Band of Brothers Question

Cafe Society
1

Hello,

I just recently registered and I’m having difficulty understanding the organization of this board.

I have a few questions about the HBO series Band of Brothers and I’ve seen one question about that series in this forum. So, I’m hoping this is the proper forum to post that kind of question. But for some reason, I keep expecting to see a separate forum devoted to TV or Movies. If you can give me any advice or point me to some page that describes the correct procedure on where to post these kinds of questions, I would very much appreciate it.

My question is about Episode One and the ouster of Captain Sobel (played by David Schwimmer). It always seemed to me that the boss (I think he was a Colonel) always knew what was going on. After all, wouldn’t someone have clued him in on Sobel’s dismal ability to lead the men into battle and what would likely happen if they were ever led into battle by Sobel?

The other officer present (I think he was a Major) was the same officer who questioned Sobel about cutting the farmer’s fence. So he must have known that Sobel was a fool.

My question is, given the boss man knew what was going on, why was he so hard on some of the NCOs while only giving a slap to the others. Why did he demote the ones he did? It seemed to me to be completely random and without any reason.

A minor question is who was Major or Colonel Horton? I always thought that the officer who told Sobel he was going to Chilton was named Colonen Horton.

Anyway, if anyone can shed any light on this incident for me, I would sure appreciate. It’s always been a puzzle to me. Why wouldn’t anyone ever tell Sobel that he couldn’t lead men into combat because he couldn’t read maps under combat conditions? Why didn’t the senior officer tell Sobel the truth? It surely would have been better for everyone all around. It would have given Sobel an honest shot at improving himself and maybe one day becoming competent at leading troops into combat. At least it would have given him a fighting chance. Whether he succeeded or not would have then rested on his own shoulders.

2

Band of Brothers is a true story based on a non-fiction book. I’ve read the book several times.

The real Captain Sobel was very much like you see him in the series. A lot of the men credit Sobel’s tough fitness program in boot camp for saving their lives. They went into war much more fit than most soldiers. In some cases that extra fitness made the difference in living or dying.

Sobel was a terrible field officer. But, in the military there’s a strict chain of command. I don’t think anyone dared say anything about Sobel to senior officers. That sort of thing just isn’t done in the military.

3

I don’t think there’s a definitive answer for this. Band of Brothers was based on Ambrose’s work, which is… somewhat biased by the opinions of the interviewees. I’ve never seen an account of Sobel’s side of the story, and the nearest other account we have – Dick Winters – is by someone who admittedly just didn’t like the guy.

Nonetheless, Winters sort-of speculates in his autobiography (I think that’s where it is) that the command knew full well that Sobel wasn’t up to leading troops into battle. But he was damn good at getting them in shape for battle – several Easy Co members attributed Sobel’s crazy training as the reason that the Company performed so well.

I suspect the miniseries went with that interpretation, for as much as it influenced the portrayals (likely, not much).

That said, the rebellion of the sergeants was far more serious. Even if command knew that Sobel was a martinet, that sort of thing was utterly unacceptable… but they couldn’t bust them all down, or they’d be left with no NCOs at all. It’s been a while since I read all the books, but essentially the ones who got busted with both barrels were either seen as the instigators, or had been in trouble for various other reasons. The miniseries was entirely too short to have depicted the whole background, so it comes across as rather random.

Col. Sink (played by Dale Dye) was the one who told Sobel he was being transferred. Maj. Horton was the officer that Luz imitated out in the field. Beyond that, let me point you to Bill Guarnere’s site.

4

Hi Joanie. Welcome to SDMB.

I can’t help you with BoB, since I’ve never seen it. But as to where to post, the forum titles have general descriptions. For example, Cafe Society says:
Our salon for art, drama, literature, movies, music, comics, cuisine – all the artistic disciplines – if it’s about creativity, entertainment, or leisure, it goes here.

So you’re in the right place to ask about a TV series. :wink:

5

Even if the higher brass suspected that Sobel was incompetent, they would not be grateful for being forced to a decision by a NCO rebellion. They dropped the hammer on a few NCOs to remind the rest that this wasn’t how things are done in the military.

