In actuality, the Kiowa by the 1880's were a spent force. Col. Randal MacKenzie's defeat of the Comanche's and Kiowa's at Palo Duro Canyon in Texas near Amarilllo in1874 did them in as a fighting force. He slaughtered Indian ponies (1500 - 2000) . He also burned down their lodges. Without this logistical base, the Kiowa's and Comanche's had to go back to their reservation by Feb of 1875. They were not a factor in any major battles let alone an assault on a fort in the 1880's. The last major Indian uprising to be put down in the 1880's were the Apache's in Arizona. There was also Wounded Knee in South Dakota but that never left the reservation and was more of a US Army massacre.
I listened to a record many years ago, “Red Hawk’s Account of Custer’s Last Stand.” Red Hawk was a 14 year old Oglala when he fought in the battle, but his account was delivered as an old man, 50 years later. He said that they lived in tribes on the prairie, the whole nation perhaps 7-8 thousand, and that they had no conception of the size of the United States, of the sheer number of people, a time when their people would have been outnumbered by the immigrants coming into the U.S. in a single week. Red Hawk stated flatly that they never would have fought if this were known.
it's like in our history when they where Over 4,000 Zulus, the main part of Cetshwayo's army, then launched a surprise attack on Chelmsford's poorly fortified camp. against 139 British soldiers that stood their ground against overwhelming odds.
To me I think this battle took place somewhere in the 1870s because I heard that the Kiowa and Comanche war were fought and ended during this time. In the 1880s, The us were fighting the Apache and Sioux Indians.
The land on which the fort was built on was flat terrain and its surroundings of hills and mountains made it a priority. This is called a pass and when enemy personnel are launching an offensive they would use the pass as a staging point for any attack.
The Main Reason why they built a Fort in and Surrounded by Hills & Mountains was so they couldn't be seen from 10 miles away, if they had built the Fort on Flat Land they would be a Sitting Duck, & a Invading army would know Immediately where the fort is if they could see it 10 miles away ! It's kinda like a Old Camouflage Effective Tactic making hard for people to see or know the Forts actually location !
That James best with doctor he was a great actor that played in a lot of western movies and the favorite TV show the dukes of Hazzard as the sheriff of Hazzard county
Fort McCulloch named after famous Texas ranger Ben McCulloch. Cimarron sells McCulloch Colts. Which were unusual looking revolvers that Samuel Colt shipped to his friend Ben McCulloch for defense against marauding commanchies after the Union army left Texas when the civil war started. The U.S. Cavalry replaced the Confederate troops in the fort after the war ended. And these so called Indian Wars continued as seen in this movie.
Um, what unusual looking Colts? They would have been either the 1851 Navy (unlikely) or the 1860 Colt Army. Colt had outfitted the Texas rangers with the 1832 Colt Patterson from the 1830s
The Calvary was never issued winchesters till the Spanish American War. There is no record of them attacking a fort it was suicide. They would attack columns away from the fort.
The soldiers would have been using the 1873 Springfield "Trapdoor" single-shot rifle in .45-70 caliber. And the patrol would have hardly been carrying sabers. They were noisy, heavy, got in the way, and were pretty useless in Western combat.
Never understood the logic of riding horses around a fort while those inside the fort shoot at you. Of course, a moving target is harder to hit than a still target, but they are still targets, nevertheless. If I were the Indians, I'd shoot flaming arrows into the fort from the cover of rocks or trees or whatever else I could come up with.
I really liked watching Western movies as a kid. Now that I'm older and have experience shooting, having people riding full speed on a horse, shooting at soldiers up in a fort, seems ridiculous. It's work to accurately hit a target even while standing still. Trying to aim and hit something while you're bouncing up and down on a running horse seems near impossible. Meanwhile, the soldiers firing from fixed positions have a much easier time. At least in this movie, contrary to most Westerns, the Indians get off their horses and advance on foot. There's still the problem of them attacking in broad daylight, after having given up any element of surprise. Better to sneak up on the fort at night when most of the soldiers are asleep, overwhelm the few guards on duty, and breach the fort before the soldiers can organize a defense.
