|
Post by custerstillstands on Apr 6, 2006 12:03:55 GMT -6
Custer didn't cross the river because he couldn't. He was repulsed by Indians and forced to higher ground. The Indians put up enough fire to keep Custer's command from crossing the village and entering the village. There never has been any repulse at the gait, and no Indian ever tell us that. They said that Custer was shooting and repulsing several minor Indian assaults on his soldiers until he moved away, in great organization according to Hollow Horn Bear. No repulse here, no retreat anyway.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Apr 6, 2006 12:11:42 GMT -6
According to other Indians that was not true . . . who do we believe?
|
|
|
Post by custerstillstands on Apr 6, 2006 12:13:59 GMT -6
and those Indians are ?
The Indians who said that no repulse was ever done are Bobtailed Horse, Runs the Enemy, Short Bull, Hollow Horn Bear, Yellow Nose, Bullet Proof, White Shield, Two Moon etc. etc.
|
|
|
Post by q on Apr 6, 2006 12:31:52 GMT -6
Custerstillstands: Ok. Why don't we say that there were, ohhhh say.... only 10 to 12 indians there at the ford. Why would the Custer you and I know, pass up the opportunity to charge a vacant village? Why would he support Reno by going on downstream? Why would he not take on the 10 to 12 warriors there and charge the vacant village. And then.... and THEN! Flank those indians attacking Reno? Where is the sense to what Custer did? I don't know about you, but going on downstream doesn't accomplish anything. It puts Reno in more danger. It puts Custer further from help if he needs it. Benteen isn't in sight. To go further would invite disaster, and did! I think more of General Custer than to say that he was an arrogant incompetent fool. But if he did as you suggest, then he must have been. Either that or Curley was right. Custer was smarter than that, and you and I both know it!
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Apr 6, 2006 12:38:21 GMT -6
How could only 10 Indians stop Custer?
If Custer had the opportunity to cross the river and hit the village he would have done so. It makes no sense to "feint" attack and fall back and see what happens. Custer knew it was important to strike the Indians while he had the chance. Something else caused him to fall back. It was more Indians than he expected who forced him back.
|
|
|
Post by custerstillstands on Apr 6, 2006 13:17:23 GMT -6
Custerstillstands: Ok. Why don't we say that there were, ohhhh say.... only 10 to 12 indians there at the ford. Why would the Custer you and I know, pass up the opportunity to charge a vacant village? Why would he support Reno by going on downstream? Why would he not take on the 10 to 12 warriors there and charge the vacant village. And then.... and THEN! Flank those indians attacking Reno? Where is the sense to what Custer did? I don't know about you, but going on downstream doesn't accomplish anything. It puts Reno in more danger. It puts Custer further from help if he needs it. Benteen isn't in sight. To go further would invite disaster, and did! I think more of General Custer than to say that he was an arrogant incompetent fool. But if he did as you suggest, then he must have been. Either that or Curley was right. Custer was smarter than that, and you and I both know it! Reno was gone at the time. He had run away. (after 4.p.m.) Custer couldn't support him anymore.
|
|
|
Post by custerstillstands on Apr 6, 2006 13:19:11 GMT -6
How could only 10 Indians stop Custer? If Custer had the opportunity to cross the river and hit the village he would have done so. It makes no sense to "feint" attack and fall back and see what happens. Custer knew it was important to strike the Indians while he had the chance. Something else caused him to fall back. It was more Indians than he expected who forced him back. You opinion is supported by nothing. Custer wanted to support Reno by attacking Indians by the flank and even Reno said so because he wrote it in his report. But Reno ran away before Custer eventually stopped to wait for Benteen and did the support by himself (according to Martini, Custer first thought that Benteen, if he went quickly, could support Reno by attacking in the flank of the village, but Benteen never showed up)
|
|
|
Post by custerstillstands on Apr 6, 2006 13:19:54 GMT -6
10 Indians never stopped anybody. They just shot some "volleys" on Custer and Custer shot some "volleys" on them.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Apr 6, 2006 13:41:21 GMT -6
Martini job was not to determine a plan of attack. He was an enlisted man with poor knowledge of English . If Custer had the opportunity to attack the village he would have done it . . . but it didn't.
|
|
|
Post by q on Apr 6, 2006 14:11:40 GMT -6
Custerstillstands: Reno was gone at the time. He had run away. (after 4.p.m.)
