In response to all those Stephen Ambrose threads.

It might be of interest to you that Ike picked Ambrose to work with him on a couple of books about himself ( Ike ). Ambrose got his start as the successful and popular historian we all know of with those books about Eisenhower...He said he was a "hippy-type with long hair" and was surprised to be picked by Ike. Now what do you think?

His book about Lewis and Clark ( Undaunted Courage ) supposedly was what caught Ike's eye...

I'd rather read an entertaining book quoting veterans, full of errors, than the dry crap these "poor and hard working but ignored <and JEALOUS as hell I might add > historians" are writing any day.

Since I am 62, and have been reading enough of the dry accurate crap for 50 years, It's easy to know when the vets are off base or mistaken. I also recognise revisionist scholars at work, too...

For instance, it makes no serious problem for me that a story about E Company, 506PIR, 101stAB made from interviews OF THAT UNIT"S VETS doesn't mention tank units I KNOW were in the Bulge enough to suit the "bogey wheel lug nut counters" among us...

The claims of E company being the "best Light Infantry Company in WWII that infuriates the little dry and probable unsuccessful and jealous Dr of history in one of the quotes doesn't bother me as I have forty to fifty MARINE companies in mind for that accolade, thank you very much , but at the same time I wouldn't give a hoot in hell for an Airborne Soldier that wasn't mistaken in the same way...or a leg, or fill in the blank

As for Winters slandering other officers that is bull ship. EVERY MAN man quoted in the book says Lt & Capt Sobel, for instance, was "the man who "MADE" E company with his chicken ship execising, but to a man, the Non Coms considered him an idiot who would get them all killed so they tried to refuse to go into combat with him in command. Evidently, Col. Sink took their advice becasue HE moved Winters into E Company command and moved the dipship to a training command in England...

The old surviving E Company vets are still trying to get Winters the MOH.

And as for the commanding General "taking Christmas off", how would you explain General McAuliffe ( sp?)the ADC being in command of 101stAB at Bastogne? I'm sure that "The COmmanding General was called back to the states for a conference" might stink a little to troops who were sent into a town in an emergency situation with very little ammo or food to hold it..What MCAullife said to the Germans was in all the papers, so we know he was in command, right?...

And as for the German units fought by 101st being sub par, Old Hitler and his Generals were always famous for picking the sorriest units available for attacks........NOT!

I can't remember the unit number of the Panzer Division that "disappeared from contact in front of 3rd Army" that Georgie particularly warned Sheaf about...He thought it proved something was up. Patton's name for the unit was "The Fireman" as it was always being sent to try to slow his advances...It was one of those "sub par" German units in the Battle of the Bulge

I read "Band of Brothers" as a used book from the Texas Aggie Book Store some years ago and thought it would be a good movie, much like I once read "True Grit" ( many many years ago ) in the Saturday Evening Post and knew it would be a good movie and that John Wayne would play "Rooster".

When SPR came out, before I even saw it, I thought the story line was recognizable as a "hollywooded up" story drawn from about two paragraphs of Professor Ambrose' BOB book. Three of four brothers were thought to be killed, and the unit Chaplain, knowing exactly where the Private was, went to him and pulled him out and sent him home...Not as exciting, huh...

I saw Ambrose interviewed on CSpan the year before his death and he said he had historicaL objections to the way they did SPR. A specific negative comment was that Hanks was too old to play a WWII Ranger Captain. He said Spielburg and Hanks just politely laughed at him, and made it the way they wanted to. He thought Hanks might have been more believable as a Light or Bird Colonel, but then it wouldn't have been a Tom Hanks' movie would it...
Matt Damon would have played Captain Miller, not Pvt. Ryan, and Hanks would get the short part of the man, just off the beach who assigned Capt Miller ( Damon ) to find McCalley Calkin... YUK.....

 

Fred, in the last Ambrose thread somebody mentions the real SPR plot and it's really not as simple as Ambrose tells it or as difficult as Spielburg tells it.

Through his faults, I am still one to take my hat off and take a moment of silence on the anniversary of his death. He was a great man.

