Announcement

Collapse

New Site - PLEASE READ

Hello All,
My name is Ashley and I am the one that moved the forum to its new hosting location. This was done for security reasons and try to keep the forum from going down every other day. I understand that the new forum looks very different from the old one but I promise almost everything you had before you still have it might just be in a different place.

Items that are gone due to a limitation of the new hosting/ forum update:
- Awards
- Flags

As I was going thought your posts I was able to fix a lot fo the issues you were listing. Below is kind of a running list of issues an what is fixed and what I am still working on.

Items that I have fixed from your comments:
- Smilie are now working.
- Color/Theme changes
- Signature are now showing up. (Here is how to edit them https://screencast.com/t/OJHzzhiV1)
- Ranking is now showing up.
- Private messaging is now working.

Some issues I am still working on are:
- Missing items from the Calendar
- Like button the posts is giving an error.

If anyone has any issues that they are running in to please let me know. Please only send real issues not things like I hate the colors of the site or the site looks cheap now. I am trying to get as many issues fixed for you as i can and If i have to read through stuff like that it's going to take me longer to get stuff fixed.

If anyone has any issues that they are running in to please let me know in the post below. Please give me as much detail as possible .
https://forums.armchairgeneral.com/forum/world-history-group-welcomes-you/armchair-general-magazine/5034776-new-site-please-read
See more
See less

So Custer? Great General, or Greatest General . ?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Pruitt View Post
    FBF,

    I won't argue with a true believer....If you think this is what happened, go ahead and think so.

    Pruitt
    It's called the primacy effect, You see most people once they lbelieve they understand something automatically dicount any subsequent information that disagrees with it. Hence the term only one chance to make a 1rst impression. Generally most people subconsciously shut their mind off from all disagreeing information.

    I also at first thought Custer was a knuckle head but if you actually read the pros and cons, and way them OBJECTIVELY you find the guy was incredibly analytical and reflective probably an ENTP personality type. Ever read his book? He sounds nothing like an egotistical self promoter, he points out his flaws, and mistakes on plenty of occasions. He held the Indians with cautious respect and empathized with them and tried to keep casualties to a minimum, Washita was to be a blood bath per his orders. but only between 30 and 90 Indians were killed, the 161 number was completely pulled out of Custers butt, to appease Sherman and Grant. He also knew indians were just as corrupt and political as the white men, and he could not justify their culture that promoted torture, rape, kidnapping and murder.

    Try Reading more than just the oped pieces that support the first thing you were told. I started out learning from the point that he was wrong, but as I read more and more, and more and actually started to make correlations, he and especially the court of inquiry cover up. Lt. Godfrey, the Court Reporter published accounts of the corruption of the inquiry. Most of the Soldiers that testified later changed their stories when they were no longer subject to repercussions from the Grant Government.

    Also now that the Indian narratives are out there about the battle you can correlate who was their, when they were there and what was going on.

    Comment


    • #17
      FBF
      Thanks for a well thought out post. Custer will always be controversial, Hollywood has made him out to be both imbecile and hero, since the 1960s he has been a popular whipping boy for white guilt over the treatment of the Native American.
      If his subordinates had carried out his orders as he issued them perhaps things would have turned out different.
      One thing we all know as fact is there is a common tradition in the US of trashing our historic figures which makes it very hard to separate truth from character assassination.
      I can not think of one American historic figure that has been exempt from being praised or defamed.
      Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
      Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by FluffyBunnyFeet View Post
        It's called the primacy effect, You see most people once they believe they understand something automatically discount any subsequent information that disagrees with it. Hence the term only one chance to make a 1st impression. Generally most people subconsciously shut their mind off from all disagreeing information.

        I also at first thought Custer was a knuckle head but if you actually read the pros and cons, and way them OBJECTIVELY you find the guy was incredibly analytical and reflective probably an ENTP personality type. Ever read his book? He sounds nothing like an egotistical self promoter, he points out his flaws, and mistakes on plenty of occasions. He held the Indians with cautious respect and empathized with them and tried to keep casualties to a minimum, Washita was to be a blood bath per his orders. but only between 30 and 90 Indians were killed, the 161 number was completely pulled out of Custer's butt, to appease Sherman and Grant. He also knew Indians were just as corrupt and political as the white men, and he could not justify their culture that promoted torture, rape, kidnapping and murder.

