Author Topic: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question  (Read 7861 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Larry L

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 780
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #60 on: October 12, 2012, 03:05:39 PM »
I've always had the interest in The Battle at the Little Big Horn. I've aquired a lot of research on it. Obviously, Custer was a glory hound but his undoing came before the Battle of the Little Big Horn. He was called back to service after the Civil War to handle Indian issues. In what we call the Battle of Washita River, he attacked what he thought to be a small band of warriors. What he did was attack a small outlying village of women and children with several villages just down the river of actual warriors. After realizing his mistake, he proceded to march towards the warriors villages at dusk but then turned the other direction after dark. This was so that the warriors would go back to their camps to defend them while Custer escaped. Reno and Benteen were with him on this expedition and remembered that Custer had sent Major Joe Elliot and 18 men after a band of escaping Indians but never attempted to find Elliot afterwards. Elliot and his men were later discovered dead from torture. At the Little Big Horn, Custer was not in command of the troops as President Grant was wanting his skin for testifying about corruption in the Indian Affairs Dept. The actual commander was General Alfred Terry who demanded Custer be placed under his command. Custer was looking for the glory that he had when he was in the Union Army but was beyond his grasp afterwards. He was in financial trouble as well and needed the glory to help with the bills. Custer took it upon himself to engage the Indians ordering Reno to circle to the south and come in with guns blazing. The typical Indian encounters would be that the Indians would just scatter and offer no organized resistance. Benteen was in charge of the wagons with ammo and food supplies. After Reno attacked, his troop numbers were cut in half by the huge numbers of Indians that were supplied with repeating rifles. He managed to fight his way back across the river where Benteen ran into him. From accounts of soldiers, Benteen and Reno built a fire and discussed Custer for an hour and a half, all the while listening to the gun fired just over the hill. They ignored a note from Custer to come arunnin' as they expected that Custer was just going to sacrifice them like he did Elliot. They didn't care to be the cost of the glory for Custer. As it turns out, when they did ride in on the scene, only squaws were there plundering the bodies, most they couldn't recognize as the squaws beat the faces in with tomahawks and usually shot a dozen or more arrows into the dead bodies. How they identified the bodies I'm not sure as the squaws also stripped the bodies of all clothing. According to several accounts, Custer was not found at the top of the hill where he shown to be buried but down at the river and was among the first to die. Historians will probably argue this til the name Custer isn't remembered. Same goes for a man named Frank Finkel who claims to be the lone survivor of the battle. If you have the interest, here's Finkels story:
http://www.historynet.com/survivor-frank-finkels-lasting-stand.htm

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #61 on: October 12, 2012, 05:19:52 PM »
Thanks Larry for the added info. It has been years since I last read the "real story" of Custer, and Little Bighorn (aka Greasy Grass). I find it both sad, and humorous that America has made heroes, and legends, out of men that were quite undeserving, Lincoln being another.
Your relating the story of Major Joe Elliott and his men was the one I was looking for, but it had been so many years, I had confused it with the Civil War, and was looking in the wrong place.
It is interesting to rehash old research, and look at that time in history again, only in truth, rather than legend.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline Bear Rider

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 115
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #62 on: October 12, 2012, 05:30:25 PM »
AtlLaw,

Once white men showed on the scene, tribes were forced to move westward due to white expansion. This caused a ripple effect across the continent. Often those tribes with contact with whites had superior technology (guns, steel, horses) and were able to kick their traditional adversaries farther west. The Sioux were woodland farmers who were forced out onto the plains by eastern tribes (not sure who). I doubt that the Sioux had truely originated in the Black Hills (sacred homeland) prior to the white man but still, they had to kick someone out of there to begin with in order to claim it as "ancestral".

Actually, none of the tribes were in their original territories. To start with, they all originated in Asia. Secondly, climate changes associated with what is commonly called "the little ice age" caused massive North American displacements which were still settling themselves out when Columbus arrived.
Flintlock! Anything else is imitation.

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #63 on: October 12, 2012, 05:37:03 PM »
AtlLaw,

Once white men showed on the scene, tribes were forced to move westward due to white expansion. This caused a ripple effect across the continent. Often those tribes with contact with whites had superior technology (guns, steel, horses) and were able to kick their traditional adversaries farther west. The Sioux were woodland farmers who were forced out onto the plains by eastern tribes (not sure who). I doubt that the Sioux had truely originated in the Black Hills (sacred homeland) prior to the white man but still, they had to kick someone out of there to begin with in order to claim it as "ancestral".

