Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Flag_This

Been told all my life that Custer and his men could have cut down scores of Indians with their sabers had they retained them and maybe even broken out and escaped.

But the Indians had rifles. And arrows have more range than sabers. They massed their forces. A fatal combination for outnumbered U.S. cavalry.

But the Indians’ victory was only temporary. Until casinos.


42 posted on 06/25/2011 9:00:46 PM PDT by elcid1970 ("Deport Muslims. Nuke Mecca. Death to Islam. Freedom for mankind.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: elcid1970
"But the Indians had rifles. And arrows have more range than sabers."

I don't think the sabers would have helped much either. I think when the Sioux and Cheyenne hit Custer it was with overwhelming force from several directions - it was over very quickly. I doubt they would have had time to unlimber and set up the gatling guns, much less use them effectively.

54 posted on 06/25/2011 9:15:08 PM PDT by Flag_This (Real presidents don't bow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson