|
Post by Yan Taylor on Dec 12, 2014 8:52:46 GMT -6
Hi Steve, I agree with your comments, my post was not directed at anyone in particular, I don't want this to spiral again, because there is no Diane at the moment to do her impersonation of Kofi Annan.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 12, 2014 9:38:11 GMT -6
I truly believe that trying to find someone to blame is the most counterproductive thing that we see on any of these boards and not any one in particular.
There may be only one to blame. There may be many. Frankly, we do not know enough about what happened in the Custer portion of the fight to access blame in that part of the story. It may be Custer. It may be Keogh. It may be Harrington, but the possibility exists that it could also be Corporal Snuffy, who made a grave error, causing the entire part of the episode to go badly.
When your son is playing street baseball, and he hits a ball through the neighbor's window he is to blame. You the parent though are responsible for his actions. No you did not hit the ball yourself, but you allowed him to play in the street, therefore you set the condition that caused the window to be broken. You as a parent are responsible for both his discipline and behavior. It is you that must fork over the cash to replace the window. You either did not instill the discipline in your son, not to do something this foolish, or by your own neglect did not supervise his activities closely enough.
In the Army, in any military force a commander is responsible for everything a unit does or fails to do, every action taken or not taken. Without this clear understanding no military unit can long exist and function. This must not be construed to mean that the commander is to blame, he may be, but it is just as or more likely that someone down the chain failed. The person who failed is to blame, the commander is responsible for it.
All too often we equate blame and responsibility as being one in the same. They may be, but not always. Not most of the time.
I think it beyond comprehension that anyone that was involved went in not trying to do their very best, including Custer. I think Reno and Benteen did everything ask of them, and in Benteen's case more. No one was trying to do anything wrong. Personally I think there were several on that field who would not give two hoots in hell if Custer got himself whacked, but none would act upon it for there was more at stake, much more.
So when we look at responsibility we must first look at the person who set this thing in motion. Did he conceive a viable plan. Did he communicate that plan. Were those that were tasked with carrying out the plan fully aware of that plan, the part they had to play in it, and what alternatives were available to them should the plan go astray. Was there a plan. All these are questions of command responsibility. I will then let each of you decide for yourselves who was to blame and who was responsible. The answer though is very simple.
There is no such thing as a failed commander standing before his commander and saying -- "It wasn't me, it was him".
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 12, 2014 9:40:22 GMT -6
I think Fred has an obligation to remain as neutral as humanly possible and only defend what he has laid out. I don't want to see anyone discouraged from reading his book based upon forum disputes. Right on the nail, Steve. I learned an important lesson from an old friend: Gordon Harper. While Gordon was willing to provide his insight-- which I often found at odds with mine-- Gordon refused to discuss his conclusions and his theories. I have reached the point in this whole thing where I am fairly set in my ideas, my theories, and the things I have written, and as I have said before, unless more and better "evidence" surfaces, I have no intention of changing anything. That book was essentially finished more than a year ago. If I remember correctly, the last change dealt with the length of Deep Ravine and the fact Doug Scott told me he and Rich Fox believe the headcut was 50 yards closer to the river in 1876 than it is today. While seemingly unimportant, it was very important. Why? Because it was very strong evidence in supporting John Stands In Timber's account of troops heading to the basin area. Now think about it. This is part of the "context" argument I am always harping about. Stands In Timber wasn't at the battle... hadn't been born yet... so everything he left us was Cheyenne lore. Yet a "closer-to-the-river headcut" tells us the basin area was wider and the fields of fire greater-- more distance between the troops and the exiting Indians-- making it a better place to position troops to attempt stopping the egress from the ravine. Sure, it is nothing definitive, but one can almost see Custer's reaction when he saw the warriors coming out of the ravine and knowing he had to try to stop it, because they split him off from Keogh's command. And it gives greater credence to the Stands In Timber account, thereby giving us greater confidence in other things he related. In reality, it is not dissimilar to "the gap" business: it explains the scattered appearance of so many of the Keogh Sector headstones and it tends to elevate Keogh from an incompetent fool to a tactically aware, struggling commander. So... as far as I can tell, there is very little in the way of first-hand, primary accounts I have not seen. And even less, accounts of any import. I am very happy, very willing, and rather able to discuss anything anyone may want to discuss regarding that book, but I am no longer interested in arguing, battling, or entertaining comments claiming "I'm wrong" or claiming "alternate theories." To me, that timeline in the book tells the entire story. I cannot even begin to tell you how perfectly those events fit within the outlined time frames. At times I literally had to take a break to get myself back down to earth, knowing or believing how well the accounts fit into an almost perfect sequence. Now I need to work on trying to satisfy Beth's inquiry. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 12, 2014 9:43:46 GMT -6
