Custer Custer the hero.

[major bill]

Well if every military hero had to be a saint we would have few if any military heroes. A person can be a hero with out any military connections. Perhaps I should have asked if Custer was a military hero.

I would say Custer was an American military hero. I would say he was an American hero for almost 100 years. However he might havr been demoted to just military hero for the late 40 years. Yet some people still see him as a hero.

 

[Irishtom29]

#2 I think I do too, however I don't feel I benefited at all from slaying of women and children at Washita, must be the American Indian in me

I think it's obvious that most Americans have benefitted from the conquest of the American Indians, the Washita was part of that process. It's difficult to pick the process apart; that a Midwesterner think he benefitted from Fallen Timbers, Tippecanoe and Moraviantown but not from Horseshoe Bend and the Red River War would be wrong, I think he benefitted from the entire process.

 

[archieclement]

I think it's obvious that most Americans have benefitted from the conquest of the American Indians, the Washita was part of that process. It's difficult to pick the process apart; that a Midwesterner think he benefitted from Fallen Timbers, Tippecanoe and Moraviantown but not from Horseshoe Bend and the Red River War would be wrong, I think he benefitted from the entire process.

not sure your position, you said earlier "Even if the conquest of the natives as wrong" and we cant reset or undo it.........and yes we can and have benefited from many things in our past that were wrong, including slavery and the mistreatment of the Indians.......is your position we should recognize we have a troubled past or that we should celebrate it because we benefited from the suffering of others?

I think its become somewhat a tricky question overall, but especially when someone such as Custer or Forrest is tied to events such as Washita or Fort Pillow even more so...........both have people who say they were massacres, both have defenders who argue they weren't because some prisoners were taken despite lopsided casualty figures, and both had a racial element to it..........

 

[Specster]

Tonight at the Ann Arbor CWRT Father Vincent Heier gave a presentation. The Custer-Mosby feud 'Mistaken Identity or Familiarity Breads Contempt?'

Here in Michigan Custer is a real Civil War hero to most people, however there are always a few people who do not see Custer as a great hero of the Civil War. Do these people what to judge Custer by his Little Bighorn campaign?

During the ACW at a time when the US cavalry was extremely weak, he was a force. Even if he was "just" a brevet general, he was well respected by many at a very young age. His action on day 3 at Gettysburg may have saved the battle and the entire war. I know many people want to credit other offcers for staving off Stuart, who had superior horsemen and numbers, but even if he was not the ultimate Union officer at Gettysburg, he did his job and he did t well.

I find it all too common for people to detract from Custers accomplishments because it is commonly considered that he was the agent provocateur at Little Big Horn. Custer was following orders - if he didnt there may have been dire consequences for him.

It is strangle how quickly he has gone from hero to villan

 

[Irishtom29]

not sure your position, you said earlier "Even if the conquest of the natives as wrong" and we cant reset or undo it.........and yes we can and have benefited from many things in our past that were wrong, including slavery and the mistreatment of the Indians.......is your position we should recognize we have a troubled past or that we should celebrate it because we benefited from the suffering of others?

Good question. Frankly, I've no good answer. Sometimes I think one way and sometimes the other.

 

[archieclement]

Good question. Frankly, I've no good answer. Sometimes I think one way and sometimes the other.

I completely understand, I feel the same about some confederates like Lee. On one hand I feel they were still Americans even if in rebellion and his military genius deserves to be recognized, But while not sure if I completely agree with the argument you cant separate the prowess from the causes it served, I can least see their position somewhat.

So I too am somewhat conflicted about it........

 

[FZ11]

and not following his intelligence and exercising caution, got him and his command killed, not exactly a good job......obviously at some point, and I would think getting yourself and your command killed would be that point.....its reasonable to question his judgement in not following the intelligence he had that would have called for caution......

pressing them would be one thing, dividing an already heavily outnumbered command, or not waiting for Benteen to come up obviously was foolhardy based on the outcome. In reality he had options, he choose the worst possible one........

