azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Aug 3, 2020 0:47:22 GMT
Steve: I really hate to say this because it sounds like I am degrading you. That is not my intention. Now you can add misrepresentation to the list. You do that posters all the time. Ian has been the subject of your degradation post, so has Dan and Dave. Do you need examples? You are the reason that some won't post here. Ever wonder why Montrose left? I think it is just your style but it is what you do. You do not have the required knowledge and experience to compete with me in the military arena. Your's is limited to a very basic, the most basic level. while mine is far more advanced. That is not trying to blow my horn, it is simply stating the facts as they exist. You show little to no understanding of tactics, and military decision making. It is exactly what anyone would expect of a Marine Corporal, having been in a combat zone, but not in combat at its most basic level. Dan, who was the same rank as you, and who served during relatively same period, was at least a rifleman, and experience as such in a rifle squad, and at one time led that squad. He will be the first to tell you that knowing everything you need to know about a weapon is not nearly enough. You must know how to employ that weapons, and at the same time be proficient in maneuvering others. I am here an other boards for this battle alone. I don't what now unless it impacts this battle. So please share your horse experience as a commander of troops, you knowledge and use of .45-70 Springfield Carbine, and the training that these troops had prior to this battle. All this is evidenced by the fact after this all day session you still have no frigging understanding of what battle readiness is. It is IN THE MIND, and it only gets there after one has experienced combat. You do not understand that, for if you did you would not fall back constantly on your gun stories. If you are suggesting that riding a horse is not important in 1876, shooting a revolver from a horse is not important, being able to make hits like the 1874 Expedition participants could then you are correct I don't understand battle readiness. If running to the horses instead of tactical movement is not part of battle readiness than I agree you are correct. I think these skills are the basis and bottom of the pyramid of all it takes to be battle ready. Without the skills nothing else really maters.To use your example "Marines were taught skills and expected to perform them under stress" That is true in the Army too, but you cannot judge performance under stress and say it prepares you for combat, that you are battle ready, unless the stress you are under is combat itself. Training helps, the harder the training the better you prepare yourself, but you never know how battle ready a soldier, Marine, or military unit is until they are in combat. You are the only that does not understand. There are skills that you must be able to do without thinking or you lose time. Skills are a must know where as tactics are choices. If you don't have the skills than the success of any particular tactic is less than desirable. You move to end product of combat ready while I focus on the skills which one must have to be battle ready. You should not engage in combat if you don't have the basis skills."You were taught tactics" No you weren't. You were taught tactical technique. You weren't high enough in rank to be taught tactics. Here again you want to argue modern terms. Please show me those terms in my 1967 Marine Corps Guidebook for Marines. It gets worse for manuals during the battle. One of the manuals in use then is named the United States Army Tactics and under it is cavalry. So I will agree that you are way up on modern definitions but they are not the same as was in use in 1876 nor in my 1967 manual. They used the word tactics in a much broader sense. According to my manual I was indeed taught squad tactics its chapter 13.
You are also very limited in being able to chose the "best available choice". You have had absolutely no military experience that equips you for making such choices, above those of the best available choice for the individual. I agree that if you can't ride or shoot, a mounted charge with a revolver is a poor choice. But if, a mounted charge with a drawn revolver, by people who cannot ride or shoot, was the best available choice in furtherance of a higher purpose, by the entire command, telling people who cannot ride or shoot, to charge with a drawn revolver, may be the absolute best choice for accomplishing the command's overall mission. I feel sorry for the poor bastards who are told to do it, but I would order it in a heartbeat if it meant the rest of my force would accomplish the mission assigned to them. You see what I mean? The best available choice is in the eye of those that make decisions, not necessarily in the eye, or general welfare of those who have to carry out those choices. That's where you and I are worlds, no light years, apart. You are still looking at the little shit with the vision and scope of a worms eye view, while others must look at it through a much different lens. You forget I was an enlisted man at least as long as you were, I was a Staff Sergeant when commissioned, and I saw a lot of what I thought then was dumb shit, that I later found out was completely justified. I think we actually agree but you method of explaining it sucks. I am only interested in this battle period. My concern was how could 5 companies of cavalry be destroyed. i only care about what these particular troops were trained for and what could have been done to change it. My issue was how I could better serve our law enforcement officers and avoid things that could have prevented the disaster. My focus on our training lead to skill building and tactical shoots. At one time we only shot at paper targets that were only down range. So my interest is in tactics used by individuals and small numbers. Here is how we define a tactic. It is something you chose to do. Other situations are emergency so there is no choice. It like and ambush if you don't detect it. If you observe you have tactical choices you can make. I don't care if you disagree with my definitions only that we understand where each of us are coming from. A good example is an emergency reload occurs when the slide locks back. A tactical reload is a choice to refresh the weapon even though it still had rounds in the magazine.
I really don't see a lot of difference between tactics used by a military entry team and a LE special operations entry team.