It might be useful for you to read up on Gen. Lloyd Fredendall. He was in command of US forces at Kasserine Pass. He was highly thought of by his superiors & detested by his subordinates. After being mauled by the Germans, Fredendall was kicked upstairs & replaced by Patton.

That’s the Army Way!

:slight_smile:

6

Sometimes bad officers are dealt with in battle. Someone like Sobel would have gotten killed on day 1. He would have been running around confused and walked right into a stray bullet. Unfortunately, he would have also gotten good men killed with him.

7

Wow! He was kicked upstaris and replaced by Patton.

You know, when you say, “They dropped the hammer on a few NCOs to remind the rest that this wasn’t how things are done in the military” …

I wonder how they expected the men to behave. Surely they didn’t expect them to follow Sobel into battle and get slaughtered?

But for my curiosity. Can you tell me, what is the way they expected things to be done in the military? I’d really like to know.

Thanks very much to Lightray. Thanks for the insight and for the link to Bill Guarnere’s site.

And thanks very much to Johnny L.A. - thank you for the info.

And thanks to Wedgehead. I am curious to see how you think these guys would have expected the NCOs to behave with the problem they had.

Also thanks to Aceplace57. I had never heard of “fragging” in WW2. But I guess it must have happened. It really steams me to think that Sobel would have gotten so many good men killed though before he got what was coming to him.

Thanks to everyone who replied. It feels very good to know that people here were willing to help me. I really do appreciate.

8

I remember the NCOs saying at the time they signed the statement “you know we could get shot for this,” and the boss man confirmed this in the meeting in his office, “Ah oughtta have you awl lahned up’n shot.” Could this really have happened?

9

You might want to watch an old movie called The Caine Mutiny. Humphrey Bogart plays Navy Captain Queeg, a character somewhat like Capt. Sobel. He’s petty, tyrannical, short-tempered, and blames others for his mistakes. When he appears mentally unstable, his executive officer relieves him and assumes command. The XO is court-martialed, but the captain breaks down on the stand. As the XO and others are celebrating the acquital, his lawyer gives them all a severe dressing-down for their actions, plotting against their captain instead of trying to help him.

I’ve always felt that ending was a bit of a cop out. People did try to help Queeg. Queeg’s greatest problem, and probably Sobel’s too, is that he couldn’t listen. Things had to be his way. Whenever anyone tried to tell him anything he didn’t want to hear, he’d bite their head off. I think if Sobel’s commanding officer had told him he couldn’t command in the field, he would have become even worse, pushing the men even harder (since it must be their fault) and not developing any of the skills he really needed.

I don’t know what it would take to turn someone like that around, but I think it’s more than just “an honest shot at improving himself.”

10

One of the reasons I think David Schwimmer did such a fabulous job with this character is that he demonstrated the one character trait that I see over and over again with people who behave like Sobel.

They are complete tyrants and monsters to those people who are below them in rank. But they are complete pussy cats - totally passive with those who are above them in rank (like the Colonel boss man). So much so, they are even passive to those who are invisible (like the invisible Major Horton who told him to cut the fence - just hilarious!).

So, I agree that Sobel would never have accepted any kind of criticism or advice from anyone of a rank below his. But, I think it would have been a different story if he was told about his shortcomings from the Colonel. I think this may have something to do with his subconscious image of his father figure. Subconsciously, he must view the Colonel as his father figure and he would have always behaved in a totally passive way with the Colonel. Remember how meek he said to the Colonel, “Permission to speak, Sir?”

Then, he never asked why he was losing Easy Company. Instead, all he wanted to know was who would be replacing him. Wow! That was so powerful. I know that was due to the writer and not to David Schwimmer. But they both helped to put the image across. I found it to be so powerful. The great Captain Sobel couldn’t even ask why he was being replaced. All he wanted to know was who was replacing him - presumably to help protect his very fragile self-image. He needed his replacement to be someone that he respected - not someone that he had prevously scolded. But, I’m not very confident about that scene. Someone probably has a much better understanding of that dynamic than I do.

