Relative of Custer here. Your paks relatives slaughtered the 7th but according to Sittig Bull, on his authority, they lost the war winning the battle. Slaughter and horrendous acts abound Thursday Ohio from 1780s to about 1815.
Ft. Recovery Ohio is the first sight of Indians wiping out 600 soldiers, 400 volunteers and nearby 300 camp folders. At my Grandmother’s farm I had collected 7 guide on irons, 3 soldiers under the barn, 200+ arrow heads, buttons, flintlock. Grandpa was an Indian and we fed the bones of 3 soldiers and two horse’s to the dogs when I was 7. Dad beat my ass.
Awhile ago there was a thread on the logic of not killing all of the enemy, taking no prisoners, and/or torturing POWs. I don’t remember all of the reasons why it isn’t a good idea, but 1) the enemy will fight harder and not surrender and 2) they will do the same to you.
Of course then the question becomes “who started the terrible behavior first?”
I know that I was shocked to hear about American troops in the Pacific killing the Japs that did surrender. I don’t think the Japs were inclined to surrender in the first place, but the American guys said “If we took them prisoner - what were we going to do with them?” I don’t know how prevalent that was.
I was also surprised reading an account of American medics in a German concentration camp. It was after they were liberated, and word from the Jews came that perhaps 20 Germans were posing as prisoners as they hadn’t been able to flee in time before the Allies took the camp over.
The medics lined up the Germans and executed them. A just punishment; I was just surprised that it was medics that fired the shots. Although I guess it shouldn’t have come as a surprise.