Lieutenant Colonel George A. Custer executed poor mission command during the Battle of Little Bighorn by failing to create a shared understanding of the operational environment and exercise disciplined initiative. Custer was the commander of a battalion in the Battle of Little Bighorn during the Indian Wars1. Little Bighorn was the location of a nomadic village of Lakota Sioux, Northern Cheyenne, and Arapaho tribes2. Custer approached the unified Indian village with his force of nearly 650 men from the east and south to act as a hammer. Following Custer’s advance, additional infantry and cavalry approached from the north to act as a blocking force or anvil in support of Custer's movements2. In less than an hour, Custer lost his life and over a third of his troops at the hands of an Indian force of nearly 1,800 warriors3. …show more content…
Custer’s scouts warned the commander of the size of the Indian village and cautioned that the Indian’s in the village likely had seen the smoke from the battalion’s camp1. Custer disregarded these warnings and did not share them with his staff or troops1. ADRP 6-0 states commanders and staffs use collaboration and dialogue to create a shared understanding of operational issues and approaches to solving them4. In this case, the extraordinary size of the Indian force was an unexpected operational issue. Because Custer failed to communicate the scouts’ warnings, his men unknowingly facing an adversary nearly three times their size. This failure to create shared understanding significantly contributed to the sweeping defeat Custer’s battalion suffered at Little
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Scribbles on Scrap: A Mission Command Analysis of the Battle of the Little Bighorn The massacre at the Little Bighorn in 1876 was one of the most recognizable battles in American history. The defeat of the 7th Cavalry Regiment and the slaughter of 268 Soldiers by the Sioux serves as an enduring subject of study for contemporary military professionals. The basic modus operandi for command principles in the times of the Indian Wars loosely mirrors the mission command philosophy of today; however, if we still lay credence to the efficacy of the mission command philosophy, how was it that a conventional force under the direction of a battle proven leader was defeated by an irregular enemy? In the end, Lieutenant Colonel George A. Custer’s complacent
On July 30, 2008, a bloody battle involving Coalition forces took place in the mountainous eastern Afghan province of Nuristan. This was the Battle of Wanat and the devastating amount of Coalition casualties began a vigorous investigation by the United States Army. The village of Wanat, defended by Second Platoon, Chosen Company, Second Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment, 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team would fall victim to numerous bad decision made by higher command. Although the men of Chosen Company fought hard, they ended up surrounded, vastly outnumbered, and without any Battalion assets. This paper will argue the reasons for the disastrous outcome of the Battle of Wanat; examining the effective company leadership exploiting effective
However, the conditions of the environment, and great distance from civilized establishments made it extremely difficult for Custer to maintain the same type of military discipline within himself or his troops. This aided in the demoralization and combat ineffectiveness of his unit. While this is not necessarily typical of all units fighting in the Indian Wars, it was noticeably true to be captured by historical accounts of both surviving members of his unit and through personal diaries of those who did not survive Little
“Custer's Last Stand” was a victory for the Indian people, but as a result of their win, they brought a lot of attention to themselves which angered the American people. As a result, the US government treated the Native Americans more hostile, allowing John Gibbons to go and attack the Nez Perce Indians, didn’t follow through with their agreements dealing with land and took land away, and kept expanding westward while continuing to grow America East to West. Directly after new got out that the Indians had not only won the battle, but had slaughtered the American army, John Gibbons rounded up every available man and went after the Nez Perce Indians, whom he thought were the easiest and head of attack. Many innocent woman and children died on
Accusations have ranged from he was a drunk, to he had an illegitimate child who was a product of rape ( later disproven by a genealogy test). Many of these accusations hold little weight in the scale that is historical accuracy. Possibly the man who almosts knows as much about Custer than Custer himself is Steven Alexander. He has been a lifelong historian on Custer and reenactor for the better part of 20 years. When asked about how Custer himself would respond to the question of fighting the Indians he snaps into first person and says “I’m a soldier.
The Lakota tribe was very cultural and the tribe wanted to share their culture with the world because they thought it was very special and something other people would like. Dee brown wrote this story explaining how the Lakota tribe was and what they did. The story took the perspective of a 27- year old man that was in and experienced the Lakota tribe and survived. The quote “getting the story right”, the meaning of that quote goes very well with the experience of battling in the war because when you fight you may do something wrong and not do it right the first
The plan seemed to be a simple one that required the three units to converge on the Lakota Indians and deal them a definite defeat. Custer and his Seventh Calvary arrived ahead of Gibbon’s unit and little did he know that Crook’s unit was turned back by Crazy Horse and his warriors. Upon Custer’s first initial evaluation, he believed that it was just a small Indian village. Custer split his unit into three divisions and carried out the attack. He was met with thousands of Lakota, Cheyenne, and Arapaho warriors that dealt a devastating defeat to George A. Custer and his Seventh Cavalry.
