|
Post by quincannon on Mar 3, 2016 4:24:34 GMT
Beth: Military planning is just like any other planning. Part of that is to articulate what you wish the end state to be - the goal- for without a goal why do anything in the first place
It is really discouraging when folks put something special into military planning, like you must be initiated into the process by masonic ritual, or be a made man, have drunk of the sacred blood of the coyote, or at the very least know the cypher to the Orphan Annie decoder ring, possess a closet full of Ovaltine, and refuse to divulge the secret handshake, even under pain of being mooned in public on your first date with Betty Boop. The process is a simple as sitting down at your kitchen table, deciding what you want to buy at the grocery, and what you can afford, then executing it. The only difference is that the stakes are much higher
Your not wrong Dave: No plan exists unless it is transmitted to his subordinates for execution, UNLESS Custer planned to take on the combined Sioux and Cheyenne Nations by himself (I mean him alone), then you could say he had a plan and transmitted it to a fool.
I know of no Irish Dragoon. I am aware of a BUFFOON of unknown ethnic origin, and the thought of offending him gives me about as much pause as passing a small pile of dog crap on the sidewalk.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Mar 3, 2016 10:39:11 GMT
Chuck, Don't be hard on the Masons and thanks for the walk down the memory lane of my youth. You are right on.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Mar 3, 2016 14:32:53 GMT
Not hard on the Masons Tom. I am not one but know many and like those I know.
The point being is that the Masons have an initiation ritual, as do the Knights, I suspect the Moose, Elks, and for that matter Spanky and Our Gang. The initiation right for planning is a slide down the birth canal. Anyone beyond the age of reason can do it. It is a manner of application to the task
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Mar 3, 2016 17:30:35 GMT
QC said: "I know of no Irish Dragoon. I am aware of a BUFFOON of unknown ethnic origin, and the thought of offending him gives me about as much pause as passing a small pile of dog crap on the sidewalk."
Obviously you never had a year of ROTC and if you had done your homework by watching No Time for Sergeants you would understand how vital it is. As Will Stockdale said "No... , but Irvin did! Close to a year of it. He's so 'ornary I think he still might have a touch of it."
As we know, Air Force sergeants are the toughest in the world, just ask Tom! Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Mar 3, 2016 19:06:41 GMT
The “old fella” was a Battery Sergeant Major in the Royal Artillery, and I just couldn't see him being tough on the parade ground, he was a lovely bloke and I don’t know anyone who disliked him, well except for the guy who he disarmed in 1967, this nut job pulled a knife on him, so he grabbed his arm and almost broke his wrist, he soon dropped the knife, the guy then walked out and threatened to come back and shoot my dad, but he just laughed, he did however keep the knife and used it to clean out his pipe.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Mar 3, 2016 20:54:03 GMT
You are correct Dave, I didn't have one whole year at ROTC. I was however anointed at birth, in the lamp oil of no less a personage as Gideon, Baptized in the water Caesar used to wash his feet, wrote a critique of Frederick the Great's music in kindergarten, took a course in Horse Holding 101, fell prostrate on the steps of the Lee Mansion at Arlington in admiration, visited Grant's Tomb, watched the horse Blackjack (named after JJP)take a crap at Fort Myer, and still found time to attend the required schools that make me marginally qualified to know a complete phony like the buffoon in question, when I see one.
I am very fortunate in life, in that I do not have to pretend I am someone else to give my life meaning.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Mar 3, 2016 21:25:32 GMT
Geez QC you make me feel like I've totally wasted most of my years.
Dave I absolutely love the movie No Time for Sergeants--a classic.
As for Custer and his plan. I think he had a rough plan in his head that had been lurking there for perhaps a few days (Since he left Terry and perhaps as long as after Reno returned from his scout) on how he wanted the battle would go. I tend to think that he was confident (As in strongly believing in his luck and yes men) that he truly he would be able to control the battle against the hostiles--based a great deal on both his previous experience and preconceived prejudices. (Indians run, they don't stay and fight, they can't organize...)
The problem is that Custer based his plans on faulty intelligence both on numbers and perhaps relied on poor advice from certain civilian scouts. (there go your Indians General). Once what Custer wanted to make happen, didn't, he then had to spend time floundering around looking for another way to accomplish something. Unfortunately the NA weren't being accommodating by standing around doing nothings and giving him the time to put together a new plan.
Sometimes I wonder if Custer gave any more thoughts about Reno as he moved up onto the bluffs and at what point he realized how outnumbered he was. I keep going back and forth on whether Custer did or didn't go to '3411'. Which was him most pressing need--moving to get ahead of the village or seeing what was going on with Reno.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Mar 3, 2016 21:30:15 GMT
Like the part of "fell prostrate on the steps of the Lee Mansion at Arlington in admiration."
In all seriousness it is a wonderful thing that historians are now studying Lee and his career in a new light. Lee of all people would have detested the "Marble Man" myth that sprang up at his death. You are correct that it is important that one be comfortable in their own skin and not have to pretend to be someone else to have value. Regards Dave
PS My wife keeps me well grounded and facing facts, like I am not in charge.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Mar 3, 2016 22:18:13 GMT
I have often said Dave that the ideal general officer is one who has the gentlemanly qualities of Lee, and the ruthless drive and determination of Grant. Very few meet that standard.