Earlier in the movie - They Rode West, 1954 - we can see a portrait of the US President back then, U.S. Grant. So the action takes place between 1869 and 1877. Not in the 1880s. Besides, love that movie, recommand everybody to watch it in its entirety.
Tell me....what self respecting Fort doesn't have a cannon....and women to put in the Mess Hall when the Indians...I meant indigenous Native Americans attack ?
The Cub Scouts defended the nation’s frontiers, and the suspenders industry played a key role. Indians had a difficult time assaulting crenellated curtain walls, and fully manned stockades without catapults, or,other siege equipment.
But Comanches still mostly used their bows which were a lot more effective against guns that would take a minute to reload they got that wrong here the Comanches fought mounted on their horses they hardly would ever un mount their horses to take a shot they were a lot better at this than the blue coats and the Texas rangers
Ha,Ha ,Ha ,les cavaliers sont équipés de Winchester mle 1892 quI n'a jamais été adoptée par L"US Army ! ! ! ! ! En 1873 , ils ont té équipé de la carabine Springfield mle 1873 à 1 coup, eet en calibre 45-70 . . . .
Anglos are so soft. If Italians settled the west the Indians wouldve been wiped out in 10 days. And if anyone asked what happened to them we'd say: Don't worry about it.
@@johnnylundberg9703 we kicked ass in Abyssinia and we brutally but down a rebellion in Lybia. If Mussolini would've waited until we actually had an Army Greece would've been easy too. Italy is known as the grave yard of Armies.
@@MrJoebrooklyn1969 You're not Italian. Your ancestors were rejected by and ejected from Italy for good reason. You are a rootless piece of muck born onto another nation's land on a foreign continent. That you have such a truculent attitude is unsurprising given your identity issues. It's the same rage seen in abused dogs.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 87 วันนี้!! คู่เอก "ก้องชัย vs โชคปรีชา"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YN6e7HVnekw/mqdefault.jpg)
With your donations I can get more time to create and upload new videos.
paypal.me/YTmustbefunny
Man, I always loved those 1950's cowboy and Indian movies!
These films are rubish ! Complete nonsense. The Indian is a cliché. Shame !
In actuality, the Kiowa by the 1880's were a spent force. Col. Randal MacKenzie's defeat of the Comanche's and Kiowa's at Palo Duro Canyon in Texas near Amarilllo in1874 did them in as a fighting force. He slaughtered Indian ponies (1500 - 2000) . He also burned down their lodges. Without this logistical base, the Kiowa's and Comanche's had to go back to their reservation by Feb of 1875. They were not a factor in any major battles let alone an assault on a fort in the 1880's. The last major Indian uprising to be put down in the 1880's were the Apache's in Arizona. There was also Wounded Knee in South Dakota but that never left the reservation and was more of a US Army massacre.
Wounded Knee eas an massacre, on on a long list comittrd by the US cavalry
Well, at least the producers didn't arm the Indians with M1's or the troopers with M-16's.
Lots of historical info here.
@@steffenrosmus9177 yes, after years of massacres by the Indians.
I thought the same thing. By 1880 only the Apaches were left and they were on the run.
I listened to a record many years ago, “Red Hawk’s Account of Custer’s Last Stand.” Red Hawk was a 14 year old Oglala when he fought in the battle, but his account was delivered as an old man, 50 years later. He said that they lived in tribes on the prairie, the whole nation perhaps 7-8 thousand, and that they had no conception of the size of the United States, of the sheer number of people, a time when their people would have been outnumbered by the immigrants coming into the U.S. in a single week. Red Hawk stated flatly that they never would have fought if this were known.
Somebody should've told him.
it's like in our history when they where Over 4,000 Zulus, the main part of Cetshwayo's army, then launched a surprise attack on Chelmsford's poorly fortified camp. against 139 British soldiers that stood their ground against overwhelming odds.
The end of the Civil War was near, when quite accidentally, an officer sneezed and yelled retreat, and retreated right into a victory!
Does anyone take a lickin' or do they all turn chicken?
