|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Feb 17, 2016 15:44:24 GMT
Prove to me and others that anyone other than GAC is responsible for what befell the 7TH Cavalry on June 25, 1876. Any blame other than Custer's took place prior 6/25/76. I will give all, Grant should have never relented.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Feb 17, 2016 15:56:03 GMT
Hi Tom, once Custer was let loose then he was totally responsible for the 600+ men in that regiment, if you think that his superiors were at fault for for allowing him so much freedom then you may take into account the notion that they may have wanted a firebrand like Custer to cause havoc in the first place. I suppose in a similar fashion that if you are sending troops to break through the enemy lines then you send in your most aggressive commander to kick the place up a bit aka Patton, as in rugby, the old saying goes the meaner your coach is the meaner and tougher your players.
Yan.
|
|
|
Post by BrevetorCoffin on Feb 17, 2016 18:36:05 GMT
Something is off kilter here. This does not appear to be a "Custerphile" board singing his praises and declaring his s**t didn't stink and no questioning his decisions allowed. IMHO no one had a good day but it all went into the can when Custer decided not to follow Reno into the valley and mistook hat waving (allegedly) for proper signal corps protocol. We can get philosophical all day about going all the way back to Peter Minuet buying Manhattan for $28 worth of trinkets but I believe that decision to swing right up the bluffs got the ball rolling. That is not on the subordinates unless one aspires to the mindreading mindset.
Reno and Benteen made some documentable, subjective errors and any screwups in the Custer Battalion after MTC are speculative at best. Agreed that the accountability for defeat at LBH was on LTC (Brevet MG) George Armstrong Custer.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Feb 17, 2016 19:40:55 GMT
Something is off kilter here. This does not appear to be a "Custerphile" board singing his praises and declaring his s**t didn't stink and no questioning his decisions allowed. IMHO no one had a good day but it all went into the can when Custer decided not to follow Reno into the valley and mistook hat waving (allegedly) for proper signal corps protocol. We can get philosophical all day about going all the way back to Peter Minuet buying Manhattan for $28 worth of trinkets but I believe that decision to swing right up the bluffs got the ball rolling. That is not on the subordinates unless one aspires to the mindreading mindset. Reno and Benteen made some documentable, subjective errors and any screwups in the Custer Battalion after MTC are speculative at best. Agreed that the accountability for defeat at LBH was on LTC (Brevet MG) George Armstrong Custer. Sometimes the best way to prove something is to disprove all other possibilities. So if you start with Custer did everything correct, someone has to be responsible. Who is it. If then you can find no one else responsible then you are left with either Custer was responsible or of course the possibly that he did everything right but was just beaten by a better force.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Feb 17, 2016 19:45:25 GMT
Prove to me and others that anyone other than GAC is responsible for what befell the 7TH Cavalry on June 25, 1876. Any blame other than Custer's took place prior 6/25/76. I will give all, Grant should have never relented. Had Custer won the day you can be sure he would have taken every once of glory. In defeat, he takes all the blame.
That makes me wonder, if Custer won would he himself have deserved all the credit? I guess though for Custer to have won, nearly every circumstance probably would have had to change starting with their speed of travel so they timed their approach to the village with the time to do a proper recon.
|
|
|
Post by BrevetorCoffin on Feb 17, 2016 20:29:14 GMT
Something is off kilter here. This does not appear to be a "Custerphile" board singing his praises and declaring his s**t didn't stink and no questioning his decisions allowed. IMHO no one had a good day but it all went into the can when Custer decided not to follow Reno into the valley and mistook hat waving (allegedly) for proper signal corps protocol. We can get philosophical all day about going all the way back to Peter Minuet buying Manhattan for $28 worth of trinkets but I believe that decision to swing right up the bluffs got the ball rolling. That is not on the subordinates unless one aspires to the mindreading mindset. Reno and Benteen made some documentable, subjective errors and any screwups in the Custer Battalion after MTC are speculative at best. Agreed that the accountability for defeat at LBH was on LTC (Brevet MG) George Armstrong Custer. Sometimes the best way to prove something is to disprove all other possibilities. So if you start with Custer did everything correct, someone has to be responsible. Who is it. If then you can find no one else responsible then you are left with either Custer was responsible or of course the possibly that he did everything right but was just beaten by a better force. Well put Beth. I will refer back to one of my first statements when I joined this and the Alliance board. Outnumbered, outmaneuvered, outfought. Custer made decisions to engage in battle, troop deployment to an extent and the regiment's fighting capability was on him. The warriors had a lot to do with the catastrophe as well. Best, David
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Feb 17, 2016 21:50:04 GMT
As QC has posted in the past (paraphrasing) "The Captain is responsible for what happens on and to his ship (command) regardless of who is on bridge."
GAC birthed this baby and he was solely responsible for the engagement outcome. I have read where some Custer supporters believe his only mistake was relying on poor subordinates, which is just drivel. GAC made the decision to attack, split the command into 4 battalions then later split his 5 companies command even further. I understand he died with about a company size command on Last Stand Hill. Somehow he forgot to share with his command his plans and trundled off into fame and glory his ultimate goal.
Our military veterans on this board as well as other LBH theme boards have stated that once GAC passed 3411 he sealed his fate and that of his 200 plus soldiers. The Indians were too numerous for Benteen or anyone to reach Custer and they more than likely would have perished in the attempt. Regards Dave
PS It is a nice feeling knowing that I will not be censored or have my post rearranged, edited, paraphrased or in any way altered except for inappropriate remarks or words.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Feb 17, 2016 22:08:59 GMT
PS It is a Bit_h feeling knowing that I will not be undressed or have my post deranged, edited, paraphrased or in any way Fu_d up except for inappropriate remarks or shi-. Want to bet, and if you keep it up you will be deleted.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Feb 17, 2016 22:11:40 GMT
Dave, Any more antics and your PM privilege will be revoked.
Regards, The Gestapo
|
|
|
Post by Moderator1 on Feb 17, 2016 22:30:47 GMT
I have my eyes on you two.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Feb 17, 2016 22:47:01 GMT
Your Honor It is guilt by association. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Feb 17, 2016 22:48:00 GMT
The operative word in Tom's initial post is RESPONSIBLE.
THE COMMANDER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL HIS UNIT DOES OR FAILS TO DO --------------------PERIOD, END OF DISCUSSION
It does not matter if blame or fault can be laid upon the shoulders of anyone else ranging from the 2nd most senior to the most junior private, the commander is always responsible.
I am watching that bugger too Mod 1. Sneaky little devil sends PM's that moderators in other places cannot censor. THAT WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Feb 17, 2016 22:49:22 GMT
Moderator1, And pretty looking eyes they are Lassie. I at some point need to get the saber/hobby horse happy face from you. I may have a use or two for it. Ok I will leave the Mississippi Bumpkin alone. Younger than me asp, you snake.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by BrevetorCoffin on Feb 17, 2016 23:04:14 GMT
Your Honor It is guilt by association. Regards Dave With emphasis on ASS-ociation.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Feb 17, 2016 23:21:58 GMT
Every time I think of the moderator on the L and L Board I am reminded of the Finley Cavalry print and I fall off my chair laughing. I think Ian has the print in his bag of tricks. Maybe he will post it for the enjoyment of almost all, save one.
|
|