Never Faithful; The Rivalry Between our Army and Marines

A. Scott Piraino

The United states has two armies. Today we take this for granted, and don’t question the reasons for funding both the United States Army, and the United states Marine Corps. But it wasn’t always this way.

There were no Marines in the Continental Army that won the Revolutionary War. During the Civil War, Congress authorized less than 3,200 men for the Marine Corps, this while the Union Armies totaled nearly one million men. The fact is, for most of their history the United States Marine Corps was little more than a security force for the Navy.

The myth of the Marine Corps as a second army began in WW I. When the United states entered the war in 1917, over two million U.S. Army soldiers were deployed to France along with one brigade of marines, about ten thousand strong. Despite being a tiny fraction of the American forces fighting in WW I, the Marines managed to make a name for themselves at the U.S. Army’s expense.

General Pershing, the Commander of all U.S. Forces in France, had ordered a news blackout that prevented reporters from mentioning specific units in their dispatches. The purpose of the order was obvious; to prevent German intelligence from learning about American troop movements. But one reporter circumvented the order, a war correspondent for the Chicago Tribune named Floyd Gibbons.

After Mr. Gibbons was severely wounded at the battle of Belleau Wood, the press corps passed on his dispatches without the approval of Army censors. The result was a storm of press coverage in the US claiming that the Huns were being defeated with “the Help of God and a few Marines”. No mention was made of the thousands of Army soldiers who were fighting and dying with equal valor.

Floyd Gibbons made no secret of his “friendship and admiration for the U.S. Marines”. There is no proof that his writings created the mythology of the Marine Corps, but we do know he wrote a biography of Baron von Richthofen, more popularly known as the Red Baron. His description of the German aviator reads as propaganda, not journalism, and his other works were probably embellished as well.

Today all Marines in basic training are taught that German soldiers in WW I referred to them as “Devil Dogs”. H.L. Mencken, an American writing in 1921, clearly states that; “The Germans, during the war, had no opprobrious nicknames for their foes…Teufelhunde (devil-dogs), for the American marines, was invented by an American correspondent; the Germans never used it.”

In addition, there is the legend of “Bulldog Fountain”, where the U.S. Marine’s mascot originated. This fountain is located in the village of Belleau, not the wood of the same name. Although the Marines fought in Belleau Wood, the US Army’s 26th division liberated the village, three weeks after the Marines had left the area.

There is no documented evidence that Germans ever referred to Marines as “Devil dogs”, and the Marines never captured the village of Belleau with its “Bulldog Fountain”. It is not clear exactly where these stories come from, but their source is most likely Floyd Gibbons. Perhaps the Marines knew this, because they made him an honorary Marine posthumously in 1941.

Floyd Gibbons helped enhance the image of the Marines, but the United States Marine Corps as we know it today came of age in WW II. Most Americans believe that the Marine Corps won the war in the Pacific, while the US Army fought in Europe. In fact our Pacific operations were hampered by a conflict between the Army and the Navy, that split the theatre in two.

The Navy adamantly refused to place their fleet, (and their Marines), under the command of the Army. After five weeks of bureaucratic wrangling, General MacArthur was given command of the Southwest Pacific theatre, while Admiral Nimitz had jurisdiction over the remainder of the Pacific ocean. The result, in Macarthur’s own words, was a “divided effort, the… duplication of force (and) undue extension of the war with added casualties and cost”.

The US Army fought the main force of the Japanese Imperial Army in New Guinea and the Philippines. The Navy and Marines carried out an “island hopping” strategy that involved amphibious assaults on islands such as Guadalcanal and Saipan. General Macarthur complained bitterly to the President that “these frontal attacks by the Navy, as at Tarawa, are tragic and unnecessary massacres of American lives“.

By way of comparison, General Macarthur’s Army killed, captured, or stranded over a quarter of a million Japanese troops during the New Guinea campaign, at a cost of only 33,000 US casualties. The Navy and Marines suffered over 28,000 casualties to kill roughly 20,000 Japanese on Iwo Jima. Even then, the Army played a greater role than Marines like to admit; the Army had more divisions assaulting Okinawa than the Marines.

The famous image of Marines raising the US flag on Mount Suribachi is actually a photograph of the second, staged flag-raising ceremony. The Marines raised the flag a second time to replace the original, smaller flag, and to provide the press corps with a better photo opportunity. That photograph has become one of the most enduring images of WW II, and served as the model for the Marine Corps Memorial statue.

The Secretary of the Navy, James Forrestal, was on Iwo Jima that morning in 1945, and when he saw the Stars and Stripes go up he declared; ‘The raising of that flag on Suribachi means a Marine Corps for the next five hundred years!”

In fact the Marine Corps was nearly legislated out of existence two years later. After the bureaucratic infighting that characterized inter-service relations during WW II, there was a strong desire among military professionals to unify the military commands. President Truman agreed, and in 1946 his administration proposed a bill to unify the separate service bureaucracies.

Having one budgetary authority for the Armed Forces, and one chain of command each for land forces, ships, and aircraft makes sense. But this would have placed the US Navy at a distinct disadvantage. The Navy had their own air wings aboard their carriers, and their own army, the Marine Corps.

The Navy and Marine Corps were determined to scuttle this legislation. Marine generals created a secret office code named the Chowder Society to lobby behind the scenes, (in opposition to their President and Commander in Chief), and thwart the unification bill before Congress. The Commandant of the Marine Corps even made an impassioned speech before Congress to plead for his separate service.

