|
Post by quincannon on Jan 9, 2015 16:08:53 GMT -6
Well novice you without realizing it did just what Reno did. You went in with guns blazing until the opposition that confronted you became so overwhelming that you slowed down, then stopped. and I will consider your post immediately above, your personal breakout from the timber. I don't think you disobeyed an order or ill served your commander. Do you.
You had the misfortune to run into about every regular poster on this board and you were nailed to the cross. Yes you do need to read more, but you can start by 1) Throwing McMurtry in the trash, and, 2) Open your eyes and ears and give both mouth and fingers a rest while you peruse the threads that cover these various issues here. Then ask questions on those issues that you either do not understand or you require more information about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2015 16:09:13 GMT -6
At least Sarah Palin was comical!! What books would you recommend Fred?
|
|
|
Post by Colt45 on Jan 9, 2015 16:52:57 GMT -6
Scarface - welcome to the board. Fred's book, Strategy of Defeat, is about the best there is, but you will need a better idea of what went on at LBH before Fred's book is digested. Gray's book has been read by many, but it has a few conclusions in there that are more of the author's opinions than anything backed up by fact. One of the best reads is all the threads in this site. I have not read tons of books on LBH, but spent a couple of months reading all the threads in this site before I ever joined and posted my first post. It's amazing how much really good information you can get from just the threads on this site. It also saves reading a ton of books that cost money. I found by using the books mentioned in these threads as backup or resource material reference the poster's comments, I learned more in a short time than I ever could have by obtaining lots of books and spending the required time reading all of them and trying to form a reasonable opinion on my own. The posters on this board are probably the best read and most knowledgeable about LBH in existence. Again, welcome.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 9, 2015 16:56:22 GMT -6
Scarface,you can even disagree, but take some time to read some of the threads you think would interest you. You are dealing with a good bunch of guys here. If you have an issue with Reno that's ok. Bring forward the basis, where you formed the opinion. Not only did the surviving officers have no clue to an overall plan, I fear, neither did the dead. From the little I know, I don't think much of Reno as a officer or a human being, Benteen, I think was a quality officer. If you look closely a number of the officers Custer did not take with him had more experience fighting NA's than the officers he took off to die with him. An officer he left with the pack train had more experience in a command position while fighting NA's, because he was late to officers call. I won't ramble any more as there are others he with a much deeper and broader knowledge than I.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 9, 2015 16:57:25 GMT -6
At least Sarah Palin was comical!! We definitely agree on that, Scarface. A couple. If you read the Gray book-- Custer's Last Campaign-- you read one of the best out there, though I disagree with how he developed the battle and I disagree in particular with his timelines. Terribly prejudiced. Scarface... in my opinion, you need to wipe the slate clean regarding your Reno and Benteen beliefs: treat them, along with Custer, as neutral as you can and go into this looking for the truth and not as an advocate of one man or another. Now... books. To me, the best starters are Jim Donovan's A Terrible Glory, Edgar Stewart's Custer's Luck and W. A. Graham's The Custer Myth.The problem with Donovan-- and most others-- is they tend to blame everything on Reno and Benteen. At the risk of being self-serving and a pompous ass, I would also recommend my new one, The Strategy of Defeat at the Little Big Horn. It is extremely detailed and deals only with the fighting of the 25th. Normally, for a new person, I would not recommend it, but a number of people on these boards have told me that is wrong and that new guys would benefit even more than others. In other words, fewer preconceptions and prejudices. I will give you two links and you can check it out and see for yourself... so please pardon this shameless self-promotion... This is the Amazon link: www.amazon.com/Strategy-Defeat-Little-Big-Horn/dp/078647954X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1420843921&sr=1-1&keywords=Frederic+C.+Wagner+IIIThis is the publisher's link: www.mcfarlandbooks.com/book-2.php?id=978-0-7864-7954-2Or, you might want to call the top LBH bookseller of them all, Richard Upton: 1 (800) 959-1876. Upton is a great guy and answers his own phone. The book was released in very late-October and is already in its 4th printing, so it seems to have been pretty well received. I think Amazon has a couple reviews. Also, for the general campaign and the battle itself, the best book ever written-- in my opinion-- was James Willert's Little Big Horn Diary. Upton published it and has just re-issued it. Knock yourself out, my boy, and send me a message if you need any help. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 9, 2015 17:29:14 GMT -6
Scarface: To what these others have said, and every bit of it has been good advice, I would add that you obtain a primer on basic tactics. You need to understand the language of war. You would do well to find a book on leadership (not management mind you)and digest it. Had you done so prior to your first post I highly doubt you would have made it.
