|
Post by strange on Feb 24, 2009 15:23:48 GMT -5
Ladies and Gentlemen— This has all the earmarks of being the beginning of a wonderful conversation, albeit one we have visited before, but with the number of contributors I see here, one that we can have again and one that can seemingly re-stimulate some solid interest. (I can thank Mr. Harper and Mr. Horse for this, though the particular site may be misplaced.) I love theories, no matter how outré they may be, and I certainly hope Gordie will add something as well, even though he does not like to debate these things. My own personal feelings about Custer’s thoughts and plans are set fairly well, though I will continue to hold that a convincing anti-argument can sway my opinions to the contrary. So here are my 2¢, as of February 24, 2009. Probably to the chagrin of my friend, George Mabry, I still hold to my conviction that Custer ignored the advice of his scouts. To ease George’s pain, however, I will concede the point that Custer was not the only one at fault; witness the following exchange: At the evening officers call of June 22, Godfrey claimed Custer showed a lack of self-confidence. As LTs Wallace, Godfrey, and McIntosh were walking away, Wallace made the comment, “Godfrey, I believe General Custer is going to be killed… I have never heard Custer talk in that way before.” Godfrey made the necessary preparations for the next day’s move and gave the necessary orders to his company. During this routine, he came to the bivouac area of the scouts and met up with Mitch Boyer, Bloody Knife, and Half Yellow Face. Boyer saw him and—apparently at the suggestion of the Crow—asked Godfrey, “‘Have you ever fought against these Sioux?’” Godfrey: “‘Yes,’ I replied. Then he [Boyer] asked, ‘Well, how many do you expect to find?’ I answered, ‘It is said we may find between one thousand and fifteen hundred.’ ‘Well, do you think we can whip that many?’ ‘Oh, yes, I guess so.’ After he had interpreted our conversation, he said to me with a good deal of emphasis, ‘Well, I can tell you we are going to have a ----- big fight.’” Godfrey was perplexed by the “numerous stands of brush, whose crowns had been joined to form a kind of overhead framework.” At first, the troops thought it was to protect the Indians’ dogs, but it was later learned these were wickiups housing young, single warriors who had joined the main camp. If all this wasn’t ignoring the facts as the scouts perceived them—however tacit the “advice” may have been—then I don’t know what is. Indeed, Custer held several more “pow-wows” with his scouts and it is inconceivable to me that they did not express their concerns, even as we know in the historical bromides, i. e., “… a road we do not know,” etc., and the “you can hang me” business atop the Crow’s Nest. Be all that as it may, I believe Benteen to have been correct when he said Custer had no plan, no plan whatsoever, and did not even believe the village was where his scouts said it to be. At this point, forget about the size; even the village’s location was doubted by Custer. I do, however, believe Custer made cautious and careful plans as he went along, always keeping that “wild card” that the scouts may have been on to something well within sight. Contrary to Benteen, I believe the “scout to the left” was a prudent and intelligent tactical maneuver; shrewd, may even be a better word, because it was Custer’s ace: a tactical reserve led by a brilliant commander who would know what to do and when to do it. And Custer was correct; unfortunately, it was left to a series of impossible-to-predict circumstances to tip over the card-house. The dichotomy now is interesting. The main thing that precipitated Custer’s move down Reno Creek—his fear of the loss of surprise—seems to have dissipated as he neared the LBH. I believe Custer fully intended to send Reno down the LBH valley to attack the village and that Custer’s five-company command would form a second—and possibly even a third wave (remember, he had sub-divided into Keogh/Yates)—and that Benteen, once mission was completed, would automatically form a third or fourth wave, ultimately clinching the deal. And I believe Custer formulated this plan as he “roared” down Reno Creek valley. When Fred Gerard’s message that the Sioux weren’t biting the poisoned apple reached Custer’s ears, Custer’s “loss-of-surprise”-turned-“surprise,” turned back to “loss-of-surprise.” The subsequent “move-to-the-right” in all likelihood precipitated the debacle, for it deprived Reno of the absolutely necessary support to fulfill what was rapidly becoming an impossible mission. (And as an aside, I have done enough work on this thing—right?, Bill, Ray, and Clair?—to believe Reno did a highly credible job until “snap-time” in the timber.) In addition, it changed—unknown to Benteen—Benteen’s mission. A hint of that came at the RCOI when PVT Davern heard LT Cooke order Reno to charge: “‘Gerard comes back and reports the Indian village three miles ahead and moving. The General directs you to take your three companies and drive everything before you.’ Those I believe were the exact words.” He added, “Colonel Benteen will be on your left and will have the same instructions.” The order was given about 200 yards before the tepee. Now, rather than call Davern a liar or a poseur—or say others conspired to drop that particular observation for Benteen’s sake—it makes sense. Custer, at that time, fully intended to do exactly that and had communicated as much to Cooke along the way, only a few minutes later everything changed because of Gerard’s semi-panicked observation. We also have the genesis here for the Martini note, because now, in Custer’s mind, the Benteen Mission had changed and he was no longer to go into the valley to support Reno. Benteen would have to be informed, ergo, the note, whereas before, no other notification would have been required. We already know the good captain was on the horns of a dilemma when he reached the LBH and had to be directed up the slopes as opposed to entering the valley; but if Plan A had been in effect, it would have been a lay-up: Benteen into the valley and away we go! To make matters worse for GAC, Benteen moved cautiously because of uncertainty, yet buoyed by the silly commentary of both Kanipe and Martini about an easy victory, and then exacerbated by comments like Godfrey’s regarding straggling gunfire being the sounds of the end of battle. What is really interesting to me is speculation about what would have happened had Benteen chosen to mount the bluffs, following Custer’s trail, and Reno had remained in the timber. In my opinion, the Seventh Cavalry would have ceased to exist that day; but that brings the size of the village into question and that we can reserve for another post. Best wishes, Fred. I'll quote a sentiment from crzhrs to the effect that Indians are not easy to find, let alone making concrete battle plans to formulate against them. Indians are very tricky in this way, which is why so many of the well seasoned, West-Point educated, Civil War veterans of the U.S. army had to practically go back to school all over again when their careers finally clashed sabers (metaphorically speaking) with the Red Man. Sharp minds like Fetterman became massacred, and people like Crook just decided to organize a whole army of other tribes altogether and just have the Indians, in some theory, to fight amongst themselves with military assistance. Nevertheless, so many of the rules had changed. Which is why its hard to nail down everybody's this thats without slamming into a brickwall of great mystery/confusion toward trying to guess whats on the minds of the fallen. God knows, if Custer had lived, he'd probably be writing more about the subject than any researcher in the last many years since his death (a little quip to say that Custer jotted down everything, eventually. Whether or not he'd thought of everything from the beginning or made his mind as he went and reflected later...... Custer would've talked, and talked, and talked.... and written and written, and right now, wherever he is, he's probably gnawing down a pencil in his clenched teeth as he'd probably be dying to tell every one what happened.) Did Custer have a plan? Did he know he'd have some action that day? Did he have the size, shape or atmosphere of the village? Did Benteen know completely everything about what was going on? Yes and no, yes and no, yes and no,yes and no. As I presented in my theory, you have a concept to zero in on the natives by casting out the fish hooks. As the evidence of his adversary became more persistent, so there the concrete soon hardened and the Stages of action became more advanced. Instead of casting out the hook, you now have to reel it in, and its a big fish, so you call on buddies to help yank it and you send a team of harpooners to dive in behind its fins and spear it....... observing new stages as the levels progress. Thats what I presented above. Benteen did not need to be informed of every minute detail. He actually probably was brought up to date on most of what Custer had wanted, but we might never know everything about what Benteen was expected to do because he has underplayed himself to a point where he is virtually nonexistent. Its always possible that Benteen was the one who never expected to run into any Indians, or atleast not ore than a handful. He'd have a right to that opinion because he served with Custer before on the previous Indian campaigns and he observed how few and far apart the major battles were. Little Bighorn was at the very beginning of the major new Indian conflicts. It was, as if, like the first day of work and everybody was settling into the various reaches of their preparation. No one was quite ready to engage, with the Indians (of all people), into a Gettysburg type of battle on what would be the very onset of this particular campaign. No typical soldier, high or low, would've even wanted to make that type of sacrifice against the "red skins". Above everything else, Benteen is entering this situation on strange terms. He is given the orders that we do know about, the order to split from Custer with a large detachment and do whatever he was supposed to do. Benteen is confirmed that he did not quite know how to feel about this. He was maybe feeling like the two of each other were on bad terms and that Custer wanted to maybe work this campaign from a distance, possibly Benteen was thinking that maybe he was to maintain a "professional distance" so that they could work smoothly with one another without actually having to be by one another. Whatever the case, Benteen was not entering the battle with a full deck of cards as far as some people are thinking. And his temperance is advanced further by Reno's admitted state of disarray