I think it beyond comprehension that anyone that was involved went in not trying to do their very best, including Custer. I think Reno and Benteen did everything ask of them, and in Benteen's case more. No one was trying to do anything wrong. Personally I think there were several on that field who would not give two hoots in hell if Custer got himself whacked, but none would act upon it for there was more at stake, much more. This is one of the best, one of the most intelligent, one of the most understanding comments I have ever read about the battle of the Little Big Horn. It takes a true pro to make that comment and to understand it. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 12, 2014 10:03:44 GMT -6
Fred: I was once a support platoon leader in an Infantry battalion. I received a radio call one day, it was at Fort Drum, that I had failed to deliver ammunition to Range so and so, and as a result had ruined most of the days training for a platoon. I was royally chewed on the radio by the battalion S-3 (Operations and Training Officer) for everyone to hear. I wanted to crawl under my quarter ton, cuddle in my sleeping bag and pray the world would go away. I was called to see the battalion commander for my transgression. When I reached the battalion TOC, I was stopped by the S-3 that chewed me, and he said I am going in with you. He then stood before our commander and said he was responsible. He failed to place that range on my tasking list, and I was blameless. He was both to blame and was responsible said he. The battalion commander stopped him abruptly and said -- You may be to blame Boyd, but I am responsible. It rests with me"
That battalion commander went on to be a very respected general officer, and the S-3 went on to be both a general officer and division commander. The lesson we received that day, was never forgotten by either of us. The S-3, later division commander gave me another insight as well, although not related to this incident - "Never be satisfied he would say. You can always do it better. When you are satisfied you begin a backward slide"
For Tom: The S-3 was Boyd Cook, and the battalion commander was Lew Hill, you probably either know or have heard of both of them.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Dec 12, 2014 12:10:39 GMT -6
Once fed Hill at a get together in a new Dining Hall in Middle River, I think. I know the name, Cook do not recall. We handled a good number of jumps at A.P. Hill, Pickett, and Bragg. One particular jump as I recall was requested for the Eastern Shore for an annual deployment, and the jumpers got spend their middle weekend at Bethany Beach in an old NG training site. Caribou's were used for this drop. My unit had to drop them and feed them.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 12, 2014 12:44:04 GMT -6
Cook died a few years ago, and the Armory in Thurmont is named for him. As good a man as you would ever want to meet.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Dec 12, 2014 15:23:46 GMT -6
Beth, you will get far more from Fred others regarding the above. Regarding Benteen and Reno their misuse was the 3rd step in the Strategy of Defeat. Regarding Sarah Parkak, only 35, and what she has brought to her field is amazing. There was, in fact, a rerun on one of the Discovery channels, last night. I have seen it in the past so I passed. I don't know if here methods would work without solid structures to lock on to. Maybe the bodies in Deep Ravine? The NA mounds in the Midwest? Certainly the ruins in the southwest USA and Central America. All above good stuff.
Regards. Tom
What I would like to see would be the paths of the NA through the valley all those travois, animals and humans following those paths for generations have probably left paths--like you can see parts of the Oregon trail its path. I don't know what type of image it would take--I know they can do amazing things. Here is a wiki article that gives one a general idea Remote sensing archalologyAlso I suspect one would see where holes were dug in the battlefield, unfortunately I don't know if the pictures would be able to tell if it was battle related or perhaps an ancient buffalo wallow. I don't know if one can find the bodies in Deep Ravine because there is a limit on how deep the images can see. It would though show what I guess you could call the history of the deep ravine and get an idea how it used to sit. Beth
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 12, 2014 15:47:11 GMT -6
Beth: You can see parts of the Santa Fe Trail in Kansas as well. There is or used to be one of those upscale roadside rest stops along I 70 where you could walk to it. Perhaps it is still there although I don't recall seeing it the last time I drove west that way.
