|
Post by quincannon on Nov 30, 2022 2:42:19 GMT
I once told a member of this board, a former USMC Corporal. who insisted that it was always a good idea to risk life to rescue a wounded or dead comrade during battle, that I would award him s Silver Star for courage, and bust him to private for exibiting poor judgment not consistent with military leadership, and the overall welfare of his command, were I his commander. Suffice to say that did not go down very well. I meant every word of it though. This fellow is a most decent sort, and I understand how he felt. That however does not relieve him from responsibility of doing what is best for the command he serves. What purpose does it possibly serve to endanger two, three, four, or more to recover one alive or dead, if in so doing you inhibit the mission of the unit. A soldier is a unit of combat power. What good, put in those terms, does it possibly do to lose three or four units of combat power in what might well be a futile effort to save one?
Similar situation with Weir. He first endangered himself, a leader, in a unit desperatly short of officer leadership. He then went on to endanger his company that through another officers's error followed him, thinking Weir had permission. Would it have not been better to shoot Weir on the spot for disobedience of a direct order under fire, then send out scouts to try and determine Custer's location and situation? Meanwhile reorganize and redistrbute the assets of the main body, making them as combat capable as possible under the circumstances, before doing anything further that could have caused greater harm rather than any good?
In my view Weir and Reno share equal blame in this particular instance.
Commanders cannot afford to have feelings, or a conscience on the battlefield. They must deal with those in the aftermath, not the present.
|
|
|
Post by Elwood on Nov 30, 2022 3:45:59 GMT
Would it have not been better to shoot Weir on the spot for disobedience of a direct order under fire, then send out scouts to try and determine Custer's location and situation? Meanwhile reorganize and redistrbute the assets of the main body, making them as combat capable as possible under the circumstances, before doing anything further that could have caused greater harm rather than any good?. Well, yes, scouts absolutely should’ve been sent out. Weir should’ve adhered to orders but I guess neither happened. In my readings the Reno-Benteen site was a real Charlie Foxtrot in that first hour or so.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Nov 30, 2022 5:29:58 GMT
Elwood: When a unit is trying to consolidate, reorganize, and replenish after either victory or defeat a cluster f**k is standard operational procedure in even the best of units. Keep in mind what must be done. You must bring your people down off of an emotional high after success, and bring them up from an emotional hole after a setback. You must then replace lost leaders. You must rest your people as best you can. You must replenish or redistribute ammunition, and other critical items. Meanwhile, you are maintaining security of the place where you are. You are preparing to be counterattacked, or being placed in contact again in a very short order, depending upon what happened immediately prior to the present. Then you send out the scouts with specific guidance as to where to go and what information to seek. Really, really good units do this in stride. Badly trained units, make a Chinese Fire Drill look professional. Still, good or bad, it is a cluster f**k.
Obeying orders is generaly misunderstood by many inside and outside the military. It is not disobedience if you, the guy on the spot, understands that the situation has changed since you were issued the order. On those occasions it makes no difference what you do, as long as you do the right thing consistent with the altered situation. I would love to give Weir this particular get out of jail free card, but in this instance nothing had changed, so there was no reason not to obey.
|
|
|
Post by Elwood on Nov 30, 2022 16:11:20 GMT
Elwood: When a unit is trying to consolidate, reorganize, and replenish after either victory or defeat a cluster f**k is standard operational procedure in even the best of units. Keep in mind what must be done. You must bring your people down off of an emotional high after success, and bring them up from an emotional hole after a setback. You must then replace lost leaders. You must rest your people as best you can. You must replenish or redistribute ammunition, and other critical items. Meanwhile, you are maintaining security of the place where you are. You are preparing to be counterattacked, or being placed in contact again in a very short order, depending upon what happened immediately prior to the present. Then you send out the scouts with specific guidance as to where to go and what information to seek. Really, really good units do this in stride. Exactly. Agree 100%. Just that well, again from my readings, Reno’s actions at Reno-Benteen site weren’t exactly the inspiration for JFK’s Profiles in Courage. Strong leadership is always needed, at that time more than ever. Not arguing with you here at all. Just trying to climb into Weir’s head a bit.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Nov 30, 2022 16:35:37 GMT
Did not think you were arguing. If you want to get into Wir's head may I suggest you read the story of Lancelot and Guinevere.
|
|
|
Post by Elwood on Nov 30, 2022 18:07:09 GMT
Ah, the historical romantic. I may do that.
