The defeat by the Texans at the 1836 Battle of the Alamo made martyrs of the heroes who fought until the end and inspired the rest of Texans to fight with valor to gain independence from Mexico. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the 1836 Battle of the Alamo and to identify how the utilization of intelligence assets or the lack thereof could off resulted in an alternate outcome. Additionally, this paper will provide a brief analysis of the battle and will, based on evidence, show how if the Texan forces would had defeat the Mexican army in The battle of the Alamo Mexico would had held control of Southern Texas yielding a faster impendence for the Texans.
In December 1835, after General (Gen.) Martín Perfecto de Cos surrendered, a group
…show more content…
The forces at the Alamo where expecting arrival of the Mexican forces until mid-March (Hickman, 2017). On 22 January 1836, Col. Bowie received intelligence from local scout Señor Jose Cassiano that Gen. Santa Ana on Texas with a force of 4,600 men. Col. Bowie had talks with local religious leaders that confirmed Señor Cassiano’s intelligence (Lord, 2012). LTC Travis rejected the intelligence and asserted he did not believed the Mexican forces would reach the Alamo before 15 March 1836 (Hardin, 2010). Further reports from scouts delivered to LTC Santa Anna described a Mexican force of 1,600 infantry, 400 cavalry, 80 wagons, 400 mules, 3,000 mule-loads of flour, 300 bushels of biscuits, 2 mortars, and 12 pieces of artillery (Lord, 2012). On 23 February 1836, the Mexican force led by Gen. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna began an artillery attack at the Alamo. The attack last for 13 days and on the morning of 6 March the Mexican force breached the wall and overpowered the outnumbered resistance (History.com, 2010). Although it took 13 days, the inevitable happened and the Gen. Santa Anna’s forces killing nearly every fighter in the fortress destroyed the Alamo. It has been reported that the Mexican force later executed the few Texan troops that survived (Hickman,
The Civil War …” in reference list. [5] For citation, see “The Battle of Picacho Pass, Visiting …” in reference list. [6] For citation, see “History of American Intelligence…” in reference
In Texas, Antonio López de Santa Anna is most notably known for defeating heroic men such as, James Bowie and Davy Crockett, in a thirteen day war, at the Alamo, a former french mission in 1836. What uninformed readers may not know is that Santa Anna ruled through eleven presidential terms, a combined total of twenty-two years. In this research paper, readers will be informed about the early life of Santa Anna, the wars he fought in, and his impact on Texas. Antonio López de Santa Anna was born in Vera Cruz, on February 21, 1794. Santa Anna’s parents were Antonio Lafaye de Santa Anna and Manuela Perez de Lebron.
Starting in mid-January to mid-February, there was interest in assaulting the Shahikot Valley in the Paktia province of Afghanistan by employing U.S. ground combat forces as part as an operation due to intelligence reports suggesting that enemy forces, which included al Qaeda and the Taliban where in the stages of reoccupying the area to regroup its forces after its sustaining defeats during the early stages of Operation Enduring Freedom. A debate between intelligence agencies on whether the enemy troops would be on the valley floor or on the hills. Well before the battle, early intelligence estimates, which drew on HUMINT and other sources, claimed that nearly 1,000 al Qaeda and Taliban forces might be present in the Shahikot Valley but then were lowered to about 200 to 300 personnel (Baranick, Binnendijk , Kuglar, 2009). They also concluded that they were mostly living in the valley’s villages, rather than deployed in the surrounding mountains and ridgelines as they thought they would be from the more tactical
“Battle of Little Bighorn” The Native Americans fought against union soldiers because, even after the union took over the Native Americans land and banished them to live Oklahoma, they came in and took the place they gave them to live in push that even farther west. After being pushed around so much and being taken out of lands that they have build houses on and farmed, they just couldn 't take it anymore. The lights have went far enough in the Indians decided to take matters into their own hands. Americans were constantly beating up, killing, and messing around with the Indian tribes.
(pg. 345-348) This book shows that there is much more to the “story” of the Alamo than what is flashed onto the big screen. Many of the details surrounding the main events have now been combined together in an eye-opening way.
The Mexica’s tribute empire covered a massive region and was populated by numerous different indigenous groups. Many accounts have attempted to portray the conquering of this empire as a fete that was accomplished by five hundred men alone facing the vast population of indigenous people. However, this view of events inaccurately shows the indigenous people as united. In fact the indigenous people were far from unified. The Mexica Empire was a newly formed entity and many enmities remained between the recently subjugated groups and the Mexica.