Actually, none of the tribes were in their original territories. To start with, they all originated in Asia. Secondly, climate changes associated with what is commonly called "the little ice age" caused massive North American displacements which were still settling themselves out when Columbus arrived.

Actually, what you just said here is "theory", and has no real basis of proof to be fact at all. This issue has been argued for decades, and no one has really ever determined any of this to be true. It right in there with "evolution".
The "little ice age" did however switch Germans from wine growers, to beer drinkers. Their vineyards froze.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline Bear Rider

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 115
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #64 on: October 13, 2012, 02:09:14 PM »
AtlLaw,

Once white men showed on the scene, tribes were forced to move westward due to white expansion. This caused a ripple effect across the continent. Often those tribes with contact with whites had superior technology (guns, steel, horses) and were able to kick their traditional adversaries farther west. The Sioux were woodland farmers who were forced out onto the plains by eastern tribes (not sure who). I doubt that the Sioux had truely originated in the Black Hills (sacred homeland) prior to the white man but still, they had to kick someone out of there to begin with in order to claim it as "ancestral".

Actually, none of the tribes were in their original territories. To start with, they all originated in Asia. Secondly, climate changes associated with what is commonly called "the little ice age" caused massive North American displacements which were still settling themselves out when Columbus arrived.

Actually, what you just said here is "theory", and has no real basis of proof to be fact at all. This issue has been argued for decades, and no one has really ever determined any of this to be true. It right in there with "evolution".
The "little ice age" did however switch Germans from wine growers, to beer drinkers. Their vineyards froze.


Sorry, fundy. The little ice age and the global climate changes attendant thereto are established facts, despite the protestations of your shaman.
Flintlock! Anything else is imitation.

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #65 on: October 13, 2012, 04:12:55 PM »
AtlLaw,

Once white men showed on the scene, tribes were forced to move westward due to white expansion. This caused a ripple effect across the continent. Often those tribes with contact with whites had superior technology (guns, steel, horses) and were able to kick their traditional adversaries farther west. The Sioux were woodland farmers who were forced out onto the plains by eastern tribes (not sure who). I doubt that the Sioux had truely originated in the Black Hills (sacred homeland) prior to the white man but still, they had to kick someone out of there to begin with in order to claim it as "ancestral".

Actually, none of the tribes were in their original territories. To start with, they all originated in Asia. Secondly, climate changes associated with what is commonly called "the little ice age" caused massive North American displacements which were still settling themselves out when Columbus arrived.

Actually, what you just said here is "theory", and has no real basis of proof to be fact at all. This issue has been argued for decades, and no one has really ever determined any of this to be true. It right in there with "evolution".
The "little ice age" did however switch Germans from wine growers, to beer drinkers. Their vineyards froze.


Sorry, fundy. The little ice age and the global climate changes attendant thereto are established facts, despite the protestations of your shaman.

fundy? Hmmm. I think ya need to take a class in "reading comprehension" there bear breath. I am fully aware of the "little ice age", and commented to that "fact". Your weak attempt at insulting my alleged "shaman" was a waste of time, as you "mis-read" my response on the "little ice age". Germany was noted for it's fine wines, prior to the "little ice age" which killed their vineyards, and wine industry, at which time they started making and developing German beers. That is "historical fact" as is the "little ice age".
Your synopsis on Native American migration and origin, is "speculatory BS at best", and has been proven as such thru DNA, and other "theory studies", and so on. There's where ya messed up, and there's where your "reading comprehension" took a vacation on my previous post.
 
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline FPH

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #66 on: October 13, 2012, 04:22:08 PM »
This has been interesting and educational, as I was not well versed in the battle. 

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #67 on: October 13, 2012, 04:29:31 PM »
Tho drifting completely away from topic at times, it has been interesting, and has refreshed my memory thru others from past research.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline Bear Rider

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 115
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #68 on: October 13, 2012, 06:04:21 PM »

fundy? Hmmm. I think ya need to take a class in "reading comprehension" there bear breath. I am fully aware of the "little ice age", and commented to that "fact". Your weak attempt at insulting my alleged "shaman" was a waste of time, as you "mis-read" my response on the "little ice age". Germany was noted for it's fine wines, prior to the "little ice age" which killed their vineyards, and wine industry, at which time they started making and developing German beers. That is "historical fact" as is the "little ice age".
Your synopsis on Native American migration and origin, is "speculatory BS at best", and has been proven as such thru DNA, and other "theory studies", and so on. There's where ya messed up, and there's where your "reading comprehension" took a vacation on my previous post.

