|
|
Post by tbw on Oct 19, 2011 8:31:41 GMT -5
addenda to the previous post. I think it imperative that we can agree to disagree on some if not alot of these issues. You have your mind made up and wont change and so do I. You use reasoning of others who have written their thoughts about his character and used that to form your judgment about what happened. I look past such prejudice and bias and instead search for the truth in the historical record. For me it's like that face on Mars. You look at it and could say it isn't anything (not that you do, just using this as an example). And I do look at it and say, I'm not sure. It could be just as you say, but, until it is visited, until someone "digs" into it, no one will ever know for sure. Some intelligent beings could have made such an artifact. It's kind of like those Nazca lines and images there. Even if it is found to have been made by some intelligent beings, why? I don't trust what others have written about it, and wont, not even sources from Nasa or other government sources that try to say it's nothing. We simply don't know. But I think i've explained how I look at things like the LBH. For me it's about digging in deep and finding the truth, not what some other nutcase writer has stated themselves about it, but what I've actually found and believe for myself through a diligent search in the historical archives. And I've backed up my statements, by these sources, in every step of my thought process and opinion what is actually there. And it has absolutely nothing whatever to do with what some want-to-be author thinks about Custer or someone else's character, it's about what really went down. Now do I think mistakes or errors in judgement were made? Have you asked? Do you care? Or is this just about the "I'm right and you're wrong" aspect that attracts your arguments here? Such mistakes and errors in judgment about current people discussing this are still being made on the other boards like this. Try searching for common ground as you have done with the question you did ask. I think you'll find it rather revealing, not just of my position, but, of the truth about what did happen. And this isn't based upon someone else's thought process based upon their thoughts in their books, it's mine and I own it, all rights reserved.  |
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Oct 19, 2011 14:40:45 GMT -5
The exchange between you and GCC represents all that is good about this forum. When two men (with two diametrically different perspectives) can not be budged, yet remain gentleman, the essence of maturity is exemplified and welcomed. I salute you both! |
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Oct 19, 2011 18:32:15 GMT -5
The salute sir is returned, for I've seen the same demonstrated by you on a consistent basis here as well as elsewhere, when others were often less complimentary than need be.
I am not compelled to be excessively unreasonable, nor compel others to conform to my views. I very often express positive indicators of others work and/or opinions expressed here. I have worked on this battle for well over 35 years now. Not that I've worked at it as one would a job, or that I should try to make some kind of living off of it. There have been years intervening where I didn't once think about this subject, and instead moved on to other pursuits of leisure and hobbies, which I think this is, and should be for all who study it and write about it an absolute must. To be or do more than that towards this subject, I think, would make one border on the insane. And still to this day I don't excessively deem it necessary to be here 24/7 to give opinion or thought to what others write. That's not to say that I don't come here every day. I do. I am the administrator of this site. I just don't feel the overwhelming need to post, even when what others here say might not be, and often is, in disagreement with my own opinion on the subject. Joe can tell you that I don't, he knows I don't. And the cause of this was due to an inequality, excessively unreasonableness of some on other channels who didn't give fair evaluation of what I and others had to say, as if it should be earned, as in some kind of rite of passage ceremony where death comes before honor. There is none of that here, none. And when I don't live up to these standards I set for myself, being human as I am, I correct my error and admit as much, sometimes it must occur, sadly so, later rather than sooner much to my own chagrin.
Anyone shouldn't feel shy about posting here. And from what I've seen demonstrated so far by those who have participated here is total respect for what they have to say and contribute however small they themselves think that contribution may be. I've seen post where one simple sentence has changed the whole meaning of and interpretation of the events that occurred in this battle. Even my own opinion has been persuaded by such a meager contribution. Certainly CC's own earlier assertion about what Custer did or didn't know and my free admission that you. CC was right, not that many post ago should be evidence of that. All I would ask of you - CC or anyone else is the same due consideration for what I or others post. Sure I've made errors in judgement, not just here but elsewhere, that is human nature. And these events have served an altogether reminder that we all are human, we all share a small part of a universal realm where due to circumstances beyond our own control, we suffer, and sometimes that is unjust, that some can't see that, understand that, one only need apply their common sense - that while they think they benefit greatly, or will, by those same set of circumstances, others do not and will not. That they can't see that difference, recognize it for what it is, is just as unjust as those who made an error in judgement that caused it in the first place. Such is the source of wars and conflict abroad, disenfranchisement at home, and the overwhelming need to seek revenge. It is my expressed hope that we can agree to disagree and in the process, at the very least, with respect, acknowledge that other's opinions are just as valuable as our own. To conclude. I've often found a shred of truth on both sides of an exchange like this, and I think it fair to say the truth, in some way or another, lay between the extremes of our views.
