Members Introductions

[tbw]

I swear Melani, I think you've argued so much with 'ahem' that person that you're beginning to believe what he says about 'saving Custer.'

I think no matter whatever history records about this battle, there will always be the attempt to 'wonder' & 'speculate' about whether or not one of the two dunderheads could have tried & 'what if' they had. It's one of the questions that keeps forums like this alive. Without those kinds of questions, and the endless speculation of opinion, there is no need to discuss anything - and in the end, when all is censored, one might change the name of the forum to - The Roadrunner Files for want of a proper subject to discuss according to...'him'.

Personally, I don't think the question should be about whether or not one of them could have 'saved Custer', he was but one of several hundred who perished - But rather, should be about our perceptions and how history may have been wrong. And in association with this, I feel way too many people attempt to spatially misplace Custer's battalion, as well as Benteen's, and in the never ending loop of craziness seek answers through horse gaits, timing gaffs and cherry picking the wrong answers from sources who were wrong.

[whitebull]

I agree with you Dennis. I believe that much has been said to confuse the real issues to hide the truth of what really happened. In other words, how could Benteen and Reno help Custer when they were in a bad jam themselves.

In that thought process, the fact that they were veteran military officers is forgotten. They were men trained to fight battles, not two members of a boy scout troop.

I respect Melani's comment because it is important to visit all of the issues involved. Finally though, it is the duty of a soldier to come to the aid of his fellow troops unless otherwise impossible.

[tbw]

Well, I certainly respect her opinions to. However, I couldn't resist the "dig". It sounded like a 'familiar' argument...

[joewiggs]

I, too, have nothing but admiration for a wonderful poster who has given so much of her knowledge to us all.

[strange]

May 1, 2010 19:17:11 GMT -5 joewiggs said:

Apr 26, 2010 0:41:51 GMT -5 melani said:

So--suppose Reno recovered his composure, assigned a company to look after the wounded, and advanced rapidly with the rest of the outfit? Would they have arrived in time to do Custer any good? Would there have simply been more companies wiped out? Would the wounded have been overrun and killed? Anybody want to play with that?

Excellent point Melani, the idea of more deaths while coming to the aid of Custer is difficult to digest. However, I can not help but wonder what could have happened if Reno had displayed some mettle, just a tad more than he did. Of Course we will never know because he didn't try.

An example would be the actions of Godfrey who forced his men to hold the line when the command came a ripping and a tearing in their frantic haste to escape the same warriors who slaughtered Custer.
Godfrey refused to let the line "bunch" forced his men, by mere will power, to stay align is "Skirmish." As a result, a single company drove back the same embolden, furious, "white" hating warriors by controlled carbine fire. This single company kept up a continuous fire while they withdrew in accordance with military tactics and safely returned to Reno Hill without the lost of a single soldier.

Can you imagine if Reno's withdrawal from the timber had been as orderly as Godfrey's (utilizing "cover" fire) how many of his troopers may have been spared?

It is true that combat is unpredictable, precarious, and pure hell. Whether a victory or a catastrophe is achieved in combat is incumbent on many circumstances, one of which is "guts"; the courage to try.

No one really has to show up directly next to Custer in order to help him. I think Custer and the ones who died would have been able to hold a field or squeeze their way out if certain other individuals had maintained their positions or engaged the Indians on another side of the conflict. I've actually never done very much serious study into a lot of the terrain and time constraints, but I'm very positive that Custer could have survived.

I think Keogh suffered greatly from Reno's movements. People like Crazy Horse would have been tied up in the timber (correct me if I'm wrong) if Reno had held his slack. Benteen or Custer would have backed him up very quickly, eventually all three fragments would have come together and the Indians would not have any of the comfort areas in the shape of isolating one from the other, or having the time to move back and forth between them, or using the land. Custer had some interesting land advantages that would've played out if it had all come together, which it didn't.

Resident Keogh from the other board posted a link to a nice little game simulator that has done the best at finally showing me the land and the positions. Benteen and Reno seem to have an ideal reach of the village. Custer is obstructed by a river, but he would have been able to work around it. Custer himself should have attacked the village from Reno's position. But he can't know everything. Reno was there instead, and Keogh would not have been destroyed so severely if Marcus had held. With Keogh alive and healthier, we now add one of Custer's fiercest combatants to the mix. Some have said that if Keogh had reached the village, he would have annihilated it.

Strange

[strange]

As for what Benteen or Reno could have done to save Custer DIRECTLY AT where he and the others made the Stands, that becomes a toughy and I don't think I'm experienced enough to answer it.