Custer certainly"followed his intelligence" He quite literally "tracked them down",right? Custer doesn't plan to attack the village until 1 day later. Custer is informed that Indians are on the back trail picking up rations that have fallen off the pack train. Custer,thinking he has been discovered, attacks. Had the Indians known Custer was close they would have escaped. Benteen is dispatched west to cut off an indian escape to the south as per Custer's orders from Terry. McDougall has to manage the pack train, and is behind Custer on the trail. Custer jumps some Indians and they retreat down toward the village. Reno is dispatched to attack the village and Custer plans to support Reno. Custer changes his mind and decides to attack down the right side of the stream. Custer actually waits for a time for Benteen but Benteen doesn't show. Had the Indians surrendered,Custer would have been praised for his imaginative attack.

 

[archieclement]

Custer certainly"followed his intelligence" He quite literally "tracked them down",right? Custer doesn't plan to attack the village until 1 day later. Custer is informed that Indians are on the back trail picking up rations that have fallen off the pack train. Custer,thinking he has been discovered, attacks. Had the Indians known Custer was close they would have escaped. Benteen is dispatched west to cut off an indian escape to the south as per Custer's orders from Terry. McDougall has to manage the pack train, and is behind Custer on the trail. Custer jumps some Indians and they retreat down toward the village. Reno is dispatched to attack the village and Custer plans to support Reno. Custer changes his mind and decides to attack down the right side of the stream. Custer actually waits for a time for Benteen but Benteen doesn't show. Had the Indians surrendered,Custer would have been praised for his imaginative attack.

cool what if.........however reality is he divided his already outnumbered command then struck off without any reconnoiter, to find himself hopelessly outnumbered and wiped out in about half an hour..........so he's not praised for some imaginative attack........and instead a poster boy with the Alamo, and Pearl Harbor for defeats..........

 

[civilken]

once again it's important to look at Custer as a 1800s individual not by today's standards and for his time he was a brave individual he always led from the front. I know I was one of those 1960s individuals who believed it was a bad guy but let's be honest by today's standards our entire army. Our government and all our politicians were bad guys for the way they treat the American Indian. And custard was no different. Remember Gen. Sheridan the only good Indian and we know the rest that was the thinking. Manifest destiny it's not pretty.

 

[FZ11]

cool what if.........however reality is he divided his already outnumbered command then struck off without any reconnoiter, to find himself hopelessly outnumbered and wiped out in about half an hour..........so he's not praised for some imaginative attack........and instead a poster boy with the Alamo, and Pearl Harbor for defeats..........

Not what if..... my post is,factually, what happened for those who may not know. Custer's battle lasted over an hour.

 

[archieclement]

Not what if..... my post is,factually, what happened for those who may not know. Custer's battle lasted over an hour.

Actually several Indian accounts, which obviously are the only survivors from the actual action, put it at a half hour, and most accounts I've read put it more as a failure then some imaginative attack........and the "Had the Indians surrendered" is most certainly some what if fantasy

 

[John S. Carter]

What do we think of his service during the Gettysburg campaign and Appomattox campaign? Would it have been better for the Union to have had another man in charge during these two campaign?

Custer was has any other young officer,seeking glory and fame at whatever the coast .His reputation that came as a result made him famous and a close friend of Sheridan which led to Sherman and then to Grant.With friends as these he was able to avoid court marshal and gain a very close contention via his marriage to influential men in Washington.As to the question at both he seemed to have been at the right place with the right forces to do what any officer with the same would have done.Custer was a dedicated warrior who had the charm and personality that enabled him to achieve glory.In the final his strategy at Little Big Horn shows just how he continued to be willing to sacrifice his men for his personal glory and maybe with victory this would carry him to the White House.Question; If he had survived would the his mentors come to his rescue again or would they state that this is not the Custer they knew (sound familiar?)? ..

 

[dlofting]

In the final his strategy at Little Big Horn shows just how he continued to be willing to sacrifice his men for his personal glory and maybe with victory this would carry him to the White House.

Custer's deployment of his regiment at LBH, was standard at the time for a cavalry attack on a Native American village. The objective was to capture the non-combatants before the village could pack up, move and subsequently disperse. At no time did Custer even consider that the Lakota/Sioux would stay and fight, beyond what was necessary to permit a successful escape. As far as Custer was concerned, no Native American force, regardless of size, had ever successfully fought an entire regiment of the US Cavalry. It is very probable that any other commanding officer in the US Cavalry at the time, faced with the situation at LBH, would have employed the same tactics as did Custer.......of course when news of the Rosebud and LBH got out, the tactics were reconsidered.

