|
Post by wild on Mar 24, 2011 15:46:13 GMT -6
Street mobs swarm, lynch mobs too Go easy on the mob, without them where would "Liberty, equality, fraternity be not to mention the colonies? "Mobs" the term used by the nobility to describe the risen people. Revolutions are spontaneous you do not organise for it.
|
|
|
Post by "Hunk" Papa on Mar 24, 2011 16:19:52 GMT -6
Sorry, won't be called a liar by one. Hunkpapa's lies and inability to admit error are all here: lbha.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=basics&action=display&thread=3228Second, Wikipedia isn't a primary source, it's only the aggregator of sources offered, just like a printed book, which the Lakota, who likely but not surely oversee their entry, list and reference by footnotes. As with the Oxford for 'honor', you here trot out an impressive (sounding, to you) source which, as then, you either may not have actually read at the time or just lied about. Then you tried to substitute another source when it looked like I was going to check and didn't say what you claimed. No admission of error. Then the hissy fit. It's all still there. Or, you could be right, but when asked you seem unable to cite page and quote, and with the precedent you've established, there is ample cause for concern. If you posture as an authority on the American West and Native America, and picture yourself quite literally as such, you can admit no error. Daicee, either grow up or visit a shrink for that silly, mistaken obsession of yours. As you have also misinterpreted my post to construe it as calling you a liar, which it did not, it rather underlines your shortcomings in the use of the English language. As I said before, do your own research. You are far too fond of eliciting information from others rather than spending the same amount of time that they have in locating information. I'd have to have some respect for you to care about your opinion of me and what I may or may not know, but as I don't, be my guest, say what you like if it will help you get over your inferiority complex. Love and kisses. Anglo
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Mar 24, 2011 18:22:12 GMT -6
"Hunk" Papa/ Dark Cloud,
Is it reasonably safe to assume that you gentlemen will not be exchanging Christmas cards this year?
Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Mar 25, 2011 7:12:55 GMT -6
The US Army has been working on swarming tactics since the Light Divisions were formed in the 80s. I can't say it is new, you can trace the concept back to the Hutier tactics of WWI. The Joint Readiness Training Center became renowned for refining the various tactics, techniques, and procedures associated with this tactic.
It is not easy to teach. I have worked with 17 African Armies. For the majority, I would not even try to teach this, way beyond their capability.
In principle, the Somali militias show some swarming ability. The Black Hawk Down fight was preplanned by Aideed, after the fact we realized they had not just developed a swarm counterattack, but had rehearsed it. They had small units all over their part of the city that orientated on any nearby US/coalition force.
However, when they made contact, they lacked the tactical skills of the Plains Indians. They were brave to the point of recklessness. In too many cases, they would come right at you, only after an initial repulse would they start trying to find a flank. I remember one guy using a plastic barrel for cover, that plan did not work out so well.
Indian accounts talk about some of their deaths as foolish, with some people charging US positions head on vice heading to flank or rear. Hardoff has several examples, Lame White Man being one of them.
Swarming takes patience. You have to wait for an opportunity, and react fast. And at some point you will have to close, and you will take casualties. This last part is where most 3rd world militaries will fail.
It is difficult to send folks into that last field of fire. In WWI they developed a tactic where advancing troops were so close to their barrage that they would take casualties from their own shells. I wonder as a former company commander how in God's name I could motivate soldiers to willingly die to friendly fire.
So I hold to my opinion that the Plains Indians had effective command and control, matched with individual and small unit combat proficiency.
The Ree Indians in the valley fight appear to have a disproportionate effect as a combat force. Hardorff believes half of enemy Indian casualties were inflicted by the Ree. I don't agree with his figures for the valley fight, but I do agree that man for man the Ree were better fighters than the 7th.
Wild mentioned that for C2 the Rosebud is a better example than LBH. At the Rosebud, Crook used a sizable Indian force as a combat multiplier. To borrow a phrase from my previous community, the best way to beat a G (guerrilla/insurgent) is with a G.