I think there would have been maybe at least 100 of Custer's men who were still alive and fighting when Benteen and Reno arrived at the last hour or hour and a half of the fight. I don't think the Indians were already done or "mopping up". Appearances may have been deceiving if Custer was dismounted and fighting behind breastworks, and that is why I think the people from Weir Point (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not good at talking about these land areas) were staring at the fight for awhile and just trying to figure out what was happening.

Saving them at that point may have been a toughy. The best they might have done is to scramble for some high officers in order to cut their strategic administrative losses and put a better taste on the battle. No matter how many men you lose, history will always treat you more favorably as long as you don't suffer the loss of some one from high rank.
Or they might also try to reinforce, but Benteen might not have felt that option to be too sustainable since Reno was acting out of his mind. His thoughts were to organize a fall back, and he also managed to "hold the field" or some part of it as I recall, not that it matters so much when you're fighting the indians. Benteen scored a Crooky style victory.

Lastly, I'm still not altogether certain if I want to believe everything that Benteen or Reno say. They may have lied or manipulated a little about their mission details and what they personally witnessed.

Strange

[joewiggs]

Strange, I understand. The dynamics of what anyone should have done, ought to have done, and could have done are extremely complicated and, often, will drawn the wrath of everyone who disagrees with you upon your head. Actually, you can't win. You can't win because regardless of the rationality, plausibility, and reasonableness of your perspective you can't prove it. You can not substantiate it because no one tried;, other than Weir's effort.

However, common sense dictates that a substantial effort to relieve Custer with an additional five companies (Benteen's three and Reno's two who were not decimated during the retreat) would have affected the outcome of the battle. it would have changed things. The gamut runs from the annihilation of Benteen and Reno as well to the saving of a portion of Custer's command.

Godfrey proved that the warriors could be repelling with concerted gun fire. Now imagine five companies charging and firing, and screaming to hell. Who knows? No one tried.

The good news is that you, I ,and every member or guest on this forum have the freedom to suggest, think out loud, and predict without the fear of recrimination from they who have all the answers.

[strange]

Wiggy (Joewiggs),

I actually think I agree wholeheartedly. The only thing keeping me from saying what you just said is my own personal handicap of still not understanding the layout of the battlefield.

When I use these forums I try to let others guide me along in the things that I don't immediately understand and I always assumed there was a consensus that Benteen and Reno would have been seriously disadvantaged (possibly by the structuring of the land?) if they had plunged whole heartedly from their position at say "Weir Point" (again, help me if I'm wrong. I'm terrible with the landscape details, time frames, locations, descriptions, and names). I whole heartedly invite you to disagree.

My position was often to the effect that Reno and Benteen should have plunged deeper even if they were disadvantaged. There are times when people should just go for it. But, as with other things, I allow people their space to disagree.

Strange

[stumblingbear]

I hope you get a chance to visit soon. Seeing the actual ground that the battle was fought on helped me to visualize the different movements that are discussed on the forum.

I have a long way to go in understanding all that happened but the experience and listening to others speak is always fun.

[melani]

Hey, strange, Iowa's not that far away from LBH--I passed through your fine state on the way to Gettysburg in 2008. Just a short hop--so come out and see the place. There's no better way to understand the terrain.

[Cutter]

Boy was I wrong.
"I forgot about Herendeen , he was there for comm with Terry. I don't remember Crook sending a message north to Custer or Terry. Ofcourse, saying something like "I'm bugging out, gonna do some fishing, see ya." wouldn't go over so well.
I'm going to study up on the Rosebud, Crook was an agressive officer, and so I've always wondered about that. "
Crook did send a message to Terry which reached Terry on the 23'd.

[Cutter]

Welcome aboard Davel.

[davel]

Thanks and I should have introduced myself.

I live in Vancouver, BC, Canada and have been to the LBH battlefield twice. I'm probably more of a student of the Civil War than I am of the conflicts that occurred as part of American westward expansion. I am fascinated, though with George Armstrong Custer. I certainly wouldn't say that I am either "pro" or "anti" Custer, but rather find him to be a complex human being, who was very much a product of his time, but in other respects, quite different. I think he would have been a "fun person" to know, but also one that could get you into trouble if you didn't watch yourself.

I also find the two major battles of the 1876 Sioux outbreak, LBH & Rosebud, to be equally fascinating and quite different from other "Indian fights" either before or after.

So I'm here to learn what other people think. We may never know exactly what happened to Custer's battalion at LBH, but it's fun to speculate.

[tbw]

Indeed davel speculate all you like, your opinions are valued here.

And I for one would love to have you post, well, anything you would really like to about the Civil War. I think I made a section somewhere for it, if not, I guess i'll have to rectify that situation. Strange also, if I remember correctly also likes the Civil War and those who served, so your in fine company here.

[crazycanuck]

History buff fascinated !