It worked. Congress rejected the Truman administration’s unification bill, and instead passed the National Security Act of 1947. This Act guaranteed separate services, with their own independent budgets, and was a victory for the Navy and Marine Corps.

In addition, the Marines succeeded in having their separate force structure written into the language of the legislation. It is very unusual for Congress to dictate the actual composition of a military service. Yet the National Security Act mandates that the Marines Corps must maintain “not less than three combat divisions and three aircraft wings and such land combat, aviation, and other services as necessary to support them“.

President Truman was furious, and military professionals were appalled. General Eisenhower characterized the Marines as “being so unsure of their value to their country that they insisted on writing into the law a complete set of rules and specifications for their future operations and duties. Such freezing of detail…is silly, even vicious.”

The war between the Army and Marines would get more vicious in Korea. On November 27th, 1950 a division of Marines 25,000 strong, was ordered to proceed along the west side of the Chosin reservoir, while a much smaller task force of 2500 Army troops went up the eastern side. Waiting for them were 120,000 troops of the Chinese Communist 9th Army Group.

The Army soldiers fought a running battle for three days against a Chinese force eight times their size, in temperatures as low as minus 35 degrees. Despite the death of two commanding officers, the task force lumbered south with over 600 dead and wounded soldiers loaded into trucks, fought through repeated ambushes, and was even mistakenly bombed by US Marine aircraft. Finally, just four miles from safety, the convoy was cut off by the Chinese and annihilated.

385 men made it to the safety of American lines by crossing the frozen Chosin Reservoir.

The First Marine Division, with the help of allied air power, managed to fight their way out of the Chinese encirclement. Marines claimed that the Army had disgraced itself, and passed on stories of US soldiers throwing down their weapons and feigning injuries. A Marine Chaplain even made statements to the press and wrote an article accusing army soldiers of cowardice.

There were so few officers and men left from the Army task force that the Marine’s claims were accepted as fact. But newly released Chinese documents prove otherwise. The Army task force fought bravely against overwhelming odds before being destroyed, and their stubborn defense bought time for the Marines to escape the encirclement.

Nevertheless, Marines to this day hold up the fight at the Chosin reservoir as proof of their superiority over the Army.

In Vietnam, a Marine regiment at Khe Sanh refused to come to the aid of a Special Forces outpost only four miles from their perimeter. On Febuary 7th, 1968, the camp at Lang Vei was overran by heavily armed North Vietnamese troops during an all-night battle. The Marines had earlier agreed to reinforce the camp in the event of an attack, but two requests for assistance were denied.

General Westmoreland himself had to order the Marines to provide helicopters for Special forces personnel, so they could be airlifted into the besieged outpost. By this time the post had been overrun, at a cost of 208 soldiers killed and another 80 wounded. Ironically, two months later this same Marine regiment would be besieged at Khe Sanh, and they would be relieved by Army troops of the First Cavalry Division.

During Operation Desert Storm 90,000 Marines attacked Iraqi forces alongside over 500,000 US Army and coalition troops. Yet the Marines garnered 75 percent of the newsprint and TV coverage. This was not an accident.

The Commanding General of the Marines in Iraq, Gen. Walt Boomer, was the former Director of Public Affairs for the Corps. He issued the following order to Marine units in the theater:

“CMC [Commandant of the Marine Corps, then General A. M. Gray] desires maximum media coverage of USMC … The news media are the tools through which we can tell Americans about the dedication, motivation, and sacrifices of their Marines. Commanders should include public affairs requirements in their operational planning to ensure that the accomplishments of our Marines are reported to the public.“

During the war Marine officers used military communications systems to transmit stories for reporters in the field, and even assigned personnel to carry press dispatches to rear areas. The Marine Commander also had his own entourage of reporters complete with satellite uplinks, and used them to good effect. He received far more air time than his Army counterparts.

The US Army performed a “Hail Mary” operation that trapped Iraq’s Republican Guard divisions and fought numerous running battles in the Iraqi desert. But no one saw them. Instead the press focused on Lt. Gen. Walter Boomer parading triumphantly through the streets of Kuwait City.

When George Bush the Second launched his misguided invasion of Iraq, the Marines were once again included, and this time the goal was Baghdad. The invasion, which began on March 20th, 2003, called for a two pronged assault on Baghdad. The Army’s 5th Corps would advance from the desert west of the Euphrates river, while the First Marine division was ordered to cross the Euphrates and make a parallel advance through central Iraq.

The invasion did not go well for the Marines. In several cities, including Umm al Qasr and Nasiriya, their units suffered heavy casualties fighting remnants of the Iraqi Army and fedayeen guerrillas. Since the Marines had fewer armored vehicles, and they were exposed to a more tenacious enemy, their progress was slower than the Army’s.

Major General Mattis, the commanding general of the Marines in Iraq, was not pleased. He repeatedly pressured his regiments to make greater speed, and this pressure grew more intense as the Marines lagged further behind Army units. On the morning of April 3rd, the First Marine Regiment, commanded by Colonel Dowdy, was ordered to drive to the town of al-Kut.

The city was another choke point, where Iraqi fedayeen guerrillas could ambush Marine convoys in city streets. As soon as his Marines reached the city, they began taking fire. Colonel Dowdy could not forget the mauling another regiment had received in Nasiriya, where 17 Marines were killed and another seventy were wounded.

