What Should He Have Done?

[strange]

The only collateral damage at Little Bighorn would have been Mark Kellogg, and the indians would have never been able to know that he was just a reporter.

All of everyone else and their possessions are all valid targets. Custer can inflict as many casualties to the Indians as he wants. Men and women were participating, Dorman himself was swarmed and tortured by some squaws and squaws did plenty of mutilations. Custer had objectives to destroy the village and kill or capture whomever he pleases. There is no collateral as far as I can tell unless someone killed someone who was trying to surrender, the indians likely did that but its not in their interest to take prisoners so again thats not collateral for them.

Strange

[joewiggs]

There is no doubt that you are correct (to a point) regarding Custer's orders regarding the taking of the village. A peaceful solution was never the intent of the military and therein lies the true tragedy of this battle.

I believe that a substantial portion of the village consisted of Indians who simply wanted to obtain food for their families, attend ceremonial/social dances, live life as it was once possible to do all under the umbrella of safety of numbers.

While it is true that a good many of the Indians were spoiling for a fight, an honest and sincere attempts at peaceful negotiation may have prevailed.

Unfortunately we will never know.

[tbw]

Joe's intro:

All of us are aware of the tragic outcome of the Battle of the Little Big Horn; for whites as well as the native Americans. What action could Custer have taken (if any) to capture the village with a minimum of collateral damage.

What action (if any) could the Village have used to prevent Custer's assault. Please do not state the obvious such as: "Custer should have stayed home" or
"The native Americans should have stayed home.

Please select one answer for each perspective.


The best answers (as qualified by judgment) will receive the "Big Horn Philosopher of the Year" for this forum. With his gracious consent, the Judge for this dubious honor will be T.B.W.

Sir Strange did make a very valid point about the words collateral damage. In this case, the way it was written, it appears that Joe was intending those words to mean - minimizing the harm to either side, combatant or not. In other words, how could the mission have been accomplished to minimize this harm such that the tragedy have been avoided for the whites; or as great if not greater harm being forced upon the Indians. In this case, more harm being perpetrated than what was expected, than what was intended. Joe's next question qualifies the parameters of the damage, "Custer's assault", and how it could have been prevented (limited) by the Natives, favoring an answer, it seems, based upon an Indian initiative to keep the collateral damage to a minimum. The unwanted collateral damage result of "staying home" not being allowed. Although that action also would have produced, perhaps, more if not greater collateral damage by such inaction on the Army's part. And if this would have been proposed to Sheridan and Sherman, I think the proposer would have been in hot doo-doo with no pooper scooper. Talk about collateral damage.

Using "unexpected damage" rather than "unintended damage" as the basis for collateral damage the CF professorship awards continues.

cutter

"To get the ball rolling. It's been my thought if he's stuck to his original plan of attack, things might have been less bloody.
By attacking on the 26th, he would have better intelligence as to strength and positions of the enemy. This would have afforded the men and mounts to have a much needed rest. This would also have given him time to rethink giving Major Reno an important mission. Terry would also be a day closer when the battle began. Ironic that his biggest fear of the indians scattering may not have happened if he kept to the original plan."

My Response

I think this is one of those 'what if's' that will forever haunt the people who think about this thing. I think it depended upon the temperament of the officers and men in Custer's command and of the Indians they were attacking and whether they would "scatter" or not. Cinnamon offered his thoughts on this.

cinnamon

Nothing different. With what he thought (indians running)and what he had in the tank (reno and Benteen) he could have not done anything diffferent. Maybe if reno and Benteen were more "perceptive" of the orders they had got, the outcome could have been less bloody.

My Response

Or more bloody. And here Cinnamon touches upon a touchy subject, those collateral damage orders of Benteen's and Reno's. Just how collateral in damage were they? That would depend upon the temperament of the person reviewing that action and whether fate, "Indians running" and such, played any part, speaking of which, Whitebull offers the following.

whitebull

"I believe that Custer should have kept Benteen with him and sent Reno to the left. Benteen would have held the timber for more than a few minutes. This would have kept the Indians occupied with Benteen instead of concentrating against Custer.

If the timber had not fallen, the outcome of the battle would have been totally different. It don't matter how much Benteen disliked Custer, as the commander of the force in the timber he would never run away without providing some type of "rear" protection.

Benteen had the guts to do the right thing, Reno did not.

The only thing the Indians could have done differently was to not be Indians. No matter what choice they made the same end would have been the same. No way would the government allow them to roam on land filled with gold, or farm land, or even land routes to the west."

