Posted on 01/21/2019 12:17:14 AM PST by vannrox
Sorry. Not buying it. The fact he cheated on his wife would cost a modern day American officer his commission. I think it was General Reno Benteen , I could be wrong but one of his fellow generals said of him “I’m only too proud to say I despised him’’. You like Custer, I don’t.
1. His wife was Custers biggest advocate. So why are you holding a grudge that she did not?
2. Major Reno is a subordinate of Custers at the Big Horn.
3. Capt Frederick William Benteen was also Custers subordinant at the Big Horn. He commanded H company.
4. Custers military record speaks for itself.
To be honest I have no idea but I seem to remember it falls somehow to Congress to deliberate?
“...The fact he cheated on his wife would cost a modern day American officer his commission...I could be wrong but one of his fellow generals said of him ‘I’m only too proud to say I despised him’...” [jmacusa, post 81]
And here I was suspecting your ignorance of USMA, ACW, and 19th century (US) history was wide & deep as it was - now you’ve removed all doubt. You are of course free to hold any opinion you like; convincing the forum that your opinion deserves to be taken seriously is another matter.
The first sentence I quoted is pure presentist bushwah. It’s a ploy often engaged in by Left-inclined academics, condemning individuals who lived long ago for failing to live up to modern “moral standards” - standards the Left sets and controls. Too cute by half.
There are no “facts” known about George Armstrong Custer’s infidelity, or lack of it. There are a lot of suspicions, rumors, and palaver by academics.
The words of one officer expressing dislike for another aren’t as significant as you think. I spent the better part of three decades on active duty, working with all ranks and all technical specialties from every US armed service department, most intelligence and security agencies, law enforcement, and personnel of a number of Allied nations; it fell to my lot to give technical advice to a great number of high-ranking individuals - very often, realities they did not like to hear. The one common constant among senior leaders in all these groups was their outsized egoes. And when they differed with another of their number, they weren’t shy about voicing their poor opinion of their opponent. They clashed more than they agreed. So the fact that someone said such words about Custer, wrong or right, deserved or not, is more in the nature of yawn-inducing than indicative of anything substantive.
Besides, what does Custer’s personal life have to do with is abilities as a soldier & commander? Claiming there is a connection here is also another Left gambit - one the Right keeps falling for, despite the fact that the Left doesn’t believe in it.
Sorry bud. You didn’t read the first part of the sentence. I said ‘’modern day’’ US officer. Custer was a bum. Jerkoff.
Hey, here’s a place you can start: Indian Country Today, 2/1/2017. Adrian Jawort.
“...You didn’t read the first part of the sentence. I said modern day’ US officer. Custer was a bum...” [jmacusa, post 85]
I read all of your post.
Your take on Custer’s private life doesn’t matter.
You are using the “presentism” gambit: the conceit that there is only one standard of “morality,” which is agreed to by all and never changes. Honest historical researchers reject it outright and warn others to do the same.
Presentism is used by two types of people:
1. Those short on knowledge, experience, or smarts. They can’t figure out what’s going on.
2. Dishonest people.
“Hey, here’s a place you can start: Indian Country Today, 2/1/2017. Adrian Jawort.” [jmacusa, post 86]
Thanks. I’ve read it on and off.
Tim Giago, the founder/publisher of the original print edition, is a well-known public personality in our area (western South Dakota). Can’t say what his connection is with the paper, just now. He’s blown hot & cold on a great many topics. Deserves credit for refusing to toe the (drearily predictable Left-leaning social-justice-uber-alles) party line on American Indian policies.
He owns no small store of courage; tribal feuds & disputes get really ugly on occasion but he perseveres.
One thing such publications are not really known for is any accurate take on military history, or current military affairs.
Uh, that’s General John A. Logan, not Custer.
I will charitably assume you just confused the phrase “native to” with the word “native.”
They mean very different things.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.