There was a discussion several years ago on the other board about Deep Ravine bodies. Don't recall all the particulars but it centered on silt and erosion over time. Maybe Fred remembers.
Come to think of it this might just be a good case to put Lieutenant Kenda CSPD(Ret) on. I understand he has some experience hunting for homicides.
PS: Come to think of it there is near Fort Union, New Mexico and place where you can see the SFT much more clearly defined than in Kansas. Fort Union is a ruin, and interesting ruin though about twenty miles west of I 25 north I think of Las Vegas, New Mexico. Can't remember if I went to Fort Union before or after I stopped for lunch in Las Vegas. I mention this because the SFT predates anything that would remain of battle related trail(s) up in Montana, so I think their might be some remnants still visible up there. AZ may know. At least he would be the first one I would ask.
|
|
|
Post by Colt45 on Dec 12, 2014 16:45:43 GMT -6
Parts of the Santa Fe trail are very visible to this day just outside Cimarron NM, on the highway that leads to Raton. As you travel out of Cimarron toward Raton, look to the east and you can clearly see the ruts about 100 yards off the roadway. The trail is visible off and on for a couple of miles.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 12, 2014 17:11:46 GMT -6
I think for those unfamiliar it should be stated for all practical purposes there are really two Santa Fe Trails. The Cimarron Cut off is the later of the two, a short cut. Interesting place to visit is an old trading post of Bent's Fort east of Pueblo in La Junta, Colorado. Some of you may have seen the rather by now elderly TV mini-series Centennial. Some of that was filmed at Bent's Fort. Very well preserved (maybe rebuilt is better) and worth the visit.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Dec 12, 2014 17:19:28 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Dec 13, 2014 9:27:20 GMT -6
Come to think of it this might just be a good case to put Lieutenant Kenda CSPD(Ret) on. I understand he has some experience hunting for homicides. PS: Come to think of it there is near Fort Union, New Mexico and place where you can see the SFT much more clearly defined than in Kansas. Fort Union is a ruin, and interesting ruin though about twenty miles west of I 25 north I think of Las Vegas, New Mexico. Can't remember if I went to Fort Union before or after I stopped for lunch in Las Vegas. I mention this because the SFT predates anything that would remain of battle related trail(s) up in Montana, so I think their might be some remnants still visible up there. AZ may know. At least he would be the first one I would ask. Alas some things might be beyond Kenda. I find the remains of old trains really interesting. It's sort of like a geological snapshot. Beth
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 13, 2014 9:41:32 GMT -6
Not far from me Beth is the old railroad bed of the AT&SF that once served us here. As of now it is perfectly preserved minus tracks of course. It will not remain there long as CS is expanding eastward rapidly. It is a piece of history that will disappear. As I pass it I often think of those that came out here via that rail line, their first experience. Sad really.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Dec 13, 2014 9:54:14 GMT -6
Not far from me Beth is the old railroad bed of the AT&SF that once served us here. As of now it is perfectly preserved minus tracks of course. It will not remain there long as CS is expanding eastward rapidly. It is a piece of history that will disappear. As I pass it I often think of those that came out here via that rail line, their first experience. Sad really. It was a typo on my part, I meant trail instead of train but I feel the same way about trains. I would love to be able to travel to places by train but it continually seems to be a 'you can't get there from here.' It's even hard to travel by the modern day stage coach --the bus. It used to be any little town had a bus stop but they just get you sort of close. On the other hand 2 of the 4 stages we took going back to Iowa at Thanksgiving had Wifi and the ability to charge your electronics. Can you imagine if our adventuring forefathers would have had GPS on the trail? Of course a weather report might have been even more useful at times. Old railroad beds make great hiking and biking trails. A huge plus for any community. Beth
|
|