whereby Benteen had to intercede on his behalf due to the precarious mental state that Marcus Reno had manifested somewhere during the battle. Now we have Custer, expecting two "competent" officers to due their job as expected. What was expected, is what we are debating. I suppose the official "concrete" planning would've been passed along to people who were present with Custer for a longer duration, thus making Reno's neck of the woods to be the primary source of official survivors who would've known everything about anything of how they were mobilized to strike. Benteen, as I've said, hangs in the balance as a wild card. He is not immediately brought up to speed, but he's expected to act when the situation progresses and he would've been briefed (is that terminology correct?) in further detail as soon as any messenger could get a hold of him. But none of it weird or mysterious. Its simply Indian warfare and Benteen has got to hold up his side of the tent when the situation presents itself. Benteen is clinging to a variety of orders to remove himself from responsibility, but I'm not quite gonna believe (especially since I use that same trick on my parents, "I was asked to sweep the driveway, so it was not my responsibility to grab a fire extinguisher when the garage suddenly caught aflame." or something in that range of excuses. Not that I've ever done chores, or swept a drive way. Usually I just carry heavy things in and out of the house and no one asks me to do more than that.) Strange
|
|
|
Post by strange on Feb 21, 2009 18:15:13 GMT -5
Do we know if in fact Benteen was to support anyone? How would he know the command had been divided? How would he know who was attacking who? How would he know where Reno and Custer were? The only knowledge he had of a battle was when he returned and first heard gunfiring and then saw the end of Reno's "fight". Still he didn't know who exactly was engaged. And it wasn't until Reno and Benteen actually met that he found out what was going on. Still gotta think Custer made a mistake by at least not notifying Benteen of the division of the command and an attack order issued. I can grab this... #1. Yes we do. Rationally speaking, I think it was Custer's idea to split into the three factions and for each faction to arrive for the other as soon as any one had touched fire with the Indians. On a specific note, Custer had himself taken the role of a supporting wing and sent Reno before him with the promise that he will arrive after. Meanwhile, Benteen has apparently not been located yet, so he is temporarily not an immediate factor of the equation. But by all reason he is now hanging in the balance as a wild card for whoever needs him. Did Benteen know that he was a wild card? Maybe he did, maybe not, but Custer would've made him to understand if the areas of communication had rolled more smoothly. Be that as it may, I'll use my first point above to reinforce my reasoning that Benteen was to reinforce some one and that he was well informed of this measure, even if he may not have always been update on all of the current happenings. Of coarse that last point brings me to another conclusion, and that is that Benteen should've been ready to improvise (just like Custer would promote during warfare against the Indians.). Custer's orders work to a flow of this idea.... 1.)what to do while we're chasing the Indians... 2.) what to do after we've hit the Indians...3.) what to do when someone needs assistance... 4.)what to do after the Indians are routed or retreated..... etc. etc. Benteen is no stranger to sarcasm, half truths, and occasional outright lies. In this respect, he clings to his "orders", very tightly, as a means to wipe his hands of the situation. I will call this a half truth. Benteen was using his orders alright, he was practicing in a Step 1 capacity as the entire battle was advanced to the higher levels of concern. #2. I assume that Messengers would've informed Benteen of how every one was being divided. Again, Benteen could not be located at the moment. #3. Messengers #4. Messengers I'm not being sarcastic with those last couple answers. I simply mean to say that Benteen would've been briefed with a steady stream of orders as the battle came underway IF HE HAD BEEN EASIER TO LOCATE. And its not necessarily Benteen's fault that he was no where to be found, because Custer sent everyone into various positions in order to obtain a reasonable far reach of the Indians. Indians are not easy to find, so you spread your arm around and wait to strike, reaching onward for whoever you can grab and calling the other factions to your aid as soon as you have hooked the big trout and you need help to reel it in. Benteen was operating on the First Stage, even as the battle had entered into the 5th or 6th out of 100 possible stages that you will face during any conflict with the Indians. When the Indians are found, you stop looking for them. When the Indians move this way, you'll move that way...etc, etc. Those are my thoughts, and I think they are damn good! Strange
|
|
|
Post by strange on Feb 19, 2009 3:07:34 GMT -5
A very interesting Adversary, given my Rightwing leanings and pro-USMilitary stances. Mr. Horse has always been polite to me, so I'll wish him well as far as myself is concerned.
I didn't really enjoy his run as "wtf" (an abbreviated slang?) but he was kind during my run on the other boards.