Speaking of books/stories, just received from Jeff Bezos, “I fought with Custer”. Charles Windolph book. Will be reading that now. You read it? If so, thoughts? Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Nov 30, 2022 20:23:11 GMT
Read it long ago. Think my son has it now. As I recall I did not really care for it, but that is not unusual for me with all Custer books. I prefer books on Korea, the Battle of the Bulge, and the first year of the war in the Pacific, where the people that write them generally know what they are talking about, there are very few enraptured fanatics, no fan clubs, and no thousand piece puzzels, with half the pieces missing
Weir and Elizabeth were Lancelot and Guinevere, but only in Weir's mind. Don't know. but I think that Elizabeth rejected his behind closed curtains letter, and that is what started him on his final downward spirialing bout with depression and demon rum
|
|
|
Post by Elwood on Nov 30, 2022 21:37:37 GMT
Weir and Elizabeth were Lancelot and Guinevere, but only in Weir's mind. Don't know. but I think that Elizabeth rejected his behind closed curtains letter, and that is what started him on his final downward spirialing bout with depression and demon rum Ok, believe I remember reading about such in a book a few months back. Recommend a book on the Battle of the Bulge. I’ve read a bit but not extensively.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Nov 30, 2022 22:34:46 GMT
"Time For Trumpets" - by Charles MacDonald is the best overall picture of the battle from before to about 31 December. Most books stop then because German loss became a forgone conclusion as you went into the early days of January.
Cole's "Ardennes Campaign" is a must read, but being an official Army history it is dry as burnt toast. Hard to find but your local library probably has a copy.
I should mention the late Charles MacDonald was a personal friend of mine. The book that started his career is "Company Commander" and that is the best World War II book you will ever read. MacDonald commanded two companies of the 23rd Infantry Regiment, 2nd Infantry Division, and was awarded th Silver Star for action in the Bulge, where he was wounded. MacDonald's first company in the 23rd was Company I. He joined that company after they fought at Brest and took them into the Ardennes well before the battle started. In the book he gives you a very good understanding of what shape the American Army was in after the campaigns in the summer and early fall. Essentially his company was rebuilding while occupying a so called "quiet" area. I think this information is vital to understanding what happened during the lead up to the battle, which is in turn very important to understanding the battle itself.
There are a number of other books that deal with portions of a very, very, vary big battle in terms of numbers and vast amount of terrain the battle was fought over. Get yourself oriented with the first, then read Company Commander, Take several aspirin, and a good belt of Scotch, then try Cole.
If you survive I will give you about ten more dealing with portions of the battle that are good reads.
|
|
|
Post by Elwood on Dec 1, 2022 16:28:59 GMT
Thank you Sir. I will look to acquire . . trumpets. As soon as I knock out this Custer book.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 1, 2022 18:59:04 GMT
I do hope you enjoy "Trumpets"
I should also mention that Colonel MacDonald was the Chief of the European history branch of the Army's Center for Military History. He left the Active Army as a captain immediately after World War II, and that is when he wrote "Company Commander". The Army thought the book to be textbook quality and hired him on as a civilian historian where he stayed until he retired in the 1980's. Meanwhile he stayed in the Army Reserve and rose to the rank of Colonel. As a U S Army historian he wrote several of the books in the "Green Book" or official U S Army history series. His works in that series are like Cole's dry and laborious to read, but that is how the Army wanted them, just a telling of the facts. Facts can be boring as hell, but they are facts, unlike some of the unadulterated crap out there on LBH.
