|
Post by montrose on Jan 12, 2014 15:35:57 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 12, 2014 15:41:02 GMT -6
I do feel that Custer was not the biggest team player, generally a good tactical commander, certainly not a strong strategist. I think that is a smart observation and one I would agree with in general. I think his Civil War record is pretty good proof of that. There were a number of Civil War generals whose abilities petered out-- the ol' "Peter Principle"-- at various stages of command and while they may have been good brigade commanders, failed at the division level... and so on. "Get" the best use, or "use" them the best he could? I tend to agree with you here, as well, but it would be interesting if you expanded your thoughts. I have often wondered about Reno commanding the Benteen scout; I just wonder how much of Benteen's advice Custer would have listened to, however. An intriguing point. Here's a little clue, Tom: you cannot understand this event unless you understand the proper timing of events. That timing changes everything from a perception point of view. "Time" is, to me, the most important element of the entire campaign to understand properly. Without it, everything degenerates into silly theories. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Jan 12, 2014 16:04:16 GMT -6
Fred wrote, "I would like to know the mistakes being alluded to. I have my own opinions and if someone were to elucidate these "mistakes," we might just begin some new threads and some new discussions."
1. Launching Reno's attack while the regiment was scattered. LTC Custer should have recalled Benteen and McDougall, and stayed in position to support Reno's attack.
2. Ignoring Indian reactions to his actions. Repeatedly we see that LTC Custer did not respond to the Indians reactions to the 7th. The intelligence was available and known There were no surprises.
3. LTC Custer failed to understand the importance of time. GAC surprised the Indians. He needed to move faster than the Indians, within their decision cycle. His failure to take ANY offensive action after launching Reno was a terrible error. He ceded the initiative to the Indians.
4. 1st failure in command. When GAC took 5 companies to the right, he should have informed the other 7 what he was doing, why, and commanders intent. Both the messengers and the messages sent were an example of amateurs in action.
5. 2nd failure in command. The move north with two companies was a reckless act, and shows a negligent and/or unfit commander. The odd thing is that new LTC commanders often start out still thinking like company commanders. The post ACW Army had a very unusual situation where many officers had had higher commands. We see former division commanders commanding regiments, former brigade commanders commanding companies. I had eleven years of green tab time. My very first and urgent thought when GAC takes 2 companies off to the north is on who is in command of the other ten companies. From this point onwards we see that the 7th Cav is leaderless. There is no one in charge and everyone is on there own hook.
What if GAC had gone to Reno Hill after Reno was defeated and took command of his own regiment? Would we have had a different outcome?
6. Reno took waaay too long to realize he was screwed in the valley. There is a point where you look behind you to see what your regiment main body is doing to support the advance guard. He obviously did not know that the main body had abandoned him. Meanwhile, the Indians surrounded him and cut off his retreat. If he had waited another 15 minutes (using Fred's timeline), his detachment would have had their own last stand.
I can go on, or go into more detail in a specified error.
Respectfully,
William
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Jan 12, 2014 16:13:23 GMT -6
Fred wrote, "There were a number of Civil War generals whose abilities petered out-- the ol' "Peter Principle"-- at various stages of command and while they may have been good brigade commanders, failed at the division level... and so on."
1. I think we have here a reverse Peter principle. LTC Custer was a successful brigade and division commander. He never commanded a company. He was the acting commander of the 7th. Remember there was always a COL commanding the unit, though frequently detached. I would say that LTC Custer showed more ability at brigade and division than he ever showed at regimental level.
2. The other issue is that conventional wars and unconventional wars require different skill sets. History has shown numerous examples of officers who are good at one or the other, but not both. People like Crook are very rare.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 12, 2014 16:23:05 GMT -6
[quote source="/post/95091/thread" timestamp="1389555284" author="@yantaylorian. Mclaglen also played with Wayne and Maureen O'Hara in The Silent Man. Also a good/fun watch.
Tom,
I think you are referring to "The Quite Man" For me his best performance was in "The Informer".
Be Well Dan
[/quote][/p]
you are quite wright
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Jan 12, 2014 16:29:33 GMT -6
Montrose,
Whether agreed or not, your points are among those that support the theory I share with others.
1. Could not agree more. Further, I don't think he'd launch it without having honorable intent to support it asap. Either misinformed or he ignored fact to head down into the valley.
2. Ignoring Indian reactions....which I suspect is near evidence that Custer was hurt and the 7th had a new mission.
3. LTC Custer failed to understand the importance of time. True, happened, but I don't think he was in charge, and they had a task to do before returning to the attack.
