mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Apr 22, 2016 4:11:41 GMT
As always Matt argues his case well and I have no doubt the RCOI was in large part a political exercise as much as anything. The question of Benteen's ability to change the course of events is interesting when considering the discussion of the John Stands in Timber account. Whatever else about it JSIT backs the conclusion that there were more than enough warriors at the north end of the village to take care of Custer and his men once Custer reached there. One can also think that the Cheyenne warriors also made up a lot of the manpower at Calhoun Hill. Given this, even if the timber was held and Benteen somehow got through to Reno; Custer was done for anyway by his division after leaving Ford B. I do not think that either the timber could be held or that Benteen could get through. The thing is that the timing and the disposition of the forces involved strongly suggest that it is immaterial to Custer's end result. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Apr 22, 2016 10:07:57 GMT
Matt, We covered some of the same ground in the thread regarding Custer, Reno and Benteen. Some earlier posts. I went back to refresh my memory, I wanted to be certain that there was not something I missed, or if you or I felt differently. I find that we are still in the same place. I find little fault with Benteen's actions, you find fault with just about all, it looks as though you and I are stuck in a 140 year old time warp. Feb 13, 2016 at 1:22pm Beth said: matt Avatar Feb 13, 2016 at 10:40am matt said: No he only knew that Custer said-there was a big village. They had been told the number of 'hostiles' would be much smaller. Benteen had no reason at the time to expect the village to be huge. And history has proved that Benteen was right. The regiment should have stayed together or at least in closer approximation to each other. If Custer had kept the regiment together then he could have sent Benteen down the valley after Reno's leading charge and then followed himself (or visa versa). Instead Custer sent Benteen off on a fool hardy scout, sent Reno to charge the village without knowing the size and location of the village and then swung up to the bluffs instead of following up with his promised support. Custer sent Benteen on a scout that he should have done himself --Terry instructed to always feel to his left--as well as before Custer knew where the village actually was. For all Custer knew he could have sent Benteen on a suicide mission. How would Benteen been able to defend if the village was actually on his scout? Benteen finished his mission and was just lucky that the village wasn't located in the upper valley . Oh and I doubt Benteen was nursing a bruised ego. more likely he was thinking somewhere along the line that Custer was an idiot. 1. Custer never indicated that he wanted ammo so why would Benteen send the ammo forward? You keep accusing Benteen of not being psychic. He can only know the information available to him at the time. Scapegoat is the correct word. No one to this day wants to see their hero be in the wrong or any less than a hero semi-deified. In their eyes, Custer should not have been defeated because he was 'the best' so it had to be someone else's fault. The blame though totally lies on Custer's shoulders and no one else. Not to beat a dead horse but.... Benteen was a season officer with 15 years experience. He knew the camp they were following was massive. He saw the same trails as Custer and had the same briefing. Hence his desire to keep the regiment together. I am not expecting Benteen to have been a psychic but I would expect him to have shown a little more leadership and forward thinking. That's all. For me, as leader of four companies and the pack train, a third of the entire force, he came up rather small. He threw his lot in with the defeated unit in the rear. For me, that's a no-no.
I'll leave the good Capt. alone for now.
Read more: greatsiouxwar1876.proboards.com/user/29/recent#ixzz46Y0zlIOHFeb 3, 2016 at 8:40pm Quote like Post Options . Post by matt on Feb 3, 2016 at 8:40pm deadwoodgultch Avatar Feb 3, 2016 at 8:33pm deadwoodgultch said: From RCOI Captain F. W. Benteen: "When I received my orders from Custer to separate myself from the command I had no instructions to unite at any time with Reno or anyone else. There was no plan at all.... The reason I returned was because I thought I would be needed at the ridge. I acted entirely upon my own judgment. I was separated from Reno fifteen miles when at the greatest distance.... My going back was providential or accidental or whatever you may be pleased to term it." Hence my question, was Benteen playing games at the RCOI? I wonder if he pulled a shoulder muscle patting himself on the back...
