|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Jan 17, 2017 12:52:56 GMT
Ian,
Solid Warrant Officers and Senior NCO's are considered the backbone of any unit. Solid adjutants are often overlooked and should never be they make everything run smoothly and make the commanders life easier. I wish my branch had not done away with W.O.'s(USAF).
Regards,
Tom
|
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Jan 17, 2017 13:25:07 GMT
Tom my auld fella (bless his soul) finished up a WO Class 2, which was a Battery Sergeant Major, he could have gone on for the rank of WO Class 1 (RSM) but thought that leaving my mother alone with nine kids was too much, besides he had been in the army for over twenty years.
According to many, his army record opened many doors for him in civvy street and he finally became a publican, which was a hard job to get in those days.
He also had a dislike for the Free Masons, as he refused to join their ranks on principle.
|
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Jan 17, 2017 13:36:17 GMT
Ian, now you can throw dirt on me my dad was a Mason, but being a builder, I guess it fit to some degree. He worked hard on support of charities. His time in WWII was 3 years in CIC.
|
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Jan 17, 2017 13:49:31 GMT
Tom his beef with the Masons came from the way they controlled the town, and if you didn't join them they made it difficult for you to get up the ladder.
He was in the licence victualers, and they looked after him, he had many friends but wouldn't bow down to anyone.
I have worked under many builders so there is no dirt getting thrown by me thank you very much, because I did learn a lot working with them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 17, 2017 14:18:47 GMT
Okay, this might be a dense brain day for me but I agree that if Custer took two other people to the edge of the bluff, Martini would probably not be one. I can see him taking Tom but who else? Cooke? I wonder if Tom would be the best choice though and if he might tell Tom to lead the regiment on and he (GAC) will catch up. Who should Custer have taken to the bluff edge and who would he have must likely taken? Steve, does that two track road you mention possibly follow the most likely route that Custer would have taken once he started to head up the the bluffs? I tend to believe Custer would have taken a route that would be easy on his horses, why waste their (the horses) energy making a steep climb, if there was an easier one available. I suspect that a horse's energy was a resource that was managed, so you had it when you needed it. *** 1st post... take it easy on me. 'easy on his horses' - Hey Beth... this is one of my (many) interest in the battle. Old 'Iron Butt' didn't care too much about the men or the horses it seems. If I remember right I will just go thru the previous few days for the men/horses. June 23- left camp about 4:30am and pack train pulled into camp about sunset. Maybe like 33+ miles. June 24- 5am to 7:45 on march. Maybe like 28+ miles. Up around 1am for another 8+ miles and then to bed. June 25- Left about 8am so maybe like 4 hours sleep or so. To Crow's nest area is like 14+ miles. From there it is about 20 miles or so to the Custer Monument. So maybe like at least 30 miles that day with little sleep... ending with Indians swarming around your disjointed units. Yikes. So many 21 yr olds... can you imagine how tired and terrified both the men and the horses must have been? Anyway, really enjoy the conversation/debate/discussion here. Thanks for all the interesting information/knowledge. Custer does seem to have had a disregard for anyone who couldn't keep his rigorous schedule. Today I suspect we would say Custer was a bit on the hyperactive side of life but a number of successful people seem to be the human equivalent of the Energizer Bunny and don't understand those of us who need 8 hours sleep and even a nap now and then. Remember each one of those long rides would have included a routine of riding and then walking dismounted and (I believe) a stop to rest the horse. I can't remember the exact sequence off the top of my head so not only would they have to have a calloused bottom but hopefully a good pair of boots to get through the day. Regardless of the long ride though I suspect they would opt for the easier ride from the valley floor to the top of the bluffs. Game trails and old roads tend to be like the what is called a 'desire path'--the path that is the easiest to get from point A to B whether it is in a city park or an empty high plains. I imagine that those young men had just about every emotion possible-from anxiety to zeal. I am sure that as they crossed the divide, they thought it would be a battle that they could confidently handle and as a group were in for a great romp but each individual had to have had a bit of reservations about their own fate. |
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 17, 2017 14:25:58 GMT
All of this is speculation. Something like this probably happened. Something like sending Kanipe off to find the packs most likely did happen. The man carries the brand of coward because of it. It is unproven and until it is proven it is an unfair accusation leveled at a man caught up in circumstances not of his making. Those accusations cannot be proven, so I wish those that engage in this would shut the goddamned mouths and crawl back into their sewer. A persons opinion in 2017 does not constitute proof of anything that occurred in 1876. The bottom line is Kanipe being sent to the packs, and Martini being sent to find Benteen is both logical and believable. I have always been uncomfortable with labeling anyone as either a malingerer or a coward unless it can be proven. I tend to believe that the majority of people just try to do their jobs to the best of their ability with the equipment they are given. |
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 17, 2017 14:49:38 GMT
Whomever was sent up there... would they know by the size of the village the probability of Reno's attack at least having big trouble? Even if they didn't see the entire village at that point. I mean... hit 1,000+ (maybe up to 1,500+ estimated before) 'hostiles' with about 100 men in the nose then expect to knock them out with a right cross with 200 more? This is the point where something terrible happened either with Custer's mind or interpretation of the scouts (whomever was up there). In my opinion that is. If he has any idea of the size of the village... he needs to get his force reformed asap... again, in my opinion. dgfred, we have really been exploring the Ford D theory-or a North to South battle flow-on this board, which actually when you start looking at it makes more sense than any other battle theory. No one has to be crazy, no one has to be a coward and no one has to dawdle. Everyone is just doing their jobs to their best of their ability and the stronger army won. So many other theories have the 7th losing the battle because of internal problems-Reno was a coward, didn't attack the village, retreated and Custer lost or Benteen didn't come to Custer's aid so Custer lost--so on because there was so much of the physical evidence that didn't seem to fit the story so that they only way to explain it was something went seriously wrong somewhere within the 7th Cav. With the Ford D theory, suddenly things begin to fall into place and make sense, Custer probably had better battle opinions that day but the one he chose-to attack at the north end of the village while Reno was attacking the south, was handled competently. I really recommend you read the John Stands In Timber account. I really need to pin a copy of it so it is readily available to everyone but here is a link to a copy of it. |
