral grounds but forgets one of the greatest cavalry commanders ever was Murat who led Napolean's cavalry and who suffered from each of the flaws Quincannon tallies rightfully, wrongfully or with exageration for the sake of emphasis against Custer. Even the great Jeb Stuart got shot in the chest chasing some NA's but lived to tell about it. If you are going to attack Custer as a commander keep it to LBH not the Civil War or be prepared to explain how in each action Custer fought in during the Civil War he errored and why Philip Sheridan was wrong to present Custer's wife with the table the terms of the Confederate surrender was written on. Mosby backed him down. Custer thought he could hang people with impunity, Mosby simply threatened to do the same to Custer's men and George blinked. Situational cowardness, you make a threat you had better be willing to back it up, or your threats ring hollow. Yellow Tavern is often spoken of as a fine moment for Custer, he was part of a much larger engagement, true one of his privates did shoot Stuart. Custer did handle himself well at Yellow Tavern, so did Merritt, Devin, and Gibbs. The Union cavalry held about a 10/3 advantage in manpower. He did not plan the engagements he participated in in the ACW. Gettysburg, another fine outing for George. The Valley Campaign, he could burn barns and crops with the best of them, while the ANV was bottled up in Richmond/Petersburg. He took orders and for the most part carried them out.
Custer had some problems after the war, you may wish to look them up. I think the Army gave him an unpaid leave for about a year. Sheridan not only gave the Custer's a chair, but a crutch.
I have given a table to my neighbors wife when I was still in Maryland, I gave my son a Rolex SM, I own a chair that was used by Andrew Jackson while in the White House. Sheridan helped carry Custer for the rest of his life. I am not impressed.
You pick the Custer engagement during the ACW we can discuss, maybe others will join in.
Regards, Tom
Mosby backed him down. Custer thought he could hang people with impunity, Mosby simply threatened to do the same to Custer's men and George blinked. Situational cowardness, you make a threat you had better be willing to back it up, or your threats ring hollow. Yellow Tavern is often spoken of as a fine moment for Custer, he was part of a much larger engagement, true one of his privates did shoot Stuart. Custer did handle himself well at Yellow Tavern, so did Merritt, Devin, and Gibbs. The Union cavalry held about a 10/3 advantage in manpower. He did not plan the engagements he participated in in the ACW. Gettysburg, another fine outing for George. The Valley Campaign, he could burn barns and crops with the best of them, while the ANV was bottled up in Richmond/Petersburg. He took orders and for the most part carried them out.
Read more: lbha.proboards.com/thread/4788/custer-commander?page=2#ixzz3bNwfmr9H
|
|
jaguar
Junior Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by jaguar on May 27, 2015 17:44:42 GMT -6
I have to take issue with nearly everything said on this thread. Tubman13 rightfully references Trevilian Station as an example where Custer almost got caught in a debacle but loses all credibility when he then goes on to accuse him of cowardace. Really? Quincannon objects to him as a commander on moral grounds but forgets one of the greatest cavalry commanders ever was Murat who led Napolean's cavalry and who suffered from each of the flaws Quincannon tallies rightfully, wrongfully or with exageration for the sake of emphasis against Custer. Even the great Jeb Stuart got shot in the chest chasing some NA's but lived to tell about it. If you are going to attack Custer as a commander keep it to LBH not the Civil War or be prepared to explain how in each action Custer fought in during the Civil War he errored and why Philip Sheridan was wrong to present Custer's wife with the table the terms of the Confederate surrender was written on. Mosby backed him down. Custer thought he could hang people with impunity, Mosby simply threatened to do the same to Custer's men and George blinked. Situational cowardness, you make a threat you had better be willing to back it up, or your threats ring hollow. Yellow Tavern is often spoken of as a fine moment for Custer, he was part of a much larger engagement, true one of his privates did shoot Stuart. Custer did handle himself well at Yellow Tavern, so did Merritt, Devin, and Gibbs. The Union cavalry held about a 10/3 advantage in manpower. He did not plan the engagements he participated in in the ACW. Gettysburg, another fine outing for George. The Valley Campaign, he could burn barns and crops with the best of them, while the ANV was bottled up in Richmond/Petersburg. He took orders and for the most part carried them out.
Custer had some problems after the war, you may wish to look them up. I think the Army gave him an unpaid leave for about a year. Sheridan not only gave the Custer's a chair, but a crutch.
I have given a table to my neighbors wife when I was still in Maryland, I gave my son a Rolex SM, I own a chair that was used by Andrew Jackson while in the White House. Sheridan helped carry Custer for the rest of his life. I am not impressed.
You pick the Custer engagement during the ACW we can discuss, maybe others will join in.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by montrose on May 27, 2015 17:56:38 GMT -6
Jaguar,
Welcome. LTC Custer is a complicated person. No one said all commanders have to be likable, or good people. Some real jack asses have had success.
Sheridan and Grant respected GACs performance in ACW, that's a good enough reference for me. He was not perfect, but no one is. Grant had his Cold Harbor.
On 25 Jun 76 he made numerous bad decisions that caused the defeat. He showed an inability to understand how to maneuver and synchronize combat power. This is very surprising in an ACW veteran.
His decision making does not hold up under scrutiny.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 27, 2015 18:03:57 GMT -6
Every one of us old retired military folks fell off the turnip truck Jaguar, but it was not last night.
Have you read the ACW official records. Have you read all of Longacre's work? Probably forgot more about ACW cavalry than most ever knew. For the technical stuff how about Stephan? Have you attended C&GS at Leavenworth and taken full advantage of the historical material the hold. Have you met, and conversed extensively with the fine folks at the U S Cavalry Museum at Fort Riley and have their phone numbers in your rolodex? Don't you ever get fresh with me sunny. It will not turn out well for you.
Now if you want to can the bullshit and discuss, let's have at it.
|
|
jaguar
Junior Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by jaguar on May 27, 2015 18:08:28 GMT -6
taubman13, I would like to point out some information regarding Mosby and Custer. There was an article in the Civil War Times (I think that was the publication) several years ago where the author tracked down the long standing and erroneous claim about Custer and the hangings of Mosby's men. The author shows that it was Wesley Merritt who hanged Mosby's men not Custer. Merritt I am sure appears in Boatner's Civil War Dictionary as he took credit for a number of Custer's Civil War actions. Do not dismiss a superior officers regard for a subordinate so easily Sheridan gave Custer's wife the table for his actions writing something to the effect that few others contributed more to the surrender. I do not want this to be a Civil War thread. I just brought this up because in some respects the pendulum has swung too far when it concerns Custer and I want to be able to sort out prejudice from judgment when it comes to LBH. For example I have read some of Quincannon's common sense and knowledgeable posts which clarify and make great sense (albeit my one dispute about morals and command)
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 27, 2015 18:21:15 GMT -6
Well if they make great sense to you, then you should realize that morals goes far beyond sleeping with some cheap fluzzy who is not your spouse, and go into, well into the realm of being morally straight in all of your dealings You are not moral if you are not honest. Custer repeatedly lied to get himself out of one scrape after another. If you do not provide for your family, and get involved in get rich quick schemes, that leave your widow penniless, you have no morals. If you neglect the training, administration, and welfare of your soldiers to go clubbing on Broadway you have no morals. If you have no sense of duty and put it aside for selfish interests you have no morals. If you break your oath to your country you have no morals, and break it he did, by repeated acts of disobedience.
His greatest moral failure though was not living up to the "have special trust and confidence" the country placed in him upon commissioning. He did not do his best at all times, and that is in the military a gross immorality.
|
|