He certainly used the RCOI to elevate himself.
Read more: greatsiouxwar1876.proboards.com/user/29/recent#ixzz46Y4RGlVXRegards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 22, 2016 12:34:10 GMT
I agree and say that the amount of fighting men left in the village was enough to give Custer heart burn, and could be one of the reasons he went so far north to attempt a river crossing without being challenged, we have discussed before that river assaults are risky especially if the crossing point is contested, so Custer move his crossing point away from the rump of the village to where it was less defended and simply bi-passed the defenders, this seems logical to me but the Cheyenne were just as quick.
I have seen on some of the old Indian maps that there was a bench that ran east to west through the centre of the village. Would this be a cause for concern for any attack? And would a feature like this stop any cavalry action from reaching the southern end of the circles?
Yan.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 22, 2016 15:22:51 GMT
To answer your last first Ian. If such a bench were there, and I don't know that answer, it would most likely depend upon how much elevation the bench had and the amount of slope in degrees it presented. It might also depend upon if that portion of the attack was conducted mounted or dismounted. As a general rule all changes in elevation can present potential problems, especially if you do not know they are there when you start out. They all have the potential to change battle dynamics.
This thread is devoted to any possible change in dynamic. The Reno/Benteen bashers hang their hat on three things. They perceive if Reno had held the timber against approximately nine to one odds, then Custer would have been unmolested, and thus allowed to have his way in the hostile rear. They also perceive that had Benteen arrived sooner at the Reno hilltop position, then moved forward without lending aid to Reno that Benteen's 130 or so could have changed the dynamic, thus saving Custer. Barring that, if Reno and Benteen just ignored all of Reno's post engagement difficulties and just mounted up an rode northward IMMEDIATELY, that Custer would have been saved, the dynamic of battle altered favorably.
What these misguided children, that play with their Tinker Toys forget is that there were at least 1000+ hostile warriors that never went anywhere near Reno in the valley, and were at the right place and at the right time to defeat Custer and ultimately destroy him. So if any one of the three things mentioned above happened there was not going to be any change in dynamic or outcome. Only when you remove those 1000+ hostile warriors and the dynamic is changed.
*************************************************************************************************
TRYING HARD: Anyone that says Reno or Benteen did not try hard enough, is peddling bushwa. There is no evidence at all that these two men and the rest for that matter, including Weir, did not do the best job they were capable of under the circumstances. Trying hard enough is impossible to determine, and those that say they should have tried harder purvey poop. It is the height of arrogance to say someone did not try hard enough. In an earlier day I would have no qualm whatsoever relieving someone who did not meet the standard I set. Never though would I ever accuse someone of not trying hard enough. The fact may be that while that person failed, he may have been trying as hard as he could, yet failed to meet the mark. Let us stop all this crap, because crap is what it is. You evaluate on performance, not on the amount of effort behind the performance.
To illustrate: Did Custer try hard? I suspect he did. Did Custer perform to the standard expected of an LTC? The record shows he did not.
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Apr 23, 2016 0:51:57 GMT
I tend to take a lot of what Benteen said at the RCOI with a grain of salt. A whole lot of grand standing, peacocking, and ass covering. I think he spoke the truth and it was relative to the question asked. Sometimes he is asked what he thought at the time other times he gives his current opinion. Since he was not the subject of the court of inquiry and time was running out then I miss you point regarding covering himself.He claims he would not cross without the pack train yet he made no contact with the pack train. He left for Weir Pt before the train have fully arrived. He sent no advance forward to identify landscape or enemy positions. He took zero action with regards to the train or its security. Yet we are to believe he wouldn't have crossed the ford without it. He had a visual contact when he moved forward so again not sure what you thought the pack train would be doing other than moving toward Benteen.Of course he would say he would do it the same way. Anything else would have required him to come down from his pedestal and admit he wasn't perfect. That wasn't on the cards. Regards Matt I think you have to believe in the decisions you make or don't become an officer. If the Army wants you to make the best available decision then what else would we expect them to testify about their decision making. What I think you are trying to interject is what might occur during debriefing and looking at a better way to do it. That doesn't change what occurs and the expectation is that in real time each officer made the best available decision.
