Who to blame? Custer, Reno, Benteen or other?

[moderator]

Please continue discussions about blame here, thank you.
For continuity I have included the relevant texts.

Feb 6, 2011 13:35:26 GMT -5 joewiggs said:

Feb 6, 2011 8:42:37 GMT -5 crazycanuck said:

Benteen didn't need a Doctor as we all know the action was going to be north with the Reno charge and the Custer support. Benteen was assigned a minor job of not letting no existent Indians scatter south all because of his horse.Custer is like my dog who won't let anybody get out in front of him. Like Custer my dog knows what porcupines are like.

Exactly, Benteen knew that the crux of the battle would be occurring at another location yet, he basically testified at the Inquiry that could have gone on until he reached the Pacific ocean if he had not turned about on his own, "hook."

This is the very type of subtle disinformation that submerges truth in a mire of crap that needs to be identified. This relatively small bit of information goes along way in proving that it was never Custer's intent to attack the village alone and it also helps us to understand his reason for his division of troops, a separation that was intended to be brief.

Such information goes a long way in deflating the balloons of disgust so many have proffered regarding that tactic of separation, don't you think?

Feb 6, 2011 14:17:55 GMT -5 crazycanuck said:

I believe Custer was following orders(Terry's orders to prevent Indian escape to the south) sending Benteen to the left. But who is responsible for the stretch of distance that developed between Custer and Benteen which led to the disaster ? Is it Benteen,Reno or Custer ? I blame Custer 85%,Benteen 10% and Reno 5%.

Feb 6, 2011 18:32:44 GMT -5 joewiggs said:

If I am not mistaken, Benteen's oblique left generally followed the path of Custer excluding a bit over mile away from him. n approximate mile left then traveling in the same general direction as Custer.

In other words, very contrary to Benteen's gross exaggerations, the actually distance traveled between the two commands were not significantly different.

Members of Benteen's own command grumbled out loud due to the slowness of the troops movement. Two messengers were sent to Benteen, two top Sergeants, with additional orders so eager was Custer to hear from Benteen.

Indian testimony tells us of one incident in which Custer waiting for approximately twenty minutes before moving on. Apparently he waited for Benteen, made several halts to glance upon the back trails for sight of him.

I'm not suggesting that Benteen purposely left his commander in the clutch. Upset because he felt slighted by Custer he simply plodded along, grumbling about his bad luck of having a jerk for a commander (Boss).

Feb 7, 2011 8:50:24 GMT -5 crazycanuck said:

I wonder why if it were so important for Custer to have Benteen close up, why would Custer risk moving on without him,knowing the size of the village and the fight in the Indians? Couldn't you regroup ,swallow the ego and return to fight another day notwithstanding July 4th and the possible glory celebrations waiting in Washington for arresting the hostiles. Ya gotta say Custer blew this one,remember he gave the orders to Benteen and Reno and they did what they were asked to do,go left and charge.I'm thinking Custer let Benteen and Reno down rather than the other way round. Instead of thinking your subordinates did not carry out there job Custer failed more so in not doing his properly. Custer is 85%,Benteen 15% and Reno 5% to blame for the fiasco and I could bump Custer up to 95% .Am I wrong ?

[crazycanuck]

The Sounds of Silence was written by Simon, February,1964,forty seven years ago,one of the all time great songs.

[moderator]

yup, its one of my favorites. Still like to spin those oldies every once in a while.

NOT to stray off subject here.... So, you got any statements, testimony or evidence of those percentages you speak of? Or, is it just your thoughts on it?

[crazycanuck]

Horse Sense I speak of, or common sense, which as they say isn't very common at times, especially with Custer that day. Let's just say Custie had a bad day just like Big Ben at the Super Bowl. Any of you guys ever had a bad day ? Ya win some ,ya lose some

Custer doesn't listen to scouts warning of "heap big fight" coming ahead, given near the divide,6 % penalty.
Custer rushes troops to battle after presuming sighted Indians are returning to hostile camp,5% penalty.
Custer wastes potential of his troops by sending Benteen left when trusted scouts could of searched instead of Benteen,25% penalty.
Custer sends Reno charging into unknown camp,25% penalty.
Custer promises support to Reno without scouting out where and when it will take place,27% penalty.
Custer spreads his troops further and fails to retreat and save his troops,7 % penalty.
Summary for Custer 5%+6%+25%+25%+27%+7%=95% blame Custer for disaster.

