Comments on: THE BATTLE OF GREASY GRASS CREEK

By: Apache105

Apache105 — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 12:26:14 +0000

Comment to Steve said # 13:

Talking about “half baked wrong conclusion”, boy you need to do some research. Your statement about Reno during the civil is just downright funny. Also it was not a steep gully but a depression left by the old river bed. And another thing-Bloody Knife was not a crow scout. Get your facts together. Reno’s alcohol courage failed just when he needed it most. He commanded nothing after this, and caused the death of many. The trouble is, it effected his officers also. Ok Take Care.

By: ed gein

ed gein — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 12:33:34 +0000

I wonder if it was called the Greasy Grass before or after the battle?

By: Frank H. Robbins

Frank H. Robbins — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 19:00:02 +0000

Notation to the all news prints:

The Native American’s at that time betwwen 1870 - 1890 was trying just to make an estancance of their way of life. All blue coats (American Calvery’s horsemen was trying to do away with the Native American’s as trying to get rid of such people.

F. H. R. comits and reply’s

By: Gary

Gary — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 04:36:05 +0000

I read the article. I found that you did do your research and it sounds pretty acurate to me. It’s not taking one side over the other but it brings out the truths of what really happened. What I noticed is that people are making recist comments on here such as savages and so forth. I am Native American and my tribe was one of them that fought in the battle fo Greasy Grass. Crazy Horse (Tasunka Witko as the Oglala called him) was a brave man as you made note of. I appreciate that you brought out his name in our language. It does bother me that a man said that women of the tribes took off the genitals of the men but the women were not allowed in battle. I agree taht we are a great nation today but why lie, cheat, and decieve people to get what you want? I’m sure we’d be an even greater nation if the white man negotiated with our ancestors. All it took was cooperation and communication. Thank you again for the article.

By: Rick Moran

Rick Moran — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 02:58:38 +0000

“Tashunca-uitco AKA â€œCrazy Horse.â€

THis proved to me that you didn’t bother to read the article - you only dropped by to leave a bunch of whiney, blithering stupidities.

If you are going to comment on my site, you must first read the article. And before you accuse anyone of racism, I would strongly suggest you have pretty goddamn good proof. Funny how those who seem to drop that word so casually are themselves the most guilty of it.

By: David Muscalo

David Muscalo — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 23:41:41 +0000

Let’s not forget the atrocities visited on the dead by the peaceful loving Indians. Except for Custer, all of the other dead were mutilated by the woman of the tribes. They were especially adept at removing the genitals.

The Eastern Indian tribes were even more savage.

I am weary of listening to the apologists who denounce the white man for ridding the continent of indolent, misogynistic savages while creating the great nation that we are today.

By: _TIMMI_

_TIMMI_ — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 07:55:29 +0000

This is great for history assignments, however Reno was not incompetent and he certainly wasn’t a cowward.

By: Old Guy

Old Guy — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 16:36:03 +0000

Both the personalities and the politics involved are far too complex for an article of this length and even well informed people will come to differing conclusions (certainly “Custer’s Last Stand” makes for an interesting cultural Rohrschach’s test - it is notable, for instance, that the “anti-Custer” revisionists gained credence during the Viet Nam War, which was not dissimilar in many ways to the Indian Wars, while Custer’s redemption began after that nightmare was put to rest). The only thing in the article I find patently objectionable, however, is the calumny of Reno. Custer, either out of ignorance of the size and disposition of the foe or out of sheer hubris, sent Reno to do, with a hundred men, what Custer quickly found out he could not do with almost 300, namely to charge straight through the encampment. Reno did not panic and retreat to a defensive position out of cowardice, quite the contrary, he was halted by Indian firepower blocking his attack and he retired when it became clear that he was in danger of being outflanked, while pinned down from the front (exactly what the Indians then did to Custer, who might have benefited had he minded the same tactical considerations). Reno’s only failure was in being commanded by an officer who should have known the necessity of scouting his enemy before committing his forces (esp. committing them piecemeal, in a manner in which they could not act to withdraw and mutually reinforce each other - Bentinck was only able to link up with Reno, and to save the remnants of the Regiment, through sheer luck). One wonders, too, if Custer, had he not been so recently maltreated by the Grant Administration and had that not left him so desperate for “glorious redemption”, might have played it differently. As it was, he felt he had to “do or die” and bad tactics and over-zealousness dictated that it would be the latter.

By: His Is Crazy

His Is Crazy — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 19:53:53 +0000

This article lies.

Custer’s orders to Reno were suicide. Reno would have had his own “Last Stand” if he had tried to obey them. Reno was the true hero of The Greasy Grass. He fought bravely to save the situation from Custer’s criminal incompetance. Custer’s troops and officers, to the last man, despised him. Custer was highly skilled at making war with women and babies. Custer was getting ready to run for president. He disobeyed orders and got his troops killed in an attempt to have one last glorious victory against the Indians. The Indians fought for their country. After the campaign, Custer’s military career would have been over. His superiors despised him, just as his troops did. President Grant despised Custer.

He murdered his own troops for his political ambitions.

By: Bobby Bearden Davis

Bobby Bearden Davis — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 22:17:21 +0000

My Really big question is how can the Union Army consider George Custer a Civil War Hero.Im told it was for his heroic charges during the Civil War.I read that on one occasion George Custer charged.General Stewarts forces seven times before he was abale to break the Confederate lines.And General Stewarts forces were half the size . Sounds like he was better at sacrificing men to gain his objective.Also it is said George Custer made a captured Cheynne Girl from the battle of Wasita.And she had a son this is the only direct decendent of George Custer.Thanks