GDG- Custer (and Gettysburg) On the Tube Again

John Lawrence jlawrence at kc.rr.com
Thu Jan 19 10:14:53 CST 2012


If you read my other posts, I also stated that he should move cautiously and not divide hi is forces

Having said that, he would have had to fight dismounted (as he did) in opposed rows, kneeling or prone with the guns deployed in a 360

Regards,
Jack

CWMHTours at aol.com wrote:

>Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>Now Jack-  just how are you going to use the  gatlings?  Where would you 
>put them?  On Last Stand Ridge it is  extremely rough, broken up, and rolling. 
> Custer's route was along the top  of the ridge and when the Indians 
>attacked it was almost on all sides,  particularly from the rear.  It was a 
>running battle.  How are you  going to set them up?  How would you keep them with 
>Custer's columns as  they raced north?  The columns would have outrun them 
>leaving them  behind.  The Indians really weren't that concentrated but 
>rather scattered  all around.  You'd be reaiming the things all the time.
> 
>They might have made a contribution at Reno Hill with Reno and  Benteen but 
>nothing significant.  
> 
>Reno had a moving line in the valley of LBG creek.  How  are you going to 
>effectively use them with any practicality?
> 
>No.  The Gatlings would have been nearly useless and a  major burden.  Even 
>if Custer had them at the last few minutes they still  would have all 
>gotten slaughtered.  
> 
>Jack, have you been there?  It is pretty rough  country.
> 
>I recommend to anyone going on Bing maps for a birds eye view  and you can 
>see it.
> 
>And what is really weird is that you can see all the little  white marker 
>stones.  Pretty weird.  
> 
>"Just  the facts, ma'am." 
>
>Your Most Obediant Servant
>Peter  
>
> 
>In a message dated 1/19/2012 9:01:37 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
>jlawrence at kc.rr.com writes:
>
>Esteemed  GDG Member Contributes:
>I think not dividing his command and moving more  cautiously would have 
>been more prudent.
>As to deployment, I have been to  the site a couple of times.
>If you had gatlings, you could deploy two lines  sole to sole and fire them 
>over their  heads.
>Regards,
>Jack
>
>CWMHTours at aol.com wrote:
>
>>Esteemed  GDG Member Contributes:
>>I think leaving the Gatlings behind was a smart  move.   Custer's plan was 
>>to move fast to catch the  Indians.  The Gatlings were  about as heavy as 
>any 
>>light  arty.  It would have slowed them a lot as they  were going cross  
>>country.  It's pretty rough country out  there.
>>  
>>Plus the Indian attack unrolled so fast there really wasn't  much  time to 
>>find a good site for them.  If you can see panaramic  pictures  you'll see 
>>what I mean.  Plus The ridge seems like  a pretty lousy place to  try to 
>use any 
>>kind of arty effectively  as it was so hilly and broken up.   And with the 
>>Indians at  360' where are you going to shoot?  Turn one way  and they 
>come in  
>>behind you   Turn the other way and they are over   there too.  One of the 
>>reason attributed to the quick demise for  the 7th  was that the ridge 
>left 
>>them pretty exposed on both  sides.  How are you  going to set up a 
>Gatling 
>>without being  pretty likely to get shot  there?
>> 
>>"Just  the facts,  ma'am." 
>>
>>Your Most Obediant Servant
>>Peter   
>>
>> 
>>In a message dated 1/18/2012 3:59:36 P.M. Eastern  Standard Time,  
>>jlawrence at kc.rr.com  writes:
>>
>>Esteemed  GDG Member Contributes:
>>The  problem with Custer is that, at Little Big horn  he refused the use 
>of  :
>>
>>1) Buffalo Soldiers (could not fight, despite  what he  should have 
>learned 
>>in 
>>th ACW;
>>2) Gatling Guns (I  thionk this  decision to leave them behind reminds me 
>of 
>>  
>>Stewart).
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Jack
>>-----  Original Message -----  
>>From: "Dennis Lawrence"  <denlaw at gojade.org>
>>To: "GDG"   <gettysburg at arthes.com>
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012  2:09  PM
>>Subject: Re: GDG- Custer (and Gettysburg) On the  Tube  Again
>>
>>
>>> Esteemed GDG Member   Contributes:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>I don't think the show  portrayed  Custer as a psychopath.  Nor do I   
>view
>>>>him as one.   An aggressive, ambitious cavalry  officer, yes.  And  one  
> 
>>>>pretty
>>>>much following standard military  doctrine of the  day.
>>>
>>>
>>>  Hello,
>>>
>>>   The problem  with Custer  interpretations is looking back, we realize 
>he 
>>> was on the   wrong side of history. Even though it was the accepted 
>>military  
>>> and  political policy , having starred in the greatest  debacle of that 
>>era,  
>>> it is easier to caricature  him  as the out of touch  renegade.
>>>
>>>   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWGAdzn5_KU
>>>
>>> Take   Care
>>>
>>>  Dennis
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.co
>m   
>>>  -to unsubscribe
>>>   http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for  Archives
>>>   
>>
>>
>>
>>----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.co
>m
>>   -to unsubscribe
>>http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/  for   Archives
>>
>>
>>----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.co
>m  -to unsubscribe
>>http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for  Archives
>----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>  -to unsubscribe
>http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for  Archives
>
>
>----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com -to unsubscribe
>http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives


More information about the Gettysburg mailing list