        Try Reading more than just the oped pieces that support the first thing you were told. I started out learning from the point that he was wrong, but as I read more and more, and more and actually started to make correlations, he and especially the court of inquiry cover up. Lt. Godfrey, the Court Reporter published accounts of the corruption of the inquiry. Most of the Soldiers that testified later changed their stories when they were no longer subject to repercussions from the Grant Government.

        Also now that the Indian narratives are out there about the battle you can correlate who was their, when they were there and what was going on.
        You don't know me and you have not read my numerous posts on the subject of Custer. Do not assume to judge me. I have given you a pass on what you believe to be the truth, so show a little courtesy and give me the same.

        Pruitt
        Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

        Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

        by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
          A bungling egoistical moron who got himself and half a regiment killed. Should have been tossed out on his ear after being found guilty of dereliction at his earlier court martial. His main skills were self-promotion and advanced butt-kissing.

          That pretty much sums it up.
          Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedy. -- Ernest Benn

          Comment


          • #20
            Custer was a very good regimental/brigade/Divisional commander, in a structured Field Army setting. AS an independent commander, not so much. As Fortesque points out, he was not a clever soldier. I will add that he was not much of an inventive military thinker, military organizer, nor was he very good at deductive reasoning.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by FluffyBunnyFeet
              At the Battle of Travilion station He saved the entire Western flank of the army under Sheridan that was caught off guard and was being rolled up by Jubal Early
              Given that Jubal Early wasn't even at the battle, and neither was Robert E. Lee (I suspect someone skimmed Wikipedia and thought Fitz Lee was Robert), and that Custer wasn't on the western flank, this seems indicative of your level of knowledge here. In fact, let me quote you Eric Wittenberg, the leading historian of the battle and on cavalry in the eastern theatre, on Custer and Trevilian Station.

              http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forum...on#post2271157

              http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forum...on#post1689041

              Far from saving anyone from being rolled up by troops that weren't present (the rest of Sheridan's force was making forward progress and doing reasonably well, actually) Custer got himself surrounded through sheer pigheadedness (mostly by troops that had not previously engaged under Fitz Lee and Rosser) and had to be rescued by other Union cavalry forces. The allegedly historical content of your posts is nothing more than pure fantasy.
              Last edited by Viperlord; 18 Mar 14, 10:07.
              "Liberty and Union, now and for ever, one and inseparable!" -Daniel Webster

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Viperlord View Post
                Given that Jubal Early wasn't even at the battle, and that Custer wasn't on the western flank, this seems indicative of your level of knowledge here. In fact, let me quote you Eric Wittenberg, the leading historian of the battle and on cavalry in the eastern theatre, on Custer and Trevilian Station.

                http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forum...on#post2271157

                http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forum...on#post1689041

                Far from saving anyone from being rolled up by troops that weren't present (the rest of Sheridan's force was making forward progress and doing reasonably well, actually) Custer got himself surrounded through sheer pigheadedness (mostly by troops that had not previously engaged under Fitz Lee and Rosser) and had to be rescued by other Union cavalry forces. The allegedly historical content of your posts is nothing more than pure fantasy.
                Interesting stuff!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
                  FBF
                  Thanks for a well thought out post. Custer will always be controversial, Hollywood has made him out to be both imbecile and hero, since the 1960s he has been a popular whipping boy for white guilt over the treatment of the Native American.
                  If his subordinates had carried out his orders as he issued them perhaps things would have turned out different.
                  One thing we all know as fact is there is a common tradition in the US of trashing our historic figures which makes it very hard to separate truth from character assassination.
                  I can not think of one American historic figure that has been exempt from being praised or defamed.






                  Now that is funny. subordinates follow Custer orders while he, himself disregard his orders from his superiors. With out the great fan club started by Libby Custer , he would have gone into history for what he was. A Glory hound and failure.
                  "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                  Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                  you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
                    Now that is funny. subordinates follow Custer orders while he, himself disregard his orders from his superiors. With out the great fan club started by Libby Custer , he would have gone into history for what he was. A Glory hound and failure.
                    Ironic, eh? Every Custer fan I've met lambast Benteen & Reno, but have amnesia about the fact that Custer was in direct violation of his orders on the fateful day...

