Winters, Compton And The Argument Which Got A Little Heated - Band of Brothers

[@vsmicer]

Here's part of the nature of the problem. I am now more or less retired, but for 23 years I was an academic historian in charge of research dissemination for a group of UK universities. My Dean was a noted war artist, and one day, he and I got a request from the Imperial War Museum in London to begin an online presence of interviews with WWII combatants (and some civilians and politicians) to get them on record while they were still around. All in all, on early digital camera tape, later to be converted for the internet, I( interviewed some 240 people, usually between 3o mins and 2hours at a time, dependent on their health and recollections. These included British, Commonwealth, German, Americans and even a small handful of Russians. 3 of the Americans were from the 'Band of Brothers'. When main related incidents occurred, fierce actions and events etc, their memories were more or less in lockstep - everyone. When it came to smaller unit matters, personal experiences, they varied - often hugely. They had the wrong people doing the wrong things, and of course except for the occasional personal papers, there was no actual record of these 'smaller' events, certainly not in unit or regimental diaries still extant. The point being, accuracy can be arguable, memories can be different or faded. Stories confused and misstold, often, the truth lost forever. The one constant is that Ambrose was always a hack historian. His book on Pegasus Bridge, an operation in which my father and his twin brother took part, is little better than semi-fiction.

[@monitor1862]

I've read several of Ambroses books. I just recently found out they shouldn't be trusted. What a shame.

[@23vespid]

Great post. In my work, I often need hold investigations with interviews to recount and remedy various events. The only thing that is certain every time is that no group of people will ever get the story correct and agree with each other. And that's for events that are less than a week or two old. For BoB, throw in the fact that some of these stories may not have been told by anyone for decades, and that each soldier may have a personal bias or interest in leaning a story one way or another for various reasons, and you'll never have an exact true story for anything. Even if all of Easy Company did seem to agree on one version of what happened during a particular event, it most likely would still be fiction as individual recollections are often fuzzy on their own and easily swayed by a story told with seeming certainty by someone else. When you apparently have Winters signing off on everything you're portraying, what more can one really ask for?

[@War_And_Truth]

You must have had an interesting career.

[@GR-bn3xj]

@vsmicer that's why I love Parachute Infantry so much, by Private Webster. While it's still his version of events, it was written so close to the actual events in his letters, I feel like the smaller details are probably more accurate than anything else. I was shocked when I heard Mularkey get mad at the series for focusing so much on Webster, call him a 2 bit player. That's when it first hit me that there could have been some cliques inside Easy, and the main clique didn't like it when anyone else got the limelight for an episode, or like what they said. Webster's book was a big help for making the book, and hence the show, so you would have thought Mularkey would have a better view of Webster. But maybe the never volunteer attitude of Webster still was bothering him.

[@kodiakkeith]

I think you're exactly right. When I was a wee lad I listened in awe as my father and his former battalion S2 (or S3?) (a Captain Easlick) discussed a famous incident that occurred at St Bathelmy during the battle of Mortain. A German armored column broke through and a panzer stopped directly in front of the 1st Battalion (117th/30th Division) HQ with its gun pointed directly at the house. My father and Easlick were there, and their story as I heard he and his former officer tell it, was that a single German officer knocked at the door and politely told them they must surrender. The battalion CO, a Colonel Frankland, said "FU" and shot him in the head with a .45. They all bailed out the back and ran for the trees while surprised SS troopers shot and killed many of them. It's a famous incident in the regiment that cemented that Colonel as a tough guy, though when I began researching my father's WWII history after his death, not a single other man that witnessed and wrote of it recalled it like that. There was a single German officer, there was a group of German troopers, they came in the front door, they came in the back door, they came in both doors. Only Frankland shot a German, they all grabbed guns and shot Germans after Frankland fired. Most of the battalion staff were killed during that sprint for the trees, few of them were killed, none of them were killed. Incidents are witnessed and then the story is told and retold and sometimes the retelling replaces the actual memory. Human memory isn't a digital recording, it's a fungible commodity that time and space alter.

[@louiefrancuz3282]

Cartoon Lipton was the unsung hero of band of brothers. His greatest contribution was in unit cohesion and organization. An argument could be made that it was Lipton who contributed the most to the band of brothers' success. He is a true Horatio Alger story, poverty in youth, war hero, and international Corning Glass executive. Lipton eclipsed Winters in ultimate success.

[@motaman8074]

Carwood

[@einmanndergeschichteliebt1760]

“Cartoon Lipton” I forgot the Sgt. Lipton's true name, thank you :D

[@specag31]

Very subjective saying Lipton exceeded W inters in success. They both chose their own path. both succeeded in getting what they wanted. Winters got his little farm in PA, Lipton became a CEO. After 4 years in intelligence in the Air Force I went to college. My senior year I applied and was accepted for AF officers training school. My best friend was beside himself. Come on, he said, we can set the business world on fire. He is s CEO of an international firm. I am a GS-15; injured in the line of duty, twice. Not a single fookin regret, I earned every scar.

[@patnor7354]

But does he have a statue in Normandie..? ;)

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

@@specag31 - Real success, if it means anything, must mean what you define it to be. Otherwise, why bother? You'd be living someone else's script instead of your own life!

[@YARCHLRL]

Doing justice by voicing truths is great and very admirable but, as a combat vet myself I can tell you that Hollywood and war will never see eye to eye. 2 completely different agendas. I personally want to thank you for helping warriors restless souls finally find peace in clarifying "stories". You are doing good and important work. Semper Fidelis.

[@War_And_Truth]

Thank you.

[@Airplanemeister]

I knew many members of the 61st Troop Carrier Squadron and some other TCS personnel. A close friend was the assigned pilot for the "Turf& Sport Special", a C-47 now on display at the AMC Museum in Dover DE. Lew Johnston was a dedicated historian who wrote several books about WW II Troop Carrier activities. He pointed out to me numerous errors and omissions in Ambrose's work. He contacted Ambrose and wanted to open a dialogue about some factual errors. Ambrose never responded at all. One big hole in Ambroes's work was, as far as could be determined, he never interviewed ANY Troop Carrier crews. Some of the paratroops interviewed by Ambrose reported that pilots increased their speed over the drop zone to get out of harm's way faster. In fact the pilots flattened the propeller pitch to give the Paratroops less wind blast when they jumped. This required increasing the engine speed to provide the same amount of thrust. Now that virtually all the concerned participants are gone facts like that are going to be lost to history.

[@longtabsigo]

28 years, 5 combat tours in Airborne, Special Forces and Special Operations units and my personal (claim to fame, for myself)I always brought home all of my men. I did loose one soldier to suicide, he survived a targeted attack in San Salvador, however, we lost him in Germany some time later. I count my blessings that the number of soldiers I took to war equaled the number I brought home.

[@War_And_Truth]

Thanks for your service.

[@chrisemerson7743]

That’s almost unheard of! Thank you for your service! I hope you passed on your intelligence and leadership to many other generations!

[@mahoganyrush300]

You have done well My father loss two men from his squad. One was killed on a patrol the other was killed by shrapnel while sleeping.

[@JeffKing-qy9nw]

The important thing is that we remember these men. I appreciate Ambrose and Hanks bringing them to my attention and I also appreciate you for taking the time to give us a more complete telling of their story.

[@War_And_Truth]

No problem

[@executivedirector7467]

Agree 100% on Herman Wouk. Excellent books.