He had to make a choice. His orders were to proceed to al-Kut, but the decision to push through or bypass the town was up to him. However, Colonel Dowdy was receiving mixed signals from his superiors. According to him “there was a lot of confusion”, some officers were recommending an attack, others urged withdrawal.

Colonel Dowdy decided to bypass al-Kut. His regiment would take an alternative route to Baghdad that was safer, but the detour of 170 miles meant that the Marines fell further behind schedule. Colonel Dowdy‘s superiors were furious with his decision.

After the withdrawal from al-Kut, General Mattis and other staff officers let the Colonel know that his regiment was to make greater speed. That night on the road to Baghdad, vehicles of the First Marine Regiment were ordered to drive the highways of Iraq with their headlights on, irregardless of security. But their progress was not good enough, the Army‘s Fifth Corps had already reached Baghdad.

Colonel Joe Dowdy was relieved of his command the following day. The Marine Corps will never admit it, but he was fired because he failed to carry out the Corps most important mission in Iraq: Colonel Dowdy failed to upstage the US Army by being the first to reach Baghdad.

The Marines would return to Iraq one year later, when the First Marine Expeditionary Force assumed responsibility for Al Anbar province, which includes the city of Fallujah.

During the change of command ceremony Lt. Gen. James T. Conway of the I MEF proclaimed that; “Although Marines don’t normally do nation-building, they will tell you that once given the mission, nobody can do it better.” The Marines took control of the area from the U.S. Army’s 82nd Airborne Division, and they made no secret of their distain for the Army’s strategy in Iraq.

Before deploying, General Conway had told the New York Times “I don’t envision using that tactic“, when asked about Army troops using air strikes against the insurgents. “I don’t want to condemn what [Army] people are doing. I think that they are doing what they think they have to do.”

On March 30th, General Conway told a reporter that “There’s no place in our area of operation that we won’t go, and we have taken some casualties in the early going making that point“. The next day four civilian contractors were killed and mutilated in Fallujah, and five Marines also lost their lives. The Marines sealed off the city and attempted to reassert control over Fallujah, but the insurgents proved to be more determined than expected.

When their patrols came under heavy fire the lightly armed Marines had only two choices; Fight it out with the insurgents on foot, or call in artillery and air strikes. The inevitable result was scores of Marines killed or wounded, and hundreds of civilian casualties. The world was appalled by the carnage in Fallujah, and the Marines were called off.

While Marines were fighting in Fallujah, the US Army was heavily engaged against militiamen loyal to Muqtata al-Sadr in cities throughout Iraq. But in contrast to the Marine’s failure to recapture Fallujah, the US Army’s heavy armored vehicles could enter hostile cities with impunity. They brought al-Sadr to heel after two months of fighting, while suffering relatively few casualties.

An uneasy truce was made between the US Army and al-Sadr’s militia, that would last until the Marines again became involved. On July 31st 2004, the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit replaced Army units in the holy city of Najaf, headquarters of Muqtata al-Sadr. Just five days later, al-Sadr’s militia would again be waging open war against the US, and the Marines would be calling for reinforcements.

The Marines began skirmishing with al-Sadr’s militiamen as soon as they were given responsibility for Najaf. After the uprising in April, US Army units had avoided driving past al-Sadr’s house as part of the informal truce, but this would not do for the Marines. The second Shia uprising began after Marines in Najaf provoked al-Sadr by driving their patrols right up to his stronghold.

A firefight ensued, and al-Sadr’s militiamen took up arms in cities throughout Iraq in a replay of the uprising in April. The Marines had not just picked a fight with Muqtada in Najaf, they had engaged his militia in an ancient cemetery that abutted the Imam Ali Mosque, Shiite Islam’s holiest shrine. And they did this without informing the Army chain of command, or the Iraqi government.

According to Maj. David Holahan, second in command of the Marine unit in Najaf, “We just did it”. But in a replay of the Fallujah assault, the Marines faced an enemy that they were not prepared for. Within hours of launching their attack on August 5th, the Marines were pinned down, and requesting assistance.

Unfortunately for the Marines, their rash attack on al-Sadr’s headquarters had sparked another revolt by his militiamen. Army units were once again fighting the Mahdi army in cities throughout Iraq. When the Army’s Fifth Cavalry Regiment received orders to reinforce the beleaguered Marines, they were deployed against al-Sadr’s militia in the outskirts of Bagdhad, 120 miles away.

The Fifth Cavalry arrived in Najaf after a two day drive through insurgent controlled territory. By then any opportunity to capture al-Sadr had been lost, because the press, and the Islamic world, were focused on the Imam Ali Mosque and the adjacent cemetery. Any attack on Shiite Islam’s holiest shrine, where Muqtata al-Sadr was holed up, would have had disastrous consequences for the US war effort.

In Fallujah and Najaf, inexperienced Marine units picked fights with insurgents, and in both cases ended up handing the enemy a strategic victory. Their failure to recapture Fallujah made the city a rallying cry for Islamic militarism worldwide, (that is until the second US assault rendered Fallujah uninhabitable). The Marine’s botched attempt to capture Muqtata al-Sadr has only strengthened his hand.

Today there are 23,000 Marines in Iraq, out of a total 138,000 U.S. Armed Forces personnel. Marines are 17 percent of our total force, yet they have suffered 29 percent of all U.S. casualties; 530 of the more than 1,820 U.S. service personnel killed in Iraq. The Marine’s aggressive tactics combined with a lack of armored firepower has proven lethal, their bravery notwithstanding.

