|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Aug 21, 2011 22:08:05 GMT -5
How about My Life on the Plains ? Custer is promoting himself as the great statesmen understanding the Indians and bringing inevitable civilzation to them. Gee I wonder who could explain it for all us dummies, in 1874, who civilized them. ? Could it be CUSTER ? Wow, Custer has himself appearing as the Renaissance man,poet,soldier,explorer etc. etc. Sounds like tooting to me. Don't forget there were humanist groups who castigated Custer for Washita in 1868. Nothing better than to write a book and not come across as a redneck to the Eastern establishment. Make myself look real pretty boy smart Commander. Maybe I will run for president some day if nothing bad happens to me.
|
|
cinnamon
Sergeant
our love will last forever
Posts: 132
|
Post by cinnamon on Aug 24, 2011 4:42:42 GMT -5
CC you always look at things under your hate of Custer. That's not fair I guess. Also what you said about the book. You are misinformed just because you are unable to go over your hate (for what concerns Custer). Life on the plains were a series of articles he WAS ASKED to write from the magazine Galaxy, in 1872. When the echoes of Washita were almost just a memory. Humanist castigating him were people sitting on their chair while the US Army was sent on the field and, among them there was the highly corrupted indian agents which forced Washita campaign. The Government and them were the most responsible for that battle. Both had interest on that Campaign.
Inside the articles for Galaxy, he mention a lot of fellows for their bravery, even Benteen - that already was despising him openly. And goes against the government policies against indians. That was not easy at that historical time. And he also state this: "If I were an Indian, I often think I would greatly prefer to cast my lot among those of my people who adhered to the free open plains, rather than submit to the confined limits of a reservation " Not an easy statement for a General fighting against indians. I close with a consideration: which historical public charachter write a biography to insult himself? Grant, McClellan, Andre Gide, Virginia Woolf...everyone is selfpromoting himself. Everyone deciding to write an autobiography is selfpromoting himself.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Aug 24, 2011 7:14:29 GMT -5
CNN,I don't hate anyone but I may dislike something or someone or some idea. As for Custer praising Benteen it is smart for Custer to "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer".Benteen could of made it worse for Custer but he didn't. As far as the Galaxie articles are concerned Custer could of turned them down. As far as praising the Indians while killing them at the same time,that is hypocritical. I dislike hypocrits. As for Custer making statements about casting his lot with the Indians and the free open plain,that is a bit much on his part. He makes this claim years after his part in terrorizing the Indians.It's imporant for would be politicians like Custer to get their stories out to the public in the most political correct way they can ,My Killings on the Plains or Dreams of my Father,it is all the same ,self promoting whitewashing the truth. This is just my opinon rightly or wrongly.
|
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Aug 24, 2011 10:03:53 GMT -5
CNN,I don't hate anyone but I may dislike something or someone or some idea. As for Custer praising Benteen it is smart for Custer to "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer".Benteen could of made it worse for Custer but he didn't. As far as the Galaxie articles are concerned Custer could of turned them down. As far as praising the Indians while killing them at the same time,that is hypocritical. I dislike hypocrits. As for Custer making statements about casting his lot with the Indians and the free open plain,that is a bit much on his part. He makes this claim years after his part in terrorizing the Indians.It's imporant for would be politicians like Custer to get their stories out to the public in the most political correct way they can ,My Killings on the Plains or Dreams of my Father,it is all the same ,self promoting whitewashing the truth. This is just my opinon rightly or wrongly. I am quite sure that the publisher(s) had something to do with over dramatizing, or overstating an understatement for an eager pubic wanting to read about a hero. I think it was done more back then to a public that wasn't as aware as we are today of certain people trying to play hero and in the process shoot themselves in the foot. CC is correct here in his assessment of how they did things back then, we on the other hand are not quite as gullible when it comes to our own circumstances due in part, sadly not on the whole, to investigative reporting. |
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Aug 24, 2011 12:07:04 GMT -5
Cinnamon and T.W.B.'s responses entail all of the circumstances that engender the remarks by GCC regarding Custer's alleged boasting and self-promotion. One can write articles until the "Cows come home" but, the public will not hear about them unless a publisher hires the writer.