Little Big Horn is a story of both tactical and leadership failure. That is the only reason the story has endured. You will see within the story right things done the wrong way, and wrong things done the right way, and in every instance of these you will see failure. What you will not see though is disobedience of orders, nor will you see leaders and soldiers that did not try. You can castigate them all you please, we do, for failing, but never once think they were not doing their duty to the best of their ability. Even the ones that take the most, and deserved heat, Custer and Keogh thought they were doing the right thing. Reno and Benteen, neither being choir boy and not without fault, did absolutely nothing wrong tactically. Their execution is suspect, but their instincts were correct. These two men, neither of which I have much personal use for, had their lives nearly destroyed by one petty vindictive woman and her dime novel pimp, and you see that still reflected to this day in the agenda driven writings of poop peddlers.
Here is but one example. Benteen has been roundly criticized for taking a nap during the hilltop phase. Was he taking a nap or was he saying to those he led, calm down, everything will be OK. I will lead you out of this. Believe me, he was just as afraid as they were, but by his action, he was controlling both his fear and more importantly the fear of those he led.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 9, 2015 17:31:46 GMT -6
Can I also add read some old stuff like the RCOI but read it open minded, not as if you are looking for a cover up. Assume that people are acting with honor and integrity and answering to the best of their ability and memory. It was a time when a gentleman was a man of his word so unless there is evidence to the contrary, act accordingly.
Also for first hand reports go to the versions that are closest to the events. Time softens memories and the more survivors got together to talk about events the more their stories start to read the same. It's the reason that at a crime witnesses are seperated and then interviews, not so much so they can get their story together but so they effect each other. People can be very honest about what they believe happened but they can also be suggestable so something they didn't see or experience will quickly become part of their own story without them really recognizing it. I also never assume that some who has a totally different story from others is lying or only their story has to be true because everyone else is in on the coverup. There were 1000's of eyes on that battlefield and every single person's experience was different.
Beth
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2015 17:43:28 GMT -6
Thanks Fred, Tom, and Beth. Appreciate it.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 9, 2015 23:31:30 GMT -6
Now let's get back to this nonsense that Custer was conducting a flank attack.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 10, 2015 5:04:12 GMT -6
Chuck, I really think we have already deposed this idea on this board. We can go way back in history to the battle of Marathon and check out a flank attack, and well done. This was not. There was not a pincer movement at LBH or an encirclement either, it could have become a hammer/anvil had Custer waited for Terry to get in position. On the US side we can find a frontal attack, a retreat, a fixed defense, but no flank attack. Military terms do not do this action justice, in that whatever it was, it was ill planned and poorly executed. If this plan had been a paper in school George would have at best got an incomplete in preparation and an F in execution.
While I will never call this a flanking movement as you must know what you are flanking and where. And even then a flanking maneuver is not always effective, as the flanking force may itself be ambushed while maneuvering, or the main force is unable to pin the defenders in place, allowing them to turn and face the flanking attack. Pardon me if I did not do justice to the proper terms, as a war college was not part of my training and career field.
Regards, Tom
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2015 6:29:21 GMT -6
Didn't Reno at some point say that he expected Custer to support him with a flank attack? I think Custer was attempting a flank attack but was overwhelmed.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Jan 10, 2015 6:29:43 GMT -6
SF, arm yourself with Fred’s two books “Participants in the BLBH” and “Strategy for Defeat”, add to this the book “were Custer fell” and you will have at your fingertips a good reference book of who took part, another good reference book with photos and maps of all the relevant areas of the battle and a cracking book explaining the build-up and various stages of the battle.
I am reading my signed copy of “Strategy” again, I finished it over the Christmas week, and now when I have a quite abode, I am reading it again as the first time there was too much happening with guest and family knocking around.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 10, 2015 7:04:15 GMT -6
Scarface, Custer's adjutant told Reno he would be supported by the whole, nothing was ever said about flank attack. If you look at the terrain you see that there is no place to mount a flank attack from where Custer was heading.
Regards, Tom
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2015 7:12:22 GMT -6
Understood. But was he attempting a flank attack? From Reno's comments he seemed to think that was what Custer was trying to do.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 10, 2015 7:25:10 GMT -6
Didn't Reno at some point say that he expected Custer to support him with a flank attack? I think Custer was attempting a flank attack but was overwhelmed. Scarface, No. Reno-- and others-- expected Custer's support to come from the rear. Initially that was the plan: that is why Keogh and Cooke came to the river, to reconnoiter. That direct support (from the rear) business disappeared with Gerard's report. What Reno said about this "flank" business was in response to a question posed at the court of inquiry: basically, that, yes, a "flank attack" could also be seen as "support." That, however, was not what was expected by Reno, or any of his officers for that matter. Now... you write: "attempting a flank attack but was overwhelmed." That leads me to believe you are referring to Ford B. That is also incorrect. It is the old theory, easy for those who are merely repeating the old story without wanting to do the work. Indian accounts prove that to be incorrect and that Custer moved much farther north without being under much pressure. So the rout and chase from Ford B is incorrect. It doesn't get any easier, Scarface... at least not yet. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|