Regards
Steve
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 23, 2016 14:41:06 GMT
There has never been a military operation conducted in the history of mankind that has ever been conducted perfectly, and that could not have been better.
We are far to fond of the perfect solution, worked out in the length of an hour, on our favorite TV show, the right answer coming in the final five minutes, just before the last commercial. Life is not like that. and battle sure the hell is not.
Also, opinions concerning one's own performance evolve over time. It is not surprising to me that those involved, especially commanders add to what they could and should have done. The words - if only - are not strangers to the commander.
It has also not escaped my attention that Reno and Benteen both kick the can for trying to clean up Custer's mess. To me those that do, range from the tad disingenuous to the final extreme of reaching the level of pin headed ignorance.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 23, 2016 15:33:02 GMT
Who is this fellow JASW? Why isn't he here?
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 23, 2016 15:33:59 GMT
I suppose looking back at it now that the army and the press wanted someone to take the rap for this mess, the army would probably be embarrassed at this defeat and like any organization they wanted to nail someone. Custer was dead so there was no point in nailing him so lets go down the pecking order and see if anyone cracks.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 23, 2016 15:37:23 GMT
I don't know this cat JASW Chuck, is he from another board?
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 23, 2016 16:49:15 GMT
I disagree Ian. The last thing the Army wanted was a complete investigation. As you know they were not so hot on the idea of the RCOI. Don't think Congress wished to pursue the matter all that much either. Had they, their Constitutional "raise and maintain armies" responsibilities would have a very harsh spotlight shining upon them particularly in the areas of sufficient size, and overall readiness, for which they bear ultimate responsibility. The age before Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC was more prone to short attention span, and long term don't give a crap, as far as public awareness was concerned. Today they would be all over this, and we would still be hearing about it in the election of 2076.
JASW is a poster with an inordinate amount of common sense on the Lunatic Fringe Board. I wish someone would invite him here lest he gets discouraged from a terminal Dragoondrivel Disease, for which no amount of aspirin is sufficient.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 23, 2016 18:25:09 GMT
I know the army would want to forget about the whole affair but wouldn't they be forced into investigating this defeat, as it made the headlines all over the world so they would need to come up with something, I bet a similar thing happened over Isandlwana and the British government had to appease the press and lean on the army for answers, I seem to remember that excuses were made about the US Carbines at BLBH and ammunition at Isandlewanna.
Yan.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 23, 2016 18:30:27 GMT
JASW has probably been brainwashed by Billy O'Shite and needs to be rescued, before its too late.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 23, 2016 20:14:37 GMT
Had he been brainwashed Ian, I would not be suggesting someone invite him here. I can't.
It was in absolutely no one's advantage or vested interest to investigate LBH. Never would have happened in any measure had it not been for Reno demanding a chance to clear his name after Whitacre got through trashing him. Even then it was not a complete investigation, but strictly limited to Reno.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Apr 23, 2016 23:15:48 GMT
Reno wanted the RCOI, he and Whitaker, it was a good call on Reno's part. Shortly thereafter he flushed any good it did away. On a personal basis he was already on a downward spiral. There were a number of sad stories to come out of this officer cadre, Weir, Reno, French, and Benteen in Utah. There were at least as many, or more, good stories visited upon the junior officers later in life. We are all responsible for our choices in life, we have to live with the results and hope those choices don't impact those we love or innocents.
Regards, Tom
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Apr 24, 2016 13:19:44 GMT
I think the dilemma is you do what you do with the information you have in hand. Given the same information you would do it the same. What you feel though is that if you had more information then you might have done things differently.
That haunts you because some of your friends died and others not there get to see those things you wish you had knowledge of in real time.
Regards Steve
|
|