Strange
PS Am I the only one who occasionally amuses the peculiar fantasy of thinking that I'm actually talking to the real "Keoghs", "CrazyHorse's", etc.? Keogh (Rini is it?) especially has a dead on physical resemblance to the real deal. For a while I've actually believed him to be a relative, if not the actual flesh and blood incarnation.
|
|
|
Post by strange on Dec 27, 2008 13:48:57 GMT -5
Merry Christmas from the Stranger aswell!
|
|
|
Op-Ed
Nov 26, 2008 1:53:28 GMT -5
Post by strange on Nov 26, 2008 1:53:28 GMT -5
I find myself changing my opinions on a regular basis, as I consider each theory that is brought up. I'm still waiting for the great revelation. I actually have had that "great revelation" of sorts. At least, with everything I've wanted to learn. I can be wrong, very often, but I get what I want to find. For instance, I made a sin of being too fond of Geronimo and looking the other way on some of the bad things that the Apaches would do. I inevitably formed an unbreakable kinship with Geronimo after simply reading his book. I so enjoyed the idea of getting history right from the very udder of a major historical figure, I practically stopped listening to any other piece of information that presented itself. Right or wrong, I definitely have higher place of honour for Geronimo and the Apaches as opposed to the Sioux and their various champions. One major reason being, I did not enjoy how the U.S. government hated the Indians enough to align themselves with a notorious enemy like Mexico. If anything, I thought we owed Geronimo a huge debt of gratitude for kicking the tar out of a country that has vexed us so continuously. It wasn't long after Geronimo's capture, before we were back at war with those sombrero wielding jackals. Geronimo was also very near and dear to my heart for articulating war into simple enough terms, for where I could once again believe in myself if it ever came around that I should dip my brow into the military. For a while, I feared that any thought of consideration toward a military career would turn me into David Berkowitz, or even worse, I also feared being like Patton. Why am I more fearful of becoming Patton? Because Patton is man of high skill who gets real nervous when he's in the thick of things. Its unfortunate that Patton was actually some one who really did hate Indians (as opposed to Custer, who, despite popular belief, had high regard and interest for everything in the direction of the redman.), because Patton is some one who could've really benefited from the type of spirit building that natives use very well. Indians are always in great spirits when they hit a battlefield, thats where the big feathers come in. When you really look at Patton's career, he was essentially built almost as if his life's sole purpose was to command the U.S. army in World War II. Patton was never a huge name for himself before then. He had his big "days like a lion", but nothing to put him on the map as an officer or grant him nation wide acclaim. He was also a very edgy personality who crankily squeaked through wide chapters of his life before finally reaching that moment where everything he had inside became like an Ignited Finger Of God. If you ever think you've heard of someone who was placed at a certain time, for a certain reason, it was Patton in WWII. Strange
|
|
|
Op-Ed
Nov 23, 2008 13:21:18 GMT -5
Post by strange on Nov 23, 2008 13:21:18 GMT -5
Strange, I don’t know you. But I have a gut feeling that you have an insight into this matter; that lays far beyond the scope of those whose prejudices give way to their words. They fail to step back 1 step and say, I will give each man who participated at the LBH an equal chance, and not look for fault nor guilt. That’s where they have to begin, and for some to go back and start all over again; its just not an option. I believe, no; I know, your assessment of Custer is correct. But to find that out I had to put to rest once and for all my own petty prejudices, and my own pride in what I thought I knew. One word of caution though. I did say, each man! Whether that be Reno, Benteen, Crazy Horse or Sitting Bull, or the other thousands who participated. One cannot find what is hidden until you view them equally, not at guilt nor fault because of their race color or creed. Boston Thats a great way to look at all history. Thats actually how I came to Custer in the first place. For years I had alot of worldly people and worldly images that portrayed Custer in a very shameful light. And then finally, after watching "Little Big Man" for about the tenth time and seeing "Custer" freak out with a mental break down, I thought I should have a look at the books and see things for myself. And sure enough, Custer became one of my favorite war heroes and I renewed my childhood fascination with Union Generals of the Civil War, combined with even yet a new fascination for Indian fighters and wild west stuff. And I went on to read about other figures which society had shamed, and many of them gave me the same result. Then I realized that many of these were people who have had a place in my heart from the very beginning, but they were people which the damnedly world had deprived me of. And so it came to pass that I was enriched, not with Kennedy, but with Nixon, not with Abbie Hoffman, but with Jimmy Hoffa! And that was just the way I hobbled along. Sir Boston, a round of applause I send to you! Its wonderful to have fresh souls coming along! Strange