The United States Marines pride themselves on being better than the US Army. They are harder, more gung-ho, and they possess some magic that enables them to do things the US Army can’t do. If this is not true, (as recent events in Iraq suggest), then there is no reason for a separate Marine Corps.

President Harry Truman once stated that Marines; “Have a propaganda machine that is almost equal to Stalin’s.” The Marines have always advertised themselves, but in Truman’s day, they at least had something to sell. The original raison d’etre of the USMC was their ability to carry out amphibious landings on hostile beaches.

The truth is, the US Army conducted the biggest amphibious assault in our nation’s history when they captured the Normandy beaches. And neither the Army or the Marines have assaulted an enemy held beach since the Korean war, over fifty years ago. In every subsequent conflict Soldiers and Marines have fought in the same way, using similar equipment and tactics.

The Marines are in fact a second Army, and since they compete with the Army for funds, missions, and prestige, their real enemy is… the US Army.

However, the Marine Corps has an unfair advantage in this competition. Since the end of Desert Storm the US Army has been downsized by one third, losing over 200,000 troops and eight combat divisions. By Contrast the Marines have lost only twenty thousand personnel. The reason is the National Security Act of 1947, which prevents any changes in the force structure of the Marines.

Today’s United States Marine Corps is only slightly larger than the US Army in Iraq. That war is stretching our Army to the breaking point. The obvious solution is to merge the Army and Marine corps into one service.

The savings would add up to tens of billions of dollars when their training, logistics, administration, and headquarters were merged. The personnel shortages that are now crippling both services would disappear. And so would the rivalry between the Army and the Marine Corps.

Published on February 1, 2006 at 1:07 am  Comments (855)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://thepopulist.wordpress.com/never-faithful-the-rivalry-between-our-army-and-marines/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

855 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Your article is obvioulsy slanted pro-Army and is somewhat misleading. Although I agree the expensive redundancy and inter-service rivalry is not productive, the fact is the Marines have adapted much faster than the army to the new world of small scale limited warfare. By being forward deployed at sea, they are more capable of sending medium infantry units to hot spots rapidly with enough armor, artillery and self-contained airpower to capture and hold a position, theoretically for a month without support. The army’s airborne divisions are too light to handle heavy forces and the amry’s main units are too slow and cumbersome. That’s why the USMC was the first major conventional force in Afghanistan, a land-locked country that should have been the domain of the army. The Army Special Forces and Navy SEALs, while getting tremendous media attention and an oversize share of the military budget must really be seen as a recon unit capable of very small scale operations. The article should have really focused on the question not of “do we need a Marine Corps”, but do we need an army? Since a mandatory draft is political suicide, the government has been forced to maintain a large standing army (and Marines). Combat happens so rapidly in today’s world that many wars are over before a force can complete a training cycle. THe fact is that we need a large-scale rapid deployment force that can project power to a foreign country and hold the enemy until reinforcements arrive. Your cut on the fact that there have been no amphibious invasions since WWII does injustice to the soldiers and Marines that participated in Grenada. Granted landing craft hitting a heavily reinforced beach is unlikely, but helicopters coming in from ships is very likley. I agree the two forces should merge, but certainly not under the army’s slow, methodical, top heavy model. The Marines have won this argument.

    • In the Army, shock troops are a small minority supported by a vast group of artisans, laborers, clerks and organizers. In the Marines there are practically nothing but shock troops.
      —Combat correspondent John Lardner, 6 March 1945 report on Iwo Jima in New Yorker magazine, 17 March 1945

      Marines know how to use their bayonets. Army bayonets may as well be paper-weights.
      Navy Times; November 1994

      Why in hell can’t the Army do it if the Marines can. They are the same kind of men; why can’t they be like Marines.
      Gen. John J. “Black Jack” Pershing, USA; 12 February 1918

      I have just returned from visiting the Marines at the front, and there is not a finer fighting organization in the world!
      General of the Armies Douglas MacArthur; Korea, 21 September 1950

      We have two companies of Marines running rampant all over the northern half of this island, and three Army regiments pinned down in the southwestern corner, doing nothing. What the hell is going on?
      Gen. John W. Vessey Jr., USA, Chairman of the the Joint Chiefs of Staff
      during the assault on Grenada, 1983

      Lying offshore, ready to act, the presence of ships and Marines sometimes means much more than just having air power or ship’s fire, when it comes to deterring a crisis. And the ships and Marines may not have to do anything but lie offshore. It is hard to lie offshore with a C-141 or C-130 full of airborne troops.
      Gen. Colin Powell, U. S. Army
      Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
      During Operation Desert Storm

      You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth- and the amusing thing about it is that they are.
      Father Kevin Keaney
      1st Marine Division Chaplain
      Korean War

      The Marine Corps has just been called by the New York Times, ‘The elite of this country.’ I think it is the elite of the world.
      Admiral William Halsey, U.S. Navy

      I can’t say enough about the two Marine divisions. If I use words like ‘brilliant,’ it would really be an under description of the absolutely superb job that they did in breaching the so-called ‘impenetrable barrier.’ It was a classic- absolutely classic- military breaching of a very very tough minefield, barbed wire, fire trenches-type barrier.
      Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, U. S. Army
      Commander, Operation Desert Storm, February 1991

      I am convinced that there is no smarter, handier, or more adaptable body of troops in the world.
      Prime Minister of Britain, Sir Winston Churchhill on US Marines.

