Posted on Oct 7, 2018
Should the Texians have defended the Alamo, or chosen instead to harass Santa Anna's army and its lines of communication?
2.03K
32
20
4
4
0
Military History
American History
Warfare
Tactics
Edited 6 y ago
Posted 6 y ago
Responses: 8
3
3
0
For one thing, Santa Anna had cavalry and the Texians didn’t; the Alamo did take out the cavalry advantage. “Lines of communication” is probably a misnomer - Santa Anna’s army split into columns that foraged their way across Texas. Also, there were ready-made harassing forces in place - the Comanches (who didn’t discriminate between Texians and Mexicans).
(3)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
Very well put CW4 Guy Butler personally I put the vote for harassing lines of communication but I also was under the assumption they meant disrupting supply lines and overall gurilla tactics, while supplying movement information back to Houston. Regardless some will say it doesn't matter what they did, it's said and done. Though you rarely see anyone mention Comanches so Bravo.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Interesting question which could possibly be applied to other military disaster.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
SGT (Join to see)
LTC (Join to see) - I look at the sacrifice made there, and the number of families affected (by loss of sons, brothers, and fathers), and I think that I would have been looking for any other way to fight other than to die-in-place. The hill country to the west of San Antonio provides suitable terrain for harassment. I think the real key is to look at access to water along the route.
(1)
(0)
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google