|
|
|
Op-Ed
Nov 22, 2008 9:01:44 GMT -5
Post by strange on Nov 22, 2008 9:01:44 GMT -5
Strange, not everything revolves around you. Most of us understand the Indian Wars to have been a clash of cultures, i.e. free-roaming vs. land owning. We all know that both sides mutilated, the Indians more so than the Anglos. As far as Custer is concerned, well he was an adequate commander but the savior of the American West, no way. Mackenzie, Hatch, whoever commanded the 2d Cav., Grierson and Merritt were all better commanders than GAC. Frankly speaking, GAC was an aggressive commander who with seasoning may have become a damned good commander; unfortunately he was killed during his educational period. Billy, A.K.A. Markland (plus you have never pasted me on any debate as you stated on any earlier post!) I know Mackenzie, I like him alot. I'd like to ask you one question, what more could Custer have accomplished in his life time? Youngest American General? Participant in virtually every major battle from Civil War to the Indian conflicts (the major battles to happen in his lifetime at least)? He's one of the best book keepers, some one who writes down everything with detail and precision and leaves no stone unturned. A trait which would've saved the lives of many Indian fighters, if they had only bothered to communicate, communicate and document, so that a tighter eye can be placed on the Indians and what they are doing. Custer's death could've been bypassed if a few authorities (from Crook and others) had paid more attention toward transferring their current experiences to the parties that need the information. And of coarse, a lot of you (speaking respectfully your educated ideas of commander) don't really enjoy how Custer leads from the front. This is a subject of agree and disagree and alot of people who think Custer is being brash. But I love that he leads from the front. He sets an example to his men that he'll be going down with the ship if his strategies fail, but most importantly...... Custer always has the best eye for whats going on around him, he places himself right in the heat so he knows no one is slacking under fire and he gets a unique sense of what the Indians are like when they are damnwell directly in front of you. If you want experience, Custer has it. Because Custer saw all of the tricks and all of their skills, and he saw it from a soldiers perspective so that they could learn. There were many enlisted men who were really sloppy. Men so ignorant of Indians, that they'll react very un-soberly at the very sight of a native. Maybe they get intimidated by the feathers, or the nakedness, or the face paint.... or maybe they are intimidated by the heavily armed effectiveness of each native..... or maybe they suddenly find themselves ensnared into one of those tricky old Indian traps, maybe the grass is burning around them and the Indians are swarming in numbers they aren't supposed to have! Custer was face to face with all of this, and he was among some of the first guys to document what a soldier is gonna meet inside the shuffle of and Indian warzone. His words, and you can even see them from "My Life on The Plains", are a screw tightener. Thats why Custer's soldiers were drilled and disciplined and practiced and lectured into well oiled combatants. Because Custer knew how many firearms you can expect from each native, he knew and he survived many of the deadly tricks they pulled out on Fetterman, and he knew how not to lose his head. And he was highly successful in every task which he functioned in his lifetime. Meaning to say, at least for me, he died early and the Indian wars still had many battles to go. Crook himself had opportunities to carve a name higher than Custer, because he was in there much longer. I didn't think Crook was half the commander that Custer was. Crook might be aggressive, but he's a whiner and he's sloppy. Crook does like Mcclellan and demands an unlimited supply of soldiers, and then he makes sloppy hits. Strange
|
|
|
Op-Ed
Nov 17, 2008 3:49:15 GMT -5
Post by strange on Nov 17, 2008 3:49:15 GMT -5
Here's an audio interview with Ty Cobb and some rare footage to go along with it. He's talking about baseball, but he's sort of preaching the jist of everything I believe in when facing any opponent..... watch the eye....
