Post by Dark Cloud on Jun 8, 2006 13:18:38 GMT -6
Please note - yet again - I'm not denigrating the aborigines. They were what they were. What I laugh at, CZ, is the attempt to elevate them to having "strategy." They didn't. And since you made it a point, I took it. If you want respect for their "strategy," you have to back it up. They didn't think like that; they didn't prepare for or have ability to fight wars that lasted years. They weren't enough to provide for the family AND wage a campaign of long duration. Outside the Huns, nobody really was able to make that work, but that was on the offensive. I don't know of any nomadic/barbaric group that successfully waged a defensive war like the Sioux tried to do.
And, hey, if the females were just as capable as the men, let's add them into the warrior totals where they should be, then. But you won't allow that. Just saying, you can't have it both ways.
mcaryf:
by paragraph.
1. I'm not contemptuous of their tactics. Where in the world did that come from? I'm contemptuous of the elevation in language. Every nomadic society has those characteristics, hardly unique or surprising to find in the plains Indians. "individual empowerment, stealth, infiltration and encirclement" are characteristics of snowball fights, for goodness sakes. These are natural tendencies, not the result of brilliance. If your people weren't masters of those qualities, your people died out long ago. Set against this was a booming population growth, industrial production, ability to write and so pass down information efficiently, and ability to learn from that. Fire control, procedure, uniforms, and weapons with a .34% superior rate of fire meant nada overall.
2. "Thus we see Reno deciding that he cannot hold the timber because he would be unable to exercise adequate fire control." Really? How about also the fear of being burned out, running out of ammo in the night, the impossible odds against him? "We see apparent breakdowns of discipline at various points in the Custer fight with officers' bodies at some distance from their men." We do? Based on markers that don't correspond to the original wooden ones that have further been inflated by 20% spurious and, in any case, where bodies were found may not be where they fell. "Many people have questioned Reno's judgement at various stages but his subordinates were required to follow his orders good or bad." Or, you know, legally take control if he were drunk or derelict in duty. Since they didn't, he wasn't, I guess.
3. "The army's communication systems were also on the day inferior to those of the Indians as they relied on a chain of command." No immaterial structure wrote or gave orders. If Martin's note is indicative of Custer command, he gave bad orders. "Several members of Reno's command were aware of Custer's movement on the flank, however, Reno himself seems not to have been aware and as a consequence took his decision to vacate the timber in ignorance of other possibilities." Reno had a better idea of fording possibilities for his 'support' than Custer did, and if Custer was on the East heading North, it wasn't going to happen.
4. "Fire discipline as a tactic becomes more relevant the more men you are deploying, it is probably a fair criticism of Custer to note that throughout the battle he never once deployed more than 3 understrength companies within mutually supporting firing range of each other." We don't know that at all. He could have had ALL five firing from Calhoun environs before deploying them, we don't know.
5. "Finally I should note that you have failed to answer my contention that the Indians did indeed have a clear strategy which was to concentrate their strength and where possible pick off the various columns sent against them." I not only addressed it, I dismissed it. Indians did not have a strategy. They were Short Attention Span Warrior Season guys. Coincidence, not strategy. "Plainly they had alternate options such as a policy of dispersal." No they didn't, they had no command structure that empowered a policy of dispersal, nobody who could order more than his immediate band.
"Clearly the ability to intercept of Crook with a force substantial enough to turn him back was made possible by the strategy of concentration." Again, this wasn't strategy but coincidence. Enough bored guys wanted a fight.
6. "You are also contemptuous of the Indians allowing Custer to attack their village and yet this is what Sitting Bull predicted would happen and would result in a defeat for the army." He did? This charming story, so lovingly retold, may be true, but it only appears to us well after the battle, much like Mrs. Custer's mirage at Ft. Lincoln departure with the upside down soldiers as well. In any case, it's one thing to prepare and allow something to happen and another to not prepare and suffer toddlers to be shot and then excuse it because of a vision. "I do not think you can have much complaint about a strategy where the leader has predicted what the enemy will do and the outcome is as he says." That depends. Did SB have this vision often? Did any soldiers fall into the village? How did his visions about Canada and his eventual return as victor and the Ghost Dance and the fact his people got walloped under his leadership figure in? Any drunk or idiot or individual enjoying the cold and starvation of a Dakota winter while breathing steaming buffalo chips will utter something, at some point, that will prove true.
"Fighting near the village actually had many advantages for the Indians to set against the risks to the noncoms. Their strength did not have to be split into offensive forces plus a village guard, they did not have to carry supplies (unlike the cavalry), they had ready access to remounts and their wounded would be tended." Look me in the eye.......come on.....look me in the eye and tell me you actually believe that was their intent. In any case, with the train, Custer had the same advantages had the 7th been remotely able to keep mules with their individual units.
7. "You seem to set great store by the idea of their failure to post scouts or lookouts in the surrounding countryside but, given the speed at which Custer was moving there was never going to be substantial warning." The......speed? Absurd. Nearly a nine hundred animals are going to raise a dust cloud that the As One With Nature aborigines should have seen and commented on early in the several hours it took the 7th to descend at less than blistering speed from the Crow's Nest. This is before the Lone Lodge crew that ran to the big village and did.......what? "As it was there was enough warning so that the noncom casualties were limited to those foraging way out in the direction from which Reno came." Well, I thought Reno's firing towards the lodges killed people inside, not out foraging. And if they knew the Army was coming, you're saying that to honor SB's vision they allowed kids to forage in that area?
8. If so, than it is a sadder reflection on the Sioux to whine about Army barbarity when they use their children as sacrifice to no known point. They had every advantage in the world, and Reno Creek offered many good ambush sites that favored the Sioux "tactic" of preferring not to get shot, taking cover, and firing from cover. Noncoms weren't deliberately targetted for slaughter, but they weren't spared either. But as CZ says, the women were just as able as the men, so why should they be treated different?