|
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Oct 21, 2011 9:42:48 GMT -5
Thank-you TB for the response but I believe Custer from the day he left for the mission when he said "I will not(wait)" and later saying the 7th would beat the Indians "in a day" HAD NO INTENTION OF WAITING AND COORDINATING AN ATTACK WITH OTHERS IF HE COULD GET TO THE PLACE FIRST(he got what he wished for....funny how that doesn't work out so well for us even today) With respect to Herendeen not being dispatched with the information change, it is his job and Custer's to relay information to Terry no matter the danger. They are grown professional men. As far as Indians in the hills and packs falling off and thinking that the advantage of surprise is lost I don't think so. There are Indians all over the place like you say buffalo hunting etc,stealing horses etc. Bottom line for me is Custer got what he asked for(get there first and handle it myself)) and his winning streak came to an unfortunate end. I have a question when do you think Custer said $%^! this is not going well (question),Luce Ridge.Now don't tell me LSH with pearl handled pistol firing and don't tell me it never crossed his mind that it is not going well because he is to busy of a commander thinking how I'm going to get myself er I mean my troops out of this one. |
|
|
|
Post by stumblingbear on Oct 21, 2011 19:03:07 GMT -5
CC, Custer was never the "El Cid" that few make him out to be. He was never the incompetent "clown" that you make him out either. Compromise! |
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Oct 23, 2011 9:03:23 GMT -5
Did Custer go as far South as he was asked per Terry's orders ? The answer has to be answered yes or no ? Will anyone answer this question ? Thank-you.
|
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Oct 23, 2011 9:50:09 GMT -5
Did Custer go as far South as he was asked per Terry's orders ? The answer has to be answered yes or no ? Will anyone answer this question ? Thank-you. It is best answered this way: "The Brigadier-General Commanding 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." Note here a definite order in Terry's letter. It was not a suggestion such as: 'The Brigadier-General Commanding thinks that , as soon as your regiment can be made ready for the march, that you should proceed up the Rosebud in pursuit of the Indians whose trail was discovered by Major Reno a few days since. Terry goes on to explain why it was impossible to give " any definite instructions" or as he termed it later in this same address, " precise orders" about what followed in that letter of instruction. And he fully said why because he as any responsible commander at that time would do and did do, he wasn't going to, "impose upon you precise orders which might hamper your action when nearly in contact with the enemy." This was the reason from there on it was suggestive orders guiding Custer's move, if - IF he didn't come "nearly into contact with the enemy" - HE, CUSTER DID come into contact with the enemy! The very same one's he was actually ordered to "pursue". It is, of course, impossible to give you any definite instructions in regard to this movement, and were it not impossible to do so, the Department Commander places too much confidence in your zeal, energy, and ability to wish to impose upon you precise orders which might hamper your action when nearly in contact with the enemy. Now the unadulterated vision and reasoning behind what followed in Terry's orders was this: "He will however, indicate to you his own views of what your action should be, and he desires that you should conform to them unless you shall see sufficient reason for departing from them. He thinks that you should proceed up the Rosebud until you ascertain definitely the direction in which the trail above spoken of leads. Should it be found (as it 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 possibility of the escape of the Indians to the south or southeast by passing around your left flank." If this isn't self explanatory by Terry's own words, I don't know what the hell is. If one takes out the "he thinks" and "should's" and replaces them with those definite orders this is what it looks like. "He will however, indicate to you his own views of what your action will be, and he desires that you will conform to them unless you shall see sufficient reason for departing from them. He desires that you will proceed up the Rosebud until you ascertain definitely the direction in which the trail above spoken of leads. Should it be found (as it appears almost certain that it will be found) to turn towards the Little Horn, he desires that you will still proceed southward, () 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 possibility of the escape of the Indians to the south or southeast by passing around your left flank." [Note.... () = 'Perhaps' was taken out of the language as it conveyed imprecise instruction.] For generations people have tried to impose these precise orders on Custer. He was under no obligation to pay any attention to them once he came into contact with the enemy. And Terry himself said so. Custer not only found them he modified those orders to fit the desires of his commanding General such that he had planned on laying over until his commanding General arrived at a later date. And that he fully intended on sending Herendeen back during that layover. He fully cooperated in all manner to Terry's letter. AND his first, foremost and only order he had was: "The Brigadier-General Commanding 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." And once he found them nothing else Terry said in that letter would matter. |