      The deadliest weapon in the world is a Marine and his rifle.
      Gen. John “Black Jack” Pershing, U.S. Army
      Commander of American Forces in World War I

      The American Marines have it [pride], and benefit from it. They are tough, cocky, sure of themselves and their buddies. They can fight and they know it.
      General Mark Clark, U.S. Army

      “The deadliest weapon in the world is a MARINE and his rifle!”
      GEN. PERSHING, US.ARMY

      “The more MARINES I have around the better I like it!”
      GEN. MARK CLARK, U.S. ARMY

      “I want you boys to hurry up and whip these Germans so we can get out to the Pacific to kick the s**t out of the purple-pissing Japanese, before the Godda**ed MARINES get all the credit!”
      Lt General George Patton, US Army 1945

      “People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”
      GEORGE ORWELL, on US Marines

      “I can never again see a UNITED STATES MARINE without experiencing a feeling of reverence.”
      GEN. JOHNSON, U.S. ARMY

      “Teufelhunde! (Devil Dogs)”
      GERMAN SOLDIERS, WW1 at BELLEAU WOOD

      “We have two companies of MARINES running all over this island and thousands of ARMY troops doing nothing!”
      GEN. JOHN VESSEY, CHAIRMAN OF JOINT CHIEFS

      “Panic sweeps my men when they are facing the AMERICAN MARINES.”
      CAPTURED NORTH KOREAN MAJOR

      There are only two kinds of people that understand Marines: Marines and the enemy. Everyone else has a second-hand opinion.
      Gen. William Thornson, U.S. Army

      The safest place in Korea was right behind a platoon of Marines. Lord, how they could fight!
      MGen. Frank E. Lowe, USA; Korea, 26 January 1952

      My only answer as to why the Marines get the toughest jobs is because the average Leatherneck is a much better fighter. He has far more guts, courage, and better officers… These boys out here have a pride in the Marine Corps and will fight to the end no matter what the cost.
      2nd Lt. Richard C. Kennard, Peleliu, World War II

      This was the first time that the Marines of the two nations had fought side by side since the defense of the Peking Legations in 1900. Let it be said that the admiration of all ranks of 41 Commando for their brothers in arms was and is unbounded. They fought like tigers and their morale and esprit de corps is second to none.
      Lt Col. D.B. Drysdale, Commanding 41 Commando, Chosen Reservoir, on the 1st Marine Division Division

      There was always talk of Espirit de Corps, of being gung ho, and that must have been a part of it. Better, tougher training, more marksmanship on the firing range, the instant obedience to orders seared into men in boot camp.
      James Brady, press secretary to President Reagan

      A Ship without Marines is like a garment without buttons.
      Adm. David Dixon Porter, USN in a letter to Colonel Commandant John Harris, USMC, 1863

      Freedom is not free, but the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share.
      Ned Dolan

      The raising of that flag on Suribachi means a Marine Corps for the next five hundred years.
      James Forrestal, Secretary of the Navy; 23 February 1945

      The Marines I have seen around the world have the cleanest bodies, the filthiest minds, the highest morale, and the lowest morals of any group of animals I have ever seen. Thank God for the United States Marine Corps!
      Eleanor Roosevelt, First Lady of the United States, 1945

      Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the Marines don’t have that problem.
      Ronald Reagan, President of the United States; 1985

      Marines I see as two breeds, Rottweilers or Dobermans, because Marines come in two varieties, big and mean, or skinny and mean. They’re aggressive on the attack and tenacious on defense. They’ve got really short hair and they always go for the throat.
      RAdm. “Jay” R. Stark, USN; 10 November 1995

      They told (us) to open up the Embassy, or “we’ll blow you away.” And then they looked up and saw the Marines on the roof with these really big guns, and they said in Somali, “Igaralli ahow,” which means “Excuse me, I didn’t mean it, my mistake”.
      Karen Aquilar, in the U.S. Embassy; Mogadishu, Somalia, 1991

      By their victory, the 3rd, 4th and 5th Marine Divisions and other units of the Fifth Amphibious Corps have made an accounting to their country which only history will be able to value fully. Among the Americans who served on Iwo Island, uncommon valor was a common virtue.
      Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, U.S. Navy

      Do not attack the First Marine Division. Leave the yellowlegs alone. Strike the American Army.
      Orders given to Communist troops in the Korean War; shortly afterward, the Marines were ordered to not wear their khaki leggings.

      “Marines are about the most peculiar breed of human beings I have ever witnessed. They treat their service as if it was some kind of cult, plastering their emblem on almost everything they own, making themselves up to look like insane fanatics with haircuts to ungentlemanly lengths, worshipping their Commandant almost as if he was a god, and making weird animal noises like a band of savages. They’ll fight like rabid dogs at the drop of a hat just for the sake of a little action, and are the cockiest SOB’s I have ever known. Most have the foulest mouths and drink well beyond man’s normal limits, but their high spirits and sense of brotherhood set them apart and , generally speaking, of the United States Marines I’ve come in contact with, are the most professional soldiers and the finest men I have had the pleasure to meet.”
      ~ An Anonymous Canadian Citizen

      “The raising of that flag on Suribachi means a MARINE CORPS for the next 500 years.”
      JAMES FORRESTAL, SECRETARY OF THE NAVY