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Jan 17, 2017 15:09:49 GMT
HR has poured scorn on the JSIT account on the black board, which is strange, but HR is strange, no I don't mean the other strange off the brown board, oh hell this is confusing now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 17, 2017 15:17:44 GMT
If what you say is true, all battles would be bloodless affairs. Both sides would line up and take a headcount and the decision would go to the larger number. Lee beat the snot out of Burnside outnumbered 2 to 1. Lee beat the snot out of Pope outnumbered nearly 3 to 1. It is not how many you have it is what you do with them that counts. Fortune favors the bold, but when you are Bold you had better have Bold's shit together, or you will be Dead Bold. QC give the new guy a chance to settle in before you hit him with your cynical best. It's a heady experience when you finally find a group of people who finally share the same interest as you and it takes a bit to get in the groove. Custer was bold and even a bit audacious but how big of a factor was that in his defeat? |
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 17, 2017 15:21:39 GMT
HR has poured scorn on the JSIT account on the black board, which is strange, but HR is strange, no I don't mean the other strange off the brown board, oh hell this is confusing now. HR is very, very, smart which means sometimes he just sees the world different from everyone else. What is that saying--there is a fine line between genius and madness? Sometimes he rattles off on tangents that seem incomprehensible but then he will hit on something that is interesting and useful. |
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Jan 17, 2017 15:26:01 GMT
I don't think our new member will take old QC to heart, after all he has traded punches with Rob the ass hole so this will be nothing to him.
But come on though Chuck, at least DGF advocates going up the valley with whole command which is something that west pointer Custer didn't think of doing.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgfred on Jan 17, 2017 15:42:11 GMT
If what you say is true, all battles would be bloodless affairs. Both sides would line up and take a headcount and the decision would go to the larger number. Lee beat the snot out of Burnside outnumbered 2 to 1. Lee beat the snot out of Pope outnumbered nearly 3 to 1. It is not how many you have it is what you do with them that counts. Fortune favors the bold, but when you are Bold you had better have Bold's shit together, or you will be Dead Bold. How did you get 'bloodless' from my post? I would have waited until the next day to attack (as ordered I believe). If I attacked then I would sweep into the herd/village from a southern route with the entire command. That will/would be the opposite of bloodless. Bold enough I think with a good chance of success where as Custer's extra-bold (aka foolish) plan got shot/arrowed/clubbed/hatcheted to pieces. ***What would be your plan at the same time/location/etc as when Custer split his force into three??? I was asked and I tried to reply honestly. |
|
|
|
Post by dgfred on Jan 17, 2017 15:47:41 GMT
I was watching the Battlefield Detectives at the LBH and they 'mentioned' at the first ford crossing attempt not only were there a few warriors but the crossing was bogging down the horses. I had not really heard that before even tho I had seen the show before.
I think maybe more the warrior opposition more than anything... how about you guys and gals?
|
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 17, 2017 16:06:32 GMT
I was watching the Battlefield Detectives at the LBH and they 'mentioned' at the first ford crossing attempt not only were there a few warriors but the crossing was bogging down the horses. I had not really heard that before even tho I had seen the show before. I think maybe more the warrior opposition more than anything... how about you guys and gals? I know I saw that show quite a while ago and just don't recall the details, I do remember that the Waterloo episode had me scoffing at a few details though-quite a few actually. I have found that that particular series tends to be sort of fluffy when it comes to the details and gives a very basic view of whatever battle they are covering. I'm not sure what they called the first ford--A? BTW I'm a midwesterner so I am perfectly comfortable with just ' you guys' -it's sort of the northern version of y'all |
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 17, 2017 16:25:02 GMT
You completely missed my point my new friend.
The point is that total numbers do not always determine outcomes. Were that to be the case the side with the fewest numbers would always lose. That is the only manner in which battle would be bloodless. Numbers do count, but they only count at the point of contact.
Your solution to the problem here is correct. The Indians were in the valley. The horses were in the valley. The valley was the place the fight should have been fought. My question to you is that given the correct solution, separation of the horses from the Indians and then forcing the Indians back upon their infrastructure with the objective being destroy the infrastructure, then the Indians in that order how do you go about doing it. There are no good avenues of approach to place you between the horse herd and the Indians coming from the south west, which is the only way to get between the horses and the Indians. Therefore your only option coming from the south both drives you into infrastructure first, leaving the bulk of the horse herd accessible. That is your tactical problem. It can be solved, but not with dependence upon the main attack alone. There must be another ingredient to assure that you plan is viable.
There is another alternative that solves the problem from a different direction, but to solve that problem, you must go back to early in the day on 24 June, and conduct a thorough reconnaissance of the battle space.
I would much prefer that you figure out these answers for yourself. In so doing you will then be able to determine what Custer did right and what he did wrong, without being fed the answers, which will skew your opinions and judgment. It does no good for you to give an answers that is a regurgitation of mine or anyone else's. It must be yours alone. That is the only way it has value to you.
I would strongly suggest that you drop Battlefield Detectives from your must see list.
I am sure that you did try to answer honestly. Never thought differently.
How are you addressed? |
|