 

According to Winters, E Company was always better than the other companies in the 506th and Ambrose vouches that, "there was no better light infantry company in the Army." How about the Rangers at Point du Hoc?
Greenjacket....

Just staying with US parachute units it would be hard to beat the 509th Parachute Regiment (later battalion). They jumped in every drop in Europe and the Mediterranian. They were in combat from Oran Algeria to the Rhine crossings. They were dropped seperately, they dropped with the 82nd (Sicily and Salerno) and with the 101st (Normandy and Market Garden). The unit sustained so many casualities in combat it was reduced from a regiment to a battalion.
Winter's company (not to mention regiment) doesn't come close to the 509th's record in combat.

 

Ah, Mr Gardner, but what about my comment that I wouldn't give a hoot in hell for a man in any combat unit that didn't think his was best?

I'm sure Major Winters was not privy to 509PIR's record at the time he made the remarks or possibly even now... Heck I'll go further...I wouldn't give a hoot in hell for a man that didn't think his recruit mess and scullery unit wasn't best...

I will promise to study 509PIR history. Goiong to Google it now....

[ 24. November 2003, 08:42 PM: Message edited by: Texas Fred ]

 

Fred, I would agree with your assertion. Winter's smugness and assurance his unit was "best" is to be expected.
However, when studying history one needs to maintain far more objectivity than that. Thus my post on the 509th.

 

All the above further illustrates the difference between history and ‘popular history’. ‘Popular history’ being that which captures the public’s imagination because it is brought to the attention of the public by those who seek to ‘give the public what they want’ and, of course, enlarge their bank accounts by doing so. And what captures the public’s imagination? Shock, horror, revelation, pathos and perhaps a bit of irony, but nothing too complicated please – oh yes, and a nice high body count.

Sadly there are many real events which have not caught the public’s eye because the money spinners have not rated them as being of sufficient money spinning potential. One such raid, which I mention once before here and attracted a nil response, is that of Los Banos. It’s greatest fault is probably that it went too well.

http://history1900s.about.com/library/prm/blliberating1.htm

There are several books and even a short video for those who prefer screen history.

http://www.themallsf.com/videos/los_banos.html


”It’s history Jim, but not as we know it?”

No.9

[ 27. November 2003, 11:45 PM: Message edited by: No.9 ]

 

To anyone interested in original photos of the Band Of Brothers 506th try this website.Page two of the BOB pages gives the real 'private Ryan story' of Sgt Fredrick Fritz Niland

http://www.101airborneww2.com/index.html

It also contains many stories and photographs of other Normandy US units.

Regards Graham

[ 29. November 2003, 08:21 AM: Message edited by: OX and BUCKS Light Infrantry ]

 

The army had decided long before D-Day that command of Division Artillery by a Brigadier General was over staffing. The rank of colonel was enough considering that most Division Artillery had only four battalions.

From late 1942 on, the Army had reduced the number of Generals in divisions while it also reorganized the TOE's of those divisions.

Some divisions such as the airborne divisions had the old quota of Generals, perhaps to cover the possibility that one might get himself killed or captured during the parachute drop.

In the 101st, Brigadier General Anthony McAuliffe was the artillery commander but was used from D-Day to control ground operations in both
Normandy and Holland. His assistant, a colonel, commanded the artillery more that adequately.

It is not unusual to leave a certain percentage of a force out of a battle to act as a cadre for rebuilding in the event that the force is wiped out. Having more Generals that was required certainly permitted some latitude when deciding who might be LOB.

also,

According to Donald R Burgett, another 101st writer of books, he had no time at all for any officer. As far as Burgett was concerned officers were only there to get you killed doing something stupid or ill-conceived. In his opinion, parachute soldiers were more than capable of killing Germans without supervision. He did, however, show a degree of respect for colonel Sink who he said, would never ask anyone to do something that he wasn't prepared to do himself.

 

Just my 2 cents worth,

I think people who judge veterans on their "innacurate" comments are only seeing one side of the coin.

