|
Post by Allen Wiener on May 19, 2012 8:10:43 GMT -5
I think he was also waiting for the reinforcements that arrived March 3.
|
|
|
Post by loucapitano on May 20, 2012 13:28:12 GMT -5
Great discussion guys. Keep it up! To me, the common axiom of all defenses of fixed positions, whether city, fortress or terrain is to "hold until relieved." The holding action accomplished by making the cost to the attacker too high so the attack never occures, or takes so long, the seige is raised from the outside. I believe that was the simple strategy Travis employed. Unfortunately, he couldn't be relieved. I respect and admire you guys with infantry training. You've seen first hand what infantry can and cannot do when loss of life is figured into the equation. Throughout history, there are occasions where loss of life is not a high consideration for both the attackers and defenders. e.g. Rourk's Drift, Bastogne. These men would "hold or die." (By the way. I've read that the 101st Airborne refuses to acknowledge that they were "rescued" by Patton.) I agree, the Alamo defenders could have sold their lives more dearly...and many did. Perhaps if they were as fanatical as the Japanese warriors of Iwo and Okinawa, in other words, a bloodbath. Sorry, it just didn't happen that way. But fight they did, and their martyrdom contributed to the history of Texas, the United States and Mexico. For that, I remember them , and thank them.
|
|