@@jackattack2608 no, but they resumed with a bang and a boom
To me I think this battle took place somewhere in the 1870s because I heard that the Kiowa and Comanche war were fought and ended during this time. In the 1880s, The us were fighting the Apache and Sioux Indians.
Why would anyone build a fort with walls underneath a mountain where the enemy can shoot down on them?
The land on which the fort was built on was flat terrain and its surroundings of hills and mountains made it a priority. This is called a pass and when enemy personnel are launching an offensive they would use the pass as a staging point for any attack.
The Main Reason why they built a Fort in and Surrounded by Hills & Mountains was so they couldn't be seen from 10 miles away, if they had built the Fort on Flat Land they would be a Sitting Duck, & a Invading army would know Immediately where the fort is if they could see it 10 miles away ! It's kinda like a Old Camouflage Effective Tactic making hard for people to see or know the Forts actually location !
And of course, not a single shot hit any horses.
That James best with doctor he was a great actor that played in a lot of western movies and the favorite TV show the dukes of Hazzard as the sheriff of Hazzard county
Fort McCulloch named after famous Texas ranger Ben McCulloch. Cimarron sells McCulloch Colts. Which were unusual looking revolvers that Samuel Colt shipped to his friend Ben McCulloch for defense against marauding commanchies after the Union army left Texas when the civil war started.
The U.S. Cavalry replaced the Confederate troops in the fort after the war ended. And these so called Indian Wars continued as seen in this movie.
Um, what unusual looking Colts? They would have been either the 1851 Navy (unlikely) or the 1860 Colt Army. Colt had outfitted the Texas rangers with the 1832 Colt Patterson from the 1830s
@@andrewstackpool4911 1860 Army with full flutes. You don't see real ones like that very often.
th-cam.com/video/TDK-c5hGPYk/w-d-xo.html
Some of the Indian Village footage is recycled from "Pony Soldier" (1952)
some of the set looks like it's from Beau Geste.
Very cool.
Great movie!
The Calvary was never issued winchesters till the Spanish American War. There is no record of them attacking a fort it was suicide. They would attack columns away from the fort.
The soldiers would have been using the 1873 Springfield "Trapdoor" single-shot rifle in .45-70 caliber. And the patrol would have hardly been carrying sabers. They were noisy, heavy, got in the way, and were pretty useless in Western combat.
That's what I thought. Big screwup,
Winchesters not made in 45 long colt or colt saa not made in 44-40 until too late.
Never understood the logic of riding horses around a fort while those inside the fort shoot at you. Of course, a moving target is harder to hit than a still target, but they are still targets, nevertheless. If I were the Indians, I'd shoot flaming arrows into the fort from the cover of rocks or trees or whatever else I could come up with.
if the North had lost the Civil War, those Indians would have been allied with the British & the Russians.
I really liked watching Western movies as a kid. Now that I'm older and have experience shooting, having people riding full speed on a horse, shooting at soldiers up in a fort, seems ridiculous. It's work to accurately hit a target even while standing still.
Trying to aim and hit something while you're bouncing up and down on a running horse seems near impossible. Meanwhile, the soldiers firing from fixed positions have a much easier time.
At least in this movie, contrary to most Westerns, the Indians get off their horses and advance on foot. There's still the problem of them attacking in broad daylight, after having given up any element of surprise. Better to sneak up on the fort at night when most of the soldiers are asleep, overwhelm the few guards on duty, and breach the fort before the soldiers can organize a defense.
You're so wise
Love James Best good actor.
very nice
Las películas en Castellano por favor. Gracias.
Who in the hell builds a fort with adjacent high ground overlooking the walls!?
Typical Gummint operation.
That's what I was thinking. It doesn't seem right, they would have used the hill or moved further away.
Wild, Wild West.
Earlier in the movie - They Rode West, 1954 - we can see a portrait of the US President back then, U.S. Grant. So the action takes place between 1869 and 1877. Not in the 1880s.
Besides, love that movie, recommand everybody to watch it in its entirety.