My Response

To be sure there must have been some kind of flaw in either Custer's mind, orders or both. When you think about it he gave the first battle mission of the day to the officer that could report his men equipped and battle ready, not to the officer best suited for the job. And then rather than send Keogh or Yates in to do a job that he later assigned Reno to do, yet another flawed chance at giving them his best shot at victory, he instead kept all the best and brightest officers with him and sent off untrustworthy others to start something he couldn't finish. Was he nuts? Kind of a revolving door here with no exit, isn't it? The leaders of the soldiers was different enough that it could have made a difference in the battle outcome, but, when it came to the Indians, "no matter what choice they made the same end would have been the same." One could assume this would have been true even if they had scattered or ran, but that would have required something SB brings up.

SB

"I wish that Custer would have followed Reno's in as, I believe, he originally intended to do. With a combined force charging in together the shock and awe might have caused the village to panic.

Once panic set in, the village may not have been capable of re-grouping and coming back together to stop the soldiers. Many Indians would have probably escaped in the melee, but the cavalry would have still had their victory."

My Response

That one word, "panic" best describes what Custer was trying to achieve that day. And when one considers that phrase, "collateral damage", equating it with "unexpected damage" in mind, rather than "unintentional damage", that one word becomes monumental. Everyone it seems doesn't know why Custer did what he did, turn and go downstream after ordering Reno off. But, this was typical Custer, and he clearly had this in mind when he ordered Reno off, if not before, because Reno knew of it and reported the same in his official report. In other words, he had no intention of directly supporting Reno from behind. As I said before this was typical Custer. All during the Civil War he would pull these classic end runs just to appear somewhere, where the enemy wouldn't expect him to be, and he was very successful at it, except here, this one time when it bit him in the butt and it cost him and his whole command their very lives.

This though is another great "what if" that will never be known. But it wasn't in Custer's character/nature to pull this, he wouldn't and he didn't, so we wouldn't ever know if if would have worked or not. In short, was he nuts? As it sure is sound reasoning put forth by SB, the shock and awe might have been there, who knows how the collateral effects of panic on the Indians would have been had he done that?


SS

"The only collateral damage at Little Bighorn would have been Mark Kellogg, and the indians would have never been able to know that he was just a reporter.

All of everyone else and their possessions are all valid targets. Custer can inflict as many casualties to the Indians as he wants. Men and women were participating, Dorman himself was swarmed and tortured by some squaws and squaws did plenty of mutilations. Custer had objectives to destroy the village and kill or capture whomever he pleases. There is no collateral as far as I can tell unless someone killed someone who was trying to surrender, the indians likely did that but its not in their interest to take prisoners so again thats not collateral for them."

My Response

Sir Strange brings up the objectives of Custer's attack,and lest we forget, they were: The Indians possessions. The Village - and its destruction, The men, women, presumably the old, the young, whoever he wants to kill or capture. And with this the statement that there would be "no collateral damage". Yet this is just what Custer wants, to bend their will, to snap it like a twig by destroying their way of life and forcing them onto the reservations. They sent out men to kill as many buffalo and hunt them to near extinction, the Plains Indians main source of food and nearly everything else as they didn't waste anything on that animal once they killed it. The whites did this not thinking of the collateral damage they were inflicting not just on the Natives, but to future generations that might not ever see a buffalo if they had exterminated them as they wanted to do. And what about the collateral damage if, if the Plains Indian Wars didn't end right then, right there at The Battle of the Little Big Horn? It didn't as Joe concludes.

joe

There is no doubt that you are correct (to a point) regarding Custer's orders regarding the taking of the village. A peaceful solution was never the intent of the military and therein lies the true tragedy of this battle.

I believe that a substantial portion of the village consisted of Indians who simply wanted to obtain food for their families, attend ceremonial/social dances, live life as it was once possible to do all under the umbrella of safety of numbers.

While it is true that a good many of the Indians were spoiling for a fight, an honest and sincere attempts at peaceful negotiation may have prevailed.

Unfortunately we will never know.

=============================================

I want to thank everyone for replying. My responses were not meant to be critical of anyone's position, merely in some cases to present an opposing view that could be out there, not that I myself believe what I said, so please don't take it that way, because it was difficult for me to say it, as it is for you to read it.

You all had very very good answers. And I liked Sir Strange's curve ball right at the end. As it turns out, it really is a matter of perspective. "What action (if any) could the Village have used to prevent Custer's assault? Who best addressed this question?