A couple I think you would enjoy are
"Alamo in the Ardennes" by McManus - Telling the story of the fight in the Bastogne Corridor
"No Silent Night" by Barron and Cygan - If you have ever seen the Van Johnson movie "Battleground" you will recognize the action presented in the book.
"Key to the Bulge" by Rusiecki - The battle for Losheimergraben - Up on the northern shoulder with the 99th Infantry Division
"Patton at the Battle of the Bulge" by Barron - Very bad name for a really good book, as it deals only with Patton by the title not the context - Almost exclusively about the 4th Armored Division's thrust toward Bastogne to relieve the 101st Airborne Division - Probably should be called Abrams at the Battle of the Bulge
Eisenhowers son John wrote "Bitter Woods" good book but very hard to find a good copy these days.
Bruce Clarke wrote a very good pamphlet for the Armor School about St Vith. Don't know if it is still in print, but if it is you might inquire at the Armor School at Fort Benning (soon to be Fort Moore when the Army finally gets rid of confederate names for their installations - the reasonous swine). Clarke commanded a combat command of the 7th Armored Division. St Vith was actually a more important battle if you consider the entire nature of the fight than Bastogne. Bastogne grabed all the headlines, but St Vith was vital to hold for the length of time it was held. Lose Bastogne and it was really no big deal. Lose St Vith early and the Germans would have been across the Meuse and the American and British Armies split.
The book that needs writing is one concerning the 4th Infantry Division (Reinforced) on the southern shoulder
Pay no attention to anything that says Montgomery did anything useful in the Bulge. He was a headline grabbing do nothing during the battle, a legend in his own mind
|
|
|
Post by Elwood on Dec 1, 2022 22:03:48 GMT
I do hope you enjoy "Trumpets" - "Patton at the Battle of the Bulge" by Barron - Very bad name for a really good book, as it deals only with Patton by the title not the context - Almost exclusively about the 4th Armored Division's thrust toward Bastogne to relieve the 101st Airborne Division - Probably should be called Abrams at the Battle of the Bulge ]Pay no attention to anything that says Montgomery did anything useful in the Bulge. He was a headline grabbing do nothing during the battle, a legend in his own mind Will do on Montgomery! Wasn’t Abrams in one of the first tanks to relieve the 101st?
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 2, 2022 0:23:07 GMT
Creighton Abrams was the best tanker ever produced in these United States, at least that's what George Patton said about him. Tanks from Abrams' battalion were the first tanks into Bastogne. "Cobra King" commanded by 1LT Charles Boggess, an M4A3 Junbo of Company C, 37th Tank Battalion was actually the first tank in. Mike Robel who used to be on this board knew Boggess, and Mike commanded Company C 2-37 Armor the modern day progeny of C/37 Tank.
Montgomery was one usless son of a bitch, with but one exception. His style was just what the British people needed at the time. His greatest contribution to winning World War II was keeping up Britain's morale. Other than that he was a slow and methodical as molassas going up hill in January, when speed and decisive maneuver were what was called for in Africa, Italy, and Western Europe.. Some of our guys like Bradley and Hodges were just as bad or worse though.
|
|
|
Post by Elwood on Dec 2, 2022 17:18:53 GMT
Was reading somewhere that as they approached Bastogne, Abrams requested permission from Patton to try a different approach, one he hoped would save time. Patton replied, quite profanely, in the affirmative and Abrams tanks were soon linked up with the 101st.
Trumpets is on order.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 2, 2022 18:12:10 GMT
I do not recall reading that, but it sounds like something that would have happened. I do know that Abrams did take a different route than he orginally set out to take. Make no mistake the Germans fought like hell to keep that link up from happening, and it was never a sure thing, until the very last. As I recall a couple of Jagdtigers were a very nasty surprise and cost 4th AD quite a few tanks
"Patton at the Bulge" by Barron should answer that question for you.
We are getting a bit off the topic of Captain Weir. Perhaps we should start another thread if you wish to continue your inquiries regarding the Bulge
|
|