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                      Ironic, eh? Every Custer fan I've met lambast Benteen & Reno, but have amnesia about the fact that Custer was in direct violation of his orders on the fateful day...
                      Again a complete lie or ignorance of fact.

                      Last orders from Terry was that his official orders from laramie

                      [LEFT]
                      Terryís written order to
                      Custer left the cavalry commander a large degree of
                      latitude. He was to follow th
                      e Indian trail that Reno had di
                      scovered on the Rosebud. If it
                      turned toward the Little Bighor
                      n, he should still continue sout
                      hward to the headwaters of
                      the Tongue and then towards the Little Bighor
                      n. All the while, his element should
                      continue ěfeeling constantly, to your left, so as
                      to preclude the possibi
                      lity of the escape of
                      the Indians to the south or southeast by pa
                      ssing around your left flank.î Terry expected
                      him to be at the mouth of the Little Bi
                      ghorn by the 26th, yet the order did not place
                      Custer on a time line.
                      63
                      In essence, the order was s
                      imply a suggestion for the cavalry
                      commander, and Custer realized this when he
                      copied in a letter to his wife the telling
                      paragraph of the order: ěIt is of course impo
                      ssible to give you any defi
                      nite instructions in
                      regard to this movement; and were it not
                      possible to do so, the
                      Department Commander
                      places too much confidence in your zeal, ener
                      gy, and ability to wish to impose upon you
                      61
                      Ibid., p. 423.
                      62
                      Utley,
                      Cavalier in Buckskin
                      , p. 175.
                      63
                      W. A. Graham,
                      The Custer Myth: A Source Book of Custeriana
                      , pp. 133-34.
                      26
                      precise orders, which might hamper your act
                      ion when nearly in contact with the
                      enemy. î

                      Terry also admitted in a now published letter to General Crooke that he had in fact told Custer to " That if he should strike the trail, and found it necessary, "use your own judgment, you know what you're doing". This letter was somehow made it to the Press, which pissed Grant off to no end. Grant and Sheridan order Terry to right a second report, laying the blame on Custer, for the debacle and take the blame off Sheridan, for a poorly conceived plan, and Clear the Military from embarrassment of the conduct of it's officers.

                      General Sherman in a letter to Sheridan in Private correspondence agreed that when Custer found he was so close the enemy camp, Custer had no choice but to attack the Village as their was no way he would have been able to conceal his presents until the 27th when Gibbons and terrys men arrived a day behind scheduled. That He either would have been attacked by the entire warrior camp now emboldened by the Battle of the Rosebud that turned Crooks much better armed and maned Column around, or find himself the scape goat for the Indian escape.
                      Last edited by FluffyBunnyFeet; 18 Mar 14, 09:59.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I would live to see a vote by the men of the 7th who were at the Little Big Horn as to Custer's capabilities. I expect he would not fare well...

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Custer was at best an average general who thought he was much more brilliant than he really was an that got him in trouble. The only thing that saved his reputation was being killed at Little Bighorn making him a martyr for the cause of western expansion.
                          “When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun'.”
                          ― Groucho Marx

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Checkertail20 View Post
                            The only thing that saved his reputation was being killed at Little Bighorn making him a martyr for the cause of western expansion.
                            Libby's PR campaign?
                            "Shoot for the epaulets, boys! Shoot for the epaulets!" - Daniel Morgan

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Custer was neither, A decent subordanet cavalry commander - yes, When given supreme command as at the Little Big Horn his talents (if any) were totally checked and exploited by the true cavalry masters of the age.

                              Death bed last words. Always pay the Legions, Septimius Severus.

                              http://www.greatmilitarybattles.com/...tle_big_h.html

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                http://civilwarcavalry.com/?p=3281

                                I thought this was a pretty balanced take on Custer.
                                "Liberty and Union, now and for ever, one and inseparable!" -Daniel Webster

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X