By the way Steve, the next time you are tempted to lecture me about best available choices, Blink or no Blink, I suggest you consult the history of your own Corps. Most of the lower ranking Marines that fought in the Pusan Perimeter battles (5th Marines) and most of the lower ranking Marines that invaded Inchon (1st Marine Division) did not even have the benefit of one hour's training at either of the two Marine Corps Recruit Depots before they were thrown into combat. So much for soldiers who can't ride or shoot conducting mounted charges. A good many of them died because they were untrained, untrained by your own Corps. Was that the best available choice? You bet your ass it was. It was also the only choice available to be made by some commander in August and October 1950, and they carried that burden of guilt with them until the day they died. Even then they would not have changed a thing, if they had to make that choice all over again. They were not battle ready, even by battle readiness standards available before they stepped ashore and into fire. By November those Marines, the ones that survived were battle ready. There you go again. I have already explained to you my interests. You example is not the same. You state it was the only available choice. That eliminates whether it was best available choice. In the battle Reno could have ridden into the village with revolvers but he chose to stop and dismount. In that case he had choices but in your example you state it was the only choice. Reno could have stayed in the timber but he chose to breakout and retrograde. We can argue did he make the best available choice. In your example it was the only choice available. That is not a choice then unless there was a do nothing choice available. I think you know the difference but you want to argue. So Steve when you play in my ball park bring a bat. In my arena the range is from verbal, soft hand techniques, OC Spray, baton, and firearms. I would think most officers attacked by a bat would choose the proper use of force from the force continuum. I think we are more productive when we discuss things about the battle but if you want to post things like "Battle Readiness? Observing battle readiness? Poppycock."
OR I am going to take issue with a lot of what has been said here Steve, not that what was said was wrong, but rather because it was incomplete and therefore confusing to layman and professional alike.
OR and only a lily livered, poorly bred, piece of shit, would disparage a man in that way, in public. Is that what you are?
What a pathetic loser statement to make. Joe Biden is running for President of the United States and his mental condition fair game. I bet doesn't want to debate Trump for fear his condition will be exposed. Because of his condition his vice president selection become more into play. Anyone running for President is subject to disparaging comments. Just ask Trump.
Regards
Steve
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Aug 3, 2020 1:07:37 GMT
Your admitted limited knowledge of battle, only proves that you are a lightweight. If you confine your interest to only this battle which you do, then that is indicative that your knowledge of battle itself does not stand any muster, and your prattle is therefore largely irrelevant. In other words the best you have is not good enough.
Why people leave is their business not mine. If some cannot stand the heat, then it is best they get out of the kitchen. I am not a gentle soul in any debate. I fight to win, but at the same time I do not seek to convince anyone about anything. If those that are convinced by me alone about something, then they are far too weak to be here in the first place. I want people to form their own opinions. You are very correct about one thing Montrose is a pussy, so is Wagner. Maybe you are too, but you do seem to have more staying power than those two poor excuse for shits. Dan and Ian are not pussies. They, each of them understand that I may offend them or they me, but tomorrow is always another day.
Now if you don't like what I say, or the way I say it stay or go, but if you go don't let the door hit you in the ass. If you decide to stay, stay away from what I write for your own blood pressures sake. Keep this in mind though, the next time you insult my intelligence and experience,and present laughable arguments about guns and police work, and how they relate to this battle, any battle, or the military in general, that it only solidifies my argument that you are no more qualified to stand in my military shoes than I am to stand in the shoes of a game warden who pretends to be a policeman. That is what you are, isn't it, and far from big city police work that you have no experience in, yet spread your crap about that as well.
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Aug 3, 2020 1:33:55 GMT
Your admitted limited knowledge of battle, only proves that you are a lightweight. If you confine your interest to only this battle which you do, then that is indicative that your knowledge of battle itself does not stand any muster, and your prattle is therefore largely irrelevant. In other words the best you have is not good enough. Why people leave is their business not mine. If some cannot stand the heat, then it is best they get out of the kitchen. I am not a gentle soul in any debate. I fight to win, but at the same time I do not seek to convince anyone about anything. If those that are convinced by me alone about something, then they are far too weak to be here in the first place. I want people to form their own opinions. You are very correct about one thing Montrose is a pussy, so is Wagner. Maybe you are too, but you do seem to have more staying power than those two poor excuse for shits. Dan and Ian are not pussies. They, each of them understand that I may offend them or they me, but tomorrow is always another day. Now if you don't like what I say, or the way I say it stay or go, but if you go don't let the door hit you in the ass. If you decide to stay, stay away from what I write for your own blood pressures sake. Keep this in mind though, the next time you