Other Indian Wars ?

[wild]

DC bases his case on 3 points.
1 Suggesting fabrication
2 The influence of Irish History
3 And a feeble attempt to dismiss both the government and the state of Poland.
We can dismiss the first two as irrelevant containing nothing new,same old same old.
The one substantive point he makes is that Polish government was not the legitmate government and that that the land mass of Poland was in dispute.

There was neither an agreed upon land mass (even among the Poles, never mind Stalin and the West) nor a functional united government.
There was no agreed land mass for any European country during that particular period.
DC's reasoning supports Hitler's position on Czechoslovacia and the Danzig corridor and Stalins invasion of East Poland.
Just in passing and to demonstrate how united Poland was;at the battle of Warsaw[sometimes refered to as the miricle on the Vistula]the Poles defeated the Bolsheviks preserving their independence and saving Europe from communism.
But the weakness of DCs arguement is in that the Allies recognised the State of Poland and it's government and entered into a binding treaty with it.

And yes, mass murder is 'mere' compared to actual genocide.
Stalin was guilty of the mass murder through famine of up to 7 million people.
In Tasmania in the early 1800s the 15000 original inhabitants were all but wiped out by introduced disease and murder by colonists.Before the UN charter but generally recognised as genocide.
7 million as against 15000 and DC has the wisdom to attribute the qualifier "mere" to one off them?

[jag]

Nov 3, 2012 9:00:13 GMT -5 wild said:

Hi Jag
From where did you dig up the bold Myles Dungan?
Regards

Well, its like this. On a recent trip to a little mountain villa, I walked into this quaint little bookshop with tourists in mind, when into my eyes appeared this little obscure saying, and I at once started to smile and then laugh, not to loud mind you, but lout enough for my wife to take notice, and she inquired as to my mental state. When I explained it to her she understood and asked if I were to purchase it what I would do with it. To make a long, not really, story short and thinking of you, I wrote down the jewel of the script boldly displayed and when I returned to civilization began my perusal of said object on the internet. I have to say I've come to a most affirmative opinion, and deepest of respect for radio broadcasters. I figured if anyone were to appreciate the saying in context and be able to translate it to the dominion commons, it of course would be you. Be of good cheer and keep your wood dry.

Later
jag

[justvisiting]

Nov 4, 2012 19:45:38 GMT -5 jag said:

Nov 3, 2012 9:00:13 GMT -5 wild said:

Hi Jag
From where did you dig up the bold Myles Dungan?
Regards

Well, its like this. On a recent trip to a little mountain villa, I walked into this quaint little bookshop with tourists in mind, when into my eyes appeared this little obscure saying, and I at once started to smile and then laugh, not to loud mind you, but lout enough for my wife to take notice, and she inquired as to my mental state. When I explained it to her she understood and asked if I were to purchase it what I would do with it. To make a long, not really, story short and thinking of you, I wrote down the jewel of the script boldly displayed and when I returned to civilization began my perusal of said object on the internet. I have to say I've come to a most affirmative opinion, and deepest of respect for radio broadcasters. I figured if anyone were to appreciate the saying in context and be able to translate it to the dominion commons, it of course would be you. Be of good cheer and keep your wood dry.

Later
jag

Huh?

[sfchemist]

Ahem...I just bumped into this thread about "Other Indian Wars" and have been richly rewarded with just about everything but that. That's fine, it has all been interesting and fun.

I do need someone to smack me around a little over an issue on my mind---such as it is. Been away for a while and I am now going over notes and rereading some books on LBH. I see many references to Custer's prowess as an Indian fighter, yet I can't seem to find any specific references other than what is listed below. I must be missing something?? Can someone here please point me in the right direction?

After the ACW we see Custer leading expeditions in and around the Texas area circa 1865-66. He then considered a military position with the Mexican Government. And it was in this general time frame when he was convicted of desertion for leaving his post and suspended for one year without pay. Before the one year suspension was up we see Custer at the winter Battle of Washita in Nov, 1868.

In 1873 Custer and the 7th Cavalry had an encounter with the Lakota when escorting a group of railroad surveyors in the Dakota Territories.

Custer later led an expedition into the Black Hills Territory in the Dakotas ~1874.

Then June, 1876.

Yes, GAC was an excellent Cavalry officer in the ACW, but what I'm looking for is his history as an Indian Fighter----where did he earn his reputation as an Indian fighter? The ACW was far different than fighting Plains Indians, who are not organized into formal military units....an Indian warrior is pretty much an independent one man fighting unit requiring different ways of attacking them.

