Posted on 06/25/2007 6:45:11 AM PDT by drzz
They did not. They didn’t even have real saddles that are made for such a position.
They did tie loops in the horse's mane to pass an arm through so as to hang down and shoot from beneath the neck of the horse and they were pretty damn nimble when a horse was shot out from under them.
The best chance to kill them was to wait for the horse to go down and shoot him while he is running for another horse.
The Sioux typically made such charges in the middle of a herd of all of their horses, so it was very, very tough to kill them, especially when a thousand or so horses are running.
That Custer, also known as "cinnamon," to some of his contemporaries, made such a breastworks while waiting for the rest of his commanders to follow orders and in the middle of battle, and to then hold out there until the last man was killed in the final charge is a testament to the bravery under fire of him and his men. - Reno should have been hanged.
Horses were power and wealth to the tribes. Depriving them of them quickly settled things, or as a cavalryman of that era would say; “without a horse a mans a foot”
- Thanks to great granddad's memoirs.
>This seems to be a common thread when discussing figures like Custer and Patton, for example
Patton led his men into disaster?
LOL! - Such one sidedness!
That very quality was what motivated Sherman to demand the appointment of Custer as his Cavalry chief during his march to the Sea, and we all know how that worked out.
"I know that some consider him to be a damned fool, but it is just that kind of damned fool that I want to lead my Cavalry on this campaign"
Cut it how you like, but Custer was a daring and brave leader of fighting men whose subordinates failed him and 210 other men who all paid for those shortcomings with everything that they had to pay.
In the Indian Wars, there is blame on both sides. Each side has blood on its hands. Be careful not to counter what you perceive as “pro-Indian revisionism” with your own brand of revisionism.
“Patton led his men into disaster?”
Three incidents are always overlooked when discussing Patton:
1. The failed (and costly — 10,000 casualties at Brest alone!)attempts to take Brest, Lorient and St. Nazaire by frontal assault. Initially continued for the sake of proving the point that “the American army must finish any task it begins”, and ultimately dropped as being “totally unnecessary” (after the true scope of the disaster had become)at a time when the entire Allied effort in France was being supplied by a single port (Cherbourg).
Prior to the battle, intelligence indicated 15,000 Germans in Brest, a number which Patton pooh-poohed and claimed was only about 500 or so. When 6th Armored spearheaded the assault,m they found the original number much closer to the truth, and because poor recon had been done prior, no one realized that not only the port was fortified, but the landward approaches to it were as well. Patton never wanted to fight this battle, and true to form, because it was not a product of his fevered imagination, he performed poorly and blamed everyone else for the chaos.
2. The extremely vulnerable left flank left open to German attack in the initial stages of the Battle of the Bulge, which had caused Patton to issue an order (countermanded by Bradley) to evacuate Bastogne. Patton had allowed his center to badly outpace his left flank, and put his army in incredible danger of having German Panzers running rampant through to his rear areas. Two units of 3rd Army, 101st airborne and 10th armored, absorbed the full brunt of the attack on Bastogne with very little support until Patton corrected his error and made his famous dash northwards. In effect, Bradley probably saved Patton’s army -— and his reputation.
3. The extremly costly, and stupid, frontal assaults on Metz, which almost spelt an end to the 5th infantry division, frittered away a battalion or two at a time, in a nearly-suicidal attempt to overwhelm Fort Driant. One battalion lost 761 of 767 men sent in. The attack ultimately was called off, after massive casualties had been suffered, when Patton’s Chief of Staff threatened the German commander with the ignominy of perhaps having to eventually surrender to Zone of the Interior troops coming up behind 3rd Army (mostly African-American troops). The German commander of Fort Driant found that prospect far more dishonorable than surrendering to Patton’s COS, and duly laid down his arms.
This is another battle in which Patton is ordered to do soemthing which he does not want to do. He’d rather bypass Metz and head for the Rhine (hoping to get there before Monty). And because it’s something he does not wish to do, he again does a very bad job of it, and his soldiers paid the price.
One thing you must bear in mind about G.S. Patton; nothing was worth doing unless he thought of doing it, and was allowed ot do it as he saw fit. Insubordination and outright disobeyance of orders were Patton’s stock in trade when ordered to do something that took him away from his preoccupation; the greater glory of G.S. Patton. All through his career, Patton shows a propensity to behave perfectly callously with regards to his soldier’s lives and limbs if he does not get the orders he WANTS to get. The examples of the Brittany ports and Metz show a Patton so unenthusiatic about the orders he is given that he hardly pays any attention at all to the probelms involved in carrying them out.
Additionally, Patton was at his best in pursuit (the traditional mindset of the cavalryman) than he was in the more mundane, but often vital, issue of finding, fixing, and investing the enemy by other methods. Give Pattton a broken and defeated foe, short of armor and supplies, and he was brilliant at chasing them and enveloping them. Give Patton an assignemt where he might have to work (and which had little glory) and he dragged his feet.
Patton was also famous for underestimating his enemies, more often than not. In many ways, Patton is more like a Japanese general than an American one; he believes his enemy (with a few exceptions) is not as tough, smart, resourceful, brave, etc, as he is, and when he runs into difficulties because of these initial mental-lapses, he resorts to bull-headed tactics and sheer stubborness, believing that guts and spirit could overcome his mistakes (which he’d never admit to have made, in any case).