insult my intelligence and experience,and present laughable arguments about guns and police work, and how they relate to this battle, any battle, or the military in general, that it only solidifies my argument that you are no more qualified to stand in my military shoes than I am to stand in the shoes of a game warden who pretends to be a policeman. That is what you are, isn't it, and far from big city police work that you have no experience in, yet spread your crap about that as well. That you think your winning by making false statements is your problem. Most of what I post is for others anyway. Your ignorance of what officers do in each state is your only defense. I think you lie when when you suggest I have never been a police officer. When we complete AZPOST school the agencies are represented in the classes. We are all peace officers in Arizona and the place your employed determines your title. Other state are different but you don't know that. What are agency does the game and fish work in Alaska? What agency in Missouri does watercraft patrol? In Arizona we enforce Title 28 traffic, Title 5 watercraft , Title 13 criminal code , and Title 17 Game and Fish. I personally have been a lead instructor in AZPOST for Title 5 watercraft where Sheriff's and Chief of Police send their watercraft officers to train. In Utah there is a separation of watercraft officers and Game Wardens. We are also the lead agency for OHV laws and rules. As far as criminal statutes we work in the big cities as well in the out back areas. I served a search warrant in Phoenix on a game violation and the suspect went a got a sawed off shotgun. Unfortunately for him I had my Colt Python pointing at him and he complied with my verbal commands. The Phoenix Police showed up and arrested numerous bikers for possession of drugs. Game Wardens are the most likely officers in the United States to be assaulted. Maybe the statistics with all these left liberals attacking the police. So do you want to admit you don't know if I have been a police officer or should I send a picture of my police officer ID to someone to prove you wrong. I think you should learn about ALERRT and what we do as interagency teams in regards to rapid response. I am surprised that you don't that we all cooperate among agencies. I am proud of my service in the Marine Corps, as a Ranger and as a police officer. Maybe you should ask the former director of our highway patrol who he contacted when his helicopter was hit 5 times from a marijuana field they were flying over. There are just as many bad guys living in rural areas as in Phoenix. I don't like doing traffic enforcement or domestic disputes but I did a lot when I was stationed in Cottonwood. Cottonwood had 8 officers, Jerome had 2 3 officers and Clarkdale had 3 officer. We all helped each other. My supervisor called me and asked if was in a bar fight in Cottonwood. I was thinking this is not good but told I did respond to a Cottonwood officer requesting assistance. After a brief pause he asked if we won. I told him we did and what I had done. He said good I didn't want you embarrassing our agency. We has a WWII Marine and one of my best supervisors. I don't think I will bend the knee to your Excellency. I trust Colt's comments. I will contact a former Army LT Col that served in tanks in middle east combat for my go to expert Lt Col. We use to talk about the battle all the time in his office at our Department. We would talk so long that his staff was mad at me. My expertise is in field investigations and interview/interrogation. For what we do here they are valuable skillsets to have. It helps to be a Marine and horseman to relate to the Crows and the Cheyennes. I don't intend to go anywhere as long as we can have these discussions. My statement was that if they closed the PM we were participated in I would not frequent this forum since nothing was happening in the board itself. Well things are happening now. By the way I was also sworn in to be a Sheriff Deputy up north and taught a class on how to run an operating under the influence checkpoint. I served as the officer in charge. Since it was only for 2 days maybe it doesn't count. There were no Game Wardens there only deputies that enforced their state watercraft law. Regards Steve
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Aug 3, 2020 2:19:45 GMT
What are you Steve? You are a game warden. Is that a lie? You have never policed in a city have you? Is that a lie? I don't give a rat's ass that you wear a badge and carry a gun. You are still a game warden. Now there is absolutely nothing wrong with policing natural resources. It is a vital function.
I don't give a rat's ass about your ability to instruct in firearms and watercraft operations either. Those too are vital functions.
I don't even care about what laws you enforce. Laws need enforcing wherever human beings are found.
It should be obvious to you by now that I do not give a crap about what you do or how you do it. I don't care if you are the world's greatest expert in firearms, or have the ability to out shoot Annie Oakley. What I do care about is your constant penchant for speaking outside of your scope of knowledge. If you want to tell us all about what it is like to be a game warden, that's fine. If you want to tells us all about your adventures astride a horse that's fine too . I will even stand by and listen to what you have to say concerning your very limited knowledge of the only battle which seems to interest you. The same goes for your fairy stories you absorbed about the Marine Corps in boot camp, most of which you do not know the purpose or meaning of, I'll try to hold my commentary. But if you of limited knowledge want to tell me about battle and the history of battle, the tactics involved. the decision making process of commanders, and other aspects of the subject, when you have no knowledge or experience, then I do object, no I strongly object.
Don't you dare ever to call me a liar again. Is that clear. Now stay the hell out of my way, stay away from what I post, and get as far away from me as you possibly can, while remaining on Planet Earth.