The Army was in pretty bad shape in 1870s. Indian auxilaries were more effective in individual and collective combat skills. Crook's ability to see this, vice Custer's inability, is a major factor in the outcomes of Rosebud and LBH.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Mar 25, 2011 9:27:17 GMT -6
Fine. Again, when I have researched your claims, you're wrong, and you've falsely credited your claimed source. Anyone doubting my contentions can read hunkpapa's disaster in the honor thread. All there. Doesn't go away. Also, his photo in the American Tribes board, with the books and gun.
Montrose,
I have a great deal of trouble equating swarming with the Stormtrooper tactics, which involved artillery, attack of command centers, and then attack with massed small automatic arms. Ants swarm, bees swarm. Birds swarm.
Mobs swarm. Does the military have a different definition? It couldn't vary much and still be a swarm. When a bison tires after being chased by predators (although they could outlast any predators but man, bad example, but let's use it) the carnivores swarm around it automatically and bring it down as quick as possible.
Also, I have trouble equating 3rd world semi-organized militias and armies with acknowledged leaders and ranks and lesser leaders and ranks (however drug addled, sadistic, pretentious and/or incompetent) with the American Indians and how they fought, which was based upon individual recognitions and actions and - other than shame - no standing penalty for wandering away as their individual medicine dictated.
That all said, I've never served or been in combat, so I need insight here.
It strikes me that swarming is the fall-back auto mode of any group of predators, just like all humans, thrown in the water, revert to a dog paddle variant asap. Any pack mentality seems to produce swarming at need with no instruction. Which means, if I am correct, that if the military is using 'swarming' for something other than as described here, they need a new word. But then, I don't see the Stormtrooper style as swarming, either, as it involves sequence and steps and command.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Mar 25, 2011 12:04:47 GMT -6
Hi Montrose, Interesting post. The Viet Mihn used swarming tactics at Dien Bien Phu.They employed their surplus humanity to achieve results more sophisticated armies achieve with napalm and cluster bombs. Modern defence systems are in depth and have no flanks.How ever your swarm will eventually [if you are prepared to spend enough men]find the internal flank. The Indian society could never field an army numerious enough to employ swarming tactics plus they had no surplus humans. I'm surprised to hear that the US military have swarming in their repertoire.The US after Vietnam will never again accept the kind of casualties swarming would involve. I hold that it was swarming that did for Custer in very quick order. I think swarming requires a momentum at least equal to running speed. If you except that swarming was the modus operandi at the LBH then all these local fire fights and maneuverings just did not happen
|
|
|
Post by "Hunk" Papa on Mar 25, 2011 13:55:29 GMT -6
"Hunk" Papa/ Dark Cloud, Is it reasonably safe to assume that you gentlemen will not be exchanging Christmas cards this year? Be Well Dan Oh no Dan, I must send a card or I don't get a present from him. Last time it was a neat little kit "Five Easy Steps to Seppuku" which I must have a stab at soon. Yours in merriment. Hunk
|
|
|
Post by "Hunk" Papa on Mar 25, 2011 13:58:12 GMT -6
Fine. Again, when I have researched your claims, you're wrong, and you've falsely credited your claimed source. Anyone doubting my contentions can read hunkpapa's disaster in the honor thread. All there. Doesn't go away. Also, his photo in the American Tribes board, with the books and gun. Now then Daicee, stop being a jealous cat. Just because I,m better looking than you. H
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Mar 25, 2011 14:10:16 GMT -6
Anyone's better looking than me, including the eventual burned roadkill armadillo from Merkel and at least two of the undercooked tarantulas that arrived in the past. I'm at an age of interest only to health inspectors looking for headlines and paleontologists. I have a face only a mother mole could love.
But people should note I have citations and page numbers, and hunkpapa just has assertions in the Honor thread. That his own posts damn him. That he lied, proved by his posts. That he admits no error or possibility of it. It's all there. And, that the Wiki page I offer on this thread, which he denigrates and doesn't support his contentions of detail, has bibliographies and footnotes and contradicts his claims for which he offers nothing but, well, his claims.
