Why don't they show Band of Brothers

[mustangdriver]

I just got done watching band of Brothers again over the last few days. Can anyone tell me why history classes don't show this. I learned more form this mini-series than I did in my whole high school history class over the entire four years. Think about what you cover in the series, D-Day, Operation Market Garden, concentration camps, and more.

[warbirdcrew]

MD-

My history teacher in high school showed it too all of his classes. It's definitely a great resource for teaching WWII history.

-WC

[mustangdriver]

Not only that , butI think it teaches students to respect their elders some, because this is what some of them did.

[b29flteng]

They won't show it because it shows the United states in a good way. Now days the liberal side of this country and the NEA wouldn't stand for it.

[warbirdguy]

Mostly its a time thing in high schools. In my Junior year US History Class we spent only 2 weeks on it. We watched a series of movies called "The Century" narrated by Peter Jennings over the course of the year, very good series by the way. Our US History class went from the Civil War up to Today, so we didn't have a lot of time.

[Forgotten Field]

Company E, 506th Infantry, 101st Airborne Division, has a very special place in the world's history. LTC Winters command, the strength of the NCO's, and the unit's efforts shine brightly, and I think we are very fortunate that Mr. Ambrose took the time to seek and tell their story. The actions on D-Day, in Holland, and at Bastogne are among the best of the best of combat soldiers, and stand alone for the valiant deeds of the members of the company.

I really like this series. I've been watching it with my son and telling him about the war and what the story behind this series means. We are up to the end of D-Day. I think it is very well done, very accurate and true to original story, and an extremely moving piece that most people who are interested in WWII should watch, especially if they want to know what life was like in the Airborne. I didn't go to war as they did, but I lived the Airborne life, and literally, some of the scenes bring tears to my eyes, and I sometimes have to turn it off as it brings up powerful emotions.

But from a historical standpoint, there are better sources to teach about infantry combat in Europe, because Band of Brothers is not truly representative of what infantry in Europe was like in WWII. Most infantry companies by the end of the war had less than 10 of the original members in the company from before deployment to Europe- many had none of the original members left (sideline here- when the 29th Division marched on review in a city near the Elbe river near the end of WWII, there were no Maryland soldiers left in the lead unit, and they unknowingly flew the Maryland flag upside down). Most of the units had over 300 days in combat, much of it un-relieved. The soldiers portrayed in this series were absolutely above the cut of the average GI. The constant stream of replacements and deaths of improperly trained soldiers entering combat with unfamiliar comrades is not well portrayed in the series, as the 101st did not follow the typical replacement train that other divisions did.

I think better books are Stephen Ambrose's "Citizen Soldier's," Egger's "The Men of Company K," Ernie Pyle's "Brave Men," and others which were more representative of the typical lives of infantry soldiers in WWII. Again, I say this in no way to denigrate the men of Company E, 506th Infantry. I just think that they were an infantry company of exceptional calibre, the high survival rate of the soldiers proves that, and that is not the norm for most infantry companies in WWII. There is one place in the book where a former member compares men of E Company to members of modern Delta Force (SFOD-D), and says they are superior in all ways to members of SFOD-D. I worked with guys from SFOD-D, and if this comment is true, the guys of E Company were simply supermen.

But I'll also say this: I would certainly pick Band of Brothers to teach people about small-unit military leadership. There are no better historically accurate movie portraits of the interaction between Enlisted Man, Non-Commissioned Officers, and Officers out there. I saw every good trait of a good NCO, EM, and Officer that I ever encountered when I was in the army highlighted in that series, and it should be mandatory watching for recruits, officer candidates, and studied carefully by junior NCO's.

[Former Member]

Mostly its a time thing in high schools. In my Junior year US History Class we spent only 2 weeks on it. We watched a series of movies called "The Century" narrated by Peter Jennings over the course of the year, very good series by the way. Our US History class went from the Civil War up to Today, so we didn't have a lot of time.

I'd have to agree with you...it's more of a time constraint than anything else. One of the history classes I took in high school only spent a couple of days on the subject of WWII. I also remember taking a "Modern History" class which was supposed to cover WWII in depth. Unfortunately the teacher got behind and the semester ended before we could even touch the subject. Either way...watching just a few episodes would probably have a far greater impact on kids than reading some boring old text book. Sadly...for most kids these days WWII is ancient history.

John

[FlyingFortB17]

Hope you guys are ready for the next Spielberg/Hanks WWII miniseries - following Marines in the Pacific. They're suppose to start shooting this year.

http://the-pacific-war.com/