Strange
|
|
|
Op-Ed
Nov 16, 2008 14:20:55 GMT -5
Post by strange on Nov 16, 2008 14:20:55 GMT -5
Strange, for me a lot of it can be summed up by Robert E. Lee's comment at Fredericksburg: "It is well that war should be so terrible, or else we would grow too fond of it." I have never gotten to the bottom of that--of course it's horrible and full of body parts and blood and guts, but here we all are studying it and even reenacting it. And everybody keeps doing it for real, throughout human history. There are some really fascinating aspects to that. There's a great bit at the end of The Last Full Measure, by Jeff Shaara, describing Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain visiting Little Round Top for the last time before his death in 1914: "He could hear the screams and the sounds of the muskets, could smell the hot burn of smoke, saw the terror in their eyes, and now he felt it, his mind opening to the marvelous memories, the pure raw excitement. If this was the last time, if he could never come back, he knew, seeing it all again, it was the most alive he had ever been." I have never stepped foot on a battlefield. But if school-yard brawls have ever taught me anything, then it must be that fantastic moment when you catch the eyes of your opponent and time slows down to a crawl. By the time I got to high school, I was far from the energetic youngster I once was (and now am!). In those years my body was damaged, through no immediate fault of my own, and I was underweight, under nourished, both stickly limbed and a little bloated at the same time. And in those years, I staggered drunkardly through all advents and everybody was talking at me and pulling me every which way and wondering "what should be done of this sickly kid?". So onward I went forth, and I picked some fights with a childhood nemesis from my even younger years. And that kid was what I thought I should've been and he too remembered that I was far more vital in the years before (by now, my reputation had been dragged through the ringer and I was just returning to my old town.... a Stranger to most people who knew me, including immediate family members). And there I angered my nemesis, and I called a fight, and kids made a circle, and I arrived with my chest length hair and tattered black leather vest........ and the fight began...... and I just let him plow my face with his knuckles. The Stranger was too far gone at that time to really put up a strategy. I just liked being in there, in the thick of it. The highlight of the moment was how I could feel my "battle senses" blink on where everything slows down and time is altered. So I took the punches, and I deserved them because I rallied the fight. I didn't stay in as long as I wanted to because I felt disgraced by my brother standing on the side line and, instead of rooting me, just waiting for me walk out and admit I was "no tough guy". So thats what I did (except I didn't "admit" anything), I wasn't feeling tired or injured but I couldn't land one punch and no one was cheering me. And so, I went several times just like that....... for a long time. Until finally the Stranger quit school and soared 6 inches in height, and 70 pounds in muscle (albeit rather husky until I was sculpted to a better looking 210 pounds which I'm currently holding.). No one would ever fight with me now, even if I wanted them to. People in Iowa will never take their chances unless they have a guarantee of winning, and there's no guarantee of winning a fight against a squarely built man who stands 6'1" 210 pounds (not to mention some one who walks through blizzards in tight underwear and has the capability of lifting 4-500 pounds). Even Hulk Hogan (who clearly has alot of size and strength over me) is simply not some one who'd take his chances with some one. He's been in the thick of back-door feuds with several individuals who are much smaller than him, but he won't jump on it. Also, in Iowa we have a lot of fat people who's big finish is to sit on people. Once you deprive them of that comfort, they are pretty much dead in their socks (though many fat people in Iowa are rather strong). So thats my reasoning and how I'd understand those feelings which are boasted from the gallant hearts of people like Custer, Robert E. Lee, Patton, etc. Of coarse, I'll probably never be in the army. Due to the-elected-official-who-I-must-stop-mentioning. Strange
|
|
|
Op-Ed
Nov 16, 2008 6:18:51 GMT -5
Post by strange on Nov 16, 2008 6:18:51 GMT -5
Yeah, thanks for catching me. I've been really upset over the election of he-who-I'll-try-to-stop-mentioning.
Certain people on the other board also speak in rather unusual manners for people who say they're interested in Custer and Little Bighorn, or even war itself in general.
Some of you talked about being "military brats" (in one comment which I don't see anymore) and how you guys relate amongst yourselves. My family has served in the military off and on, but we aren't career people who live and grow on the bases (my uncle Larry was a real star in the navy, who could've soared to any rank he wished, but he got really angry when they told him he could not serve on a submarine. Due to the fact that he was 6'7" and over 320 pounds at his lightest.). We pretty much join when there's a war to fight and then go back to farming. I'm happy to say that I'm not a farm kid because MODERN farm kids and farm-ers in Iowa are some of the biggest arse-holes on the planet, along with most Iowans who take the money from their dead family members to buy 4-wheelers and trespass on every one's land as if they own the world (of coarse, I can't say my older neighbors are much better, because their damned grass-farming arse-hole of a grandfather likes to ride his Cadillac through our field like he's king Tut). My mother didn't farm grass, her hands are twice the size of a man's and they have stitches running through them. Its safe to say that I will be using my inherited brick hands to clobber all three generations of those spindly-necked, midget grass-farmers if I ever get a hold of some of those SOBs.