What started this out was my wondering why General Terry, while on board the Far West, chose GAC and the 7th to track down and find the Lakota and other NAs aligned with Sitting Bull. Terry had other options.

Thanks,
Wayne

Oh: quincannon, it is my understanding the Springfield rifle used by Custer's men was the Model 500 trapdoor 1873 with a 24" Barrel. To reduce the recoil for Cavalry use, cartridges were loaded on the light side, which also reduced their effective range. I can't recall this effective range but once the fighting was up close and personal that became a moot point. If Custer forces used the .45-55 cartridge, and I think they did as that was the reduced load from the more standard .45-70. The first number (.45) is the diameter of the bullet in inches, with the second number representing the number of grains of powder in the brass case. Based upon my experience with military surplus rifles, I'm going to guess the effective range of the .45-55 was in the neighborhood of 150-200 yards. A skilled marksman would probably be ok at 200 yards, with an average marksman reduced to the lower 150 yard range. Now, quincannon, these are estimates and unfortunately I've never fired a Springfield 1873 Rifle with any type of cartridge, but man-o-man would I love to. The ranges I quoted are not very long at all, as 300 yards is not that far for an experienced rifleman. The problem with a heavy bullet in front of a reduced powder load (.45-55) would mean the trajectory would not be very flat, requiring practice adjusting for the exterior ballistics of that particular load. The .45-55 saw its demise along with Custer at the LBH. However, the standard .45-70 cartridge is still in use today and with modern powder, cases, primers, bullets and newer weapons this cartridge today could probably reach out to 1000 yards---which by the way is my goal with rifle rounds I shoot which are 7.62x54 rimmed cartridges. Now if anyone out there has better information please let me know, I really dig this stuff and would appreciate anyone updating my understanding of these cartridges.

[Dark Cloud]

Custer was considered a great Indian fighter by Custer, and he wrote a book. Benteen and others then and now thought it absurd.

[sfchemist]

Thanks DC. Also, back in the day you and had many discussions and I've learned a lot from you, appreciated your help then and today.

Thanks,
Wayne

[sfchemist]

Aug 17, 2013 21:02:38 GMT -5 Dark Cloud said:

Custer was considered a great Indian fighter by Custer, and he wrote a book. Benteen and others then and now thought it absurd.

Forget to mention that I'm re-reading his book "My Life..." and forgot how biased he was against the indigenous population. Custer appears to be defining the Native Americans as something less than human. While I don't agree with Custer's comments, I'm trying to understand them in the context of the times. The cultural collision between whites and Indians was difficult at best with two diametrically opposite lifestyles and philosophies often clashing in violent confrontations. There were also conflicts within our own government: East Coast humanitarians were often at odds with those suffering from the Indian attacks out West. This is the time and place where Custer lived and worked: huge cultural clashes with differing civilian policy demands. And given that there is nothing new under the sun, Congress created a Peace Commission to study these conflicts---how typical.

Wayne

[jodak]

Today, November 4, is the 225th anniversary of "St. Clair's Defeat", the greatest defeat ever suffered by the U.S. Army at the hands of Native Americans and, as a percentage of casualties, one of the Army's greatest defeats ever. Of approximately 1000 troops 632 (63%) were killed or captured and an additional 264 (26%) wounded.  There were also 34 civilian contractors killed and 13 wounded.  The Indians lost 21 killed and 40 wounded.

[benteen]

Nov 4, 2016 9:35:10 GMT -5 jodak said:

Today, November 4, is the 225th anniversary of "St. Clair's Defeat", the greatest defeat ever suffered by the U.S. Army at the hands of Native Americans and, as a percentage of casualties, one of the Army's greatest defeats ever. Of approximately 1000 troops 632 (63%) were killed or captured and an additional 264 (26%) wounded.  There were also 34 civilian contractors killed and 13 wounded.  The Indians lost 21 killed and 40 wounded.

Jodak,

Normally in a battle it is app 3-1 ratio of WIA to KIA. This was just the opposite. Do you think that this was similar to last stand hill where when the fire diminished from the soldiers, they went in with knives and tomahawks to inflict all those KIAs.