      “The safest place in Korea was right behind a platoon of MARINES. LORD, how they could fight!”
      MAJ. GEN. FRANK LOWE, U.S. ARMY

      WE STOLE THE EAGLE FROM THE AIR FORCE, THE ANCHOR FROM THE NAVY AND THE ROPE FROM THE ARMY.
      ON THE SEVENTH DAY WHILE GOD RESTED, WE OVERRAN HIS PERIMETER, STOLE THE GLOBE AND WE’VE BEEN RUNNING THE WHOLE SHOW EVER SINCE. WE LIVE LIKE SOLDIERS, TALK LIKE SAILORS, AND SLAP THE HELL OUT OF BOTH OF THEM.
      WARRIORS BY DAY, LOVERS BY NIGHT, PROFESSIONALS BY CHOICE, AND MARINES BY THE GRACE OF GOD.

      • “ON THE SEVENTH DAY WHILE GOD RESTED, WE OVERRAN HIS PERIMETER, STOLE THE GLOBE AND WE’VE BEEN RUNNING THE WHOLE SHOW EVER SINCE.”

        That is a false assertion.

        Marines were not a significant component of the US Military until WWII. In World WarII, they fought in the Pacific. The US Army made the US’ main effort, against Germany, the more dangerous foe.

      • “I can’t say enough about the two Marine divisions. If I use words like ‘brilliant,’ it would really be an under description of the absolutely superb job that they did in breaching the so-called ‘impenetrable barrier.’ It was a classic- absolutely classic- military breaching of a very very tough minefield, barbed wire, fire trenches-type barrier.”
        Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, U. S. Army
        Commander, Operation Desert Storm, February 1991

        This implies General Schwartzkopf singled out the Marines for praise. Óe did not. Óe praised all the components for their roles in the victory.

        The Army’s role was to make the main effort in the ground war. VII Corps fought the Republican Guard. The Marines fought Iraq’s second line units. The Tiger Brigade, an Armored Brigade from the Army’s Second Armored Division, attached to the Marines, took out the Iraqi armor facing the Marines.

      • cpl hodder usmc 1977-1983 thankgod i was able to have the priviledge to serve in the finest fighting force to ever walk the face of gods green earth….marine green for life.

      • LOLOL Hey TW Barker USMC 0311-That was awesome. You’re an actual fucking imbicile.
        I only have one question. Why do you put your zip code next to your name?

      • Hey cpl hodder, just a point of information:
        La Légion Etrangère Française is the finest fighting force to ever walk the face of this earth.

        Your Chesty Puller couldn’t lick the piss drops of the dick of a Legionarre. And our entraînement fondamental at Castelnaudary makes your boot camp at Parris Island look like a weekend in Disneyworld. One difference between a marine and a Legionarre is marines do nothing but talk the talk. Legionarres don’t brag, Legionarres don’t even talk, we just walk the walk. Another difference between a marine and a Legionarre is that every Legionarre is a combat veteran. It’s virtually guaranteed you will be in combat somewhere in the world within one month of finishing at Castelnaudary. And if you care to serve in 2e Régiment étranger de parachutistes, 2e REP, you will likely spend your entire 5 year contract in combat.

        We used to have an expression in the Légion: “ma soeur est un s d’u marin.”
        Translation: “My sister was a U.S. marine.”

        Marine green for life. Hoorah. You’re a fucking clown.

      • If 18FOX was FFL, I’m the goddamn pope. He can’t even fucking spell Legionnaire.

      • The French Foreign Legion? bwahahahahahahahaha

        We Marines have a saying:

        “Going to war without the French is like going hunting without an accordion”

      • TW Barker seriously needs to expand his library beyond Leatherneck Magazine.

      • I guess you prove this articles point…The Marines have a great Ad campaign. How about you put up fact not propaganda.

      • “At the end of the day, the only service that can do decisive combat is the United States Army. You can bomb all the bunkers you want, you can do all the beach assaults you want, but until you stand at the square of the other guy’s capital and run up your flag….you ain’t won”– marine General John J. Sheehan

    • Obviously you are another brainwashed marine or marine lover. Can’t face the facts.

      The Marine Corps is filled with men that do not know their own history. Men that will gladly die for no reason.

      Grenada…..wasn’t that a exercise to see how U.S. Special Operations Forces would work in low intensity conflicts.

      Get your facts straight before oyu talk…..don’t reguritate what your drill told you.

      • haha, this is pretty sad. the marines upstage the army at every turn and you want to give a bunch of half ass excuses. noone here believes your bs. all you have to do is meet a soldier, then meet a marine. case closed. you obviously had your girl stolen by a marine or something. i dont know man but let it go.

      • thats why theres a forest that was named after the u.s. marines in ww1 by the way im 15

    • I have been posting comments to a couple of Marine Corps videos on Youtube, mainly pointing how the Marine Corps embellishes its history. A number of the people who have replied to my videos are Marines who have no knowledge of American history, military or otherwise. Lately the owners of those videos have blocked my comments. The Marines show they can not handle the truth. ROTFLOL

      • You don’t seem to know jack shit about anything. What resources do you have dumb ass. Obviously you’re some hooah bitch that doesn’t have the balls to say anything to a marines face. Whether or the facts of the past is
        True. Since WWII it’s a fact the marines have been better and have had harder traing. The army has 3 times as many marines yet who protects the white house and every U.S. embassy throughout the world.