11

Another thing to remember is that there was no way to know how bad a combat leader Sobel was until they actually started training for combat. A martinet who demands everything be done his own way, but trains his troops well, and does a good job in combat, would certainly make an acceptable officer. So until they started doing field exercises and realized he couldn’t read a map, and didn’t understand infantry tactics, there was no reason to do anything about him - he was doing an acceptable (or better) job up until that point.

12

Also, with good officers and troops serving him, many of Sobels blunders may have been mitigated. In one training maneuver, Lt Winters took the objective (a crossroad) while Sobel got lost. Sobel still got the credit for this since Winters was one of his men. Getting ambushed in the North Carolina training maneuver was more a problem for Sobel since he directly ordered the actions that led to their loss.

But even if the Colonel knew that Sobel was despised by his men, so what? A lot of officers are hated by their troops even if they’re competant to lead. Grumbling and griping from the ranks is as old as organized warfare.

13

“Leadership” is the toughest thing to try and train/teach.

The military tries to train it’s NCO’s and junior officers with organisational techniques, but being able to motivate your men, and get them to trust you, is less of a science, and more of an art form.

Some organised officers (like Sobel) who pay attention to detail (granted, Sobel couldn’t navigate cross country) and ensure all the i’s are dotted, and all the rooms in the barracks are spic-and-span look great on paper (i.e. in non-combat roles), but somehow fall short as ideal in combat. Then again, some martinets (like Patton) do fine.

Even in WW2, the military had manpower problems, where there is more jobs to be done than there are bodies to do them. After spending all the time (and money) training these folks, the senior leadership like to give the officer’s under them every opportunity to succeed.

The merely adequate officer can still muddle through well enough, as there may be enough skilled NCO’s and officers below and above the individual in question to compensate for whatever shortcomings there may be. Part of Sobel’s problem was that he did not instill loyalty and confidence in his leadership with the men serving around him. Thus, noone was inclined to cover for him. I think even Colonel Sink finally had enough with Sobel, when Sobel’s NCO’s did their mutiny.

As far as military discipline goes, the NCO’s are expected to follow orders. The military is not a democracy. That old saying sounds pretty cliche, I know. But it’s true, and the meaning goes deeper than just deciding what hilltop to overrun today.

There are a lot of unpleasant (or boring) tasks that had to be done. (Like mucking out the latrine.) In any outfit, your probably going to have a number of malingerers and bad attitudes. If they thought they could get out of unpopular duties by complaning to the chain of command (with potentially made up crap, as well), they would do so in a heart beat. Such behavior destroys unit morale.

I don’t think Aceplace57 was referring to fragging. Sobel was more than capable of blindly wandering in front of a German machine gun nest, with his troops all lined up with him.

14

In the 1960’s Sobel attempted suicide I believe, succeeding only in blinding himself, and he died in the late 80’s in a VA home.

I picked up a book by his son, IIRC, in a train station book store, and flipped through it. It seems his son had a fractious relationship with him, partially as a result of Vietnam, but had made his peace with his father and was writing the book at least partially to rectify what he felt was an unfair treatment of Sobel in Band of Brothers.

15

I don’t think he had anything “coming to him.” Sure, his men didn’t like him because he was a martinet & a hard-ass, but that’s true of a lot of people in the military. He wasn’t a good combat leader, but he got relieved of that position before he could get anyone killed. And from the book, it sounds like he became a perfectly good regimental Supply officer - there’s even a story (not seen in the TV show IIRC) where he drives a jeep full of ammo to the front lines because they’re running short.

ETA: He did remain a martinet in the book as well. There’s another story where the Army wants all the paratroopers to turn in their silk escape maps of France, or face a $75 fine. Those maps were prized souveniers, so when Sobel wants to collect them all, Winters (by then a Major and battalion commander) tells him to screw off.

I read a quote once that leading men into combat, and leading them well, is the hardest and most rewarding job on Earth. There’s no shame that he didn’t have the skills to do that job well.