Benteen does sulk, dawdle an disobeys an impossible to little to late order from Custer,2 1/2 % penalty.
Summary of Benteen,2 1/2% blame for disaster.

Reno insists Benteen stay on hill and discourages search for Custer plus wastes time burying a friend when shots were heard north of them,2 1/2% blame penalty.

Summary of Reno,2 1/2% blame for disaster.

Based on the Horse sense scale we have Custer 95%,Benteen,2 1/2% and Reno 2 1/2 % percent to blame for the disaster. Ya gotta blame the general and quarterbacks for the losses.

[moderator]

Hmmmmm... well thought processes are Ok, acceptable and certainly something to consider, mind if we take a little closer look, first 3 first. The first two might have a bearing upon the 3rd, so lets take a little closer look at that 3rd one... "Custer wastes potential of his troops by sending Benteen left when trusted scouts could of searched instead of Benteen,25% penalty."

Question...Why do you think he sent Benteen left?

There had to have been some legitimate reason to do it, right? I mean, what if they had barely won that thing, and Benteen still (which you, me and the fence post out my back door knows he would) made the assertions he did at the COI. "Senseless"... "Fort Benton..." and to paraphrase 'he disobeyed his orders Custer gave him" ad-infinitum and reported all that to Terry. Custer wasn't stupid, he learned to cover his behind and there is ample proof of that. So what would Custer's response be to Terry or perhaps his own court review for sending Benteen to the left?

[crazycanuck]

Custer did not have to send Benteen left,south etc. He could of checked that region more efficently with scouts,thus following his orders. Custer would of lied like the rest of them at his own court review,why would he be any different than Benteen or Reno... cherry picking your answers etc. Custer called some bad plays that day...in my opinion. In doesn't matter why he sent Benteen left but he did and it ended in disaster.Bad call among many. Another bad call by Custer that day was him assuming the Indians would scatter and not fight(you know like the Steelers thought the Packers would do),thus go in early instead of waiting for rendevouz. Custer outsmarted himself. Custer might of been brave,wily,ambitious , smart maybe...but wise I don't think so. I will stop short of calling him stupid that day.

[crazycanuck]

" Hear my words that I might teach you " . I also think that successes like Custer tend to get in a "it worked before it will work again mind set" so he goes to the LBH with the Washita move still in his playbook. Ya gotta run and end around , draw play,statue of liberty or fleaflicker now and then to keep your oppositon quessing Custie. Ya can't be the star of every game Custie, as quarterback or as general as you liked to be called you gotta direct WISE plays using your teamates in an united front.War is a team game even if you are The Son of the Morning Star. Now 'I've come to talk again.... hear my words that I might teach you".

[crazycanuck]

Why didn't Custer cross at Ford B in full force. Just like the beaches of Omaha,Juno,etc. somebody is going to be scarificed? Did Custer loose his nerve and was afraid of leading this charge. Surely you would of got plenty of people across out of the 200 plus troops. And don't give me that feigning story and searching further north to cross. Why didn't he make a stand at Ford B like Reno did with his skirmish line and tree defence ?

[crazycanuck]

lose his nerve not loosey goosey like Custer was that day.

[moderator]

CC,

You need not be condescending and/or catechize me, I am simply asking in civility your thoughts on the subject. I assume, if you didn't want to discuss this subject you would not have brought it up, but because you did, I offered this thread to discuss, not just with me, but with others, your thoughts and ideas. If you don't care to discuss it, but would rather attack me, then you do know what to do, do you not?

If you would like to continue our discussion with respect and civility, I would be most happy to do so, and am simply asking one simple question... (how else am I to gather your views on this subject if I don't ask?)... as I did last time before you went off the deep end.

About the only thing we haven't covered here, is: whether you think Custer did or didn't disobey his orders (letter of instruction) issued by General Terry?