[@stantheman66]

I'm glad you're bringing the truth to light. Dramatic licence should not tarnish real men's honor. I'm happy to see Spear's wasn't a looter, it hurt his reputation of being a complete badass.

[@executivedirector7467]

No surprise that the problems originate with Ambrose, a known liar. Good writer, poor historian.

[@myurgil]

I’ve seen Tom Hanks interviews where he acknowledges that some characters had to be amalgamations of several people in order to portray certain key events while keeping the core cast at a manageable size. That’s easy to understand since if you were to compile a list of every man who served in E Company during WWII, you would probably have at least 100 names on that list that none of your subscribers have ever heard before. Other liberties had to be taken for dramatic purposes as well. While I applaud you for setting the record straight, your tone implies complete and utter disdain for the filmmakers of what is arguably the greatest program that has ever been produced in the history of television.

[@War_And_Truth]

Gosh your last paragraph is a big call. But I'm allowed to have a deep dislike for the production team of the series. I don't think they were genuine in their intentions and certainly don't think they did their due diligence.

[@Art-is-craft]

@@War_And_Truth You can critique it but it would be unrealistic to expect a production to be capable of capturing every detail correctly. The author, service men and producers would all make mistakes especially 50 years after the war. The production also had to try and give a portrayal of service men who died how could that be accurate.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

The authentic reproduction of history is impossible at the present time using our present technology. Even the best and most-careful historian will make errors in his account of whatever events are being related. The best anyone can do is to capture the flavor of the time and events taking place and impart those things to the reader or viewer. Also - anyone expecting Hollywood to portray history accurately is - to be charitable - a bit naive. If the narrative and plot/flow of the piece come into conflict with history, almost always the director is going to choose what makes a better story and not what makes for accurate history. This is simple common sense. A film must be seen in order to become a success - even the best production withers on the vine if no one pays to see it. The best directors and producers strive to make good films which tell a compelling story, while also remaining reasonably accurate historically. Band of Brothers is one of the best works of its kind ever to be released, yet any specialist in the history of the 101st A/B could punch holes in the show for errors, omissions, and so on. The same is true, but to an even greater degree, for "Saving Private Ryan." The team making the film did the best they could, but inevitably, their telling of history took a back seat to the story itself...

[@malcolmpas]

@@War_And_Truthwow, big call in questioning their intentions. I appreciate the work that you do in bringing these KZbin films together, but I am very surprised by your strong critique. Most recognise the story, character limitations, as well as the historical issues associated with events that took place many years ago (there is no ‘right’ view, but an amalgam of our collective views). Your obvious disdain for the production company has caused me to rethink your balance. P.s - I’m not a THs fan generally, but appreciate how BOB has provided an insight into the impacts of war.

[@MH-jx1hc]

I want to thank you for doing this. It's interesting and important work. The changes to Buck's story I can see being made for the show element. From the dramatic element you can't just have Compton break in episode 7. It's creative license and the producers should have been clear that they did use it. Band of Brothers is a drama, more closely based on history than many, but definitely not an accurate academic history. Whatever the producers say there are plenty of interviews on KZbin with Winters where he ends up clarifying his view because it was not what was portrayed. The producers really need to look at themselves. The idea that George Luz was a handyman came from a phonecall to his wife. Someone asked her what he was like, she said he was very handy around the house. He was apparently an engineer. His sons seem pretty good natured about it but that's the level of effort that was put into the research: a brief and misunderstood telephone call. At best it represents the recollections of

[@War_And_Truth]

Thank you. Ill be doing Buck's story at Bastogne shortly.

[@AB-zz2yl]

Always look forward to these posts, thank you and keep them coming 👍

[@War_And_Truth]

Thanks, will do!

[@tnwhiskey68]

It's pretty interesting that nothing got by Winters! The whole series portrays him as a guy that would never brag on himself, but the whole series is also a "look how great this guy is" type of deal. Makes sense. I have two combat tours, one was 20 years ago and another was 14 years ago and I can remember very few details or conversations that would be big for a show. I'm sure a lot of it is skewed.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

If "Band of Brothers" lionized Richard Winters, you can be sure it wasn't his idea. He was a very down-to-earth man, one who didn't seek the spotlight. I think when it found him after the world-wide fame of the book and series, he handled it as best he could, in part to honor the men living and dead with whom he had served. He used his fame to focus on the soldiers, the men, which is as it should be. One of his grand-kids asked him if he was a hero, and he said, "No, but I served in a company of them." That's the sort of an answer a humble man would give.

[@Manticore2024]

I can’t remember the last time I saw anything come out of Hollywood that was factual, especially when it introduces itself as “Based on true events”. I love reading historical books, and I was very, very disappointed to find out that Stephen Ambrose neglected that fact.

[@cheesenoodles8316]

I was lucky enough to have the Veterans of WWII as my teachers, neighbors and relatives. I grew up trying to get "war stories" revealed. I watched any/all war movies and knew they were very "hollywood". I expect errors and missconcepts. So when Band of Brothers came out, it set the bar very high, but it will always have discrepancies.

[@randallturner9094]

I used to get together with my friends every week for whiskey and BoB viewing when it first came out. Flawed, maybe, but still the best ever.

[@cheesenoodles8316]

@@randallturner9094 Me too. First time we did not spend the whole time, wrong gun, wrong tank ect. Next is Master of the Air. My friends Dad was in the RCAF and bailed out of a Whitely first mission over Germany.

[@randallturner9094]

@@cheesenoodles8316 I’m not happy with Masters of the Air as much. They’re telling the wrong story. No stress.

[@TrickiVicBB71]

Masters of The Air is a mess. I only watched till #3. But WWII Bombers here on KZbin points out in detail using after action reports, personal war dairies, and US Bombing Survey documents everything wrong with the whole series.​@cheesenoodles8316

[@frankpinmtl]

Couple of points: I don't take the "Leave me" scene as giving in. I take it as a man sacrificing himself so others can get away and live to fight another day. Secondly - there's a reason why you're not supposed to be best friends with ER's, if you're an officer. How are you supposed to order that man to what may be his death, if you and he are best buds? It's why Compton had that episode in Bastogne. He couldn't handle seeing Toye and Guarniere hurt like that.

[@War_And_Truth]

They weren't being 'chased' by the Germans. There was no risk of him being captured which is why he never said it in the first place.

[@frankpinmtl]

@@War_And_Truth Why the quotation marks? Chased is your word, not mine. He was in combat, IIRC they were pulling back, in that scene. He got shot, he said leave me. No risk to being captured? Was Bull Randleman at risk of being captured, when he had to hide in a barn and kill a soldier, during the same operation? Was that tank that was bearing down on him at risk of running him over? I'm going by what was presented in the series. Buck was shot and said leave me, so the others could get back to safety. Bull spent the night in the barn after the Germans rolled through the position. The scene didn't come across as Buck losing his mind but it did come across as the enemy rolled over their position.

[@War_And_Truth]

@@frankpinmtl That's the whole problem, you are going off the series and I am going off the history. Bull fought that German during the daylight and they pulled out shortly after. He held the town on his own until units came back the next morning.