My answer after we pause for station identification. (and a few commercials ;D)

[tbw]

PS

Anyone who still wants to give an answer to Joe's question may still do so. This also applies to after I have determined the winner. Because I would like to see this discussion continue. I value all opinions in this, ALL, as will be seen in the concluding remarks. As I've indicated before, I think everyone's answers so far have been very very good, and it is from their perspective, not mine, nor my values or my opinions, but their own, that's the only right way to do this.

Now a word from our sponsors...

[joewiggs]

Tired...worn down...feeling out of sorts? then get a bottle of vitaminagin

the tonic that keeps you up when you'er feeling down! ;D

[cinnamon]

I would just add this, as somewhere someone said Custer was perhaps wrong to give the missions he gave to Reno and Benteen. He could not do otherwise, concerning the assignments, as Benteen and Reno where in charge of their Battalions. 7th was divided in 3 Battalions and the pack train. Custer was in charge of the first (C I L E F) Reno the second (A G M) Benteen the third (D H K)
Custer gave the 2 actions tasks to his two platoons commanders, he could have done nothing else. He could have changed the roles: made himself the first charge and surely he wouldn't have abandoned the timber (maybe even wouldn't have been there), but, Reno would have not crossed the river upstream: "oh sir oh sir so many indians, I am outnumbered, I found here a place to save my regiment and oh Benteen, please, stay with me, I hear bombs down in the valley but, oh gosh but I don't know where is Custer..." So the outcome would have been the same. About the plan, is interesting to read the letter that Gibson wrote to the son of Yates, in 1915: "Benteen was ordered to take his battalion to the left and if he found any indian trying to escape up the valley of the little big horn to intercept them and drive them back in the direction the village was supposed to be." Not so senseless, isn't? And it pairs perfectly with another letter Gibson wrote in 1908 to Godfrey where he states: "I could not see far on account of the sharp turns in it (LBH V)or at any rate a turn which obstructed the view. I saw not a living thing in it and I hurried back and reported so to Benteen who then altered his course so as to pick up the trail. I have often wondered what the result might have been if Benteen had taken his whole battalion to where he sent me, and then to have struck the village at some point other than where we did strike
yes yes, come on Benteen be quick and bring packs with you, come on come on Benteen!
"God damn him, here he is: he will fight anymore"

[joewiggs]

"Wow!" Cinnamon I can not disagree with any of your points. While there is some speculation regarding any action Reno may or may not have taken, your summation is very reasonable based on known facts.

Your input, and the input of others, is so valuable- thank you!

It appears that the Honorable Judge, T.B.W., has a lot to think about. If any one can do, he can! ;D

[stumblingbear]

Gibbon's letter, the last order, which was not listened to, and Benteen's statement while looking at Custer's body were powerful Cinnamon. Great job!

[cinnamon]

Thank you so much Stumblingbear! However it was Gibson, not Gibbon.

[whitebull]

Normally when someone you don't like becomes deceased, you find a reason to see something a little positive about him. Benteen's dislike for Custer would only make sense if Custer had slapped his momma, or insulted his wife, or spoke evilly of his children.

It just don't make sense how much Benteen did not like Custer a bit!

[cinnamon]

envious, became bitter by the personal success of the object of your enviousness. I have known much people like Benteen, that would spit on your corpse just for envy

[crazycanuck]

Maybe Benteen was envious of Custer who graduated last in the West Point class of 61 with his poorest marks in calvary tactics. Benteen may of thought Custer was dumb as a doorknob. Custer was promoted quickly and became star and friend of Sheridan during the civil war. Benteen more of a genteel than the motor mouth cussing Custer couldn't fathom someone with less experience and polish than him being his commander. Benteen probably muttered " Custer luck" the boorish nouveux riche Custer has what I should of had, thus the jealousy.

[cinnamon]