The Marble Man is a creation of Jubal Early and the last standing Glorious Lost Causers. He was not immune to kick me in the ass mistakes and made quite a few. He was as much of a Marble Man as Grant was a drunk and a butcher. Neither is true.
I think it is equally wonderful that both serious historian (not 2016 dime novelists) and the various military schools are studying Custer in anew light as well. Unlike Lee and Grant though the legendary Custer will be proven a lie by such studies. There is no substance to the man.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Mar 3, 2016 23:18:26 GMT
I think that any commander needs a slice of luck, it’s the same in sport as even the best teams usually end up getting a large slice of the fifty-fifty decisions. Just look at the US 29th Infantry division, they planned and planned their landing and were well equipped and led, but what happened, the German high command sent the 352nd infantry division to stiffen the defences along the part of the coast known to the allies as “Omaha Beach”, this area was already covered by the 716th infantry division and the addition of the 352nd gave it much needed support.
Another factor was that German divisions stationed in France usually had only six infantry battalions, but for some reason the 352nd had nine.
Bottom line is that on that day the US 29th infantry were just unlucky and faced a tougher foe then thought and that was not down to their leaders. But I must add that the guts a determination shown to by the junior officers and NCOs won the day, but their losses would have been lower only for the fact that the 352nd was integrated into the defense line.
Yan.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Mar 3, 2016 23:47:59 GMT
Yan Very insightful and informative right on target! Good Man. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Mar 4, 2016 2:59:08 GMT
I agree that everyone needs luck. Custer used 'the Custer Luck" like a gambler on a winning streak, at some time the odds are going to catch up to everyone.
Custer also used his 'luck' as a cloak of confidence and an excuse for not really having to put a true effort into anything--after all what more do you need if you have luck. For example he believed it would get him through anything and relied on it more than doing his do diligence on how the financial market worked when it came to his silver mine. He went through life wanting the quick easy payout without putting a whole lot of actual effort into it, his choices were just lucky.
|
|
|
Post by BrevetorCoffin on Mar 4, 2016 4:56:23 GMT
I agree that everyone needs luck. Custer used 'the Custer Luck" like a gambler on a winning streak, at some time the odds are going to catch up to everyone. Custer also used his 'luck' as a cloak of confidence and an excuse for not really having to put a true effort into anything--after all what more do you need if you have luck. For example he believed it would get him through anything and relied on it more than doing his do diligence on how the financial market worked when it came to his silver mine. He went through life wanting the quick easy payout without putting a whole lot of actual effort into it, his choices were just lucky. While there is no disputing a certain amount of luck in some of his engagements Beth, I think you are over generalizing, possibly for effect. You don't come out of so many battles and engagements purely on luck. Custer was a good soldier. He was no dummy. Definitely made mistakes and had flaws but he had many successes too which were earned in no small part because of his leadership, boldness, and skill and maybe a sprinkle of luck. Regards. The man's Civil War record was pretty stellar. Yes, he got overzealous sometimes such as Trevilian Station and had to get bailed out by support, but he was brevetted for good reason and awarded the table Lee signed the surrender on for good measure. I do not believe in any below average intelligence either as you have to have some smarts (and a good sponsor) just to get into West Point. Custer could be reckless and impulsive which caught up to him in 1867 and 1876. Matt-we sort of agree on something! :-) Best, David
|
|
|
Post by BrevetorCoffin on Mar 4, 2016 4:56:35 GMT
I agree that everyone needs luck. Custer used 'the Custer Luck" like a gambler on a winning streak, at some time the odds are going to catch up to everyone. Custer also used his 'luck' as a cloak of confidence and an excuse for not really having to put a true effort into anything--after all what more do you need if you have luck. For example he believed it would get him through anything and relied on it more than doing his do diligence on how the financial market worked when it came to his silver mine. He went through life wanting the quick easy payout without putting a whole lot of actual effort into it, his choices were just lucky. While there is no disputing a certain amount of luck in some of his engagements Beth, I think you are over generalizing, possibly for effect. You don't come out of so many battles and engagements purely on luck. Custer was a good soldier. He was no dummy. Definitely made mistakes and had flaws but he had many successes too which were earned in no small part because of his leadership, boldness, and skill and maybe a sprinkle of luck. Regards. The man's Civil War record was pretty stellar. Yes, he got overzealous sometimes such as Trevilian Station and had to get bailed out by support, but he was brevetted for good reason and awarded the table Lee signed the surrender on for good measure. I do not believe in any below average intelligence either as you have to have some smarts (and a good sponsor) just to get into West Point. Custer could be reckless and impulsive which caught up to him in 1867 and 1876. Matt-we sort of agree on something! :-) Best, David
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Mar 4, 2016 14:14:18 GMT
Custer’s first real command was G Company 2nd Cavalry and saw plenty of action, after this he commanded the Michigan Cavalry Brigade, so he was really in command of two regiments of cavalry, he held this post for over a year and finally placed in charge of a full division (3rd Cavalry Division), which could hold between two and four brigades, so let’s say for simplicity’s sake that Custer’s had under his command two cavalry brigades, now that is four regiments of cavalry, now that’s pretty impressive, so why did he find himself so out of his depth when commanding a single regiment?
Yan.
|
|