[@frankpinmtl]

@@War_And_Truth From your video, at the 4:00 mark: "there were a number of scenes that lacked context or depicted him in a way..." Go back and listen to your narration 10:20 "After he was wounded in Holland, in that scene, it's seems as though Compton had given up and was willing to be taken prisoner" No. You're talking about the series, here. Your opinion is that it seems like the show portrays him as 'giving up' because of his mental state. Not to me, it doesn't. It shows to me that he was willing to sacrifice himself for his men, plain and simple. Watch the scene again, listen to your narration.

[@frankpinmtl]

@@War_And_Truth Furthermore, to the point about Compton 'surrendering' - I don't think that this is the case, at all. The scene, if played out, makes it seems as if he would have stayed and kept firing, giving his men time to get out. The Germans would have had to kill him. He was just that kind of guy. He was going to take one for the team. The ultimate one...

[@skipsmoyer4574]

I love military history, facts are my goal, not a good story. Real history has lots of good accounts that don't need embellishments

[@mjl1966y]

More notably, Wouk wrote the Caine Mutiny, which is required reading for any fan of military fiction. It's semi-biographical, but not a memoir. Excellent story with an excellent point to be made.

[@plantfeeder6677]

Thank you once more W&T. There was another scene in episode 'Repacements' where Compton is playing darts with his men. It shows him playing left handed until the money throw where he switches to his right hand and wins the game and their money. Wonder how real that was? To be fair about Herman Wok's books he did have the advantage of time on his side when he did his research as the war was only 20-25 years past when he researched his books and many of the stories were still fresh in the men's memories. Speaking of well written works. If the war in the Pacific is of interest to anyone. I highly recommend Ian W. Toll's Trilogy: Pacific Crucible, The Conquering Tide, and Twilight of the Gods . It is by far the most detailed(from both sides)and well written account of WWII in the Pacific I have ever read. He's also the author of Six Frigates, but that is a completely different story in a completely different century.😉

[@randallturner9094]

Six Frigates is awesome!

[@War_And_Truth]

Compton never mentioned playing darts in his memoirs but the story might have come from Luz or Heffron who were also in that scene.

[@GR-bn3xj]

I loved the show, but it's been eye opening to fnd out so much was either wrong or changed. I hate to say it, but it's changed my view a little bit of the show. Still one of the best shows i've ever seen if not the best, But i'm not really sure why they had to change so much. The truth would've work just as well. I have heard all the reasons why so I understand, But I wish it had been more accurate. I also don't think the average person knows this. That's the part that makes me the saddest. They are probably like me, They watched the show and think they know the truth, when In reality It's just a partial truth.

[@thomasbrown9402]

It’s similar to my feelings for “A Bridge Too Far”. It’s a great film. It has a basis in fact, but ultimately it’s mostly Hollywood fiction. Do I still love it? Yes. But I’m glad there are real historians making videos on YT to tell the real stories so they’re not forgotten.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

Don't bear any ill-will for the producers of "Band of Brothers." The fact that they tried to tell the story at all is in and of itself praiseworthy, for this kind of saga isn't easy or cheap to bring to the screen. And for all of its faults, Ambrose's work on the book provided a solid foundation for the mini-series. We all owe a debt to those who took the time and effort to make the series, if for no other reason than the fact that millions of people worldwide have been moved to study WW2 history as a result. That's a pretty solid legacy, if you ask me. Far as Stephen Ambrose goes, was he an ideal or perfect historian? No, probably not - but he still connected with the millions of readers who purchased his books, and in so doing paid tribute to the "greatest generation" in a way that honored them. He also paved way for the National D-Day Museum, later renamed the National World War Two Museum, in New Orleans, Louisiana. That's not a bad legacy, either.

[@greglavine4035]

Yes very True,and I am grateful...this work has taken a life of it own with some...and others of us are a bit more critical in our reverence to the honor of this time and the heros of the Greatest generation... perhaps if you are going to attempt to document the history of the finest unit in the European sector...they should have dotted their I,'s and crossed their T,s before they signed the first contract..and at least got the basic history correct..instead of penciling in things that didn't happen

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

@@greglavine4035 - I'm an old man now, one who has been studying, reading and thinking about history for more than a half-century. And in my many years of watching various war films, min-series and the like, if there is one thing I have learned about Hollywood and history, it is that when historical fact gets in the way of telling the sort of story they have decided that they want to tell - "they" being the screenwriters and the producers - history and historical accuracy always take a back seat. It is just the way it works in that town. The recreation of the past in any meaningful sense is a very tall challenge under the best of circumstances, even when everyone is above board and reading from the same sheet of music, so to speak. Even the most well-intentioned historians make errors - of commission and omission alike - and the constraints of time (theirs and the film-makers both) mean that only a portion of the story, whatever it is, can be told. Which means that someone and/or something or both are going to be left out, or covered incompletely. Even if we stop right there, it means that in the case of such a stupendous success as the book and mini-series, there are going to be guys whose stories in Easy aren't told well, told properly or even mentioned at all. A case in point: Private Albert Blythe. Blythe's character figures heavily in the episode III "Carentan," and at the conclusion of the episode, it is implied that Blythe dies not long after being wounded in 1948. Well, that's factually incorrect. Blythe became a career soldier, and stayed in the Army after 1945, having made a full recovery from his wound. He later fought in Korea winning a Bronze Star and Silver Star for valor, with the 187th Airborne Regimental Combat Team. He was decorated with the Purple Heart three times over his military career. He ultimately rose to the rank of master sergeant. He died in 1967 following complications from surgery for a perforated ulcer. The writers and researchers for the series dropped the ball on that one, there's no way to explain those errors. But that's how it is with almost all historical films and productions, even the very best of them. The problems of the historian or scriptwriter are compounded by the fact that people who have experienced the same event or series of events in the past often remember them quite differently. Or they remember selectively or in a distorted or mis-remembered manner for some reason. This is hardly surprising given the trauma of war, and the toll it inflicts upon those who pass through it. This is part of the job of the historian to separate fact from fiction to the extent possible, to weight the various accounts and other evidence and synthesize some sort of coherent narrative from them, and so on. The screenwriters also have this job, too, with the additional task of crafting an entertaining story that people will want to watch. So it isn't hard to see how the job of the historian and that of the screenwriter(s) can come into conflict or disagreement.

[@purpleslog]

Winds of war and war and remembrance are fantastic reads. I’ve read them both times. I saw the miniseries when they originally came out and I have watched them several times since then on DVD and on KZbin copies walk is a great writer and he was also a World War II Navy vet, which made him a little more familiar and comfortable with those settings. Fantastic books all around.

[@randallturner9094]

re: navy vet - actually that’s the only problem with his books. (Not that there really is one.) Our view into WW2 naval affairs benefits from the environment, the concentration of eyewitnesses on naval vessels. We could have benefited from a WW2 company-grade officer turned writer of his caliber in one of the Army’s combat arms. Captain Obvious observation - Band of Brothers was flawed but still the best ever.

[@HabitualButtonPusher]

As an old soldier and veteran I can firmly say the way we recollect things and the ways others recollect the same events can be completely different based on specific points of view. Imagine after 40 years many inane details were blurred. At a meet up of old Desert Storm guys, they were retelling a story of how I fired 5 LAAW rockets back to back at some armored vehicle. I was like, that wasn’t me it was Danny. We literally got into an alcohol induced half assed good natured argument about it. As far as Ambrose and Hanks, they were guys trying to shed some light on a small group of guys which represented a shared experience of millions of guys in thousands of units all sick of being in a war and wanting to be home. Regardless of what uniform you wore, that’s something everyone that’s been sent far from home can understand.