And airy demands I should do my own research, when all he need do is cite his source for the date and person first in the Black Hills for the Sioux. He cannot.
|
|
|
Post by "Hunk" Papa on Mar 25, 2011 14:35:12 GMT -6
Anyone's better looking than me, including the eventual burned roadkill armadillo from Merkel and at least two of the undercooked tarantulas that arrived in the past. I'm at an age of interest only to health inspectors looking for headlines and paleontologists. I have a face only a mother mole could love. But people should note I have citations and page numbers, and hunkpapa just has assertions in the Honor thread. That his own posts damn him. That he lied, proved by his posts. That he admits no error or possibility of it. It's all there. And, that the Wiki page I offer on this thread, which he denigrates and doesn't support his contentions of detail, has bibliographies and footnotes and contradicts his claims for which he offers nothing but, well, his claims. And airy demands I should do my own research, when all he need do is cite his source for the date and person first in the Black Hills for the Sioux. He cannot. I can, but I'm playing hard to get. Go on, woo me a bit. H
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Jan 1, 2016 14:21:09 GMT -6
My first post on this board addressed the lethal pause, but I can not find it at the moment. I believe this thread covers the area of LTC Custer and his decision making process.
I believe that Custer with 2 companies did spend time vicinity cemetery ridge. They were not decisively engaged. There was a window where they could have continued to the Keogh battalion, or even headed east to circle back to the regiment trailing battalions.
Fred makes the point that they reacted to the few Indians near them, and ignored what was going on on Battle Ridge. This delay ensured the destruction of the Keogh Bn. It also guaranteed their own deaths. While they delayed, Indians following them from Ford D caught up and pinned them in place.
(This is a place and time where the term fixed could be used, but that term has been abused to the point of insanity on the other board. E Company lost most of their horses by the classic error of forming a linear skirmish line facing in one direction. The Indians attacked from the flanks and rear and destroyed the horse holders. I will believe Rini that the Indians were fixed in the valley, as soon as he proves that the 7th captured 10,000 ponies).
LTC Custer showed the decision making ability of a Lieutenant. His decision making was grossly deficient from the perspective of a company, never mind regimental commander.
Just a reminder, LTC Custer was convicted by court martial for a similar failure of decision making and unfitness to command. There is a consistent pattern of behavior 1867-1876.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 1, 2016 14:34:23 GMT -6
Fred makes the point that they reacted to the few Indians near them, and ignored what was going on on Battle Ridge. This delay ensured the destruction of the Keogh Bn. It also guaranteed their own deaths. I think "assessed" might be a better word than "ignored." I think Custer and Yates were caught off guard here and the sound of battle, along with the sights around them may have stunned them. This was followed by a hay-maker: Runs The Enemy's foray. We could call it, "Reality Strikes." Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jan 2, 2016 5:41:22 GMT -6
As per col montrose and just about everyone else .
LTC Custer showed the decision making ability of a Lieutenant It was the Indians who made of Custer a Lieutenant with all the options of a bumble bee in a jamjar. The power lay with the Indians at all levels ; numbers, fighting men ,morale ,mounts,terrain ,weapons, time . Custer had suprise and he blew that. The" recce " beyond MTC reminds me of an ant checking out an anteater before attacking. We are only short of suggesting that it was a mass suicide with the Indians in the role of scavangers. Apologies for the rant .
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 2, 2016 6:21:38 GMT -6
Sane Rants are welcome. What defines a rant? I guess we know one when we see one. All I see here are rather creative analogies!
|
|
|
Post by edavids on Jan 2, 2016 8:43:43 GMT -6
A rant might include comments on Custer's competence and philandering, Reno's drunken cowardice, Benteen's dawdling and abject hatred for his commander, cavalry v infantry mindsets, Zulu warriors and Reno's non-existent support being only minutes away. Sound familiar? JUST ADD CAPS!!!!!!!
|
|