Be Well
Dan

[jodak]

Hi Dan,

I was not familiar with the details of the battle and attempted to look them up, but nothing that I could find shed a whole lot of light on it. From what I can tell it appears that the survivors were largely militia that fled at the outbreak of the battle, while the regulars stood and fought in good order but were mostly annihilated.  I had suspected that maybe a large number of deaths were due to killing of prisoners after the battle or, as you mentioned, the Indians overrunning them and killing them in close quarter combat.  However, the exact opposite appears to be the case. It seems that, after the initial assault, the Indians formed a defensive line which the regulars assaulted in repeated bayonet charges, each of which was decimated by Indian gunfire.  It strikes me as having been somewhat akin to the Japanese Banzai charges during WW2, with similar results

[jodak]

November 26, 1941

Col. Christopher (Kit) Carson, commanding the First Cavalry, New Mexico Volunteers, was ordered to lead an expedition against the winter campgrounds of the Comanches and Kiowas, believed to be somewhere on the south side of the Canadian. On November 10 he arrived at Fort Bascom with fourteen officers, 321 enlisted men, and seventy-five Ute and Jicarilla Apache scouts and fighters he had recruited from Lucien Maxwell’s ranch near Cimarron, New Mexico. Two days later the column, supplied with two mountain howitzers under the command of Lt. George H. Pettis, twenty-seven wagons, an ambulance, and forty-five days’ rations, marched down the Canadian into the Panhandle of Texas. Carson’s destination was Adobe Walls, where he had been employed by Bent nearly twenty years earlier. After a delay caused by snowstorms the column set up camp for the night of November 25 at Mule Springs, in what is now Moore County, thirty miles west of Adobe Walls. Two of Carson’s scouts reported the presence of a large group of Indians, who had recently moved into and around Adobe Walls with many horses and cattle. Carson immediately ordered all cavalry units and the two howitzers to move forward, leaving the infantry under Lt. Col. Francisco P. Abreau to follow later with the supply train. After covering fifteen miles Carson halted to await the dawn. No loud talking or fires were permitted, and a late-night frost added to the men’s discomfort. At about 8:30 A.M. Carson’s cavalry attacked Dohäsan’s Kiowa village of 150 lodges, routing the old chief and most of the other inhabitants, who spread the alarm to several Comanche groups. Pushing on to Adobe Walls, Carson forted up about 10 A.M., using one corner of the ruins for a hospital. One of the several Indian encampments in the vicinity, a Comanche village of 500 lodges, was within a mile of Adobe Walls. The Indians numbered between 3,000 and 7,000, far greater opposition than Carson had anticipated. Sporadic attacks and counterattacks continued during the day, but the Indians were disconcerted by the howitzers, which had been strategically positioned atop a small rise. Dohäsan led many charges, ably assisted by Stumbling Bear and Satanta; indeed, Satanta was said to have sounded bugle calls back to Carson’s bugler. With supplies and ammunition running low by late afternoon, Carson ordered his troops to withdraw to protect his rear and keep the way open to his supply train. Seeing this, the Indians tried to block his retreat by torching the tall bottomland grass near the river, but Carson set his own fires and withdrew to higher ground, where the battery continued to hold off the attacking warriors. At dusk Carson ordered a force to burn the Kiowa and Kiowa-Apache lodges, which the soldiers had attacked that morning. The Kiowa-Apache chief, Iron Shirt, was killed when he refused to leave his tepee. Concerned with protecting the supply wagons and Abreau’s infantry column moving up from Mule Springs, Carson decided to retreat. The reunited forces encamped for the night, and on the morning of November 27 Carson ordered a general withdrawal from the area. In all, Carson’s troops and Indian scouts lost three killed and twenty-five wounded, three of whom later died. Indian casualties were estimated at 100 to 150. In addition 176 lodges, along with numerous buffalo robes and winter provisions, as well as Dohäsan’s army ambulance wagon, had been destroyed. One Comanche scalp was reported taken by a young Mexican volunteer in Carson’s expedition, which disbanded after returning to Fort Bascom without further incident. General Carleton lauded Carson’s retreat in the face of overwhelming odds as an outstanding military accomplishment; though the former mountain man was unable to strike a killing blow, he is generally credited with a decisive victory. Carson afterward contended that if Adobe Walls was to be reoccupied, at least 1,000 fully equipped troops would be required. The first eyewitness account of the battle other than Carson’s military correspondence was published in 1877 by George Pettis, who had served as the expedition’s artillery officer. [From This Day in U.S. Military History]

Seems to have many parallels with the BLBH, with the exception of the outcome.  Were the howitzers the deciding factor and would they have hade the same effect at BLBH?

[tubman13]

Similar in many ways to the incursion into Sioux/Cheyenne ceded territory in eastern Montana from Feb.-May 1874, down to the two howitzers. The 1874 was an all civilian incursion, and helped to inflame the situation that lead to the 1876 campaign.