[@patnor7354]

Chewing out an officer in front of enlisted men is a much bigger no no than gambling. Shows that Winters was not as great as he made himself out to be.

[@phillipchappell6013]

True, it was done more then once . I also had couple Officers tell me, Sometimes the chewing out of the officer in front of men wasn't done to harm the officer, more of indirectly chewing out of the men.

[@andysheepleton]

Funny that Winters would dress down Compton for being too close to his men and that it could lead him to play favorites when that is exactly what Winters did with Nixon.

[@WarEagleAtlanta]

Bravo!

[@plantfeeder6677]

The difference being Nixon was an officer and certainly not one of the men. Who Winters chose as a friend based on that is irrelevant as I see it.

[@charlesgantz5865]

@@plantfeeder6677 Nixon also wasn't in Winters chain of command, until the very end of the war.

[@r12e5p]

1) Nixon was a fellow officer and also wasn’t in Winters’s command. Also, as the battalion S-2, he was not even expected to be in a combat role. 2) The real issue is that officers were not supposed to fraternize with enlisted. Right or wrong, it was a regulation, and Buck broke it. This had nothing to do with playing favorites.

[@andysheepleton]

The reason that they were not supposed to fraternize with enlisted men was so they would not have a hard time ordering their men to do their duty and hold them accountable. There was also a worry that they would end up playing favorites. So everything that Compton's actions could have lead to in theory is exactly what happened with Nixon in actual practice. He was a drunk and as such was unfit, but because of a personal relationship he was not held accountable. So what Compton could have ended up doing in theory, Winters ended up doing in practice.

[@stantheman66]

Buck was one of my favorite characters in the series. Him, Winters, Spears and Nix were men I'd aspire to be, even with the flaws that might come with that.

[@alvingallegos6367]

I always looked up to David Webster although he wasn't portrayed as a barn burner, he got home alive and endured the training at Toccoa like everyone else. Interesting how he was portrayed in a modest light to volunteer for such a unit yet seemed to be graceful in spite of the negative attitude for missing so much and was later accepted back. Makes me wonder if he fought at all since the series tend to leave stuff out like with many others.

[@stantheman66]

@@alvingallegos6367 I agree

[@3-2bravo49]

From my experience, officers or higher nco's don't grow a report with enlisted who can't tell the difference between when it is time to be friendly and when it is time to be deadly serious. Even before i became a team leader I had a pretty good relationship with some squad leaders and officers. If you are mature enough, things usually work out just fine. It's best not to take anything personal anyway.

[@danielb7660]

I admire these men and all who have served this nation especially those in combat. Freedom is never free. As for Tom Hanks, the more I learn about him the more full of himself I think he is. You're an actor Mr. Hanks but the series B of B has quite a bit of "Artistic" license. As for Buck Compton, I liked how Neal portrayed him and never thought less of him throughout the series. Each and every combatant on all sides who behaved honorably should be remembered as heroes to their respective countries. These "Men" were 17 to 26 years old for the most part with many being 18 to 22 years old. God Bless Them ALL. No more wars. No more wars for MONEY.

[@armyvet8279]

They should have filmed it the way it really happened.

[@RivetGardener]

That's a difficult thing to do 50 years later.

[@Whitpusmc]

@@RivetGardenerTrue but in Blithe’s case the family sued them so they had the correct information.

[@cptkiddokidd5137]

Then they could not have filmed it. Nobody knows, nor knew, how it "really" happened. Life is not like that at all.

[@Whitpusmc]

@@cptkiddokidd5137 Yes, they could. They had Winters who knew and insisted that things about himself and some soldiers were accurate but they deliberately ignored or included false portrayals like Blithe when they HAD the correct information before filming. They could have included the correct information about Blithe with as much effort as they did the incorrect information that the family had sued them to correct in the book. They didn’t have to film Spears stealing stuff when Winters had the ability to talk to Spears and in fact did about the shooting (and then included false narrative about him shooting the group). Ambrose was lazy and slandered good men

[@Whitpusmc]

@@cptkiddokidd5137 When you know a guy served in Korea you don’t film a blurb about him dying in England. This isn’t a matter of interpretation it’s deliberate inclusion of data you know to be false.

[@miguelservetus9534]

Thank you, thank you for taking the time to address some of the inaccuracies. The men involved would appreciate your efforts. They will rest easier. I loved Winds of War. But would you agree that Wouk had it a bit easier to get the truth into his novels as he was writing form the 30k foot level. That is he was using the course of the war, the battles, the strategies as the framework and his characters as fiction. Not excusing Ambrose, as he did a great disservice, was writing about individual soldiers. One could argue that he had the more difficult task, but also had a higher responsibility. Again thanks. The effort you put into these works is clearly obvious. I hope that you are able to mention Compton’s later life and work.

[@War_And_Truth]

Youre welcome.

[@michaeldean1289]

Fascinating story once again mate! I still can’t understand why Ambrose blatantly ignored, or failed to do more research on the members of Easy Company when he was literally publishing a unit biography. I would have thought that he would have contacted the surviving members and consulted with them for their version of the storyline after gaining permission to print such information 1st. Whilst Tom Hanks and Spielberg may have gone along with the book, he should have also double checked the background or details more so when he was going to do a movie, again firstly to obtain permission from the members or their respective families, and secondly to confirm the details before developing and screening the movie. We all know that Hollywood bends the accuracy due to certain constraints and runtimes but there has to be more respect and some certain degree of legal obligation when you are trying to depict a film that is focused on a small unit operation, and not a broad overview of a theatre of war. Keep up the great work mate!😢

[@War_And_Truth]

He was pushing out so many books he didn't have the time to research any of them as well as he should have.

[@executivedirector7467]

Ambrose was a really good story teller and a really shitty historian. We know he plagiarized and lied at times. He completely made up a relationship with Eisenhower that never existed.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

You make some good points, but ultimately, I don't think you understand how movies get made. Big name producers, directors and stars don't routinely get down into the weeds vis-a-vis the kind of historical accuracy issues you mention. If there is money for it, the production hires military advisors and/or historical consultants, who are often listed in the credits at the end of a film. Dale Dye, a former Marine Captain, consulted on "Band of Brothers," and "Saving Private Ryan," and Stephen Ambrose was a historical consultant. That sort of thing. There's a brief anecdote which illustrates the barriers which stand in the way of historical accuracy in these sorts of productions. During "Saving Private Ryan," Dr. Ambrose mentioned to Spielberg and Hanks that none of the main cast members -including Hanks - were young-enough to portray their characters. Hanks was then in his forties when playing "Captain Tom Miller." That's not only overage generally speaking, but that's overage for a captain, too. Spielberg and Hanks looked at him like he was from Mars and rejected his suggestion/comment. And that was that... no more mention was made of the problem, although in "Band of Brothers,"they took greater pains to use age-appropriate actors. You're just not going to get anything approaching 100% accuracy historically out of these kinds of productions. The way Hollywood works is that if the story and history conflict, the story wins and so much for historical accuracy. The best productions lessen the damage to historical accuracy as much as possible, but it still happens. Just the way things are....

