[flash width=420 height=315]//www.youtube.com/v/pZuGQJVftsk?hl=en_US&version=3[/flash]
Today, June 25th, is the 138th anniversary of the launch George Armstrong Custer’s ill-fated bid to become the 19th president of these United States.
It ended poorly at this first campaign stop, the Little Big Horn River in Montana, due to heavy turnout of Native American voters from the Lakota Sioux, Northern Cheyenne and Arapaho precincts.
Sadly, those brave men who followed Custer’s foolish errand died with him.
Lt. Col. G.A. Custer pulled a boner 138 years ago, for sure. If that happened today we'd never see the end of all the Senate Hearings.
I remember reading the Sioux considered the Black Hills as sacred ground. Discovery of gold and an influx of settlers frustrated the Prairie tribes with the outsiders lack of reverence for their sacred lands. They did their best to run the folks off, but it drew the attention of the U.S. Army.
While the quote below states Sitting Bull led the resistance against the 7th. Calvary, I believe some accounts place him away from the Battle. I guess it's a moot point. Too many dead people.
"Sitting Bull was a Lakota Medicine Man and Chief and considered the last Sioux to surrender to the U.S. Government. He was a Native American shaman and leader of the Hunkpapa Sioux, who led 3,500 Sioux and Cheyenne warriors against the US 7th Cavalry under George Armstrong Custer at the Battle of Little Bighorn on June 25, 1876."
Tatanka Iyotake (Bull Sitting)
..." In later life, Sitting Bull toured with Buffalo Bill Cody's Wild West Show, where he was a popular attraction. Often asked to address the audience, he frequently cursed them in his native Lakota language to the wild applause of his listeners.
Toward the end of his life, Sitting Bull was drawn to the mystical Ghost Dance as a way of repelling the white invaders from his people's land. Although he himself was not a follower, this was perceived as a threat by the American government, and a group of Indian police was sent to arrest him. In the ensuing scuffle, Sitting Bull and his son Crow Foot were killed."
I've always wondered.
A couple of hundred Americans willingly engage an enemy force maybe 10 to 15 times their number. Hopeless, and suicidal outcome.
Their leader considered a fool.
A few years earlier.
A couple of hundred Americans (and others) willingly engage an enemy force maybe 10 to 15 times their number. Hopeless, and suicidal outcome.
Their leaders considered heros. (The Alamo)
The American Indians were not a homogenous entity. Lots of inter tribal warfare too.
Often allies with the US Army against their enemies. Custer had Indian Scouts from rival tribes.
That's all.
PS I believe G A Custer was one of the youngest, most aggressive generals during the Civil War.
His brother, who also died at the Battle of the Little Big Horn,
was a double recipient of the Medal of Honor during the Civil War.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Custer
I read a book about GAC years ago. He was extremely brave but and arrogant and one of the biggest a%$%$#$s I have ever read about. He would have his men strapped to a wagon wheel and whipped minor infractions such as their shirt not being just right. But then he would march his men off on an un-authorized expedition with no water just to check on something about or for his wife. He reminded me of Douglas MacArthur in their opinion of themselves (which if accurate would elevate them to virtual godlike status). I don't like him... or MacArthur... or Andrew Jackson (Choctaw Tribal Member... he's a backstabbing %$#$#) I guess one could consider them "great" men but I would definately not consider them "good" men.
Interesting comparison... out of curiosity, have you ever read William Manchester's biography of MacArthur?
> I guess one could consider them "great" men but I would definately not consider them "good" men.
There is definitely a distinct difference. In certain instances many ordinary men have performed for God, Country and Humanity in ways that have landed them with laurels and chapters in history books. They were not all "good" men..The history books have a way of cleansing an individual of his or her mortal indiscretions or habits.
A good example would be Gen. Ulysses Grant. Some accounts portray him as an indecisive chronic drunk. When his President & Country called on him to direct troops in the War of Northern Aggression he accepted the challenge and history has been kind with his legacy. I'm assuming that being crude, drunk and moody didn't factor in with the task at hand.