4. Yeah. Complete incompetence for boy scouts, never mind military. They had eyes for another issue.
5. 2nd failure in command. We don't know that happened. But if it did, it indicates to me that the 7th was without a commander. Custer wasn't that bad.
6. Reno from the beginning had correct intuition and obeyed to the point he thought a side hit by Custer would provide. When he could not excuse no support any longer, he acted.
Seriously. Doesn't all this make coherent sense if Custer were hurt and they were trying to adjust for that and were not so allowed? Things fell apart, and the center did not hold.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 12, 2014 16:31:08 GMT -6
I think the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences would agree as well with you Dan, he was awarded an Oscar for his performance. Few remember it though, but it was by far his best roll Tom: I worked for a living. I was an Infantryman Did my time in USAF and Air National Guard.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 12, 2014 16:36:30 GMT -6
One of the best ANG units for many years running was the 175th Fighter Wing MDANG at Martin there on Eastern Avenue in Bmore. The Guard part of the old Martin plant is now called Warfield ANG Base, the Warfield in question being a cousin of Wallis Warfield Simpson.
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Jan 12, 2014 17:07:09 GMT -6
Mclaglen also played with Wayne and Maureen O'Hara in The Silent Man. Also a good/fun watch.
Tom,
I think you are referring to "The Quite Man" For me his best performance was in "The Informer".
Be Well Dan
[/p]
you are quite wright
[/quote] Good catch Tom. "Quiet Man" Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jan 12, 2014 17:13:55 GMT -6
This has gained no traction but worth repeating.If you send cavalry charging into a surprised village you are going to get large numbers of Indians exiting village and seeking refuge across the river where Custer was waiting. The Indians had no idea the strength of Reno's force.Could he have caused a general panic and flight?
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 12, 2014 18:04:42 GMT -6
Getting back to some semblance of reality, and reading Will's post very carefully, does anyone think that a non Custer in command would have, first gone up onto that ridge, and having done so, knowing the boss had just been whacked, make the ill advised decision to move further north once reaching Calhoun Hill. That move north was pure Custer. It was a movement made by a man who was deploying a division not five woefully understrength companies. The natural reaction to such an event, the soldiers reaction would be to consolidate what forces you had available, and then access the situation. I have a great deal of respect for DC, but this picture he paints just flies in the face of everything I know about an army, and the way that units and the people that make them up react to sudden crisis.
There was not a damned thing wrong with what Custer did the entire day, had he been in the van of a three thousand man division. There was everything wrong with what he did while in the van of a 600 man regiment.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 12, 2014 18:04:59 GMT -6
Seriously. Doesn't all this make coherent sense if Custer were hurt and they were trying to adjust for that and were not so allowed? Things fell apart, and the center did not hold. Stop pressing your point by using extraneous, non applicable examples! Your team is winning, you don't have to be so damn nervous about it. They are making the Bolts look like high-schoolers. Your big concern is Brady and the 'Chick. Meanwhile, relax and enjoy yourself. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 12, 2014 18:33:51 GMT -6
One of the best ANG units for many years running was the 175th Fighter Wing MDANG at Martin there on Eastern Avenue in Bmore. The Guard part of the old Martin plant is now called Warfield ANG Base, the Warfield in question being a cousin of Wallis Warfield Simpson. I don't know about his relationship with W.W.S., but I know he was not related to Paul Warfield (NFL) as he told me when I met him in the 70's. I was in the sister unit to the 175th, the 135thTAG for 24 years. Good memories of Essex/Middle River.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jan 12, 2014 18:36:33 GMT -6
Custer's force was incapable of a sustained defence;it was too small. No skirmish line either by the entire command or individual companys could have held for more than a few minutes before being outflanked and rolled up. Only a defence in depth had a chance of holding out and that would have required at least double the numbers Custer had.4 or 5 Strong points in staggered echlon with all round defence in mutual support was required. The Reno defence illustrates the lack of tactical sophistication among the leadership.Their defence was no more than a circular skirmish line being as strong as it's weakest point.A serious breach in that line could have resulted in total failure.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 12, 2014 18:41:20 GMT -6
Tom: Were you with them when they flew the Carabous, or later when they had the 130's. Flew out of Middle River in one of the former once to Fort Drum in January and liked to freeze my ass off.
135th is now gone and both the flying squadrons are part of the 175th Wing.
Ted Warfield was a good guy.
|
|