|
Post by quincannon on Oct 22, 2021 16:53:00 GMT
No Mac, I think Reno thought he was the advanced guard of the main attack. He probably had notions that whatever Benteen was sent off to do would be the supporting attack. I am not clear as to if Reno actually knew what Benteen was sent to do (being told that is), but he could could put three, and nine together and come up with some sort of answer to make a judgment on the matter.
The very words "big village" betray the fact that Custer had absolutely no idea of just how big that village conglomerate was until he viewed if half way into his journey. At that point the size alone upset his tactical maneuver apple cart.
I was not as clear as I might have been regarding Reno's predicament in the valley. Reno was on his own hook UNTIL he had broken free. I doubt Benteen coming up in the valley could have effected the relief of Reno's battalion. He just did not have enough combat power in my view. I do concur though in that Benteen's arrival did prevent Reno from again being surrounded and overcome on the Reno Hill position.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2021 17:13:33 GMT
I agree Reno could be considered as the Regiment's Advance Guard. It is unwise for the Main Body to leave the Advance Guard without telling them.
Concur with Reno was on his own hook. Had Benteen come up on his left, there was no defensible ground until maybe they were back across the river. Whether he lucked into a successful break out or planned it, he did the right thing, and once Benteen shows up, Reno rightly assumes command of the larger Wing/battalion/group/whatever you want to call it. Benteen informs him of his orders and passes the burden to Reno. Whether he reverts to just commanding his company, retains his battalion, or becomes 2nd in command of the wing/battalion is unclear to me. (Having commanded two platoons and three companies, I can report no matter how much you enjoy command, turning over command to someone new provides a temporary relief; you can feel the burden lifting off your shoulders, only to be replaced hours or days later with new ones.)
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 22, 2021 18:04:35 GMT
UNWISE, is not a strong enough term, but we will let that fly for the moment, although stupid does come to mind.
My personal belief is that the two battalion arrangement was dissolved when Reno and Benteen link up. He seemed to concern himself with the matters of his own company from then on. That said, I am sure he was still counted on as a rational voice in Reno's planning for further action. Rational is a relative term though, because moving northward toward Weir with everything but the kitchen sink in tow was a bone headed move in anyone's comic book.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Oct 22, 2021 19:55:18 GMT
Well that said, I don't think that GAC took much notice to what Reno and Beteen were doing, he had given both of them their orders and was going ahead with his own buisness of hitting the village from another direction.
He never sent back the two messengers which Reno had sent him, so he saw no need to, Reno had told him the score as he saw it. Benteen was sent fresh orders so he was also taken care of.
As I see it, he thought that his major and senior captain could take it from there and fight with what they had, as combined, they had more troopers than Custer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2021 21:03:52 GMT
Custer was in COMMAND of the 7th Cavalry REGIMENT. He is responsible for everything the unit does or fails to do.
How did he form his Regiment? 1 Way Another Way 7th Cavarly - Custer (First hat) 7th Cavarly (custer) 1st Battalion - Custer (2nd hat + Crow Scouts). Crow Scouts (Boyer( 1st Squadron - Yates (2 Companies) 1st Battalion (Yates 5 Companies) 2nd Squadron - Keogh (3 Companies 2nd Battalion (Reno 3 Companies + Ree Scouts (Varnum)) 2nd Battalion - Reno (3 Companies + Ree scouts) 3rd Battalion (Benteen 3 Companies) 3rd Battalion - Benteen (3 Companies) Trains (1 Company + Contract Teamsters + 12 Company detachments) Trains (1 Company + Contract Teamsters + 12 Company Detachments)
If Custer commanded the 1st Battalion or the Right Wing, he has abrogated his position as the Regimental Commander. You cannot command two organizations at once. Custer should have given each battalion a clear mission. Benteen, Move SW at a 45 degree angle to the regiments current course. If you find Indians, attack them and report contact to me. If you don't make contact and continue until you get to the Little Bighorn River and turn North to link up with the Regiment.
Reno, Take 3 companies and move on my left flank on the other side of the river and conform to Keogh's movements. Be prepared to assume the role of advanced guard. You have control of Varnum's scouts. Keep me informed as to what you see.
Yates, Move on the right as I direct following this river. Be prepared to deploy or to form 2 battalions, yours with C,I, L and Yates with E and F.
Trains. Follow Yates' battalion. Stay out of contact with the enemy.
"Sir," says Benteen, "Shouldn't we keep the Regiment together?" "Carry out your orders, sir!" "Yes, Sir," says Benteen.
Time passes. They discover the Lone Teepee and a small Indian Band. "RENO! You are the advance guard. Move out and attack that hostile band. I don't want them to reach the main camp, which we have not yet found. I will follow you and provide support. If we make contact with more enemy, attack and fix them and I will continue to support you." "Yes, sir".
Time Passes.