Looking at Wikipedia, Sobel was awarded the Bronze Star - it doesn’t say for what or when, but they don’t give those out for perfect attendance or shiniest shoes.

16

In thinking this over, I believe you make the best point. Your post makes this episode hang together and has it all make sense. In the military, when someone is given an order, they must carry it out. It is absolutely unacceptable for that person to refuse a direct order. Never under any conditions is that acceptable.

So, one way or another, Sobel had to go. It’s just too bad he couldn’t go somewhere where he could do some good. Like somewere he could train officers in how to train paratroops. After all, when it came to training paratroops, he was excellent at that. From what we see, he may have even been one of the best ever. He was so good, that he surely did deserve a promotion. It was just too bad that the promotion he got was not a real good fit for his skills. As a matter of fact, it wasn’t even a real promotion. If he could do it - and there is never any gurantee that someone who is well skilled at something will be competent at training others how to become competent in that skill. But, if he could do it, Sobel should have been training pratroop trainers - not training officers how to jump. Nothing in his history indicated that he was the right man for the job when it came to training officers how to jump out of an airplane. It seems to me that he was not the right man for that job.

17

I would say that much of “Leadership” comes down to respect for those below. Comparing (David Schwimmer’s portrayal of) Sobel with Patton, I believe that Sobel shows the typical pattern of respect upwards but not downwards. In my opinion, Patton exhibited great respect down the ranks, which endeared him to those below him. So, while Patton might have been a martinet, the soldiers under him respected and trusted him because the respect flowed from the top.

I believe that Napoleon, too, exhibited that trait.

I think that, generally, people will follow anyone who truly respects them.

18

I can’t tell if you are confusing respect with friendship or some other compassionate emotion.

Soldiers and sailors will follow a leader who is a prick, as long as that leader knows their buisness.

I think Sobels problem was that he demonstrated that he didn’t know his buisness (small unit tactics and overland navigation). He also blamed others, or other circumstances, for his failures, and didn’t appear to make the effort to learn from his mistakes. [At least in the TV series, anyway. I hadn’t read any books on this topic.]

19

I never really got to answer Lightray before I exceeded the five minute time limit on editing posts. In other words, I tried to change my post later than five minutes after I first edited it (at least I think that is what happened).

I once learned at a very early age, that just because someone is skilled at something (like hitting a baseball), that doesn’t mean they will have any ability at all when it comes to teaching others how to do that. In fact, they can often be downright terrible when it comes to teaching others. Just because someone is highly skilled at something - like Sobel was skilled at training paratroops, that doesn’t mean he will be able to teach others how to train paratroops. In fact, he could very well be completely terrible when it comes to that. But here is the reply I wanted to give to Lightray:

Lightray, I want to thank you for helping me understand what went on when it came to terminating Sobel from Easy Company. As I understood it, your point was that the rebellion by the Sergeants was far more serious than any problem with Sobel. After all, there is no way the Colonel would have ever allowed Sobel to lead any of his troops into combat. But, there were likely many easy ways to get Sobel out of his leadership role before he ever faced any combat. However, there were probably very few good ways to handle the Sergeants’ rebellion and that was much more serious and involved a lot more men than any problem with Sobel.

I know that leading a hundred men (or so) into combat would be very serious if they were likely going to suffer terrible casualties. But it would have been easy to get Sobel out of there before he ever led anyone into combat and there would have been very few negative consequences there. But dealing with the Sergeants’ rebellion could have had many long-term serious consequences and that needed to be handled properly and right away, too. Anyway, I believe you hit the nail right on the head and I thank you for helping me to understand that. I never understood it before.

P.S. This is not related to the main issue here. But is there any way that anyone could help me to know how many men are in a Company and what is the relationship among a Company, Platoon, Regiment, Army, etc.? I’m wondering if some of those things are not exactly fixed but can be kind of honorary groupings? In any case, when it comes to this series, I would really like to know how many men are in each of those kinds of units and how those units are organized in the US Army.

20

Good discussion. BTW, I had never heard the term martinet before I saw people say that about Sobel.