As T.W.B. stated, publishers want to make a substantial profit (imagine that) and a lot of the so called "Hype" originates there.
Cinnamon pointed out that Custer acknowledge others in writings. He is absolutely correct!
Although some will insist that Custer was an annoying braggart, incompetent soldier, and a womanizer;reality displays an individual of diametric qualities.
He loved his Country, his wife, and his job. I do not wish to sanctify the man, for ultimately he was a human being just as capable as you and I of making mistakes.
What is clear and, history substantiates this, Custer was just as much a victim as the alleged war monger some would have us believe.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Aug 24, 2011 13:26:24 GMT -5
Thank-you Jigs but I think MANY people would think that Custer was an annoying braggart,womanizer and then ultimately an incompetent commander in 1876 when he became an ultimate victim. "Things go around" like that, please excuse my trite cliche or hackney.
|
|
cinnamon
Sergeant
our love will last forever
Posts: 132
|
Post by cinnamon on Aug 24, 2011 16:27:04 GMT -5
CNN,I don't hate anyone but I may dislike something or someone or some idea. As for Custer praising Benteen it is smart for Custer to "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer".Benteen could of made it worse for Custer but he didn't.
Custer was praising Benteen because Benteen had to be praised. He did with him exactly as he did with others, no matter what the relations were. And, also, you are saying here the contrary of what you said once in another thread, that was: Custer was not smart because he didn't kept close to him his enemies at the LBH...and come on! Benteen did everything was in his power to ruin the reputation of Custer, publicly, among the soldiers of the 7th (Ben Clark sent him back with a kick in his old a..) and on the newspapers, behind friends
As far as the Galaxie articles are concerned Custer could of turned them down.
Why in the heaven would have he turned down this? In that period He needed money because he had a bad year, and accepted to write articles for Galaxy and gave them what they wanted. You can see that in the correspondence. He did nothing wrong. And that was happening in a period of time that was all but wealthy for the Custers. It got even worst when their house burned in 1873, where they lost almost all what they had.
As far as praising the Indians while killing them at the same time,that is hypocritical. I dislike hypocrits.
Custer was an officer. He had to go where they send him, but as far as he could, he always try to change the Government policies toward the indians. The only way he had, was to speak out his feelings and it is what he did. He wasn't at all hypocritical. This is not hypocritical. It is not hypocritical write down publicly that you are against what they are sending you to do, putting at risk your own career, as he did denouncing the frauds by indian agents. Also, according to what you write here, it seems that Custer was killing indians here and there, again the contrary of one statemente you did elsewhere, where you said he had just two encounters with indians, LBH and Washita. In fact. Only that in that thread you had to show him as an ignorant of indians matters, so you state this. Now, you have to say that he is a killler of indians and you state he was going here and there to kill millions of indians.
As for Custer making statements about casting his lot with the Indians and the free open plain,that is a bit much on his part. He makes this claim years after his part in terrorizing the Indians.It's imporant for would be politicians like Custer to get their stories out to the public in the most political correct way they can ,My Killings on the Plains or Dreams of my Father,it is all the same ,self promoting whitewashing the truth. This is just my opinon rightly or wrongly.[/quote] You see, you don't know that there are a lot of such comments by Custer in his private correspondence. So far in the past of his "terrorizing indians". (That he did not at all, I add. Crook killed many more indians then Custer). Even during the Hancock expedition, he wrote friends, and to Libbie that he thought the Campaign was wrong and he hoped peace coming soon.