[@executivedirector7467]

@@GeorgiaBoy1961 All quite true, but it's also true that Ambrose was just a really shitty historian and got a lot wrong in his book. We all make mistakes, of course, but his pile up, and he's been credibly shown to be a liar too. So while I don't disagree with anything your wrote, it's not all the movie makers' fault.

[@michaeldean1289]

@@GeorgiaBoy1961 Hi mate Thanks for your feedback! Yes I know about Dale Dye’s service record and his role as a Military Advisor to assist Hollywood’s writers directors etc try and get the storyline in some semblance of accuracy with how they (Actors) correctly carried their weapons and portrayed themselves relevant to the timeline of the movie etc I also appreciate the problem associated with older veteran actors trying to play the roles of real people that were half their ages as well, after being in the Australian Army at 18 years old over 40 years ago, and anyone who was getting close to their 30’s was pretty well unheard of unless they had done some time, or carried rank. The average age for a WWII combatant was about 25 yo whereas in Vietnam the age was about 19. My only gripe was that when they are going to do a movie on a small unit biography they should have done more research on the subject material, and arguably more relevant on the characters that they were going to depict out of respect, and not so much for the accuracy.

[@justinrichardson3864]

The fog of war kicks in immediately for the people on the ground. There is ample evidence showing that confusion arose during pre-production and production where two men were confused for each other by their fellow soldiers because they had similar names or one guy remembered a story differently from another. Ambrose's shortcomings are well-documented. I don't think there is or should be an expectation of 100% accuracy for any dramatic retelling, and I would say that there is a world of difference between, say, "Band of Brothers" and "JFK." "Band of Brothers" may have benefitted from making up names for some characters meant more to exhibit what we might call tropes but were also realistic, such as "Dike" in the series. It's unfortunate that any veteran or their family might feel let down by the series. I recently read an account from one of Malarkey's relatives that said he was disappointed/hurt to be left out of the final episode (baseball game scene), but the issue was that the actor was unable to get back to the location in time for the shoot for whatever reason. Hanks, et al, fully intended for Malarkey to be in that scene. Productions of this magnitude encounter all sorts of curveballs that they have to deal with in real time. At times, it is what it is. All of that said, "Band of Brothers" is a profound dramatic achievement that only scratches the surface of reality, and as a result, it has stirred many to seek more information (Some of which you are providing.). My parents and I took an E Co based D-Day to Eagle's Nest tour in no small part due to the series, for instance. (The series has spawned many "Band of Brothers" related cottage businesses in Normandy.) My own grandfathers died when I was young, so getting to spend 11 days near a D-Day veteran in Normandy and beyond was life-changing. I don't know that I would have had that experience had it not been for the show generating so much interest.

[@erikerik7308]

thanks, always good content, very nice

[@War_And_Truth]

Thanks again!

[@phillipchappell6013]

I feel comfortable saying this in own comment now, I think said some this in reply to a comment. But I think the incident between Compton and Winters was then and there type of situation. Winters caught Compton gambling with Enlisted men Both were in the wrong the enlisted and Compton. By chewing Compton in the front he was indirectly chewing the men out by doing it in the open. When they were done Winters probably felt that was far as needed to go. Was it wrong most likely yes, However given what happened I think the Army would side with Winters.

[@martingenerous1678]

So, what's your take on The Big Red One?? The director, Sam Fuller, was an actual 1st Infantry division, WW2, Veteran. The movie is mostly derived from his personal experiences

[@War_And_Truth]

I love the film but I would need to research the unit they are depicting. Its a lot of work if only 2,000 people are going to watch it. Ill look at it down the track when I have a bigger audience outside of Band of Brothers.

[@ColinH1973]

Thank you for continuing to set the record straight, as it's the only way to honour the memory of the men.

[@charliegreer4507]

The real blame falls on Ambrose. Since his passing, it has come out that a lot of his books contain mass misinformation and inflated statistics. His dramatisation of real history brought about the creation of a bunch of BS, such as “hundreds” of paratroopers drowning in the flooded fields, every gunner on Omaha had an MG42, etc. While Hanks and the production staff had the responsibility to cross-check their references, I’m sure they figured that Ambrose was correct in most of the information. He was considered one of the best historians at the time, and was undisputed in many of his false claims. I think one should also take into account the fact that the miniseries couldn’t have ever been 100% accurate, because it is, at the end of the day, a piece of TV drama. They had to make the show accurate, whilst also keeping it entertaining for audiences not well-versed in WWII history. They would never get it all correct, but I think it’s safe to say that it’s still one of the more accurate media depictions of the war. It got a lot wrong, but it got a lot less wrong than most other movies/TV shows about the Second World War, especially those made from the 60s-00s.

[@HandyMan657]

You are spot on about those books. Spot on. Thanks again. Take care, keep safe.

[@War_And_Truth]

Thanks, you too!

[@onraymondhickey5149]

Do think that they should have shown what Buck did when Bill & toye got hit? He flipped and ran toward the German lines,Luz had to tackle him. Winters and men did not want to show that . That's why the scene shows him just dropping his helmet. There's reasons why things were changed all through the series.

[@bmac454]

Good work- I'm 61 and read heck lot history books ,but it's amazing amount of younger generation who take Hollywood &TV productions as gospel truth ,one of worst iv seen is U 571, I so hope people who like B o B view your vids an uncover the true story of "All" the men

[@War_And_Truth]

Yes judging by some of the comments I would totally agree with you.

[@PhilW7670]

I think that it is wrong to criticize Winters for “allowing” inaccuracies. It’s not like he had total creative control over the series and could veto every little inaccuracy. The story has to be told in a way that makes viewers want to watch and that means taking license sometimes. It is also possible- and likely- that Winters was told the story would move forward despite his objections. The production company that buys the rights to a story is first and foremost interested in making money, and they will often be ruthless with source material to do so. Look at the number of fiction authors that have hated how movies based on their books have turned out. Also, there were 147 men in Easy Company. The miniseries focuses on just a handful, and there was no way to incorporate all the things that Easy did during the war without creating composite characters. Maybe Buck didn’t have the exchange with Winters during the movie, or maybe he had forgotten in the decades since the war. Maybe that whole scene actually occurred with someone else but they rolled into Buck’s character to keep the story manageable. Or maybe they were trying to just show the toll that being in the army hospital and seeing the grievous wounds other guys had suffered took on soldiers returning to the front. Bill Guarnere says in the series that it wasn’t Buck’s wound that got to him. It was being in the hospital. To me, none of the storyline with Buck made him look bad. He came back from the hospital rattled and yet he still did his duty. I don’t why people thinks that makes them look cowardly. Courage isn’t about having no fear. Courage is having fear and overcoming it to do your duty anyway. Buck remains one of my favorite characters for that reason and many others.

[@Chubby_T0511]

I've said it before, after reading Winters' book, I thought he came across as arrogant and full of his own publicity. It seems to me the hero worshipping of Winters is, for the most part, based off of a 10 part mini series that's been proven to be littered with inaccuracies.

[@charlesgantz5865]

I've thought that Winters, in his book, came off a bit whiney. Kind of weird for an autobiography. That may be why Sobel was always on his case.

[@magicklady82]

Agreed!

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

Winters was none of the things you accuse him of being. He was about as humble a man as you are likely to find in his position. Your attitude is what needs checking. Lesser men always seem to want to tear down greater men. Maybe, just maybe, you ought to give humble thanks that men like Winters lived in the first place and made the enormous sacrifices that they did for generations to come. Ingratitude is an ugly thing.