But that's all ridiculous. The Sioux were surprised, disorganized, fought bravely and well and clobbered an inferior force. Superior strategy and tactics? No.
And, hey, if the females were just as capable as the men, let's add them into the warrior totals where they should be, then. But you won't allow that. Just saying, you can't have it both ways.
mcaryf:
by paragraph.
1. I'm not contemptuous of their tactics. Where in the world did that come from? I'm contemptuous of the elevation in language. Every nomadic society has those characteristics, hardly unique or surprising to find in the plains Indians. "individual empowerment, stealth, infiltration and encirclement" are characteristics of snowball fights, for goodness sakes. These are natural tendencies, not the result of brilliance. If your people weren't masters of those qualities, your people died out long ago. Set against this was a booming population growth, industrial production, ability to write and so pass down information efficiently, and ability to learn from that. Fire control, procedure, uniforms, and weapons with a .34% superior rate of fire meant nada overall.
2. "Thus we see Reno deciding that he cannot hold the timber because he would be unable to exercise adequate fire control." Really? How about also the fear of being burned out, running out of ammo in the night, the impossible odds against him? "We see apparent breakdowns of discipline at various points in the Custer fight with officers' bodies at some distance from their men." We do? Based on markers that don't correspond to the original wooden ones that have further been inflated by 20% spurious and, in any case, where bodies were found may not be where they fell. "Many people have questioned Reno's judgement at various stages but his subordinates were required to follow his orders good or bad." Or, you know, legally take control if he were drunk or derelict in duty. Since they didn't, he wasn't, I guess.
3. "The army's communication systems were also on the day inferior to those of the Indians as they relied on a chain of command." No immaterial structure wrote or gave orders. If Martin's note is indicative of Custer command, he gave bad orders. "Several members of Reno's command were aware of Custer's movement on the flank, however, Reno himself seems not to have been aware and as a consequence took his decision to vacate the timber in ignorance of other possibilities." Reno had a better idea of fording possibilities for his 'support' than Custer did, and if Custer was on the East heading North, it wasn't going to happen.
4. "Fire discipline as a tactic becomes more relevant the more men you are deploying, it is probably a fair criticism of Custer to note that throughout the battle he never once deployed more than 3 understrength companies within mutually supporting firing range of each other." We don't know that at all. He could have had ALL five firing from Calhoun environs before deploying them, we don't know.
5. "Finally I should note that you have failed to answer my contention that the Indians did indeed have a clear strategy which was to concentrate their strength and where possible pick off the various columns sent against them." I not only addressed it, I dismissed it. Indians did not have a strategy. They were Short Attention Span Warrior Season guys. Coincidence, not strategy. "Plainly they had alternate options such as a policy of dispersal." No they didn't, they had no command structure that empowered a policy of dispersal, nobody who could order more than his immediate band.
"Clearly the ability to intercept of Crook with a force substantial enough to turn him back was made possible by the strategy of concentration." Again, this wasn't strategy but coincidence. Enough bored guys wanted a fight.
6. "You are also contemptuous of the Indians allowing Custer to attack their village and yet this is what Sitting Bull predicted would happen and would result in a defeat for the army." He did? This charming story, so lovingly retold, may be true, but it only appears to us well after the battle, much like Mrs. Custer's mirage at Ft. Lincoln departure with the upside down soldiers as well. In any case, it's one thing to prepare and allow something to happen and another to not prepare and suffer toddlers to be shot and then excuse it because of a vision. "I do not think you can have much complaint about a strategy where the leader has predicted what the enemy will do and the outcome is as he says." That depends. Did SB have this vision often? Did any soldiers fall into the village? How did his visions about Canada and his eventual return as victor and the Ghost Dance and the fact his people got walloped under his leadership figure in? Any drunk or idiot or individual enjoying the cold and starvation of a Dakota winter while breathing steaming buffalo chips will utter something, at some point, that will prove true.
"Fighting near the village actually had many advantages for the Indians to set against the risks to the noncoms. Their strength did not have to be split into offensive forces plus a village guard, they did not have to carry supplies (unlike the cavalry), they had ready access to remounts and their wounded would be tended." Look me in the eye.......come on.....look me in the eye and tell me you actually believe that was their intent. In any case, with the train, Custer had the same advantages had the 7th been remotely able to keep mules with their individual units.
7. "You seem to set great store by the idea of their failure to post scouts or lookouts in the surrounding countryside but, given the speed at which Custer was moving there was never going to be substantial warning." The......speed? Absurd. Nearly a nine hundred animals are going to raise a dust cloud that the As One With Nature aborigines should have seen and commented on early in the several hours it took the 7th to descend at less than blistering speed from the Crow's Nest. This is before the Lone Lodge crew that ran to the big village and did.......what? "As it was there was enough warning so that the noncom casualties were limited to those foraging way out in the direction from which Reno came." Well, I thought Reno's firing towards the lodges killed people inside, not out foraging. And if they knew the Army was coming, you're saying that to honor SB's vision they allowed kids to forage in that area?
8. If so, than it is a sadder reflection on the Sioux to whine about Army barbarity when they use their children as sacrifice to no known point. They had every advantage in the world, and Reno Creek offered many good ambush sites that favored the Sioux "tactic" of preferring not to get shot, taking cover, and firing from cover. Noncoms weren't deliberately targetted for slaughter, but they weren't spared either. But as CZ says, the women were just as able as the men, so why should they be treated different?
But that's all ridiculous. The Sioux were surprised, disorganized, fought bravely and well and clobbered an inferior force. Superior strategy and tactics? No.