You see CC, you are not different after all from the people you dislike because you think they created Saint Custer. Because you have plainly invented your demon. Another myth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cutter on Aug 24, 2011 23:38:55 GMT -5
Damn I ldislike using this computer with short pants , (phone). I have to say to Cinnamon, Well Said. Seems to me a brevit promotion to general is not always earned in the way it should. Damn this isn't easy to do. I have found that if one turns this infernal machine side way's, it is much easier. I refer to brevit general crazy, and not, of course Custer. Again, well written Cinnamon.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Aug 25, 2011 7:50:06 GMT -5
CNN,you are entiled to your beliefs that Custer was a Saint . I don't think he was. And by the way CNN,do you know where I can pick up some of that famous Cutter Insect Repellant to keep annoying pests at bay ? I refer to General " Gnat " Cutter and his stings. Ouch !
|
|
cinnamon
Sergeant
our love will last forever
Posts: 132
|
Post by cinnamon on Aug 25, 2011 8:28:39 GMT -5
I don't think Custer was a Saint CC, I just think he wasn't so damn evil.
|
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Aug 25, 2011 8:40:14 GMT -5
Undoubtedly, Cinnamon out pointed you in his very eloquent response GCC! Your extreme animosity towards Custer is no different nor realistic that those who attempt to make a Saint of the General.
I am proud to say that not one member of this forum has ever remotely attempted to picture any character of this battle as other than human. Humanity entails characteristics that run the entire gambit: intelligence, stupidity, bravery, cowardice, confusion, commitment, and every other manner of human responses to a crisis , in all probabilty, occurred on the battlefield that faithful day.
Cinnamon, your response exemplifies the best this forum has to offer;great job!
|
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Aug 25, 2011 9:04:41 GMT -5
Undoubtedly, Cinnamon out pointed you in his very eloquent response GCC! Your extreme animosity towards Custer is no different nor realistic that those who attempt to make a Saint of the General. I am proud to say that not one member of this forum has ever remotely attempted to picture any character of this battle as other than human. Humanity entails characteristics that run the entire gambit: intelligence, stupidity, bravery, cowardice, confusion, commitment, and every other manner of human responses to a crisis , in all probabilty, occurred on the battlefield that faithful day. Cinnamon, your response exemplifies the best this forum has to offer;great job! I second that motion. And would add, I am proud to say that not one member of this forum has ever remotely attempted to picture any character of this battle as other than human. Humanity entails characteristics that run the entire gambit: intelligence, stupidity, bravery, cowardice, confusion, commitment, and every other manner of human responses to a crisis, in all probabilty, occurred on the battlefield that faithful day. And you can tell this by how like quote, "scattered corn" they died. |
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Aug 25, 2011 9:34:31 GMT -5
Sir: Scattered Corn speaks volumes. To me, it sum's up all the emotions that occurred, simultaneously, that day. That statement capitulates the total shock and horror of the fighting men and their desperation at the last moments.
Can you just imagine the despair of that dark day? Look at the "scattered corn" uopn the blood soaked earth.
|
|
|
|
Post by whitebull on Aug 25, 2011 9:47:55 GMT -5
I don't think Custer was a Saint CC, I just think he wasn't so damn evil. Cinnamon, keep up the good work. Maybe one day CC will get the picture. Just don't hold your breath. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Aug 25, 2011 10:22:00 GMT -5
Gentlemen, Custer is a product of his time, thus his disrespect for the Indians of the Plains("White Mans Burden") at that time. LBH was a setback for the government. The move by Custer and the government toward the LBH was a continuation of Indian removal Act of 1828 playing itself out. People should know there history warts and all so young people get it straight. Custer was no great Indian fighter(who would want to be anyway). Insecure people are just looking for a hero(made up or real) after the Civil War(depressing times) and Custer was more than happy to fulfill that role and to regain the noriety that he once had. A big win over the hostiles would restore his image. He risked peoples lives for this gain and I'm pretty sure till this day he would be happy with the infamy.Your right we are all human but some more than others. Custers defeat at LBH led to the vengeful murder of CrazyHorse in 1877 ,Sitting Bull 1890 and of course the Wounded Knee Massacre of 1890 and further for Custer to carry out government policy of killing some women,children and older people at Washita should not be glorified . Your right human behavior runs the gambit and that is why we want to be vigilant in educating for the truth so that enlightened citizens and leaders emerge directing the future . Further ,Custer was a master in attracting and holding the publics attention'making himself(if you wish to believe him) into something bigger than what he really was, which at this time was a punched out former prize fighter(Civil War) coming back into the ring for a glorified title shot at LBH. Custer tried to move up in the rankings but was killed in the ring.
|
|