[davel]

I think that Custer divided his forces in a bid to address two possible scenarios. If the Indians ran, he would be in a better position to intercept them. If they stood and fought, he could quickly attack with a united or divided force, depending on circumstances. As so often happens in war, something occurred that wasn't anticipated. I believe that the Indians attacked in a much more aggressive and cohesive manner than they had ever done before, other than at the Rosebud, and Custer was completely unaware of the details of that fight.

I'm just beginning to read some accounts of the British Army in India, where numerically inferior forces consistently defeated well armed and well led armies.......usually through superior discipline and tactics, but it didn't always happen.....and it wasn't happening for Custer on that June day in 1876. If he pulled it off, he was a hero, and if a few things went a bit differently, he might just have done it.

[crazycanuck]

Sorry, didn't know I was attacking you but only faulting Custer on what I consider his lack of foresight. When I quote Simon and Garfunkle I am only using a quote for fun not to be demeaning or condescending though I do enjoy satire, etc. I do have a sense of humour but maybe you don't see it that way . Terry giving an ambiguous order to Custer to pitch in and use his extreme expertise to strike when deemed necessary is like putting the wolf in charge of the hen house.To me that's all Custer needed to do his thing. He must of smiled like the proverbial Cheshire cat reading Terry's orders. Did Custer disobey Terry's orders,legally no, but spiritually yes.And sir, when you perceive me going off the deep end you have to forgive me because sometimes I'm just living up to my alias CRAZY . No harm no foul. You know more about this topic than I do. Have a nice evening.

[crazycanuck]

Too many p!$$#@ off Indians Davel with Custer being introduced to the concept of unintended consequences of war with poor terrain,no backup support,enraged Indians defending there turf. It was there LAST STAND and maybe not so much Custers last stand. You may be right with the two scenarios but I think Custer stayed back on Luce Ridge area because he was wide eyed bewildered now knowing he had a big fight on his hand,as he knew what was happening to Reno, could happen to him. I think Custer panicked and should of got out of there.Just my opinion.

[crazycanuck]

Davel,Custer at Luce Ridge could watch the two companies at Ford B and the village at the same time and as you say strike out at a new crossing north of Ford B if the elderly,women and children moved that way,which they did and to the Northwest but as you imply things unfolded too quickly with the Indians crossing south of Ford B and pressuring Custer and of course the eneviable collapse. Best defence is a good offense which Gall unleashed.

[moderator]

Davel,

You may have something there. I'm not sure other commanders used it as much as he did, but Custer was well known for his three pronged attacks upon the Indians. And in spite of what some may say about this, it is in the old records and recorded there for anyone who would care to research it. One problem I always had with the LBH, it lacked one of the three prongs he was so famous for using, something not quite right there.

CC,

I don't have any problems with anyone who just wants to discuss things, nothing at all, but when someone, anyone puts "YOU" or any other pronoun to reference a person in their text in response to something I said, it can be and in the instances 'you' used it, it was most certainly was condescending. I won't belabor this point other than to say 'you' need to go back and look for it, its there and it wasn't the S & G post. And before I conclude, "You know more about this topic than I do." I doubt that very much. I most certainly do not know more than you or anyone else, nor would I ever make such a statement, and with that in mind... I and am quite used to moving on if you are...

I think the first thing 'you' need to understand is that we, no, not just me, but we, don't know your positions on the issues. And when 'you' come out an make a blanket accusation it seems rather unfair if 'you' don't explain why (It is done other places and usually don't go unchallenged, so why should or would you expect it to be different here?) I was just attempting to clarify those issues by asking questions. And I think it more than fair to say that it would take most people no more than 1 post to sum up there response, while I appreciate the 'post count' on this one, would it have been possible to have used the 'modify' button on the original post to add further comment or perhaps edit for clarification what had already been posted? (Just asking because I don't think some people know its there.)

You most certainly have a right to your views and opinions, that is what makes discussion forums like this one interesting, no two people will have the same ideas, notions or views. And that brings an added bonus to all of us, because without your participation, how could we learn from your perspective? And please do understand that I most certainly am not trying to change your opinion on anything. I ask questions, just like anyone else in an attempt to understand your position on the issues. The debate should be held to the TITLE of each page here, and not get personal between us because of differing views.


