|
Post by quincannon on Jan 7, 2014 17:39:34 GMT -6
Well I suppose you could add an additional voice over or graphic stating that Crazy Horse got a big shive in the back and Sitting Bull was dispensed with when he got troublesome., and the restaurant owned by the Crows does a land office business with tourists in the summer. Yes, a happy ending here is very hard to find.
I read all of Johnston's stuff. Enjoyed them all. To bad he did not live to complete what he set out to do.
|
|
|
Post by scottbono on Apr 10, 2014 23:33:08 GMT -6
I am having a very hard time figuring out how you are going to develop a "happy ending" screenplay out of the Rosebud Scott, as was your earlier stated intention. At least the screenplay was. I seem to remember one earlier loosely based on Rosebud but cannot remember the name. It was mid 1950's vintage though. You might want to look into that. The fight at Rosebud was too much for Crook's logistics, and he had to fall back on them, located somewhere around president day Sheridan, Wyoming. Terry C. Johnson did a quite decent, I thought, fictional version of the battle. Fighting Apache was much harder in my opinion than fighting the northern plains tribes. They were as different as night and day, and I think it fair to say that Crook, at the time of the Rosebud, had yet to adapt. He would greatly improve later. QC...greetings to you and the other board participants after a protracted time away. I've been hammering out the synopsis, outline and breakdown of the projected script concerning The Battle of the Rosebud. To get to your statement, QC, there IS no happy ending; rather, a mis-interpretation of the fight's results by both sides that leads to further heartache and misery. I'm going to be heading to Baltimore in a few months (in time for the crabcakes and steamed crabs and cold brewskis) with the intent of visiting Carlisle Barracks to do some serious research. My sister has been extremely helpful - a LTC in the USAF JAG office - in opening a few doors and even suggesting I consider a piece on the RCOI from the standpoint of whether anything was intentionally held back in the testimony. She offered to help with that also from the military/legal standpoint. Anyway, the current project is The Rosebud and everything seems to point to a rather dark/gritty affair screen-wise. If you or anyone else has suggestions, feel free to let me know; I'm open to examine any 'trails' at the moment. Regards, Scott
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Apr 11, 2014 3:58:17 GMT -6
Welcome back, you might want to chase the, "Did Custer have a plan thread". Enjoy B-more.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 11, 2014 6:23:53 GMT -6
Funny you just mentioned movies, there is a DVD section in the charity shop were a do a couple of mornings work, I came across a DVD called “Combat Zone” it is based in Vietnam and it cost a £1 (about $1.60c), I shall check it out at the weekend.
|
|
|
Post by scottbono on Apr 11, 2014 14:11:13 GMT -6
Welcome back, you might want to chase the, "Did Custer have a plan thread". Enjoy B-more. Regards, Tom Hey Tom, thanks. I am going to mosey on over to the thread and 'cram'. I guess whatever he had in mind comes under the heading of 'plan' but then you read here what the military folks begin describing as a 'plan' and GAC's idea fals far short. Baltimore in the summer is no joke - humidity around 90%. Late summer - forget it even when the trade-off is bigger crabs. I'm looking at early summer and what I don't take in crab-wise I will make up for in beer. Regards, Scott
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Apr 11, 2014 18:39:34 GMT -6
enjoy I will be OK,NM,CO, MT,& SD.
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Dec 11, 2014 9:29:33 GMT -6
I haven't looked at the other board since the summer. Based on recent comments here, I took a look.
Caveat: Please no personal attacks on anyone. My focus is on having a reasonable discussion.
1. The amateur versus military professionalism issue continues over there. A theory stated as fact is that reenactors understand 19th century tactics better than military professionals.
My issue is that many tactical discussions are arrant nonsense, in any century you want to pick. If I were to state that the 7th Cavalry were dressed and equipped as a roman legion, I would be wrong. That is not an opinion, it is a fact. Fundamentals of tactics are frequently wrong on that board. You can post manuals and copy definitions, terms, procedures; and it is totally over the head of some of the amateurs.
I left that board because it is hostile to anyone with military experience. To defeat facts, that board on a daily basis derides, denigrates and insults at those who have served. The more you know, the more hated you are over there. The arguments on that board are not rational, they are emotional.
Put aside the emotion, and let's look at some of the theories over there with tactical applications.
2. Reno could have defeated the Indians with the force he had, with no help from the rest of the regiment. The theory is that if he had continued to attack and not stopped, he would have won the battle on his own. By the way, they have been discussing this theory with hundreds of posts, for months.