[@patnor7354]

@@GeorgiaBoy1961 You knew him personally? No, so then your simpy worship has no weight.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

@@patnor7354 - "Worship" is a straw-man fallacy, sport.... nowhere did I use that term, nor was it implied. And I'll thank you not to attribute to me things I didn't say. We clear here - or do you need me to draw you a diagram?

[@sid2112]

See? That's real. That's dramatic, that should have been the scene.

[@gagelange7024]

Would have ruined the Jesus complex of Winters

[@jerbs5346]

​@@gagelange7024 Having a main character that's a quaker is overdone.

[@einmanndergeschichteliebt1760]

@@jerbs5346 Major Winters was not a Quaker, he was Lutheran. That Quaker joke was an invention of Hollywood.

[@jerbs5346]

@@einmanndergeschichteliebt1760 More specifically, I'm trying to say, a main character being pure hearted at all times and idolized by the rest is overdone.

[@einmanndergeschichteliebt1760]

@@jerbs5346 You’re right, I couldn't agree more. I just corrected your trivial mistake.

[@KOHTAOMURDERSDEATHISLAND]

👍👍 Great video once again. I also find it enlightening to read the comments from your viewers.

[@War_And_Truth]

Lol I find it daunting to read the comments. Some people don't hold back their 'objectivity' :P

[@Winters506]

Winters spoke up often about inaccuracies in the mini series. So much so that he would threaten to stop giving interviews if they wouldn’t take heed and write it the way the veterans were correcting them. Also, look into Mark Bando if you want to check on inaccuracies. He’s one of the most non biased authors I’ve ever read on.

[@War_And_Truth]

Ill be posting a video on Bando in the next couple of days.

[@kennedymcgovern5413]

I don't understand the references to their training, when deciding why someone felt like an outsider. When I got to my ship, sure I was new. I was a replacement for someone that left there before me. But I went to the same boot camp as everyone else there. I went to a school just like everyone else there. I just went through it a different time. And the guys that came after me, they went through after I did. But we all had the same training. Why would this be different with the airborne? Would Compton, and any other replacement not have just gone through the same training in a following class?

[@trekfortruth2841]

When I went through boot camp at Ft. Sill, OK I felt such a closeness and pride with my classmates by the time we graduated. We were all Forward Observers as were our DI's. My first posting was to the 101st at Ft. Campbell and I remember my disappointment at the lack of unit cohesion and pride vs what I had just left. It was understandable as at the battalion level we all had different jobs, and as FO's we spent a fair amount of our training time parsed out to our assigned infantry platoons so we were rarely together as a group. I think for Easy and the other original companies it had to do with them being the first ever graduating class in something brand new, and then being the first to ever take this new concept to war. But as has been highlighted by this YT series, the divide between the original members and the replacements was also overplayed by Band of Brothers

[@randallturner9094]

re: divide between replacements and original members being overplayed - I don’t think so. The dehumanizing aspects of our WW2 replacement system is well documented in general, though whether in the particular case of this one unit it was impactful is unknowable. Towards the end of WW2, they changed doctrine to deploying replacements in small units, not individually, in order to address some of the morale issues. This is one thing Germans handled better than we did. Something we could still improve on today.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

The Toccoa men were bonded by being together for two years throughout all of their training and formation of their unit. The replacements did not live through all of this, nor did all of them go through the same training pipeline. Once the paratroopers were formed, and the pipeline set up, there was considerable streamlining of their training. This was also driven by larger-than-expected losses from June 1944 onward. Compton was a officer and a paratrooper, but an outsider, so there was a period of adjustment while he got to know the men and they got to know him.

[@Whitpusmc]

It’s not a documentary but those men lived those lives and risked those lives for our freedom. If you dishonor their lives in such a widely publicized and shown project you are doing something wrong on a significant level. Plus some of these errors would be trivial to get right as the family TOLD you the correct facts. It’s not like movies dont get re-edited and revised! Star Wars anyone??

[@CheckYourLeaderTV]

It is incredibly difficult for an officer to be ‘friends’ with the enlisted men under their command. I. 33 years of service I’ve only known 1 officer who had the charisma and ability to do it without compromising their command presence. It may sound d fashion but familiarity does breed contempt. The main issue being that it can lead to officers compromising the success of the task or mission due to a desire to remain popular. It seems Compton also understood that if you have competent NCOs they are best placed to look after the day to day needs of the troops. Winters criticising a fellow officer in front of others and in particular the enlisted men is particularly poor form. The more I learn of Winters the more I see him as someone who was a master of self promotion. It is possible to be an excellent battlefield officer but a person of poor character. As for Hanks,… he might have produced a fantastic TV series but it’s clearly riddled with historical inaccuracies. The worst part is his portrayal of certain veterans in a poor light which I find rather disgusting.

[@roberttyrrell2250]

Doing research in 1960s, writing a book/"movie in 70s was probably a lot easier than 80swhen many of these men were passing away. Blithes sistuation would be as easy as checking his service record in public.

[@altonbunnjr]

It’s pretty obvious that Hanks’ statements were all just salesmanship for the series, not to be taken at face value.

[@eamo106]

following your theories

[@Lupinthe3rd.]

With regards to Hermann Wouk (pronounced Woke btw) winds of war and war and remembrance Hermann spent almost 13 years doing research work on the book and he actually moved to DC to be close to the national archives. He also was more of historical fiction writer and a former naval officer in WWII writing the novel the caine mutiny.

[@War_And_Truth]

I was worried youtube would ban the video if I started talking about wokeness :P

[@phillipchappell6013]

From my view and I trying more Easy company now. Ambrose did Easy Company no favors. But you also remember alot of men were gone too. As for Compton always wonderd what true relationship with Winters was.

[@MSCNnation]

Would you consider doing a series on Masters of the Air? That series was absolutely terrible

[@DallasBurgher]

I disagree that Blithe was depicted badly. I saw a man with an unknown problem that was trying to overcome it. He volunteered to be the point man when he was shot and the healing did not go well.

[@executivedirector7467]

But it was factually wrong. The guy was decorated for combat heroism in Korea. He didn't die of wounds in 1948 or whenver the series and book said.

[@War_And_Truth]

You are going off what you are seeing in the series. Apart from the aid station blindness scene there is nothing documented that Blithe had any issues. The scene where Speirs gives Blithe a pep talk about already being dead etc is also fiction. Speirs was nowhere near Blithe at Bloody Gulch. There were not even in the same company.

[@koeh07]

How do you feel about the pacific series? I understand the major errors in BoB but, considering how it was the most expensive series at the time, and ultimately gathered less than even 1/4 of the viewership of BoB, do you believe it's a more historically accurate portrayel of veterans and war or has the same faults as BoB?

[@War_And_Truth]

I think the Pacific is a lot better because they didn't really have time to focus on all the personalities which is where Band of Brothers got its popularity but fell down from an accuracy stand point. The Pacific book (written by Hugh Ambrose) is more historically accurate than what his father left for BOB so that probably helped as well. Masters of the Air is a complete mish mash of truth and fiction. I found it interesting in parts. There are a couple more scenes (the pilot walking through a death camp and the P-51's strafing the POW camp at the end) I would like to compare as they didn't seem at all legit to me.