Custer couldn't support him anymore. Where is the evidence for this? You,nor I know, nor does anyone else know; that at that time Custer knew Reno retreated.
|
|
|
Post by custerstillstands on Apr 7, 2006 1:10:17 GMT -6
Martini job was not to determine a plan of attack. He was an enlisted man with poor knowledge of English . If Custer had the opportunity to attack the village he would have done it . . . but it didn't. Martini heard Custer explaining to Reno and other officers what was the plan.
|
|
|
Post by custerstillstands on Apr 7, 2006 1:11:22 GMT -6
Custerstillstands: Reno was gone at the time. He had run away. (after 4.p.m.)
Custer couldn't support him anymore. Where is the evidence for this? You,nor I know, nor does anyone else know; that at that time Custer knew Reno retreated. Because we have Indian testimonies who said without any doubt that Indians were aware of Custer's advance when Reno's position began to collapse. See Michno or Gray
|
|
bhist
Full Member
Posts: 221
|
Post by bhist on Apr 7, 2006 1:33:31 GMT -6
Custerstillstands: Ok. Why don't we say that there were, ohhhh say.... only 10 to 12 indians there at the ford. Why would the Custer you and I know, pass up the opportunity to charge a vacant village? Why would he support Reno by going on downstream? Why would he not take on the 10 to 12 warriors there and charge the vacant village. And then.... and THEN! Flank those indians attacking Reno? Where is the sense to what Custer did? I don't know about you, but going on downstream doesn't accomplish anything. It puts Reno in more danger. It puts Custer further from help if he needs it. Benteen isn't in sight. To go further would invite disaster, and did! I think more of General Custer than to say that he was an arrogant incompetent fool. But if he did as you suggest, then he must have been. Either that or Curley was right. Custer was smarter than that, and you and I both know it! Reno was gone at the time. He had run away. (after 4.p.m.) Custer couldn't support him anymore. As Markland likes to say, “you’ve opened the door on this one…” So, you’re now saying Custer KNEW that Reno retreated to the bluffs when Custer was at Medicine Tail Ford. Of course, there is not one bit of proof for this, but let’s say it’s true – who now becomes the ultimate betrayer of the Battle of the Little Bighorn? It’s Custer. So, Custer knows Reno is in trouble and has retreated. Custer’s a pretty smart fellow so we can assume that Custer must have been thinking two things (not in hindsight but thinking of what Custer knew while at the ford); Reno has used up a lot of ammunition and Reno has a lot of casualties in his command. If Custer is assuming this, then why does he turn NORTH? He abandons his fellow comrades. And, he could only do this for two reasons – he doesn’t like Reno; he’s willing to let hundreds of 7th cavalrymen die because of that hatred and/or Custer was scared to death of 10 Indians. Reno faced several hundred Indians and fought them for half an hour, but Custer gets shot at by 10 warriors and he saw his number was up; he panicked and fled the scene. Naturally, all 209 men would follow their commander running scared like a little girl. Ok, I’ll close the door now.
|
|
|
Post by michigander on Apr 7, 2006 1:35:31 GMT -6
However someone seems to forget here that not all the companies went down to the river. And we are not sure Custer led the company which was going down on the river.
|
|
|
Post by custerstillstands on Apr 7, 2006 1:37:36 GMT -6
However someone seems to forget here that not all the companies went down to the river. And we are not sure Custer led the company which was going down on the river. Fox said an interesting point about the F Company which was always near Custer's HQ during the march. I think that if it's provable, it means that F Company was some kind of bodyguard to the HQ - means Custer was with the left wing.
|
|