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Aug 3, 2020 3:15:54 GMT
What are you Steve? You are a game warden. I am a Ranger which includes title 17 Game and Fish law enforcement but we are also the lead agency for watercraft enforcement. Our wildlife managers are required to have a degree in a wildlife related field. Our law specialist officers enforce watercraft and OHV laws. Our Prescott officer is a retired Phoenix police swat team member. One of our new highers is a Marine and also a retired Phoenix Swat Team member. They do not enforce Game and Fish laws and are funded from watercraft and OHV funding sources. I was the law enforcement program supervisor over G&F, watercraft, and off highway vehicle programs. I supervised investigations. I worked with USFS, BLM, ATF, FBI and state, county and city agencies. I attended DHS meetings with various agencies. Is that a lie? You have never policed in a city have you? Is that a lie? I don't give a rat's ass that you wear a badge and carry a gun. You are still a game warden. Now there is absolutely nothing wrong with policing natural resources. It is a vital function. I have served as a police officer in the Verde Valley. I still have my ID card. As far as our districts that job is varied in regards to activities. At Lake Powell the officer has no Game responsibilities and Utah handles our fishing reports. That officer is in a watercraft district. Our Phoenix officers are called urban officers and they deal mostly with urban lakes and nuisance wildlife. They work closely with Phoenix and Mesa officer with arrests for drugs and assaults at urban lakes. There are very few districts that are strictly Game Warden type districts and they highly desirable. Flagstaff for the officer here have watercraft and OHV responsibilities along with hunt patrols. We also have an OHV officer position that was filled by a police officer from down south. He left us to go to our state troopers. That is what I have been trying to tell you but we are caught up in the discussion rather than the facts. I did have a wildlife manager district from 1979 until 1992 but I promoted to law enforcement only and served until 2014. In September of 2014 I started as a Captain of reserves. It requires a minimum of 400 hours per year. My first year I did 800 hours. I don't give a rat's ass about your ability to instruct in firearms and watercraft operations either. Those too are vital functions. I don't even care about what laws you enforce. Laws need enforcing wherever human beings are found. It should be obvious to you by now that I do not give a crap about what you do or how you do it. I don't care if you are the world's greatest expert in firearms, or have the ability to out shoot Annie Oakley. What I do care about is your constant penchant for speaking outside of your scope of knowledge. If you want to tell us all about what it is like to be a game warden, that's fine. If you want to tells us all about your adventures astride a horse that's fine too . I will even stand by and listen to what you have to say concerning your very limited knowledge of the only battle which seems to interest you. The same goes for your fairy stories you absorbed about the Marine Corps in boot camp, most of which you do not know the purpose or meaning of, I'll try to hold my commentary. But if you of limited knowledge want to tell me about battle and the history of battle, the tactics involved. the decision making process of commanders, and other aspects of the subject, when you have no knowledge or experience, then I do object, no I strongly object. My areas of expertise are on the ground investigations and interview and interrogation. The areas you listed may or may not have relevance. In firearms I know what it takes to be proficient and it does not mater if you are in the military, police, or a civilian. Don't you dare ever to call me a liar again. Is that clear. Now stay the hell out of my way, stay away from what I post, and get as far away from me as you possibly can, while remaining on Planet Earth. I will not be silenced when I speak the truth. I have served a police officer and was commissioned as a police officer. I worked domestic violence, drugs, fights, and even a bank robbery with the Chief of Police where I was commissioned. I did not work traffic.
Regards
Steve
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Aug 3, 2020 3:42:52 GMT
I checked my police ID card and I was commissioned as a police officer from July 3, 1980 until April 12, 1984. That would be a little more than 3 and 1/2 years. Here is a redacted ID. I did that because Britt Collie, BC, told me never to post the full ID. I am sure that you can read police and that Tom can verify that is me. A 31 year old me. Regards Steve
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Aug 3, 2020 3:45:58 GMT
Like I said you are a game warden.
There is not one goddamned city in the Verde Valley. The place is practically absent of habitation from Flagstaff to Phoenix. I don't give a crap about your ID Card. You never policed in a city, did you?
They don't do ground investigations and interrogations in the combat arms Steve. If firearms were all that it took to be a competent military member you would be well qualified. That knowledge and proficiency is not all it takes, and anyone who equates your proficiency with firearms to military knowledge and experience is a damned fool. I am not a fool, and I have been reading you for years, evaluating what you say in light of my own military experience at a much higher level then you ever dreamed of achieving, higher than my own expectations as well, but that is another story, and I find you wanting in knowledge.
I don't want to silence you, I just want you to stay away from me. You can talk about anything you wish to, just not to me. By calling me a liar you attacked my personal honor. I can do one of three things about that, shoot you, beat the crap out of you, or do the thing you most fear, ignore you, and all that you are and think you are. I chose to do the last, and our book is closed. Don't cross my path again.
I really don't care what your police experience is. Only you care. It is your life, but you are still a game warden, and what are you going to do when you can no longer have a life wrapped around the only one thing you can do. Regret and eventually die, but still a game warden.
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Aug 3, 2020 4:14:27 GMT
Like I said you are a game warden. There is not one goddamned city in the Verde Valley. The place is practically absent of habitation from Flagstaff to Phoenix. I don't give a crap about your ID Card. You never policed in a city, did you? Chuck you need to go to bed. You just made another false statement please stop it. Cottonwood is a city in Yavapai County, Arizona, United States. According to the 2010 census, the population of the city is 11,265.They don't do ground investigations and interrogations in the combat arms Steve. If firearms were all that it took to be a competent military member you would be well qualified. That knowledge and proficiency is not all it takes, and anyone who equates your proficiency with firearms to military knowledge and experience is a damned fool. I am not a fool, and I have been reading you for years, evaluating what you say in light of my own military experience at a much higher level then you ever dreamed of achieving, higher than my own expectations as well, but that is another story, and I find you wanting in knowledge. I don't want to silence you, I just want you to stay away from me. You can talk about anything you wish to, just not to me. By calling me a liar you attacked my personal honor. I can do one of three things about that, shoot you, beat the crap out of you, or do the thing you most fear, ignore you, and all that you are and think you are. I chose to do the last, and our book is closed. Don't cross my path again. I really don't care what your police experience is. Only you care. It is your life, but you are still a game warden, and what are you going to do when you can no longer have a life wrapped around the only one thing you can do. Regret and eventually die, but still a game warden. Another false statement you have got to stop. I work for Northern Arizona University instructing for the Park Ranger Training Program. That is my paying job and it pays for my trip to Montana each each year. We have graduated close to 800 students since 2006. Margaret Anderson was shot and killed in the state of Washington. Two others officers shot and killed a suspect in Arizona. Tanya Plainfeather is a graduate and works at the battlefield. I saw her this year working in the cemetery. I plan on buying Marine Corps flags next year for all the Marines buried there. There are 138 Marines buried there according to Tanya. She said she would put them up if I bought them.