"other" theory studies?

Citing unspecified "evidence" is simply an admission that you are just regurgitating the opinions of others -- that you have done no real research on your own.
Flintlock! Anything else is imitation.

Offline FPH

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #69 on: October 13, 2012, 06:25:48 PM »
I

fundy? Hmmm. I think ya need to take a class in "reading comprehension" there bear breath. I am fully aware of the "little ice age", and commented to that "fact". Your weak attempt at insulting my alleged "shaman" was a waste of time, as you "mis-read" my response on the "little ice age". Germany was noted for it's fine wines, prior to the "little ice age" which killed their vineyards, and wine industry, at which time they started making and developing German beers. That is "historical fact" as is the "little ice age".
Your synopsis on Native American migration and origin, is "speculatory BS at best", and has been proven as such thru DNA, and other "theory studies", and so on. There's where ya messed up, and there's where your "reading comprehension" took a vacation on my previous post.

"other" theory studies?

Citing unspecified "evidence" is simply an admission that you are just regurgitating the opinions of others -- that you have done no real research on your own.


I haven't noticed any "cites" coming from any side.  Care to give me a few?  Are you published in a peer reviewed publication?

Offline sidewinder319

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 634
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #70 on: October 13, 2012, 06:56:56 PM »
Custer was given the table on which Gen. Lee signed the surrender. He was given the table as he was considered most important in the defeat of the Southern Army. He was however most unpopular with the Northern Politicans as he was a strong Democrat. The Indian Wars were most unpopular following the long Civil War. The press and peace groups strongly opposed the Indian Wars. Much of the bad press and his troubles were related to his possible run for the presidency on the Democratic ticket. The Democrats after all was the Party of the just defeated south. Custer a popular American General who could become president as a Democrat was putting the fear in Republican Washington DC. How many mistakes were made who will ever know. These were American GIs out numbered 8 to one, The facts that Custer prepared for a big battle and expected it are there also. He had the Steam Ship Yellowstone  winched up the Big Horn to be near the battle field. The decks were layered with grass and hundreds of wounded troops were medivaced to Ft. Bismark. Just different thoughts on this subject.

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #71 on: October 14, 2012, 01:56:56 AM »

fundy? Hmmm. I think ya need to take a class in "reading comprehension" there bear breath. I am fully aware of the "little ice age", and commented to that "fact". Your weak attempt at insulting my alleged "shaman" was a waste of time, as you "mis-read" my response on the "little ice age". Germany was noted for it's fine wines, prior to the "little ice age" which killed their vineyards, and wine industry, at which time they started making and developing German beers. That is "historical fact" as is the "little ice age".
Your synopsis on Native American migration and origin, is "speculatory BS at best", and has been proven as such thru DNA, and other "theory studies", and so on. There's where ya messed up, and there's where your "reading comprehension" took a vacation on my previous post.

"other" theory studies?

Citing unspecified "evidence" is simply an admission that you are just regurgitating the opinions of others -- that you have done no real research on your own.

Your the one that started these "migration theories", and "asian ancestry theories". I was talking about "Custer" when you brought them in. It would seem that the "regurgitating" from one end or the other has been done by YOU. Trying to shift this on me, tells me that YOU are the one "leaving deposits" of bits and pieces of someone else's "chewed up theories" on this thread. Which really have nothing to do with "Custer" or the "Little Big Horn". That you don't like me is apparent. That I don't care should be equally so. But the thread IS about the latter, and I should have ignored you in the first place, so I accept part of the blame for drifting off topic.
The thread was not intended to be what the American Indian did, or did not do to each other, or where they did, or did not come from, or if it was "Carma" from the white man for all mentioned. It was about the Defeat of Custer at the Greasy Grass.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline Bear Rider

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 115
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #72 on: October 14, 2012, 07:46:11 AM »
It's always fun to listen to fundies whine. However, I don't waste my time trying to educate the willfully ignorant.
Flintlock! Anything else is imitation.

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #73 on: October 14, 2012, 07:57:00 AM »
It's always fun to listen to fundies whine. However, I don't waste my time trying to educate the willfully ignorant.

You've already tried but, with your limited education it was a short class indeed, with little or no credits. Good day sir. ;)
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline Bear Rider

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 115
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #74 on: October 16, 2012, 02:39:37 PM »
It's always fun to listen to fundies whine. However, I don't waste my time trying to educate the willfully ignorant.