      • The jarheads can’t stand facts. They’re not all they’re cracked up to be, and the myths are mostly concoctions of their own little minds. Semper Stupid!

    • Wow, I’m speechless. A viable, intelligent comment on this thread. I began to lose hope that anyone had actually delved into the mechanics of our military and the role it plays in the world…unfortunately that includes the “author” of the article. It’s more like typical things you hear around a keg or something. Alot of cursing, chest beating and spouting facts that resemble things you read in bathroom stalls.
      I’ve never met a combat vet, from any service, who isn’t proud of his branch. But the unique thing is, brotherly ribbing aside, they also don’t vomit up angry nonsense to prove it either.
      Must be that whole “you actually had to be there thing”. Which again, most of the people here(“author” included) cannot say they were.

      • Memo to all veterans who served in America’s armed forces. If you ever come across some asshole from the French Foreign Legion don’t hesitate to give him 5 minutes of close-order knuckle drill. Everywhere these overrated Yoe Hoes go to always get their asses kicked and then try and put a spin on their defeats. You are not elite if you are always getting your ass kicked. end of story

    • Just an FYI. The Army had conventional troops in Afghanistan either simultaneously with the Marines on 25 Nov ’01 at Mazaar e Sharif (where former Marine turned CIA agent died) or at latest one day later on the 26th to assist the SF ODA in defeating the prisoner uprising and secure Bagram from the SAS.

      MAYBE beating the Army’s conventional troops by a day is hardly evidence of being more successful in creating a more nimble force. I wish I could cite a specific date more confidently but the Army wasn’t as concerned with documenting as it was with getting into the fight which it did at Mazaar e Sharif before the Corps saw a green tracer.

      Might also want to reasses the 82nd DIVISION being on the ground before the USMC during desert storm and contrary to popular belief had equivalent or greater combat power in Saudi Arabia even after the Marines arrived.

      Here’s a link to the airflow. http://www.history.army.mil/CHRONOS/intro.htm

      You’ll find the 82nd had a BATTALION of light tanks on the ground WEEKS before the Marines arrived and the first company of Army M1s arrived in Saudi Arabia TWO WEEKS before the Marines docked.

      I don’t agree with the author’s conclusion. IMO he doesn’t make the case for disbanding the Marines. It’s about as strong as your case for the Army not being responsive or the absolutely ridiculous case for disbanding it. If nothing else a decade of 12 month deployments and providing the lion’s share of combat power overseas makes the case for who is indispensable.

      • This is old forum but army was so big about being first in iraq. But the army got scolded all over the media by congress. You forgot one thing ….supplies. those guys played cards till they the supplies arrived from theNavy. Navy had to ship food to army cuz they ran out. Your deployment was a major FAIl.

    • Uh..the Army’s 10th Mountain ands 101st were the first conventional units into A-stan guy…weeks..before any Marines set foot. I know..I was there…

      • Moderator – please share my e-mail with Scurvy.

        Scurvy – Contact the 10th ID museum because they were looking for more evidence to confirm the 10th ID was in Afghanistan on or before 25 Nov ’01. Who in the 101st were you referring to because all my research shows they arrived in Afghanistan after 25 Nov (though they were in theatre near Karshi Kandabad in south-central Uzbekistan before the Marines arrived in theatre).

    • AWESOME ARTICLE!!! Thank you for exposing the coattail-clinging, media/glory-seeking, cowardly-sandbagging, “not-cut-out-for-the-job” Marines for what they really are! Clearly the world would be a much better place without the Marine Corps as you point out. The Marines have managed hoodwink and fool the world for 236 & 3/4ths years now, taking credit for countless U.S. Army accomplishments. You did fail to mention the fallacy of Marine Corps basic training, know to Marines as Bootcamp. The misinformation and tales of folklore that akin this experience to one of the most challenging military basic trainings in the world couldn’t be more further from the truth! These so-called Marines are basking in two-man rooms curing co-ed training sessions that even include stress cards for those who feel especially challenged. This laxed training regimen follows the Marines into their careers, where they tend to depend on the U.S. Army to save their pathetic @$$es time and time again, as history as you spin it illustrates.

      ALL branches of the military are essential to our freedom, and I say this as a PROUD UNITED STATES MARINE AND PATRIOT OF THIS COUNTRY HAVING GIVEN MORE THAN 20 YEARS OF SERVICE FOR YOU TO WRITE THIS CRAP (and I’d love to know your contributions to this country, aside of running your mouth, spinning misinformation and otherwise being yet another worthless turd-cog in the wheel of society). Pull your head out of your @$$ and get with the program – maybe you should put your negative energy to a something more positive, like volunteering in your community and making a positive impact on the nation that enables you to run your mouth in a slanderous way. Maybe someday you’ll be kidnapped in some third-world country… heaven forbid a Marine comes to your aid………

      • Bias much you arrogant twat?

      • ohhhra hodderusmc77@yahoo.com

      • Ok as an Army vet myself… your post is just wrong on Facts there buddy..

      • dandy1974, you’re an idiot!