Even Grant was one of the middle in his class, CC, and was said to have "unmilitary bearing". And you forget to say that Custer was highest in artillery. To be last in West Point means nothing, at least in some cases. Heroes of the Civil war were more often than no, last or bad in their classes. However, Custer last place was to be viewed in a particular way: as said by Ambrose, it would be wrong to point the accent on the fact he was 34° (not 61) on a class of 34: there were 108 applicants to the academy admission on his same class, among them only 68 were accepted and Custer was among them. Of those 68, just 34 were promoted and again Custer was among them. Just for trivia, I would like to remind that the Genius Einstein was not admitted to the Zurich College, because he didn't fitted with their criteria and was flunked in mathematic. Beethoven in music. Fred Astaire was said to be able to dance a little bit and unfit for movies. Tolstoj was claimed to be unable to learn, Edison too much stupid to learn something, Walt Disney fired because of hi lack of ideas. As a bright exemple J.E.B. Stuart, graduated only 13° which wrote to his sister: "For one to succed here [West Point]all that is required is to have an ordinary mind and application; the latter is by far the most important and desirable of the two. For men of obtuse intellect, by indomitable perseverance, have been known to graduate with honor; while some of the greatest genius of the country have been found deficient for want of application, Edgar Poe for instance." George Pickett is another great soldier who was deficient at West Point. Thomas Barry, silver star, graduated middle in his class, as noted by James Robbins.
About his "less experience", Custer had far more experience than Benteen or at least the same he had, and what he acquired was not on luck, but obtained in action, more action than Benteen (for how brave this one was, and in fact he was)has ever done. His Civil war service records last 3 pages.
You can be right, however on the reasons Benteen thought to have, but Benteen was dead wrong. Custer was never publicly harsh about him and gained him the brevet in 68 for his action on the saline river. He even scolded his wife Libbie when she was not enough "kind" to him. In fact, Benteen hated not only George but also Elizabeth Custer. And hated anyone or anything that had something to do with Custer. Barrett explain someway this attitude by a Benteen's unsaid want of recognition by his superior, but if we look at battle reports we see that Custer always reported the gallantry of his Captain. Benteen hated the Custers from first sight, when they were presented, and along all his life he spitted on them lies, poison and half truths (worst of lies) in order to put them in a bad light. Even when his Commander was still lying hot on the field.
I'm happy to see you back CC.

[strange]

Aug 13, 2011 8:05:36 GMT -5 cinnamon said:

Even Grant was one of the middle in his class, CC, and was said to have "unmilitary bearing". And you forget to say that Custer was highest in artillery. To be last in West Point means nothing, at least in some cases. Heroes of the Civil war were more often than no, last or bad in their classes. However, Custer last place was to be viewed in a particular way: as said by Ambrose, it would be wrong to point the accent on the fact he was 34° (not 61) on a class of 34: there were 108 applicants to the academy admission on his same class, among them only 68 were accepted and Custer was among them. Of those 68, just 34 were promoted and again Custer was among them. Just for trivia, I would like to remind that the Genius Einstein was not admitted to the Zurich College, because he didn't fitted with their criteria and was flunked in mathematic. Beethoven in music. Fred Astaire was said to be able to dance a little bit and unfit for movies. Tolstoj was claimed to be unable to learn, Edison too much stupid to learn something, Walt Disney fired because of hi lack of ideas. As a bright exemple J.E.B. Stuart, graduated only 13° which wrote to his sister: "For one to succed here [West Point]all that is required is to have an ordinary mind and application; the latter is by far the most important and desirable of the two. For men of obtuse intellect, by indomitable perseverance, have been known to graduate with honor; while some of the greatest genius of the country have been found deficient for want of application, Edgar Poe for instance." George Pickett is another great soldier who was deficient at West Point. Thomas Barry, silver star, graduated middle in his class, as noted by James Robbins.
About his "less experience", Custer had far more experience than Benteen or at least the same he had, and what he acquired was not on luck, but obtained in action, more action than Benteen (for how brave this one was, and in fact he was)has ever done. His Civil war service records last 3 pages.
You can be right, however on the reasons Benteen thought to have, but Benteen was dead wrong. Custer was never publicly harsh about him and gained him the brevet in 68 for his action on the saline river. He even scolded his wife Libbie when she was not enough "kind" to him. In fact, Benteen hated not only George but also Elizabeth Custer. And hated anyone or anything that had something to do with Custer. Barrett explain someway this attitude by a Benteen's unsaid want of recognition by his superior, but if we look at battle reports we see that Custer always reported the gallantry of his Captain. Benteen hated the Custers from first sight, when they were presented, and along all his life he spitted on them lies, poison and half truths (worst of lies) in order to put them in a bad light. Even when his Commander was still lying hot on the field.
I'm happy to see you back CC.

In addition, Jack Lalanne was a fat kid and Charles Atlas was a 90 pound weakling!

For everything, there is a first and a last. Some remain there while others move up or down. Still others might even be under or overestimated to begin with.

[crazycanuck]

Good points gentlemen but should we be comparing apples to oranges ? Custer ( the struggling practical jokester military West Point student apple) was no Einstein ( the theoretical physicist orange) but more like George Bush who also was no Einstein( but a practical joker struggling Yale frat brat student apple ). I suppose you could debate that Custer and Bush were successes.... or not.