You've already tried but, with your limited education it was a short class indeed, with little or no credits. Good day sir. ;)

I rather doubt that any fundy can be considered educated by other than backwoods, redneck standards.

However, if you ever decide to read something other than fables, try "The Little Ice Age", or "The Long Hot Summer" by Fagan. IIRC, they have extensive bibliographies.

Another book for your reading list is "Forged", by Ehrman. Perhaps it can cure you of your delusions.
Flintlock! Anything else is imitation.

Offline mcwoodduck

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7983
  • Gender: Male
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #75 on: October 19, 2012, 04:40:21 AM »
AtlLaw,

Once white men showed on the scene, tribes were forced to move westward due to white expansion. This caused a ripple effect across the continent. Often those tribes with contact with whites had superior technology (guns, steel, horses) and were able to kick their traditional adversaries farther west. The Sioux were woodland farmers who were forced out onto the plains by eastern tribes (not sure who). I doubt that the Sioux had truely originated in the Black Hills (sacred homeland) prior to the white man but still, they had to kick someone out of there to begin with in order to claim it as "ancestral".

Actually, none of the tribes were in their original territories. To start with, they all originated in Asia. Secondly, climate changes associated with what is commonly called "the little ice age" caused massive North American displacements which were still settling themselves out when Columbus arrived.

Actually, what you just said here is "theory", and has no real basis of proof to be fact at all. This issue has been argued for decades, and no one has really ever determined any of this to be true. It right in there with "evolution".
The "little ice age" did however switch Germans from wine growers, to beer drinkers. Their vineyards froze.


Sorry, fundy. The little ice age and the global climate changes attendant thereto are established facts, despite the protestations of your shaman.
Sorry to tell you this but the Man Made global warming was made up.
Clearly we have had warming and cooling of the earth do to many factors.
The one thing that makes me sure that the global warming (not supported by satalite data) is false is that the global warming models do not take into account solar activity.  Some how dismissing the sun as not relavant to global warming does not make sense and looses all creditbility with me.
Because some one sites many sources to a stupid therory and quotes others does not make the therory true.
I can tell you that breathing water has more Oxygen in it by percentage than the air does and they you will be healthier breathing more saturated oxygen and site many other doctors and dive masters but that does not make me correct and will only kill people.

Offline Empty Quiver

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2847
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #76 on: October 19, 2012, 06:00:17 AM »
AtlLaw,

Once white men showed on the scene, tribes were forced to move westward due to white expansion. This caused a ripple effect across the continent. Often those tribes with contact with whites had superior technology (guns, steel, horses) and were able to kick their traditional adversaries farther west. The Sioux were woodland farmers who were forced out onto the plains by eastern tribes (not sure who). I doubt that the Sioux had truely originated in the Black Hills (sacred homeland) prior to the white man but still, they had to kick someone out of there to begin with in order to claim it as "ancestral".

Actually, none of the tribes were in their original territories. To start with, they all originated in Asia. Secondly, climate changes associated with what is commonly called "the little ice age" caused massive North American displacements which were still settling themselves out when Columbus arrived.

Actually, what you just said here is "theory", and has no real basis of proof to be fact at all. This issue has been argued for decades, and no one has really ever determined any of this to be true. It right in there with "evolution".
The "little ice age" did however switch Germans from wine growers, to beer drinkers. Their vineyards froze.


Sorry, fundy. The little ice age and the global climate changes attendant thereto are established facts, despite the protestations of your shaman.
Sorry to tell you this but the Man Made global warming was made up.
Clearly we have had warming and cooling of the earth do to many factors.
The one thing that makes me sure that the global warming (not supported by satalite data) is false is that the global warming models do not take into account solar activity.  Some how dismissing the sun as not relavant to global warming does not make sense and looses all creditbility with me.
Because some one sites many sources to a stupid therory and quotes others does not make the therory true.
I can tell you that breathing water has more Oxygen in it by percentage than the air does and they you will be healthier breathing more saturated oxygen and site many other doctors and dive masters but that does not make me correct and will only kill people.
;D
**Concealed Carry...Because when seconds count help is only minutes away**

Offline crossxsticks

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 71
Re: Custer and Little Big Horn Battle Question
« Reply #77 on: May 31, 2013, 10:12:26 AM »
 spider's no speak of Buffalo Calf Road Woman  ,  ;D      ho hou