Okay, what was the tactical situation? Reno started his attack with 2 companies up, one back, a standard procedure. He used the river to protect his right flank, his left was in the air. Indians rapidly focused on his exposed left. A hunting party of 100-ish showed up out of a creek to the left, and hundreds more mounted and moved around Reno. Reno was forced to move his reserve into line. He still lacked the combat power to extend across the valley. In fact, he needed the 5 companies of the main body.
Reno was defeated when the Indians got behind him and started an attack into his rear. They had their own flank protected by the river as they attacked north. Indian numbers were 5-900.
So what does continuing to attack north with unprotected flank and rear do? The command would be annihilated with no survivors, within 30 minutes. The Indians get behind you faster if you keep moving forward. As you close in on the village, all those warriors still fixing their make up join the fight faster and in greater numbers. Many men who never fought in the battle now join in out of necessity. A culminating point in or near the village puts you in the open, on a flat plain, with no cover.
From a tactical view, this theory has zero chance of success. It is a suicide run.
3. The other dominant theory is that LTC Custer ordered MAJ Reno to conduct a holding attack, while GAC attacked the enemy flank. Again, facts jump in t prove this a false theory.
1) The orders issued by GAC to Reno do not say this. Right here, this theory is counterfactual.
2) The only place to conduct a flank attack is on the left. Custer did not go there, so again, theory is false. The decision not to enter the valley put Custer out of support of Reno. The bluffs and river made a flank attack physically impossible. Custer met and was mainly defeated by separate groups of Indians in the circles further downstream. In other words, different Indians at a different location in time and space. By the logic of the other board, Wounded Knee is also a flank attack. It's still the 7th Cav, fighting the same Indians, just at a different point in space and time.
3) LTC Custer had a single company approach Ford B. His other elements were stretched out over a mile away. It is fascinating that the Custer fanatics think George Armstrong Custer would conduct his main attack with 20% of his force. Whatever happened at Ford B, it was not an attack. Also, it was not on a flank. The Indians in this area faced GAC. So he would have been attacking straight into their main line of battle, and across a river.
3) GAC moved past the Indians fighting Reno. Flank attacks are a window in time and space. There was a window to conduct a flank attack, but GAC was not in poition to do so.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Dec 11, 2014 9:43:35 GMT -6
Montrose, I think that Custer just wanted Reno in the valley and making a holy show of his self, he knew that when the village spotted Reno that this would cause a reaction, so this is what he wanted, I don’t think it mattered to him if Reno had to halt and fight on foot in line or ride through and cut the place up, the reaction was enough to allow him to deliver the killer blow.
One thing that does irk with me is that he thought that the Indians would run and that two battalions of three and five would be enough to do the job, so it he thought that these warriors would be frightened to death and scatter, then why was he worried that satellite camps would attack his flank. He sent Benteen out to deal with any threat from this area and reduced his combat strength by three companies, so why would he think that the village would run but these other smaller camps would attack?
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 11, 2014 10:48:02 GMT -6
Will,
A brilliant post and one I have copied and pasted to my files.
Merry Christmas, friend.
Very best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 11, 2014 16:09:11 GMT -6
An absolutely outstanding summation of facts. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by welshofficer on Dec 11, 2014 20:11:33 GMT -6
Montrose,
I now know what is meant by "the other board". I think we all know the date of death for all the troopers of AGM companies if they had assaulted into the village. On the principle of "say nothing about someone unless it is good", I do not propose to comment further on those two arguments being postulated elsewhere.
WO
|
|
|
Post by welshofficer on Dec 11, 2014 21:04:54 GMT -6
Montrose, I think that Custer just wanted Reno in the valley and making a holy show of his self, he knew that when the village spotted Reno that this would cause a reaction, so this is what he wanted, I don’t think it mattered to him if Reno had to halt and fight on foot in line or ride through and cut the place up, the reaction was enough to allow him to deliver the killer blow. One thing that does irk with me is that he thought that the Indians would run and that two battalions of three and five would be enough to do the job, so it he thought that these warriors would be frightened to death and scatter, then why was he worried that satellite camps would attack his flank. He sent Benteen out to deal with any threat from this area and reduced his combat strength by three companies, so why would he think that the village would run but these other smaller camps would attack?
Ian. Ian,
What's the potential implications, if Benteen does not sweep those valleys, for the attacking force at the southern end of the village and the mule train if there are satellite villages there and they do not flee but come towards the main village? It all goes back to attacking without prior reconnaissance, because GAC thought he had been discovered.