Reno: Holy Shit! Look at all the EFFING Indians. Messenger, tell Custer, we are pursueing the INdians and there are at least 500 massing to my front. Reccommend you come up on my left. Repeat that back." Blah...
Time Passes. No response. "MESSENGER" Take this message to Custer. Yes sir.
Time Passes. CRAP! No response. Dismount, Fight on foot. Form Skirmish line!
Time Passes. More Crap. Retire to the woods over yonder.
Time Passes. More Crap. Bloody Knife's blood and brains all over Reno's face. MOUNT! DISMOUT! MOUNT" FOLLOW ME.
Time Passes. Benteen decides he is not going all the way to the LBH and sets back to the main trail. Kanipe arrives, I have a message for the trains. Trains are that way bub. Whats going on? Blah blah blah. OK. Be off with you. (Maybe Benteen should have sent a messenger saying he was coming back, but he hadn't made contact so there was no need.)
Time Passes. Martini comes up. COME QUICK. Blah blah blah. Hmmm. I can't come quick and bring the Pacs. Go tell the Pacs to pick up the speed, then come back to me. Follow me boys. (Maybe a messenger at this point)
Time Passes. On Reno Hill. Benteen comes up. Hands him message.
Shit. I have no idea where he is.
Meanwhile, GAC has stuck the male appendage into a sausage grinder and it getting chewed up.
Custer abrogated command by not responding to Reno. He became a battalion commander, I think, and paid no attention to anything else. Not that the command and control techniques of the time would have enabled him.
It doesn't matter what orders he gave his people. He needed to update them. I don't think he had a plan and when he formed one, he was all by himself and beyond help.
IF he had commanded a platoon, company, squadron, or battalion he probably would have done better. But no. A brigade and division commander whose tactic was CHARGE.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 22, 2021 21:21:06 GMT
So, the moral of that story is not in how you task organize, it is how you plan the battle, and assign missions to your subordinate battalions commensurate with your ability as a regimental commander to exercise command and control over the whole.
The more long range your ability to communicate is, the further you can separate the various elements your command. The shorter that range, the less battle space you can maneuver over. Voice, trumpet, and messenger, are short range means.
The minute a commander decides to take personal charge of a subordinate portion of his command is what the term FUBAR was invented to describe. Custer was not the only one who fell to this temptation. Rommel's "race to the wire" during Crusader in November 1941 is another prime example of what not to do. In much the same way as Custer moving north, Rommel put himself at the head of a battle group seeing an opportunity, which in turn put himself out of communications with the rest of Panzer Armee Afrika. Meanwhile, while he was chasing shadows, the rest of his army was getting the snot beaten out of it. Had it not been for two staff officers (von Mellinthin and Westphal) acting upon what was, and not what Rommel thought what was, and the German General Staff System that supported their actions, Rommel's name would have stood right beside George Armstrong Custer, as prime examples of mobile warfare idiots.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Oct 23, 2021 9:52:05 GMT
Well noted on Rommel Chuck.
Mike, you have described what a well trained and professional regimental commander would do.
It seems to me that GAC, had no intentions of doing anything to work with the other two battalions.
I don't think he even liked those two men, which is really not professional.
There are many on this board who can describe Custer better then I, but I don't regard him as professional, but slap dash with contempt of some officers under his command.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 23, 2021 15:17:12 GMT
I think you are mistaken Ian, at least as far as no intention of working with the other two battalions. The note to Benteen indicates just the opposite. What would be an accurate statement is that Custer, by his action of going too far north, had negated his ability to work effectively with the other two battalions.
I could not begin to count the number of people I worked with during my career that I did not like, and more than a few that I detested. It has nothing to do with professionalism, not to like someone. It becomes unprofessional when the fact that you do not like them, interferes with your duty to work with them toward common purpose.
Technically a professional is described as a person who is payed for the work he performs. That is quite different than being professional in your conduct.
Mike has described what a well trained regimental commander, who uses that training to command in a professional manner should do. The humanity of that regimental commander is the factor that indicates what that commander will do.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Oct 23, 2021 18:31:42 GMT
You have answered all my questions Chuck;
The Benteen Note (vague) Reno (gave him a false promise and sent no word back)
Did GAC do anything what Mike said in his post?
The only professional thing Custer had on his mind was the profession he had planned for when he retired, namely after he took the glory from this battle.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Oct 23, 2021 19:07:40 GMT
The 7th was split into four;
Custer: 210 Reno: 140 Benteen: 118 Pack Train: 132
Only two battalions advanced to contact;
Custer: 210 Reno: 140
Now GAC made all these decisions to split and advance without seeing his objective, in fact his only real concern being the village scattering, thus robbing him of his goal and glory, which begs that he thought 360 in two battalions would be enough. But what if he played it different, what if he left the packs with the 90 or so soldiers, to look after itself, transfer company B to Reno and kept Benteen’s battalion to reserve and had them advance behind Reno?