 

[Irishtom29]

I think that Mackenzie and the 4th, in the same situation as Custer at the Little Big Horn, would've won the fight. Mackenzie had the 4th under control and if a subordinate had been ordered to come quick he would've. The 7th was kind'a dysfunctional.

And had Custer sent Polish lancers or British heavies in on the left, Reno's attack, they would've gone through the Indian town like Billy be jiggers. Which has nothing to do with anything.

 

[archieclement]

Custer's deployment of his regiment at LBH, was standard at the time for a cavalry attack on a Native American village. The objective was to capture the non-combatants before the village could pack up, move and subsequently disperse. At no time did Custer even consider that the Lakota/Sioux would stay and fight, beyond what was necessary to permit a successful escape. As far as Custer was concerned, no Native American force, regardless of size, had ever successfully fought an entire regiment of the US Cavalry. It is very probable that any other commanding officer in the US Cavalry at the time, faced with the situation at LBH, would have employed the same tactics as did Custer.......of course when news of the Rosebud and LBH got out, the tactics were reconsidered.

Well take heart, because of Custer's judgment and appreciation of the situation he faced........we can now say a Native American force HAS successfully fought an entire regiment of US Cavalry.

 

[mkyzzzrdet]

Custer was has any other young officer,seeking glory and fame at whatever the coast .His reputation that came as a result made him famous and a close friend of Sheridan which led to Sherman and then to Grant.With friends as these he was able to avoid court marshal and gain a very close contention via his marriage to influential men in Washington.As to the question at both he seemed to have been at the right place with the right forces to do what any officer with the same would have done.Custer was a dedicated warrior who had the charm and personality that enabled him to achieve glory.In the final his strategy at Little Big Horn shows just how he continued to be willing to sacrifice his men for his personal glory and maybe with victory this would carry him to the White House.Question; If he had survived would the his mentors come to his rescue again or would they state that this is not the Custer they knew (sound familiar?)? ..

As I understand - there is no first hand proof that Custer ever sought the White House.

 

[FZ11]

Custer's deployment of his regiment at LBH, was standard at the time for a cavalry attack on a Native American village. The objective was to capture the non-combatants before the village could pack up, move and subsequently disperse. At no time did Custer even consider that the Lakota/Sioux would stay and fight, beyond what was necessary to permit a successful escape. As far as Custer was concerned, no Native American force, regardless of size, had ever successfully fought an entire regiment of the US Cavalry. It is very probable that any other commanding officer in the US Cavalry at the time, faced with the situation at LBH, would have employed the same tactics as did Custer.......of course when news of the Rosebud and LBH got out, the tactics were reconsidered.

This^^^^^.

 

[FZ11]

Actually several Indian accounts, which obviously are the only survivors from the actual action, put it at a half hour, and most accounts I've read put it more as a failure then some imaginative attack........and the "Had the Indians surrendered" is most certainly some what if fantasy

Well,I guess you haven't read enough accounts. Here's a good one with a timeline for you. Lakota Noon by Greg Michno. Actually,Custer's battle from the first shot fired by Custer to the last shot fired by Custer approaches one and a half hours. It's right there in Michno's timeline. The firing was sporadic at the beginning. The one half hour to which you refer is just the final phase of Custer's battle.

 

[Irishtom29]

Well take heart, because of Custer's judgment and appreciation of the situation he faced........we can now say a Native American force HAS successfully fought an entire regiment of US Cavalry.

Hell, at the Wabash the Indians defeated most of the United States Army---2 regiments of regular infantry, 2 regiments of Federal levy infantry, regular artillery and militia. This on the heels of the whipping Harmar took at Kekionga.

 

[dlofting]

Hell, at the Wabash the Indians defeated most of the United States Army---2 regiments of regular infantry, 2 regiments of Federal levy infantry, regular artillery and militia. This on the heels of the whipping Harmar took at Kekionga.

Sorry, I should have qualified my statement as pertaining to plains Indians...those who used horses in war.