WO
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Jan 7, 2015 18:14:27 GMT -6
Sigh,
Discussion on the other board: "Amateur: Since you were an enlisted man who chose not to make a career of the military, I am not very surprised. In any event its nice to hear you admit that you were never exposed to how a fixing force engages the enemy in combat. I suppose that explains a lot."
Professional: "If we look at careers than I will stand by being a Marine and a law enforcement officer for over 35 years. Again you misrepresent what I posted and then make some stupid comment. I stated we never used the term fix as you an informed civilian are using it. You can look through my combat notebook and see if you can find a fix and flank attack.
This is a bold face lie "nice to hear you admit that you were never exposed to how a fixing force engages the enemy in combat".
What I stated is the Marine Corps never taught your fix and flank attack or fix and flank tactic as terms as you use. They did teach how to fix bayonets.
You should be ashamed of yourself as a representative of the LBHA and acting as a moderator to make such comments."
Steve, you have the patience and tact of a saint. You make me proud to be an American.
Now I do not want to start a flame war. An amateur has been posting some very bad and factually incorrect threads on tactics. When his errors are shown and proved to be false, he makes personal attacks. I do not mind conducting discussions on theories that involve rational thought. But arguments that rely on emotion and systemic falsification of facts; just don't pass the common sense test.
(Though I can't resist a sidebar. There is a poster called A10 ACN. The A10 is an air force ground attack plane. ACN is abbreviation for acorn. So I assume the name is shorthand for Flying Nut.)
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 7, 2015 18:53:25 GMT -6
Montrose, don't sigh, in this life we get what we get. Thank the lord you served with open minded people who were trainable, for the most part.
I spent 24 years involved with the military,80+% as a weekend warrior. I could feed people, billet people, and bury people. My AFSC included all three. I was one of the best shots in the unit, did not learn it in the military. I am not a combat veteran. If I was to get in a real fighting war I would hope that I had the proper training, quality non-coms, and an ego controlled, focused, and task driven OIC.
I have been blessed, to know well, several solid combat vets who would no more tell me how to do my job, than I would have thought I could have done theirs properly. These folks never talked about their jobs unless asked and never more than required to answer the question asked. Fun guys and party, you bet.
I had the pleasure to meet Steve last year and he was only as forth coming as required to answer what questions I had regarding the LBH. Congenial with a good sense of humor. He carries himself well, there is no bluster or pretense about him. I owe him a breakfast at Chucks favorite restaurant. Those on the other board who do not consider what he says are suffering their own loss.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 7, 2015 19:43:50 GMT -6
Yes Tom but you did not sit beside a Cavalry Colonel from Vietnam and learn all about cavalry over dinner. There are Armor Colonels in the Army, some of which serve in or command Cavalry units, but there have not been Cavalry Colonels since 1948. There are just as many, probably more, Infantry officers that serve in and command cavalry units in today's army.
Cavalry, for those who do not know is the reconnaissance arm of the Army. Their mission set is defined by the appropriate field manuals. Their job is to find, guard, protect, screen, and outpost, usually for a larger force The myth of cavalry in the American experience is one fostered more by the John Ford movie than reality. You cannot have any rationality from those who know only the myth. Cavalry is no longer a branch. It has not been since 1948. Most of the cavalry in today's army do not even have a cavalry role. The two largest cavalry units are by organization motorized infantry that carry a cavalry name for the sake of tradition. The cavalry division is a heavy or armored division, a main battle force, not cavalry, carrying the cavalry name only for the sake of tradition. Several of our squadrons are Aviation units that have a reconnaissance mission, they too are titled cavalry. All the old songs are there. The guidons still red and white swallowtails. The Colors are still the familiar yellow.
Cavalry is a function, not a branch, and all the Cavalry Colonels are long dead, except in the dreams of the pretender.
So the choice is clear. The professional studies, advocates, and opines on the function, mission, and appropriate tactical concepts, and the amateur lives in a world of myth making and dreams of the good old days that were never good, just old.
Rational thought and conversations that stem from that thought cannot be had when one of the parties to the conversation is not rational. It cannot be had with people who have no concept of what they are talking about. It cannot be had, when fabrication of fact is the last resort of those not in possession of those facts.
Steve says the breakfasts are good. I know the selection of books are good. The tee shirts so so. It is only the death burger where my refined tastes are offended.
There is no Lone Ranger, Cisco Kid, Zorro, or Easter Bunny either. Just like cavalry colonels, cavalry minds, and cavalry tactics, they are works of fiction and fantasy.
|
|