The Native Americans many times did not understand what the soldiers were doing, from this the Sioux became scared and fled. Furthermore, Reno’s battalion had coverage from the landscape which cause mass confusion, among both groups. From the eyes of George Henderson, the Native Americans truly never faltered; however, as it was mentioned they could not truly see the battalion. The one statement made from both sides was the Native Americans fled. Though no party considered the other weak, they both felt fear, both the battalion and the Native Americans became confused during this battle.
The Effective Military Leader Warrant Officer Romero, Philip T. SPC: Captain Dearth, 1st Platoon The book “Black Hearts One Platoons Descent into Madness in Iraq’s Triangle of Death” by Jim Frederick is a true story about multiple leadership failures and six United States Soldiers from 1st Platoon, Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment, 101st Airborne Division who were convicted for their involvement in horrible crimes while deployed to Iraq. The horrific acts including rape as well as murder committed by the soldiers of 1st platoon were a direct result of poor military leadership. Bad leadership will corrupt any military unit.
Class, One reason for the defeat of the Plains Indians was the decline of the buffalo herds, due to the killing by white hunters. The buffalo was one of the most sacred things to the Native Americans, but was their main source of supplies, because they used every part of the buffalo to help them. Second are the former Indian lands being settled by homesteaders, because this reduced the ability of tribes to migrate freely through the plains. This also did not allow the Indians to hunt for more buffalo herds. Lastly was the hostile encounter with the US Army which provided a few victories for the Indian population although Sitting Bull and the Indians fought stunning battles such as the defeat of the US Calvary at Little Big Horn, in the end
Article Reviewed Potts, J. B. (1994). General Custer and the Little Bighorn reconstruction-again. Journal of Military History, 58(2), 305-314. George Armstrong Custer joined 210 troopers in death at the hands of Sioux and Cheyenne warriors; but his famous last stand has lived on in public memory. Generations of historians, novelists, and poets, along with painters, illustrators, and motion picture and television producers, have made Custer the nation 's most remembered soldier and the Little Bighorn the most frequently depicted battle.
By definition, “mission command is the exercise of authority and direction by the commander using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations,” according to ADRP 5-0. Mission command is about knowing when to change the task to fit the purpose. This paper is intended to analyze the mission command of one side of the battle, focusing on the commander’s role in the operations process. The Battle of Bunker Hill was the most important battle of the American Revolution because of Colonel Prescott’s superior command and control.
While Cluster was walking along the little bighorn river the Terry/Gibbon column was marching toward the mouth of the little bighorn. Custer planned a surprise attack but he get spotted before he was able to do it. So he decided to attack without anymore waiting. His scouts warned him that the village is very big but he didn 't hear on them. And so he ran into his crushing defeat.
The Importance of Accountability in the U.S. Army Every living thing on Earth demands discipline and accountability, but when it comes to U.S. Army, soldiers are trained specifically in these subjects. There are extreme costs at risk if these principles are not held high by the Armed Forces. Most organized Armies focus on the importance of accountability and teach it in the very beginning stages of readiness. Accountability includes things such as showing up on time to safeguarding sensitive records, keeping account of resources to watching out for fellow soldiers. Almost everything can be tied back to the importance of accountability.
In Life Among the Piutes, sarah winnemucca hopkins describes what happens when soldiers came to their reservation based off what white settlers tell the government. The most shocking instance of this happened when Winnemucca encountered a group of soldier who told her the white settlers accused the natives of stealing cattle, “the soldiers rode up to their [meaning the Piute’s] encampment and fired into it, and killed almost all the people that were there… after the soldiers had killed but all bur some little children and babies… the soldiers took them too… and set the camp on fire and threw them into the flames to see them burned alive”(78). This is an abhorrent act that is unthinkable in a functioning society. The natives had done nothing but want to hold some shred of land from the settlers who had taken everything from them and are exterminated like vermin. This was something that stayed hidden from many white settlers because of its barbarism and by exposing it Winnemucca truly educates the reader, past and present, on how natives are