So let see if I can sum this up in an attempt to understand your position. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. [Also note I did add comment and ask questions in an attempt to clarify your position.]

"Terry giving an ambiguous order to Custer to pitch in and use his extreme expertise to strike when deemed necessary is like putting the wolf in charge of the hen house.To me that's all Custer needed to do his thing. He must of smiled like the proverbial Cheshire cat reading Terry's orders. Did Custer disobey Terry's orders,legally no, but spiritually yes."

Still scratching my head on this one. I think this was a polite way of saying 'YES he did'. And you're in good company, Rev. DR. Theodore Munger who was the pastor who gave the eulogy at Terry's funeral had this to say:

"It was inevitable that blame for the terrible but magnificent blunder should rest somewhere, and naturally, upon the officer in command, whose subordinates are supposed to carry out his orders."

It was of course Terry who said,

"directs that, as soon as your regiment can be made ready for the march, you will proceed up the Rosebud in pursuit of the Indians whose trail was discovered by Major Reno a few days since."

He thinks that you should proceed up the Rosebud until you ascertain definitely the direction in which the trail above spoken leads.

"Should it be found (as appears almost certain that it will be found) to turn towards the Little Horn, he thinks that you should still proceed southward, perhaps as far as the headwaters of the Tongue, and then turn towards the Little Horn, feeling constantly, however, to your left, so as to preclude the escape of the Indians to the south or southeast by passing around to your flank."

I think all the appropriate quotes are there. So where did Terry, Gibbon & Custer expect these hostiles to be? "Should it be found (as appears almost certain that it will be found) to turn towards the Little Horn..."

In fact for a very long time this part of the story has never ever changed. They knew before Custer ever set foot to the stirrup where those Indians were. And that trail to it was what Custer was looking for and found at Busby.

"Custer did not have to send Benteen left,south etc. He could of checked that region more efficently with scouts,thus following his orders...." & "I believe Custer was following orders(Terry's orders to prevent Indian escape to the south) sending Benteen to the left."

I guess my question would be; why would Custer be concerned about 'following his orders' if he had in any way disobeyed the letter of Instruction from Terry? That just doesn't make sense.

And the Scouts he should have sent?

"Custer doesn't listen to scouts warning of "heap big fight" coming ahead, given near the divide,6 % penalty."

My question would be why wouldn't he? Why trust them out there, if he didn't trust them at the Crows Nest?

"Custer wastes potential of his troops by sending Benteen left when trusted scouts could of searched instead of Benteen,25% penalty."

He knew from Terry's instructions and the fresh trail they were on after Busby, where those Indians would be - somewhere near the end of that trail "along the LBH". When Custer went to the Crows nest, he supposedly, according to Benteen 'didn't believe the Indians Scouts', which would have included Lt. Varnum, that they were seeing things as he didn't see anything. If that was the case then why Send Benteen anywhere to "Pitch in" to the "Indians" he was to "look up" after coming down from that same mountain where he supposedly didn't see anything? ("" quotes directly from RCOI, Benteen testimony)

Custer sends Reno charging into unknown camp,25% penalty.

I really don't think it was unknown, they knew from the beginning, before Custer ever set foot to stirrup, where it was. Benteen's own estimates at the RCOI of how big the trail they followed was and the size of the camps they had passed through, and his comparison with what Gen. Crook had done gives us a lot of information Custer also had at that time. And I'm not totally convinced about Benteen's statement that Custer didn't believe his scouts. I think he did, and I think he also trusted them. Proof of that was on the evening of the 24th when those same scouts came back late in the evening and reported finding the Hostile camp (yet another nail in that coffin that they didn't know where it was or how big it was). They did, the scouts had observed it that evening before returning to inform Custer of its location, and Custer used that information to make a forced march that same evening. The Crows nest observations and any reports the scouts may have made also would have contributed to how big it was along with the size of the camps they had passed through and the size of the trail were huge indicators of just what was there. Thats what they had the scouts for. I don't think Custer went into this thing as blind as some people would like to believe. And I think the scouts should be given more attention to understand this better, something that usually isn't done in an objective manner.