I don't think I have challenged your expertise and I am surprised about some of the comments you make that infer that. So is the whole thing just a game to you since you believe that you have superior credentials? I think the military has long given up with any investigation. They were happy with working on marksmanship and horsemanship for the future.
As far as my comments on false statements they are correct and I presented the facts. Here is your statement: "I am to stand in the shoes of a game warden who pretends to be a policeman."
So we can agree that I was a police officer and if you suggest that a police officer for a town is something different than your above statement than you're a winner. The bank I responded to was in the City of Cottonwood with the Chief of Police of Clarkdale.
I think you have not made trip from Phoenix to Flagstaff in a long time. Tom could fill you in since you don't want to listen to me. Camp Verde calls itself a town but the population is over 10, 000 which is the minimum population of a city.
Regards
Steve
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Aug 3, 2020 4:29:45 GMT
Were you a police officer for the town of Camp Verde, which I last visited in the late 1990's? Were you a police officer in Cottonwood, a town I last visited about ten years ago?
If the answer to either of these questions is yes, you have my most sincere apologies. If the answer is no, you are still a game warden with no city experience.
I don't need Tom or anyone else to fill me in about Arizona. I had relatives there until very recently, and have visited a goodly number of times.
You really need to reassess your life Steve. No one cares what bank you responded to or whom you responded with. What they do care about though is you trying to make out that your experiences qualify you to comment on something you know little to nothing about. Being a police officer, regardless of what type of police officer you are, and having been a Marine, seem to be the most important things in your life. I've got news for you sunshine, we are not in life what we do, we are what we are, and what you are in my book is a big mouthed clown who is so stupid that he refuses to stay in his own back yard, and thinks that he can trespass in mine with impunity and immunity from retaliation. That is not and never will be the case.
Now let me suggest you read what I said about our book being closed, and stop treating us to a medley of your police greatest hits. You were doing your job, a job you receive no thanks for. Let that be your reward and move on with your life, instead of trying to hang on until you die, the way you are now.
I swear you get more like Rini every day. He knows nothing but pretends he does, just like you. Wait that is a lie, he was at an ROTC Dinner and learned all about the cavalry in one evening over rubber chicken and stale apple pie from a cavalry colonel, just as you learned you vast store of military information by washing your underwear in a slop bucket, and reciting poems you were forced to memorize, at boot camp. Two of a kind.
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Aug 3, 2020 6:45:29 GMT
Were you a police officer for the town of Camp Verde, which I last visited in the late 1990's? Were you a police officer in Cottonwood, a town I last visited about ten years ago? I was a police officer for the town of Clarkdale. The dispatch was out of CottonwoodIf the answer to either of these questions is yes, you have my most sincere apologies. If the answer is no, you are still a game warden with no city experience. I think you have it wrong. The skillset is greater among Game Wardens. What exactly do you think is so important to be big city officer that could not be found in a county outside city limits? I know are wildlife manager have a broader set of skills than our watercraft and OHV officers. You are presenting a false narrative of the skills of a "Game Warden". We did have Game Wardens at one time but is was before Arizona was a state. There is nothing wrong but you need to know the title in the particular state. Nevada has Game Wardens and they do a similar job. I think our average officer is closer to an police detective or investigator. Our training includes tracking, collection of evidence, ballistics and tool mark identification, blood splatter analysis, fingerprinting, tire cast, crime scene photography to name just a few. I think the small towns and county deputies are more likely to have an increased skillset.I don't need Tom or anyone else to fill me in about Arizona. I had relatives there until very recently, and have visited a goodly number of times. Then why would say there are no cities in the Verde Valley.You really need to reassess your life Steve. No one cares what bank you responded to or whom you responded with. What they do care about though is you trying to make out that your experiences qualify you to comment on something you know little to nothing about. Being a police officer, regardless of what type of police officer you are, and having been a Marine, seem to be the most important things in your life. I've got news for you sunshine, we are not in life what we do, we are what we are, and what you are in my book is a big mouthed clown who is so stupid that he refuses to stay in his own back yard, and thinks that he can trespass in mine with impunity and immunity from retaliation. That is not and never will be the case. I am positive that the people we rescued from the bank did care. That you don't care doesn't really matter. What I sure is that you don't have the skillset that good police officers have. We don't going around slamming people. You have no clue what is the most important things in my life. I think you are presenting a false narrative in that I don't trespass in your neighborhood. I make observations and form opinions independent of anything you say. If skills such as horsemanship and marksmanship are not part of battle readiness then I will stand corrected. I think the Marine Corps and what we teach in law enforcement puts an emphasis on certain skillsets. If can't shoot the qualification course they can take your gun and badge away until you qualify and you could lose your job. If you call someone a big mouth clown nothing happens. That is because officers are taught verbal judo and ignore the person.Now let me suggest you read what I said about our book being closed, and stop treating us to a medley of your police greatest hits. You were doing your job, a job you receive no thanks for. Let that be your reward and move on with your life, instead of trying to hang on until you die, the way you are now. That assumes I value your opinion. I will and have been doing less but the minimum standards of officers now days makes it easy to do the job. I don't tell you to get out of your house and do something productive since I don't know what you do. You don't tell me what to do. I am not looking forward to being senile like Biden or my father as I saw him when he was in his 90s. I going to what I can do for as long as I can. I enjoy it. My real job as a firearm instructor at NAU is not fun but I like the money and helping others. So what is the down side to spending a day on Lake Powell in a $250,000 boat and you don't have to pay for the gas. They pay for your hotel room and meals.