But anyway, I was relating how I wasn't a military brat, but I am a huge history buff. And I can't understand the thinking from some of the people on the other board because.....
1.They have feeble stomachs when it comes to blood and guts and bodies, but we ARE talking about battles here. We're also talking about combatants, sometimes not just from the Indians, who mutilate their opponents and bring home pieces of flesh from their enemies as trophies, or bounties, or sometimes to just be mean. 2. They despise Custer, and Custer lovers, which is unfortunate because HE'S THE CENTRAL FIGURE WE'RE DEALING WITH! Granted, I know there were many great soldiers and warriors to discuss, but no one can possibly have a fruitful discussion of Little Bighorn without mentioning the big cahoona.
I don't even think they behave like "Indian Buffs" either (at least, not an Indian War Buff). Their Indian threads don't have as much adventure in them (so far, we have rather underdeveloped threads in that category, but I did make some interesting posts). I am very fascinated with Indians ( I just enjoy the U.S. Army alot more, especially the Union army and Union veterans. If you think I'm ever being hard on Indians, you should peer into my brain and see what I'm usually thinking about the south). Being a fan of Blackbeard will immediately make you a fan of certain Indians if you're a guy who's interested in the art of battle dress and intimidation, along with individuality and great tales and stories from each individual (this is an area where I appreciate Indians more than whites. I like how they pay attention to each one on one experience rather than the general movements of an army. That'll leave a lot of work for some of you want the knowledge of the opposite, which is usually only accounted by whites........ most of whom could not make their voices heard on account of being dead).
All in all, I still had a fun time back when I was on the other board. And I wouldn't mind coming back if they could simply lift my ban. But I'm also very happy here and I congratulate you all for having a great sound mind and moderators who are VERY reasonable (thank you, very kindly!)
Strange
|
|
|
Op-Ed
Nov 15, 2008 7:02:49 GMT -5
Post by strange on Nov 15, 2008 7:02:49 GMT -5
It took some time before I really understood how savage the dreaded Merkel board could be. I was wily in the first place, so I didn't really notice how the bickering attitude's were being sent into so many different directions.
The Stranger is also rather slow when it comes to receiving insults (because some insults are rather uplifting and complimentary, while others are spoken in a type of internet lingo which even I, as a youth, am unfamiliar with). I send my sincerest sympathies toward your plight and I hope they don't scar you too badly.
****
Sorry for going off subject. I think I'll retire for the morning.
*political commentary removed by mod. (Try to stay on topic Strange, politics is a very touchy subject to voice opinions on and it really has no place on the board here. It only tends to inflame passions. Thanks.)
The Moderator
Strange
|
|
|
Post by strange on Sept 20, 2008 16:09:02 GMT -5
Wasn't the "bravest man" supposed to be some one from the Reno area? I might be confusing with White Bull, but there's one blond haired SURVIVOR which an Indian fingered as Custer (supposed to be French, as some of you have remarked).
I'm completely irritated at the fact that I've never read an Indian looking at a picture of Custer and saying "thats the guy!". I'm sure that, even then, a photo could've been located somewhere (he was printed in the news papers, and hell, the Indian veterans lived long into the 20th century! Just like Libbie.). I cling to the idea that there must've been plenty of Indians who could've made positive ID's of most officers with one glance of a photo.