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 23, 2021 19:14:07 GMT
Good
It was a note, that would be sufficient to conclude that he was at least aware that he had more under his umbrella of command responsibility than just the battalion he had under his direct command. Vague is irrelevant in this instance. Yes it was vague, but the note itself is what is in question, not the vague character of the note itself
He only gave Reno a false promise if at the time the promise was given, Custer knew it to be false. I don't think it was false at all. He told Reno he would be supported by the whole regiment did he not? Everything I see says he intended to fulfill that promise. He just did not tell Reno how he intended to fulfill it, which was the grave error, not saying that he would be supported. False is only false if you have a false intention in making the statement.
No I cannot see anything that Custer did that Mike said. That's probably why Custer died.
You really don't know that Custer had planning for retirement on his mind. He was 24 years away from retirement in the first place. Secondly none of us can read the man's mind. It is wrong in my view to be critical of Custer about things that we cannot know, like his state of mind for instance. There is plenty left over to criticize Custer for that we can and do know. I prefer to stick to that.
Yes he did not see his objective. Rommel did not see his objective in the "race to the wire" either. What is your point. Custer would not be the first or last to make that mistake, a mistake that usually ends badly.
You really don't know that Custer's only concern was the village scattering. That is what people have been saying for a hundred forty five years, and it may be true, but again none of us read minds.
Have you ever gone to the store to buy groceries, thinking you had enough money in your pocket to pay the bill, only to find that the groceries cost more than you anticipated? Have you ever tried to push a car out of a snow bank with yourself and two others, only to discover it takes three more people to do the job, because the snow bank was deeper than you anticipate? I have done both of these things, and I did them because I am human, and humans make mistakes. If he though he could do it with three hundred odd soldiers he underestimated the number required. He made a mistake, because of lack of knowledge, something we humans do every day.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Oct 23, 2021 19:22:50 GMT
No I cannot see anything that Custer did that Mike said. That's probably why Custer died. That is why I said what I did, Mike posted what a pro officer would have done, GAC did none and it cost him.
I really don't think pulling me up on things like "what was on Custers mind" etc, in fact it is unfair to do so, the people who knew him said that he was a glory hound and wanted to move into other circles after this campagn, so I am just relating to these comments, just like I would relate to any officer who you knew and took your comments on them as true.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 23, 2021 19:34:01 GMT
George Custer is not a superhero Ian. He was well above his head, and paid the price for it. Guys like Mike and myself look at what he did, and the mistakes he made, as learning tools, nothing more
The fact remains you can not read the man's mind Ian. Those who knew him could not read it either. They formed opinions about him. You can relate their comments about him all day long, but when you say he was thinking this or that, you cannot know that.
Any comment I have on anyone is opinion, my opinion. That opinion may or may not be valid, it's just mine, to be taken seriously, or left on the table. I have a very low opinion of MacArthur as an example. There are a lot of people that share that opinion. There are a lot of people on the other hand who think he was the best commander since Alexander the Great and you cannot convince them otherwise. So who do you believe.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Oct 23, 2021 19:41:30 GMT
George Custer is not a superhero Ian. He was well above his head, and paid the price for it. Guys like Mike and myself look at what he did, and the mistakes he made, as learning tools, nothing more Chuck, you know me better then that, I am no Custerphile or whatever they call them, I have agreed with everything you say about GAC and his mistakes, I don't know how you come to some of your conclusions about me or my posts, you seem to turn them on their heads and make them sound different.
You must be missing Joans home cooked dinners!
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 23, 2021 21:51:36 GMT
I did not say you were a Custerphile or anything like it Ian.
All I am trying to get through to you is that when you make statements indicating that you know what he was thinking, or what his emotional state was during the battle you are going off in the wrong direction if you want to be true to the purpose of this board. We do not know these things. All we know are what the opinion of others were, and opinions are like hair on your head, everyone has some. We should in my view stick to only what we know, not what "we think" was going around in someone's brain at the time, for we cannot know that.
Custer left no memoirs of the LBH fight he was dead, so we have no way of "knowing" his intentions. We can only speculate on what they were. Eisenhower did leave a memoir, and I will give you one example of the difference here. In December 1944 the Ardennes Front was held by four Infantry divisions. Two were brand new and untried, but at full strength, and two were veteran, but badly under strength having not yet recovered from the Hurtgen Forest. Those four divisions covered a front of over seventy five miles long. That is about three times the doctrinal distance they should have covered. To abbreviate the story the Germans broke through that front and pushed those troops back a considerable distance and generall beat the snot out of them for about eight to ten days. Had we not had Eisenhower's memoir, and he not survived the war, we would in this day thought he was the dumbest son of a bitch on the planet for allowing that situation to exist. We would be reading his mind, just like some of us try to read Custer, and we would be dead wrong. Eisenhower tells us why he thinned out that front. He took a calculated risk, for fostering another purpose. He knew all along what could, and might probably happen. We must be careful in attributing anything positive or negative to a person, when our attributions are based upon opinion and not fact.
|
|