[@dirus3142]

Pacific suffers a lot from the technical side of portraying events. Like with the Market Garden episode Many of the campaigns lacked contexts due to production constraints, and artistic licence. Guadalcanal right in the beginning is a good example. It needed to be 3 episodes long. With the 2nd episode really showing what the Marines went through with the Navy gone after losing that battle. The time Leckie spent in Melbourne is half true at best. I read Leckie's book Helmet for my Pillow after the series came out. You can see clearly it's the source of his story, and how the show writers changed things.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

"The Pacific" is a much better series than many critics give it credit for being. Of necessity, it is of a different tone and narrative structure, since it relies on not one but three accounts - namely, those of Robert Leckie, Eugene Sledge and John Basilone. Some of the parts, such as Basilone's interactions with his future wife and also the men under his command in the field, may have been conjecture, but the overall impressions and tone of the series hit home. In my humble opinion, of course.... I just wish the producers would do a story about the U.S. Navy at Guadalcanal, now that they have done the Marines....

[@onraymondhickey5149]

In 1998 and before there was no internet like you have today

[@War_And_Truth]

No but there were telephones and postage stamps. If they didn't know, they should have left it out.

[@bobbarclay316]

For Compton, didn't the loss of his best friends break him?

[@War_And_Truth]

Ill be doing a video on Compton at Bastogne in the near future.

[@greglavine4035]

Why can I find footage of Winters,speaking toward Blythe and complaining too Hanks about inaccurate accounts but you claim Winters had final say when Winters claimed he didn't.I agree with the premise of all this but...a little inaccuracy goes a long way, wouldn't you say

[@War_And_Truth]

If you watch my current video on Strayer vs Ambrose you will see a critique sheet which Winters provided Ambrose on every page of the book. In a HBO interview Hanks did on the series, he stated that NO scene would get through if Winters didn't want it. I dont know why Winters allowed the Blythe story to get through. He was aware that Blithe survived prior to the series coming out. Perhaps he didn't see the end of episode epilogues.

[@greglavine4035]

Ok ,there certainly is footage of Winters speaking to the error and setting this matter straight (Blythe)....but really how would Winters know the half of this massive work of every one of these men being in command at the command post...he got the scuttlebutt with along with reports..so yes Dick Winters got the Dick Winters story correct..it's the only one he can remember and verify ...as for all his men,he did his best .. Bill Guarnere said he was happy with the story as it seems with most of the others ... But clearly Hanks should have been more thorough in their research of this epic, and definitely shouldn't have taken some of these liberties to pencil in history that never happened ...

[@supramby]

I believe the quote from Winters in the show was something to the effect “never put yourself into a position where you can take from these men”. That is honorable and it seems Winters was respected by his NCO’s to the point of facing a firing squad standing up for him. Seems we have some people that wish to tarnish Winters for some reason. I guess he’s too homespun Pennsylvanian. Inaccurate accounts are bound to happen in a dramatization but the attitude and respect in the accounts of the men seem to say he was respected. I love the series and have learned a thing or two on this channel. Or so I believe.

[@War_And_Truth]

Yeah but he never said that. He wasn't worried about gambling or taking from the men. His only concern was officers getting too close to the enlisted men. Also you have to remember that there are always two sides to every story and Winters was not perfect.

[@patnor7354]

Some of us see how well Winters spins his own tale...

[@jacobbaughman748]

I disagree with your conclusions. I think the pre-jump ass chewing was spot on in its presentation. The point WAS the gambling, not the cards. A superior should NEVER put themselves into a position where they can benefit from their subordinates loss! Simple. As for his injuries in Holland, again, I think the show presented it well. He wanted his men to abandon him to the Germans so they wouldn't be at risk for his sake! It was an ongoing battle and the withdrawal was in progress. The words were written in the script, "I weigh more than both of you combined; you can't carry me out was the clear implication! Hollywood ALWAYS says "It's not a documentary!" What's the difference in a stipulation that this movie is BASED ON or INSPIRED BY a true story or event? Once they buy the rights, they own it and can make the movie anyway they want to! That's the difference between watching the mini-series and actually living the event as a participant. It was/is great television, in my opinion.

[@War_And_Truth]

Well thanks for displaying a different point of view without abuse. Everything I wrote on this came from Compton's memoirs.

[@jacobbaughman748]

@@War_And_Truth I'm sorry if I wasn't clear with my commentary. I was talking about what was presented in the mini-series. I have no idea what happened in real life because I wasn't there to witness it. However, with twenty -five years of service in the Army I know from where I speak of discipline in the ranks and exercise of authority. The military is the only profession that requires its practitioners to do or die trying. Not doing what you're told, when you're told to do it, is the first breakdown in discipline leading to failure of mission accomplishment! An Officer who fails to maintain his position of authority because he wants to pal around with his subordinates is the most catastrophic example to demonstrate. It's called fraternization and it's a crime under military law. It's not ABUSE, it's training and discipline to military standards to safeguard and defend the nation.

[@ospreycove]

I never treat any Hollywood drama as a documentary. To me these shows bring to light historical events. Feel free to do your research. Braveheart is considered one of the most inaccurate movies of all time. Yet how many people had never heard of William Wallace before the Braveheart. I really don't care that a show is not 100% accurate.

[@BonnKialStevens]

Wasn't Winters a 1LT and the Company XO at the time Compton joined the Company? If so, wouldn't this actually make Winters a superior officer in both rank and Chain of Command?

[@War_And_Truth]

He had been removed from company XO after the Sobel incident until after D-DAY but yes he was a 1st Lieutenant. The point was he wasn't Compton's platoon leader (Warren Roush was) which tells me Winters was probably stepping on toes (unless it was a very informal conversation which it didn't appear to be)

[@Fater4511]

@@War_And_Truthhe was removed in November '43. 6 months before dday. Compton joined the military in December of '43. Also on dday, winters was acting CO of easy because he was the next in line and Compton even acknowledges this in the series that winters is above him "doesn't that make you our new CO, dick?" Yeah it does. They are not equals, never were.

[@littleguy6753]

They got Webster 100%. Webster admitted to "goldbricking" in his book "Parachute Infantry". It's a highly detailed book more about how they lived than who did what in battle.

[@War_And_Truth]

100% wrong you mean. His portrayal was probably the worst in the series.

[@littleguy6753]

@War_And_Truth let me say your videos are incredible. But i think you should re-read the book. I'm on my 3rd read, and he admits to never volunteering or doing anything he considered dumb. The odd thing is how he never avoided a fight, loved the men he served with, but made a point of showing everyone how much he hated the Army. I think he's the most interesting & complex character in the BoB story. I don't think he would have liked being the narrator in one of the episodes.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

None of us safe and sound in our homes in peacetime ought to judge someone like Webster harshly. Combat soldiers endure hardships that ordinary people can't imagine, and they do what they can to survive the ordeal with some semblance of dignity and honor. There's a vast difference between the headquarters well behind the line where officers decide the fate of the enlisted men - and the actual man who have to pay in blood and suffering to realize the objectives their superiors have decided upon. Only a combat soldier can judge another combat soldier....

[@bobpettitt2468]

3 MIN IN AND STILL NO NEARER TO THE REASON YOU GAVE

[@War_And_Truth]

Keep watching

[@jamescanterbury6634]

Hanks never served. Don’t know about Ambrose, but it’s pure evil. Dyke and Sobel were especially vilified wrongly

[@moontheloon8910]

Ambrose was busted for plagiarism

[@doncarlton4858]

After returning to LA after the war Buck Compton transfered to the US Air Force Reserve. He ultimately retired as a Major General. I believe this made Winters highly jealous of Buck and the reason why he maligned him. Also Buck never understood Winters protecting the alcoholic Nixon.