Strange
|
|
|
Post by strange on Sept 18, 2008 16:57:29 GMT -5
Just to jump in for a moment.... Its VERY difficult to deal with some of the people who think Custer was shot early on in the battle. Recently I came across this website which has a lot of good accounts to read from, but its also ABSOLUTELY OBSESSED with trying desperately to inform the reader that Custer was stiffed early in the battle ........ www.astonisher.com/archives/museum/who_killed_custer.htmlOn a fascinating note, in regard to their top ten Indians who might've killed the General, they seem to purposely place a few Indians which can immediately be proven wrong so that they can make their main guy look more favorable........ and these people are obsessed with the idea that White Cow Bull put Custer on ice. (Of coarse I'm very happy to discuss White Cow Bull, and our resident JohnBryan started a great thread which I had fun with. So I'm not discouraging any discussion) The website I'm mentioning, astonisher.com, is absolutely blunt headed. And its a real shame because that website has plenty of information, its only irritation is its constant goading to lead everyone to the eventual conclusion that Custer was killed at the opening. I think there's far too much to the battle to believe that the major officer, or officers, were killed right at the first inkling. There are alot of things happening, a lot of land to travel back and forth on, which makes any quick assault by the Indians to be a little obsolete unless Sitting Bull's magical hallucination led every warrior to plan hours before and hide in the exact places where Custer moved. We know Custer started on the offensive, and it probably took some time before Indians can really flip that around. We have the fact that the major fight was made in three different places by soldiers on the move. We have Indians like Two Moons who are clearly taking responsibility for more than they were worth. And then we have Indians like Red Horse and Gall, who, while they might be conflicting on few things, will paint some consistent pictures about each interval. If the Indians, in some wayward universe or dimension, numbered as high as 10,000; it would take them extra time to move around. Bulky numbers are not easy to mobilize when you have several many Indian leaders of similar rank and position who want to do different things. The great size of the village, with more likely less than 3,000 active battle participants, was the major flaw which decided the fate of the Indians in the overall war. This mistake lands right on the head of Sitting Bull when he gathered so many tribes into one place. The Indians, in the way they fight, are more useful with 5 men as opposed to 5 thousand. The Indians are not stupid or unorganized, they simply get sloppy with bigger numbers because it does not match the economics of their warfare. The bigger the numbers you believe, the longer the battle goes. Lots of terrain. Fetterman faced a higher number of Indians, with only 80 men to his stable, and even he put up a pretty good stand. You had a brawling bugle boy and couple hunters who caused a great amount of damage with their fancy new rifles. That would be just three people who were considered very effective in the fight. Now Custer has over 3 times the numbers of Fetterman, and he's still working without the other two thirds of his regiment. And on top of that, Custer was facing even less Indians. Custer might not win, but any one would be damned to say he went down easy. Strange
|
|
|
Post by strange on Sept 13, 2008 23:23:43 GMT -5
Strange, my young friend, I cannot think of any single writer who could begin a posting by mentioning his ‘undies,’ and (within the space of four short paragraphs) cover fifty years of presidential history to end on the topics of ‘animal neglect’ and its relationship to ‘facism.’ All on a thread bemoaning the loss (temporary, I hope) of a thoroughly competent Custer era scholar. Amazing. My hat’s off to you. highway At the end of the day, I'm a simple patriot who likes to dig in the rain. Many are given to lies and coercion But stories are most sweet when they arrive at your feet and you are much scarier to meet in person Yea, the Strange PS No, I did not visit a cemetery. Just my backyard.
|
|
|
Post by strange on Sept 12, 2008 23:31:20 GMT -5
Another Nixon fan. Nixon did a lot of great things for this country. Are you the honest half or the crook half of Nixon? HONEST HALF! So boldly so, that I draw myself in the Undies! Nixon started in the Eisenhower administration, and I'm very fond of Eisenhower. He's a bit rough around the edges, but I like having a bulldog style politician. He had a similar youthful exuberance just like Kennedy, but poor Nixon couldn't sit on that comfort for long because he didn't have a wealthy family to watch his rear. I'd say Nixon is three times the worker of any politicians. His major failings are derived more from a country that scorned him, and from so many wayward things happening in the world at his time. He probably would've served much better if he had been elected in 1960. My family is also very fond of Ford (seemingly we are the only ones who are). He returned the country to its functioning state. Strangely it was Oliver Stone's movie which got me interested in Nixon, and I'll applaud him for trying to rise above his liberal leanings and look at Nixon's life more thoroughly. Nixon and Jimmy Hoffa also offer me my own special view of the Kennedy conspiracy. I think most conspiracy theorists are faulted in the fact that they are too pro-Kennedy. There are some villainized individuals who are not half as bad as they are depicted, and conspiracy enthusiasts could've benefited with a little less finger pointing. I've enjoyed most preseidents, up until the dastardly administrations of Clinton and Bush jr. (which happen to be the ones which I've lived through most of my life). When I was 2 or 3 years old, I felt extra pleased with everything around me and I still recall EXACTLY how much I enjoyed the first Bush who had just come off fresh from the mighty Reagan administration. I can also see some good things about Bush jr., but Clinton is the one I despise the most. Clinton really screwed up law enforcement people in my state. Iowa is a very liberal state, and liberal cops are borderline Nazi's. A neighbor called in a bunch of phony charges about my dogs and cats. My dog Lucky is 16 years old now (human years) and he's a rare Jindo dog from Korea which is built slender like a coyote. I showed my dog to the dizzy police dame, gave every piece of information about him........ and the damn police still made us jump through hoops for a whole month before we could clear our names from the charge of "animal neglect". Just simple situations like that. Thats fascism. Strange
|
|