Didn’t mean to hijack the thread, but yes, there is a species of military commander (Patton was one, Custer, given the little I know about him, seems to be another) who tends to make mistakes caused by overconfidence.
We just drove that highway, called Beartooth, one of the most scenic in the US of A. It’s one of our favorites. Red Lodge is indeed different and we’ve stayed in the historic Pollard Hotel many times. I remember that article about the drugs being planted. It was in Playboy, which I read “only for the articles”-—well, maybe not back then. :)
Lew
I took a trip up to Bismarck to see my Brother back in the early 80's, including a trip over to Yellowstone N.P.
As a "side trip" on my way back to Bismarck, I decided to stop by the Little Big Horn National Monument.
I spent the rest of the day light hours there. I walked the trails & listened to the recounting of the events by both the "white man's side" and the "Indian side." It was fascinating.
Afterwards, I asked the employees who spoke what books they recommended reading. Save The Last Bullet For Yourself and the recounting of "Wooden Leg" - I forget the exact title now. I bought both and even more. I wasnt disappointed in the least. Those two books were excellent.
That "side trip" to the Little Big Horn really got me into the whole plain's Indian history and deeper into Texas Indian history.
I look forward to going back up to Montana again - but not until my 3 year old son gets old enough to comprehend and appreciate the monument and the history.
free dixie,sw
he was REALLY good at MURDERING CSA POWs, too.
free dixie,sw
“That Custer, also known as “cinnamon,” to some of his contemporaries, made such a breastworks while waiting for the rest of his commanders to follow orders and in the middle of battle, and to then hold out there until the last man was killed in the final charge is a testament to the bravery under fire of him and his men. - Reno should have been hanged.”
I drink to that- you are totally right !!
There are historical facts hard to deny, and the Indian revisionism is ignoring every historical record to show the tribes as eternal victims. I wonder how many bad Indians you’ve recently seen on television. Not one. They all are Good Savages, in touch with Waka Tanka and ready to speak with the buffaloes.
I wonder if the fairy tale you’re talking about is Custer kicking all the Confederate ass out of the Shenandoah. Even Confederate Generals Rosser and Kershaw recognized that Custer was one of the best cavalry officers of his times.
At the battle of Five Forks, Confederate prisoners even cheered Custer.
Patton was a cavalry officer, just like Custer. He knew that quickness and agressiveness was the key of the cavalry.
Patton was, and is still recognized as one of best generals of his times. So was Custer.
They have employees who don't speak? - Not trying to be sarcastic, just confused.
I look forward to going back up to Montana again - but not until my 3 year old son gets old enough to comprehend and appreciate the monument and the history.
Great idea. You and I both. - I have a son going on 5 and a 3 year old daughter. - I was going to wait a few more years but hey, what if I die somehow?
I'm returning to the area and also Glacier, Yellowstone, and Cody next summer.
I guess I will be hiking the old trails to Trout Lake in GN alone...
As in a person of noble birth bound to a code of chivalry (bravery, courtesy, courage, moral purity, honour, and gallantry toward women)?
Bwahahahahahahahaha! Custer was a coward that preferred to attack his enemies while they slept, killing warriors, old men, women and children indiscriminately.
His casualties were caused by his greatness as a general
He died for being a pompous idiot, believing that he and his men were light-years better fighters than the red man he despised. He vastly underestimated his enemy, and his men wen decimated due to his idiocy. Sheridan and Sherman all wished to exterminate the native Americans, just as they had both opined about Southerners. Bigots and racists both. Of course Phil Sheridan would laud someone who was meeting his expectations and wiping them out. But if you really think that casualties equals greatness, perhaps he should have had a thousand more men die needlessly, then you could venerate him even more.
- From what I’ve read before, Custer did not realize the number of Indians facing him and, on top of that, his arrogance led him to believe that the Indians would flee upon his approach. The cavalry had a good record up to that point in winning skirmishes against Indians and Custer could not believe that this battle would turn out any different.He was probably the most surprised man at the Little Big Horn when he realized that the Indians were not about to run away.
- I think you will find that Caen was the command center for the German Army in western France and was heavily protected by the best German divisions, all heavily armored. While Montgomery held down heavy German forces in this area it permitted Patton to break out in the more lightly defended south of France. As the Germans tried to adjust to these attacks, Montgomery maneuvered to surround the bulk of the German Army then in France at the battle of the Falaise Gap, where the Germans lost more men and equipment than they had at Stalingrad.
However, the white man committed many horrific, unprovoked acts as well. As I said before, there is blood on both their hands. History is messy. Good guys and bad guys aren't always easy to identify. From my admittedly limited readings on the battle, Black Kettle's relationship with the Dog Soldiers isn't that clear. While not completely innocent, it's not clear in my mind that he was completely guilty either.
My earlier statement to you was a caution. I think you might be pushing the pendulum back too far past the center in trying to offset the inaccuracies of the Indian revisionism. As is often the case, the truth is probably someplace in the middle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.