At that time, only about 75,000 Mexican citizens lived north of the Rio Grande. As a result, U.S. forces led by Stephen W. Kearny and Robert F. Stockton were able to conquer those lands. Taylor advancing, and captured Monterrey in September. With the losses adding up, Mexico turned to old standby General Antonio López de Santa Anna, the strongman who had been living in exile in Cuba. Santa Anna convinced Polk that, if allowed to return to Mexico, he would end the war on terms positive to the United States.
“In exchange for his freedom, Santa Anna signed a treaty recognizing Texas’ independence” (Battle of San Jacinto, 2015). General Houston and his army were heavly inspired for victory following the massacres at the Alamo and Goliad. Santa Anna lost the Battle of San Jacinto due his previous viciousness, arrogance, and misuse of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) assets effectively. Had Santa Anna not made these mistakes, the Battle of San Jacinto would have turned out differently and Texas may have not won its independence from Mexico (Wright, n.d.). Introduction
Battle of Tenochtitlan – Fall of the Aztec Empire The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the historical Battle of Tenochtitlan and apply critical reasoning and battle analysis techniques to assess the utilization of intelligence assets and provide alternate outcomes. Prior to the arrival of the Spaniards in 1519, the mighty Aztec Empire was at the height of its power. From their capital city, Tenochtitlan, the Aztec controlled much of what is now known as Mexico and Central America, ruling an estimated 15 million people. The Aztec palaces were as vast and sophisticated as any of those in Europe and their temples rivaled the Egyptian pyramids.
The 1945 Raid of Cabanatuan, Luzon Island, Philippines stands fast in history as a battle of wits between Imperial Japanese Army and the partnership of the United States Armed Forces and the United States Armed Forces Far East (USAFFE) Filipino Guerilla Forces. Americans and Allied Armed Forces used distraction tactics and precise human collected intelligence to successfully free over 500 Prisoners of War (POW) held by Japanese forces. The purpose of this paper is to conduct a battle analysis of the Raid of Cabanatuan and to provide an alternate outcome based on applicable intelligence assets using intellectual standards and elements of reasoning. The Raid of Cabanatuan was a multinational effort to rescue allied POWs held in Japanese captivity
General Santa Anna chose not to use words but to take action, attacking the U.S. Their first major action was at the Alamo. A total of 189 defenders, including such famous Americans as Jim Bowie and Davy Crockett, gave their lives in defense of the Alamo. But the fort was overrun and controlled by Mexico. 1844, the U.S. annexed Texas, making
The dominant interpretation of the Battle of Little Bighorn prior to the 1950’s was looking at this monument as the perspective of the orthodox patriot. “When I first went to work at what was then Custer battlefield in 1947 at the age of seventeen. . . The Indians were cardboard cutouts, impersonal foils for celebrating the heroism of Custer and his troopers.” (Utley 72). The orthodox patriot honored General George Armstrong Custer, not because of racism, but because the orthodox patriot views American history on a positive note in comparison to the Native Americans who know about the Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument.
Student’s name Professor’s name Course Date Book Review Synopsis of the Content The Texas Revolutionary Experience by Paul D. Lack is a book aimed at honoring the legends of the Texas Revolution. More focus and insight is given on the reasons that led to the conflict witnessed in 1835-1836 and an analysis of how the real events transpired.
He presents his opinions based on facts and reasoning, and enlightens his readers with many truths that had been buried and hidden behind false beliefs. While digging deeper into myths surrounding the Alamo, Crisp uncovers hidden truths involving other historian’s information about facts like Davy Crockett’s memorable death (p. 65), the misquoted Houston speech (p. 49), and the validity of the de le Peña
The Battle of the Little Bighorn, also known as Custer’s Last Stand, is one of the most significant battles in American history. Lieutenant Colonel George A. Custer, commander of the 7th Cavalry Regiment, performed a series of devastating tactical mistakes based off inaccurate assumptions and assessments on the size and fighting capability of the Northern Plains Indians, led by their fearless leader Crazy Horse. The Northern Plains Indians who would capitalize on these mistakes with overwhelming numbers and superior tactical action; killing all 210 Soldiers under Custer’s direct command and killing another third of his divided force. This paper will use the United States Army’s four step battle analysis methodology to analyze the Battle of