|
Post by chris on Apr 9, 2015 13:39:08 GMT -6
Had Custer before June 25, 1876 ever faced a force even close to as big as what was at Little Big Horn? Beth US Civil War or Indian fights? Not being flip Beth, hope you don't take it that way. I'm thinking Washita, where Custer had no idea of the enemy size. Best, c.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Apr 9, 2015 13:49:02 GMT -6
Had Custer before June 25, 1876 ever faced a force even close to as big as what was at Little Big Horn? Beth US Civil War or Indian fights? Not being flip Beth, hope you don't take it that way. I'm thinking Washita, where Custer had no idea of the enemy size. Best, c. Don't worry, I don't take it as flip. I am not as familiar with Custer's CW service as I probably should be. Washita on the other hand was so close to being even a more serious mess that you would think a wise commander would learn that you need to do your recon, but Custer seems to have taken it as a postive reinforcement that he was "Lucky". Beth
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 9, 2015 14:09:03 GMT -6
I don't want to appear flip either Beth, but I don't see where it matters.
A commander confronted with such numbers must make one of three decisions. 1) He can accomplish all he wants to do, 2) He can accomplish some of what he wants to do, 3) He can accomplish none of what he wants to do. If the answer is number 3, then you wait until the day when you can accomplish numbers 1 or 2.
Numbers only matter at the point of contact.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Apr 9, 2015 14:29:19 GMT -6
I don't want to appear flip either Beth, but I don't see where it matters. A commander confronted with such numbers must make one of three decisions. 1) He can accomplish all he wants to do, 2) He can accomplish some of what he wants to do, 3) He can accomplish none of what he wants to do. If the answer is number 3, then you wait until the day when you can accomplish numbers 1 or 2. Numbers only matter at the point of contact. It was more of an idle wondering, Custer seems to have most of his career acted like he expected Reno to do. I was wondering if he ever sat at the back and commanded a number of forces doing different things. He tried at Washita but still was in the midst of the fighting and managed to lose track of a number of men. I was wondering if it was a repeating pattern in his career. Do you think Custer ever in his career considered those three points? Beth
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 9, 2015 15:19:19 GMT -6
If you are asking my opinion, I think Custer considered combat as nothing more than an extension of the back yard battles of his youth. I do not believe he ever took his profession seriously.
|
|
shaw
Full Member
Posts: 187
|
Post by shaw on Apr 9, 2015 15:39:32 GMT -6
Custer actually courted disaster at Washita. Thousands of NA were encamped along the river. The 7th took on one small village. Had Custer stuck around he might have had to deal with a much larger force of Indians. Reference Major Joel Elliott who decided to pursue NA's in flight and got himself and his patrol wiped out.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Apr 9, 2015 17:40:19 GMT -6
If you are asking my opinion, I think Custer considered combat as nothing more than an extension of the back yard battles of his youth. I do not believe he ever took his profession seriously. I'm not sure if Custer knew what type of commander he was, at some points he is a by-the-book strict disciplinarian, other times he want to be everyone's best bud. It's like was clueless on how to be a leader, which is what I thought West Point was supposed to teach. He seems like bloodhound, point him at his prey and he will lead the pack to it. Did Custer himself ride to Battle Ridge or did he just send Keogh. If he had gone to battle ridge do you think he would have seen that the battle was unfolding in a way he might not be happy with? Beth
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 9, 2015 18:21:39 GMT -6
The word you are looking for to describe Custer in your first paragraph Beth is weak.
Now take all references to the military and West Point out of that same paragraph and how do you analyze him?
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Apr 9, 2015 18:39:39 GMT -6
The word you are looking for to describe Custer in your first paragraph Beth is weak. Now take all references to the military and West Point out of that same paragraph and how do you analyze him? As a Peter Pan, a little boy who never grew up and always wants to play with his brothers and get mommy and daddy's approval. Beth Editted to add. As a commander, he was so in over his head it is surprising he lasted as long as he did. His friends higher up in the military food chain did him no favors by covering up his inadequicies by either letting him get away with thing, giving him a long leash, letting him come back early or interceding on his behalf. Beth
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 10, 2015 4:53:25 GMT -6
In any field you should improve your skills with time, I think in all Custer spent around 16 years in the army, is 16 years long enough to go from a 2nd Lieutenant to leading a full regiment?
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Apr 10, 2015 5:15:23 GMT -6
In any field you should improve your skills with time, I think in all Custer spent around 16 years in the army, is 16 years long enough to go from a 2nd Lieutenant to leading a full regiment? Ian. Sixteen years certainly is, if you learn along the way. Mentoring is a big part, I don't see a good deal of that in Custer's career, he learned politics doing staff work and was promoted above his proven ability. We see this in our public school system, it hurts unprepared graduates.
Bravery, brashness, and luck can take you only so far. Even the politics part failed him after the war, you want an Eagle or a Star, you don't bash a sitting Presidents family member. Not smart. Does this term apply in other areas of his career. Several weeks ago I mentioned an A.G. Chuck did not care for, he was not the only one that did not care for the man. I know a Bird Col., Group Commander, who had to get his way by playing on this A.G.'s ego. This Group Commander spent the last 2 years of WWII flying fighters over Europe, and knew how to navigate tight situations.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by mac on Apr 10, 2015 6:10:58 GMT -6
Is it fair to say that Custer started his career at a time when his gifts were most needed and valued and his promotions were more recognition of his courage and aggression rather than his strategic brilliance? After war these gifts are less valuable in peace time and against an unconventional enemy. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 10, 2015 6:22:28 GMT -6
And only four out of those 16 years were spent during the ACW, after that it was Indian fighting (or the lack of it).
Ian.
|
|
shaw
Full Member
Posts: 187
|
Post by shaw on Apr 10, 2015 8:47:05 GMT -6
Custer was a protege of Phil Sheridan. That carried a lot of weight back then. I'm reminded of the fact that the table on which Lee signed the surrender of the ANV was given as gift to GAC and Libbie by Sheridan.
Or was it Grant's table?
Anyway, he got a table from the surrender. No one asked the house's owner Wilbut McClean if he was okay with it.
|
|
shaw
Full Member
Posts: 187
|
Post by shaw on Apr 10, 2015 8:49:27 GMT -6
|
|