This indigenous method of attacking US Forts by riding around seems stupid at best
Tell me....what self respecting Fort doesn't have a cannon....and women to put in the Mess Hall when the Indians...I meant indigenous Native Americans attack ?
Very accurate!
Really? Why didn't the Indians employ the whiteman tactics? After all they had guns and horses? Why were they so reckless?
Apart from the cavalry using Winchesters instead of Sharps Carbines or Springfield rifles.
Why would a bunch of guys ride around a fort shooting at them like in Blazing Saddles?
Can anyone present tell the title of the movie? I am collecting this type of cinema and I have never seen this one before. Greetings!
They Rode West
Love this. What's the name of this western?
Cool
That was intense
The Cub Scouts defended the nation’s frontiers, and the suspenders industry played a key role. Indians had a difficult time assaulting crenellated curtain walls, and fully manned stockades without catapults, or,other siege equipment.
ROTFLOL
crenellated curtain walls they could have used their M60's huh?
WINCHESTERS 92 in the US Army ???? in 1880...lol
Woo woo hayya Hihya hoya dancing around the fire I always wondered what it meant?
That Circle-Dance must be inspired by recreational "grass" at this big Pep Rally before the Big Game against the Calvary ??
excelente muito bom;
Uniforms hopelessly wrong as usual. And Winchester rifles? Can't movies ever get it right.
Yeah, but those tight-fitting pants must have really got the female movie goers all warm and tingly inside.
As nações indígenas são as mais guerreiras
It has typical voice n back ground
I prefer the battles with the Hekawi on "F Troop"
and again, not a single Springfield trapdoor.............
Jaaaaaauuuuu...jeeefeee.desveladoo
Who supplied the Kiowa and Comanche tribes with rifles and ammunition?
Adam Cheklat they stole them in raids
@@bumpdownspooky True, but they also extensively traded with people in New Mexico for steel weapons and guns
Young King oh thanks didn’t know that
But Comanches still mostly used their bows which were a lot more effective against guns that would take a minute to reload they got that wrong here the Comanches fought mounted on their horses they hardly would ever un mount their horses to take a shot they were a lot better at this than the blue coats and the Texas rangers
Cristopher Flores yes sir
I love Usa🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
the indians were always big outsiders to win , if you wanted to put a bet on at the bookies .
👍👍👍
What idiot would drop a fort into a landscape that was surrounded by a number of higher peaked hills?
Whoever the producer was.
What the movie called
They rode west.
long live european contest!!!
Americans vs Europeans
***FREEDOM IS"NT FREE LET'S SAVE BURMA***
To bad it was like that.
Red Apache.
Ha,Ha ,Ha ,les cavaliers sont équipés de Winchester mle 1892 quI n'a jamais été adoptée par L"US Army ! ! ! ! ! En 1873 , ils ont té équipé de la carabine Springfield mle 1873 à 1 coup, eet en calibre 45-70 . . . .
Amerikanischer hat schon immer die Minderheiten gekillt 😄
Native American Red Indian.
Folk fra Jylland
Castellano pero hablado 😠🇨🇱
Стыдно,уничтожение коренного населения,преподносить как какие то героические битвы....
First view....
インディアンに正義ですね❗️
Cuando era niño veía estas películas....
Anglos are so soft. If Italians settled the west the Indians wouldve been wiped out in 10 days. And if anyone asked what happened to them we'd say: Don't worry about it.
Just like in Abessinia, Libya, Greece and other places?
@@johnnylundberg9703 we kicked ass in Abyssinia and we brutally but down a rebellion in Lybia. If Mussolini would've waited until we actually had an Army Greece would've been easy too.
Italy is known as the grave yard of Armies.
@@MrJoebrooklyn1969 You're not Italian. Your ancestors were rejected by and ejected from Italy for good reason. You are a rootless piece of muck born onto another nation's land on a foreign continent. That you have such a truculent attitude is unsurprising given your identity issues. It's the same rage seen in abused dogs.
@Sarah Jessica Farter if u said it to my face you'd be knocked out.
Top notch rubbish battle scene 🤠🤡
United States vs white actors pretending to be Kiowa & Comanche
Espanih.xf.