[@War_And_Truth]

Lieutenant Colonel, but I certainly get your point.

[@Art-is-craft]

The irony of all of this is that people are having a go at the producers for taking liberties and they then put up comments that take the same sorts of liberties.

[@einmanndergeschichteliebt1760]

Compton was responsible for his men’s action and he should have been equal to his men, his men really could say “he protects these guys too much because they’re his buddies, I’m not gonna die for their pleasure" and it would be a collapse of combat discipline. There’s nothing to be jealous about it, Compton stayed in the army reserve until 1970 (Winters left it in 1952, 18 years earlier). Nixon was an intelligence officer in the regimental staff, Winters was not responsible for Nixon's acts at all. The officer responsible for Nixon’s actions was Col. Strayer and he demoted Nixon for his alcoholism.

[@richardmardis2492]

It’s kinda hard to hear such truth after falling in love with the series- but I’d rather hear the truth, and the people get the proper respect and attention. Thank you🫡

[@War_And_Truth]

You're welcome. And at least it was enjoyable for a decade plus.

[@christopherskipp1525]

Wasn't Speirs a war criminal?

[@einmanndergeschichteliebt1760]

According to current law of war, he was undeniably a war criminal. You throw your weapon honestly (you don’t make fake surrender) and you are untouchable now. But at that time, only harming prisoners was strictly forbidden (military laws were not as certain as today; for example, there were no specific laws about the using air force, so the Allies violated it as they can), but surrendering and being taken prisoner could be interpreted differently in some cases. When the Nazis violated this uncertainty so much, every state wanted to change this stuff. Speirs didn’t accept the surrender of some German soldiers and shot them.

[@christopherskipp1525]

@@einmanndergeschichteliebt1760 Yes, he was a first order bastard.

[@War_And_Truth]

In the circumstances I would say no. I am about to post a video on a man who was with Speirs up until he was promoted to E Company CO. There are definitely some questions there. These guys are all dead now, they have nothing to answer to.

[@patnor7354]

Yep. But you know how it is... "It's not a warcrime when we do it..."

[@dianekeller7534]

What the hell makes officers so great they are just people nothing more

[@johncentamore1052]

It's about morale and discipline. I'm sure you've been in situations where there was some favoritism being shown, or where that one person got away with EVERYTHING. In the military, that can cost lives. When an officer gives an order, especially in combat, it could be disastrous for even one person to hesitate because they think, "He's not sending Joe or Bill because they're buddies. I'm not risking my life instead." When you're ordering people into a situation where they may die, there is no place for even the impression of favoritism.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

In theory, the officers are supposed to be the "best of the best." The most-outstanding men in any given unit. In practice in units like easy Co., 506 PIR, 101st A/B, the company grade officers - the lieutenants and captains - were usually a few years older than the enlisted men. They were college-educated, and graduates of ROTC, West Point or officer candidate school - and so had life experience from doing that as well. The divide between officers and enlisted men dates back many centuries to when officers were"gentlemen" or even members of the nobility, while enlisted soldiers were under law, "men" and not "gentlemen." The distinction has persisted into modern times, not withstanding its paradoxes and flaws. In practice, in most armies, senior non-commissioned officers or SNCOs, are not only responsible for leading their men - but for training junior officer as well. It is also germane to note that in most larger units, at or above company size, the commanding officer usually coordinates with the senior enlisted man, such as a sergeant major or first sergeant. While the former is in charge, the senior NCO often speaks with the authority of the CO and can act on his behalf. Which is to say that the sergeant major reports to the CO and no one else.

[@TraceSteffen]

I enjoy your videos… but you are getting more and more “get off my lawn”. Saying Hanks shouldn’t have made this series is silly. A tiny fraction of the people who know any of these men or the amazing actions they performed without the spotlight Hanks cast. Sure he got things wrong. The Blyth thing is really bad. But it’s like you are on a crusade to bash instead of just correcting what “history” got wrong. Your audience is a direct verify to the series. Please keep the videos going… but maybe relax a bit. You are doing good. But the opinions are just over the top.

[@War_And_Truth]

I have never said Hanks shouldn't have made the series. I have only ever said that the writers (and Hanks himself as it is his company) should have better researched and cross checked the facts and not just relied on a single source (the book). I get dirty because the man (Hanks) claims to have done this great service to E Company when he has actually run a lot of them through the mud.

[@jamespagdon2998]

You do to much speculation and saying things like it seems like this or it seemed like that. ell it seems like you are making things up to make it fit your own narrative.

[@War_And_Truth]

Well that's the thing, I speculate instead of making it up.

[@RivetGardener]

The MASTERS OF THE AIR tv series was so bad I quit watching after episode 3. Not worth the time.

[@War_And_Truth]

The last few episodes are better

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

It wasn't all that good in comparison to "Band" or "The Pacific," was it? Three stars out of five, IMHO...

[@AngryMarine-il6ej]

So Ambrose's own son had a hand in it as well? Considering Ambrose's background as writer and historian, it's a wonder none of the Easy Company veterans came forward to provide rebuttals to the book once it was released. Ambrose had been criticized numerous times for factual errors and plagiarism over the extent of his career as historian and writer. It would have been much better if he didn't write the book in the first place.

[@Art-is-craft]

It would be impossible to have such accuracy in such large epic books and TV shows. The level of research would take hundreds of thousands of hours. It would require an army of researchers and then there would still be mistakes.

[@user-mc4sq3fk5d]

Winters, for all his homespun Pennsylvania nonsense, was an egotist late in life. I mean the guy has a statue in Normandy I saw as a Lt. of all ranks. Btw, what will you do when you have exhausted every angle of band of brothers? I don’t fault you for clicks but I hope you have a plan B. Maybe the Pacific miniseries.

[@GR-bn3xj]

There is a lot of material so I don't think he has to worry about it for a while. The pacific just didn't do it for me

[@purpleslog]

Now that the presenter has mentioned it, he should go through winds of war and war and remembrance.

[@purpleslog]

@@GR-bn3xjor the pacific.

[@curtyoung1175]

Piss off with the Pennsylvania comments

[@user-mc4sq3fk5d]

Piss ioff? Well clearly a Brit so what skin do you have in the game?

[@vlmellody51]

Herman Wouk's last name, according to the author, is pronounced "woke."

[@War_And_Truth]

I'm deaf so I have never heard his name pronounced before.

[@vlmellody51]

@@War_And_Truth oh okay.👍 I learned ASL back in the early 80s, and while I still practice at home, I haven't had a reason to use it for more than 30 years.

[@directionallycorrect2027]

Your ability to convey a story is great. Your constant whining of Ambrose & Hanks is tiresome. Their work is open to the world to judge. Your continuous chirping in the background means nothing until you stand on your own name. Unsubed until I see your name and your published work on this channel.

[@War_And_Truth]

What difference does my name make? I'm not an author or a recognized historian. I just research WW2 topics and the Ambrose/Band of Brothers story intrigues me (and plenty of others) If you want to listen to someone talk about themselves and their credentials all the time there are plenty of those on YT.