Do you really look forward to being old and helpless? Maybe you have the genes where that won't happen but that is not my lot in life. If I die then I go to be with the Lord so what is downside of that? Maybe I get see my mother, dad, or brother. I do the things I like to do. I still have horses and camp out with them. There something that will kill you. I have friends that ride motorcycles and that seems risky also. In my job not everyone you meet has done something wrong and it is enjoyable. I get that there is bad guys out there also.
I swear you get more like Rini every day. He knows nothing but pretends he does, just like you. Wait that is a lie, he was at an ROTC Dinner and learned all about the cavalry in one evening over rubber chicken and stale apple pie from a cavalry colonel, just as you learned you vast store of military information by washing your underwear in a slop bucket, and reciting poems you were forced to memorize, at boot camp. Two of a kind. Now that is great Democrat trick you are trying to pull off. Blame someone for things you are actually doing. I challenged Rini a lot on misrepresentation and you have done the same. There is a city in the Verde Valley and just like Rini you state there wasn't a city based upon your knowledge. I don't know what Rini's background is with ROTC but I don't think it is not as you state above. I will find out.
I hope you are asleep by now. Rest well my friend. Tomorrow I will patrol around Robinson Crater. We are concerned with people living off the land and there are deer and antelope in the area. There are meth labs out there somewhere also. Wear your mask and stay safe.
Regards
Steve
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Aug 4, 2020 0:40:53 GMT
And I do not include Gordon Harper among those who tell us they know. Gordon Harper tells us what he thinks. There is a difference, and the difference is more from the human condition then knowing about this battle or any other. I think, is far different from I know. Scott, is a recognized expert, but unless he can see underground he has no reason to say anything about artifacts EXCEPT, there may be some there. You do not base an entire theory of what happened on Scott, because Scott is still in a - There may be - state, and not yet in a state of - there are. Until that changes from may be to there are, and I found them where I thought they might be, then any theorizing is premature. Wait until some future discovery is made. That is the time to change or modify a theory, and not before. Not sure what you mean. If one thinks that there should have been more artifacts and one explanation is that heavy equipment removed surface material and place in the road bed it is a reasonable explanation why no artifacts were found. Your law enforcement view is not relevant here per say. The defense is a deliberate act designed to HOLD ground. Absent the intent to hold, actions such as we mostly see at LBH are something else. I chose to use the word skirmish in its literal form, meaning the disputing of some place or piece of ground. Disputing and the intent to hold are two different things. The disputing of ground may be for one of a number of reasons. There is only one reason to defend, that being to hold for an extended period of time. The essential factor in the defense is that the place you intend to hold must have both value and meaning. There is no place on the Custer portion of that battlefield that has any meaning, save one. There is only one place that has value, that being Calhoun Hill. The value of Calhoun Hill, is brought about by circumstance, and that circumstance was only in the eye of the commander, Calhoun, who made the decision to hold it. He reasoned and based his decision upon, his then knowledge that four companies were north of him, and had Calhoun Hill fallen, the rear of those four companies would be compromised. That then is the meaning. I think not wanting to die is a valid reason. Shooting horses and placing the carcasses for defensive purposes shows some intent to stay there. The Calhoun Area sucks in defending against the Indians firing from Henryville. I suspect that is why the Indians concentrated there. Wait for the soldiers to stand and then shoot, A soldier has to stand up to fire. A field trip conducted by the Friends of the Little Bighorn was done on the Calhoun Area. The Rangers giving the tour staged participants on the edge and had them attempt to simulate shooting toward Henryville. They had to stand to see the area. We have no knowledge that any similar circumstance existed in the Custer portion of the fight, and until we do we may not properly say they were defending. Even your example of defending LSH is invalid. There was no deliberate decision to hold that ground. It had no value, nor did it have meaning. It was just a place where they were run down and destroyed. If they had their choice in the matter they would have been anyplace else then there. I submit shooting horses and using them for defense shows an attempt to stay there until dead or rescued.The above is far different from what faced Custer's decision making process in the north. He had, at one time, all his companies in hand, and the requirement he had was not to hold anything in the way of terrain. None of it was vital to what he was then about. All he had to do was dispute possession of the terrain, to buy time so he could figure out the best course of his future actions. To stay and defend something that he could place value and meaning on, or to go, and perhaps look for other opportunities in the hours and days that lay ahead. Ultimately we think that his decision was to go, but that decision came too late. AgreedNow to corridors: You are absolutely correct that Custer used well known, well traveled movement corridors on his approach march to LBH in the days preceding the battle. That is not the question here at all, and no conclusions would be drawn from it, anymore then anyone could conclude my future course of tactical route choices, by citing the fact that I took Interstate 25, then Interstate 90 to the battlefield, from my home. From that point ,in the presence or near presence of the enemy, I am going