|
|
|
Post by whitebull on Oct 23, 2011 10:11:17 GMT -5
What I don't get is if Martin was so heard to understand why was he picked for a job that included talking to and carrying messages for the command group. Could it have been that Benteen, like everything else, exaggerated here too? By the way, I just found this thread.  |
|
|
|
Post by whitebull on Oct 23, 2011 10:13:49 GMT -5
Gosh darn, I was reading the wrong page! Duh!  forgettabouit! |
|
|
|
Post by whitebull on Oct 23, 2011 10:21:25 GMT -5
Good info TB however Custer was to thoroughly scout to the south and not let any Indians escape in that direction. Custer did not do this. Custer was suppose to be in a coordinated attack, meeting Terry/Gibbon on the 26th. He did not do that. Instead he gambled, picked up a fresh trail and hurriedly(marching in the night) led his troops to disaster. He failed because he didn't follow the orders. If Custer had to "thoroughly" scout the south before he found the Indians who could have escaped north, east, and west, he would have needed 6,000 men and not the 600 he had. Remind me to never get a job working for you partner, you expect too much! |
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Oct 24, 2011 6:46:05 GMT -5
Discretion not the best part of valour for Custer
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like an order to me "You should still proceed Southward" but no Custer folllows the fresh trail West because he wants to get to the Indians FIRST . He wouldn't get to them FIRST if he went South but he likes to be FIRST.....his pappy may of said to him when he was younger "if ya ain't FIRST yer last boy". Custer thinking that the future belongs to the bold(like him of course)(ask the dead civil war troops under his command about his boldness) couldn't of been any happier using the sighting of the Indians on the trail as an excuse to attack earlier(Custers luck but not so this time ) but as we all know haste makes waste(how many men did Benteen,Reno and Custer lose?), and curiosity killed the cat and of course "ye reap what you sow"
Do I think Custer cared about his family and troops underneath him? Sure to an extent but not so much did he care that he wasn't prepared to gamble an err on the side of audacity so he could be FIRST.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Oct 24, 2011 6:57:10 GMT -5
Maybe Ivory Taurus/Whitebull but 6000 seems a little high when Crows and LBH mountains to the West, Terry to the North,the Souix are not going back East and CUSTER TO THE SOUTH IF HE DID HIS JOB PROPERLY,LIKE FOLLOW ORDERS. If you could use hindsight don't you think this would of worked out better than Custers results?
|
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Oct 24, 2011 7:03:47 GMT -5
As you know Stumbling clowns have been known to wear outlandish clothing .
|
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Oct 24, 2011 7:15:19 GMT -5
I don't know about that Stumbling,like El Cid , Custer too was suspended/punished/ exiled from duty for questionable behavior. CUSTER ABANDONED HIS TROOPS ONCE TO GO SEE HIS WIFE un beeeeeeeelllllliieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevable( a romantic like El Cid). I also think that Custer 's strategy was non-inclusive abandoment at the LBH .
|
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Oct 24, 2011 7:46:41 GMT -5
Discretion not the best part of valour for Custer ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sounds like an order to me "You should still proceed Southward" but no Custer folllows the fresh trail West because he wants to get to the Indians FIRST . He wouldn't get to them FIRST if he went South but he likes to be FIRST.....his pappy may of said to him when he was younger "if ya ain't FIRST yer last boy". Custer thinking that the future belongs to the bold(like him of course)(ask the dead civil war troops under his command about his boldness) couldn't of been any happier using the sighting of the Indians on the trail as an excuse to attack earlier(Custers luck but not so this time ) but as we all know haste makes waste(how many men did Benteen,Reno and Custer lose?), and curiosity killed the cat and of course "ye reap what you sow" Do I think Custer cared about his family and troops underneath him? Sure to an extent but not so much did he care that he wasn't prepared to gamble an err on the side of audacity so he could be FIRST. CC you can believe anything you want to. I was pointing out the language style & differences in the actual order where Terry actually stated a definite "you will" "pursue" and what Terry quote "thought" he "should" do because he didn't know where the Indians had gone to. It is interesting that he thought that they went upstream when they arrived at the LBH, that's exactly where they went after the fight. But do note the language style and replace the indefinite "you should" with "you will" and you'll see that difference yourself. Likewise replace where he said "you will" with "you should" and you can easily see how it weakens those orders because he, "Terry thinks", but that all goes away when Custer finds what Terry told him to do "pursue" and you can't do that unless you find them. |
|