There is a reason why many vets do not want to recount the war, 1) We as the new generation, frequently judge them by 21st century standards or simply do not understand, and 2) the vets that do, recount it as the most momentous event in their lives and are frequently seen as quacks or slanderers.

I was on my way to work today and my friend and I agreed that (based on "Sapper Brians" accounts on this forum) every week in his shoes would be like having a "Diana" or a "9/11" day, ie an event that will shake you and something that you'll never forget for the rest of your life.

Ergo, try explaining to all of us a moment in your life that was as momentous as that, that stirred up emotions as strong as that.
You're bound to let your feelings and emotions spill a little into your account no?
Now then, try to compare said account to a Historian's who has had years of meticulous research from maps, photos, DOD accounts, intelligence agencies and the internet. Of course it'll be different.

Equate it as a courtroom trial. Several witnesses (veterans) are bought to the stand for their account, by the prosecution or defense(interviewer/author). Through the course of the trial, the Jury learns some things, some facts some fantasy (perhaps construed as facts). Now a GOOD lawyer (historian) cross-analyses these with uncontraverable facts to see what is true and what isn't.

In the end the Jury (us) make up our minds with what they've seen.

Ambroses's books aren't and shouldn't taken as a history lesson. They should be taken as Witness accounts, and should be cross-analysed with proper historian's accounts.

After all, these interviews are the individual feelings and experiences of mostly teenage soldiers (how objective were you at 19?) remembering the most highly emotional event in their lives. Lets be realistic and not try to compare apples (Ambrose's books) and oranges ("History" books)

There are now more veterans than ever, wanting to have their accounts heard and passed on to future generations before, they in turn, pass into history. We have a chance to compare this other side of the coin to the "Hard to read" books that Texas is referring to. It should not be missed.

 

well said, Bratwurst. I liked the "ergo" especially. I agree with you.

That still leaves the subject of referring to Ambrose as a WW2 historian. In SPR, they interview him about WW2 and his title is "historian." I'm not sure if you guys have ever read the Lewis and Clark stuff by him, but I hear it's not only accurate, but a well written history book. Should Ambrose be considered as a historian, or an oral interview specialist? In BoB it actually writes down places where he had to encourage the veterans to go on because they were tearing up.
But again, applause to you, Bratwurst.

 

It makes a General better if he is reputed to have fought against the best enemy forces and won. Realistically, after Falaise, the German replacement divisions were only a shadow of their former selves. The back had been broken. This did not of course prevent good soldiers from appearing on the battlefield but as far as facing a superior enemy was concerned, the American GI, his commander and the supply columns behind him was as good as and usually better than his adversary.

Read "The GI Offensive in Europe" by Monsoor for more on that subject.

And as for Patton being held up by the "fire brigade", this was standard German doctrine to permit a large frontage to be defended by a meagre force. But more to the point, what was old Georgie trying to prove by bogging himself down in the same impossible terrain as he had found himself in WW1? Point is, it makes for better heroism for history to say that you were held up by a superior cunning enemy than by your own foolish attempt to force a path through easily defended terrain.

Patton knew well that his officers, men and equipment was superior to that of the Germans (and, in his opinion to that of his allies) and was proud of the fact that in his words, "the Third Army had moved faster and engaged more divisions in less time than any other army in the history of the United States- possibly in the history of the world", but he was also the last man to reach the Rhine.

It is all in how you tell the story.

 

Major....

Patton was urinating in the Rhine before any other group or division. He had contacted 'Ike' and told him the night before this that he had "Snuck a division across the Rhine without anyone the wiser.

Lst to Reach the Rhine?....NO....

First to urinate in it!

 

Its a nice trivia question
On reaching the Rhine, just looking at maps

Second British Army in September 1944 (Lower Rhine)
US Seventh Army in November 1944
French First Army in November or December 1944
First Canadian Army in February 1945 (reached Rhine above Lower Rhine shortly after the start of VERITABLE)
US First Army about 2 March 1945
US Ninth Army about 5 March 1945
US Third Army about 7 or 8 March 1945