to chose the route that makes the most tactical sense, in light of what I intend to accomplish. That route will usually be the one I least expect the enemy to guard, or the one that is the least visible to my enemy, so that I might mask my movements. Always, at least in my experience, those "best practice" tactical routes turn out to be the hardest to travel. As far as you pointing out the greater possibility of ambush on the ridge route, that is a concern, no doubt about it. In that circumstance the commander would weigh his need for say stealth, against the possibility of ambush. That is his decision to make. Over 95% of the markers are in travel corridors. The western corridor is shown on Maguire's map. Today the markers are in the same location. The total truth here is that only one "Custer Route: has been documented. That one is across the ridges. It does not matter what you, McGuire, or Joe Shit the Rag Man thinks, the fact still remains that only one Custer route has been documented. When you bring me proof that he used Cedar Coulee, Middle Coulee, Medicine Tail Coulee, or the river route, PROOF I SAY, NOT YOUR'S OR ANYONE ELSE'S CONJECTURE, then that too can be examined and entered into the depository of knowledge about this battle - not before. Until then you may think what you wish, but without provable knowledge you are just blowing smoke up people's ass. The Curtis map is drawn by a scout participant and it is clearly Middle Coulee. Middle Coulee is the only one straight across from the egress route. Curly states that some troopers went straight across. So Curly is consistent with the scout drawn map. Maguire's map is exactly what Curly states happened in MTC. It shows one trail into MTC and two leaving. The interval from the separation point to the point Martin states he was sent back is around 800 yards. From that point to Ford B is 600 yards. Thompson states he observed action within 600 yards of MTF and there was viewscape presentation of what Thompson could see. There is a Sioux drawing showing the gray horses using the western corridor.
Short of bringing that proof, which will never happen now, you must evaluate what you think may have happened in the light of - was there a tactically sound reason to use it. With the river route, only a certifiably insane lunatic moron would use that route for a tactical approach march, under that prevailing set of circumstances. Curly, Martin, and Thompson place Custer within 600 yards of MTF. A Sioux drawing places the gray horses there. Finally Maguire's map used at the Reno court of Inquiry shows single route into MTC and two egressing. Donahue can think what he wants to as well, but unless he comes up with a reason why that enormous piece of ground was only occupied by two under strength companies that were actually the size of a platoon, when the size of the ground alone calls for a full strength, period appropriate, battalion, or more, his tactical bucket has a howitzer sized hole in the bottom. It will not hold water. Tactics, like politics, is the art of the possible. Lots of Indians. As soon as you clear the bend in the river near the car bodies you can see the river area. So maybe Colt can give us the formation they may have used. The distance from end of BRE near the gate to the cement building foundation is not that far. If CIL were going to follow E and F they would still be on BRE waiting for them to pass and fall end behind them. The question I have is would they sent a platoon to look at the Fords?If Rini misrepresents things it is out of ignorance. You must think ignorance is only the absence of knowledge. It is also the misapplication of what knowledge the person does have. Rini is like the guy who has all the pieces of a puzzle in his possession, and does not know how to properly assemble them. Worse yet, he assembles them as he thinks they should be, without first consulting the picture on the front of the box, or taking a course in Puzzle Building 101. That is ignorance too. Sort of like my latest tank project. I have all the pieces, but putting them together confounds me. Do you not think it strange that all these people who spout their theories from Donahue, to Wagner, to Montrose, to Gray, and even to Rini, who adores the man to the point of sexual attraction it seems, all present this man Custer as a tactical moron? He was no Bonaparte, but he knew battle, and whatever his personal, political, and professional failings were, he had a basic understanding of what needed doing, and a concept of how to do it. To conclude that he would make every mistake possible in the book, just so it would fit the aforementioned person's theory is just beyond ignorance so far, that one can only conclude that the purveyors of this junk are themselves stupid. I agree and what we have worked on here seems more plausible. I think in the end for me it only has to make sense to me which is what Gordie stated several times.
Regards
Steve
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Aug 4, 2020 8:14:50 GMT
To return to Benteen's comment; I think he may reasonably have expected to see the bodies close together showing a "unity of command" if you like, and he was shocked to see them separated by the length of Battle Ridge hence the scattered comment. As we know most writers over the years have interpreted this distribution as showing that Custer again divided his force leaving C,L on Calhoun Hill and I some way further north. The problem with this is that it assumes Custer was a tactical idiot, which he was most certainly not. Alternatively those suggesting he would do this could be the ones who are tactically challenged.
The next thing to consider is why are E and F left marooned on BRE and CR when C,I,and L have all managed to move off to the south. The number of horses on LSH and surrounds have been mentioned; by any count there are nowhere near enough horses to mount those men. The warriors were not tactically inept and record that they had women and others attempting to scare off the horses. I think it is a small distance to join the dots on this data and to conclude that one reason the withdrawal failed was the loss of the Company E and Company F horses.
A corollary of this is that Company F were the last company to occupy BRE and were then certainly initially much further north on BRE than their end point on the east slope of LSH.
The location of the Indian Memorial (which disconcertingly was full of rattle snakes when I visited it) is, I think, important as the presence of numbers of warriors around this area is a good reason for Custer to need to move south in withdrawal rather than to move east.
Cheers
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Aug 4, 2020 12:30:50 GMT
Mac
I agree and there is only one truth but we may never know what it is. We may come up with theories and maybe among them is the truth. So for me its acceptable to have different degrees of probability and choose from the most likely explanation. For me the Indian accounts and the artifacts play an important role in making an assessment. What the military should have done or what they were doing is secondary since there are no survivors. We have military personnel with expertise here that give their best estimate of what should have been done and how they would have done it. What we are missing is what exactly were those commands and movements. We know the end result and Benteen describes it but it doesn't fill what the soldiers were doing between the time they entered MTC and the battlefield as Benteen saw it.
One of the problems is there are not Indian battle reports that paint the whole picture. The Dog Soldiers did certain things the Elks did another but they don't coordinate timing and location and maybe never talk about it outside their society members. So piecing together the accounts you have to realize there is not a Cheyenne account. There are multiple accounts. I am working with a younger man that can recall all the names and locations and is trying to piece it all together. As far as groups of Cheyennes there are a least five and we are told that Dog Soldiers went everywhere.
There is a group of Cheyennes returning from hunting and moving down MTC. There are Cheyenne that left and gathered on Custer Creek and later engaged. There are Cheyennes that went with Sioux across MTF. There are the Cheyennes that JSIT talks about who kept there horses across the river to the north and were retrieving them when the saw Custer heading north. Finally there is a lot of evidence that the sacred items were there and just across the river from Deep Ravine. Tom and I have been pursuing that. My suspicions are that there are multiple events around the deep gully portion of Deep Ravine. I believe the Kit Fox were there and maybe even some staked themselves there to defend against entry into the river.
Looking at the markers you can follow a line north from Deep Coulee to LSH. There is a line from the end of Cemetery Ridge crossing Cemetery Ravine and into Deep Ravine. Maguire shows both of these. He only had bodies and ground disturbance when he drew his map.
Right now I think that Chuck and Colt have laid out the best scenario for what Custer was doing. I think the retrograde would fit what Benteen describes. What we don't know is what was the cohesiveness and what was reaction to a reduction in force. Were the markers with Keogh a short term location or even moving. Only the Indians would know what they saw and I think we may never know.
I wish that we could all be there. The discussion of Ford Ds would be well worth the trip.
Regards
Steve
|
|
colt45
First Lieutenant
Posts: 439
|
Post by colt45 on Aug 4, 2020 12:33:13 GMT
Mac, The loss of horses could easily have prevented E and F from getting to the east side of BR, following the other companies, and would have left them with no choice but to be on LSH and along the SSL and deep ravine. I would hypothesize that L and C had already withdrawn before E and possibly F lost their mounts. In my theory, E and F would have been the last to withdraw given their positions on CR and BRE. The loss of mounts would have stranded them, and as we know, I company was caught in transit back toward L company. F company may have been able to get off BRE and make it to LSH with some of the mounts, but the hostiles who caught I company behind BR would also have cut off F company from moving any further south than LSH. And the hostiles coming from the ford D areas would have prevented east and north movements as well.
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Aug 4, 2020 13:05:12 GMT
As far as my discussion with Chuck my feeling was that he thought being a Game Warden would have lessor standing or skills than a big city police officer. But what I argued was the nature of an Arizona officer instead of defending Game Warden. There is no such thing as a universal Game Warden job description they have similarities but the agency they work for varies. In Alaska their state police have brown shirts and blue shirts with the brown shirts enforcing wildlife laws. In New York they environmental police who also do other activities such as domestic violence. In Arizona we have Wildlife, Watercraft, and Off Highway Vehicle responsibilities. We also participate in ALERRT rapid response teams and training.
State officer enforcing Game Laws may have more expertise in a variety of areas with regards to evaluations pertinent to discussions here. So I can't speak for all but let me share a few things. All our wildlife officers have a bachelors degree. Our law enforcement specialist do not have to have a degree and we several big city police officers taking those jobs. We use horses and mules. We use pack animal. I have personally recorded thousands of miles of riding horseback for patrol and water catchment checks. I attended the AZPOST mounted school and there were some big city officers there. Our Department runs the range at Ben Avery. Our DPS has their armory there and a separate range. The Phoenix SWAT comes to our range as do the city police officers.
Our officers are trained in investigations to a level of what you would see in detectives. It takes an additional year after completing the police academy for them to become field officers. Because of the degree requirement our officers can testify as expert witnesses where other agencies would have to have a crime lab witness. They are trained in tracking and the use of GPS.
The skillsets they are given certainly would be most useful in these discussion. It was because of my training in horses and GPS that Gordie invited me to help him. As we know he passed away but I had brought my saddle and field equipment so we decided to ride the area of Benteen's scout to the left. Others have done it but I have not seen anyone take a GPS and record it where it can and has been shared with others.
So I apologize for not defending the skillsets of Game Wardens instead I was trying to explain that each state has different job responsibilities.
Regards
Steve
|
|