      • As a Marine, I don’t disrespect the Army, but I disrespect the bullshit in this article. Yes, the Marines do more with less, and I’ve seen the product from other service’s basic training, and they are no comparison to a Marine. This is meant with no disrespect it’s just a fact. If you’re ever in a situation on the ground, where all the billions of dollars of technology can’t help you, up and close, you’ll pray there are Marines in the area. Pride does not come from bullshit, but bullshit comes from ignorance. You must have lacked the balls to be a Marine, so to the author of this bullshit. Are you really a pathetic jihadist praying for the end of Marines? Or as mentioned earlier, did a Marine have your significant other screaming Semper “fi” or OOOOhhhh Rahhh, while she was getting banged unconscious? You are a pathetic parasite living in a dog turd. I imagine your kind need to exist because prisoners need sex too.

    • Without the Army there would be no Marine corps. The Vietnamese had an Army but no Marines or Navy! The Marines were insignificant for most of Americas history!

      • “without the army there would be no marine corps”. Really? You’re pretty stupid. The marine corps is part of the navy, without a navy there would be no marine corps. If you want to look at it this way, there would be no U.S. Army without prior armies from other countries that came before them. Maybe I just don’t really
        understand the statement you’re trying to make.

      • This is an interesting arguement considering the Vietnamese had both a Marine Corps and a Navy, both of which were created by the French before their forces began to withdrawal after the failure of the Dien Bien Phu in 1954. The Vietnamese Marine Corps (VNMC) is considered by a large majority of Mobile Riverine Force sailors’ to be ahead of their peers in the Vietnamese Army. Also, I have noticed your comment on these supposed insignificance of the USMC, yet Gen. Petraeus and Gen. “Mad Dog” Mattis both used the Combined Action Program (CAP) and the Manual for Low Intensity Warfare to build the entire framework for combatting insurgents in the Global War on Terror/Overseas Contingency Operations. CAP was a Marine Corps program developed during Veitnam, with attached Green Beret training teams, to midigate Vietcong presents in low lying rural areas. The other is a Manual created and kept up-to-date since its creation after the conclusion of the “Banana Wars”.

    • LOL I like how every reply is pro Marine propaganda. We have found the blind. Oh and this is a Soldier who lost his best friend thanks to the Marines breaking the truce with Al Sadr. Marines get themselves and everyone else killed where as we save Marines and take more lives and fight larger operations. I appreciate the services members but I hate the Marine organization.

    • Sadly, the Marine Corps can never again be a great organization.It came into its own in the Twentieth Century, and performed spectacularly during World War I, World War II, and in Korea, and truly was a great organization.

      Unfortunately, since the post-Korea era, the powers that be who control the Marine Corps have been more concerned with preserving its legacy, than in continuing that legacy. The Marine Corps of today is systemically and institutionaly afraid of losing, and is thus no more than an expensively maintained anacronism.

      The Marine Corps never really had an excluse reason for being at any rate. Certainly not at its current strength. Its self-described amphibeous expertise was never exclusive to the Marine Corps. The U.S. Army launched 5 major amphibeous landings during World War II. All were expertly performed, and eminently successful. Three of those amphibeous assaults, North Africa, Sicily and Normandy were ten tims the size of any amphibeous assault the Marine Corps ever attempted. And the United States has not launched an opposed amphibeous assault since World War II, and in the day of helicopters and air transport, never again will.

      The Marine Corps command structure repeatedly kicks and screams against ever being committed to any action in which it is not virtually assured of being successful. It is very reminincent of the later-World War II British Army, who continuously resisted operations, regardless of their strategic neccessity, if it was not virtually assured of winning. The British Army of that era had legitimacy in that attitide, as Britain was nearly depleted of military age citizenry. But today’s Marine Corps resists operations it is not virtually assured of winning, simply because it is too concerned with risking its reputation. It is loathe to ever deploy without its airplanes, and there must be an institutional reason for that. The Marine Corps, and marine Corps commanders have historically demonstrated they are not overly concerned with losing lives. So that clearly is not the reason. Maybe an excuse, maybe a crutch, maybe a paranoia. In that sense, the Marine Corps of today, and in deed the post-Korea Marine Corps is well past its prime, and well past its usefulness.

    • This stream is as long as it is silly. Why do you all persist? It’s all very simple:

      The Army and the Marine Corps have two entirely different organizational structures, and accordingly have two very contrary operational philosophies that each accord with their respective obligations.

      The Marine Corps is built for assault, and their doctrine is designed to accomplish that end. They hit fast, and hit hard. The Marine Corps neither understands, nor is capable of conducting serious war. The Army on the other hand, is built for the long haul, and their organization is built, and their doctrine is designed to that end.

      The Marine Corps operates in simplistic tactical strategies, and with no strategic strategy concerns. Institutionally, and historically, the Marine Corps willingly accepts heavy casualties to quickly accomplish its short mission. The Army operates in carefully calculated tactical strategies, with strategic strategy always the ultimate overriding concern. The Marine Corps hits, takes hits, and withdraws. The Army hits, takes hits, and fights on. The Army simply cannot afford to take heavy casualties. It holds the obligation of continuing the fight for the long haul, and must retain its tactically integrity to that end.

      The 3rd, 4th, and 5th Marine Divisions amphibeously assaulted Iwo Jima in World War II. Combined they took about 5000 KIA and about 19,000 WIA in 36 days, for about 24,000 total casualties, or roughly 29 % casualties. But they could, because they knew after a month or so they would be withdrawn to a remote tropical island to rest and refit.

      The 1st, 4th and 29th Infantry Divisions amphibeously assaulted Normandy in World War II. Combined they took about 3000 KIA and about 10,000 WIA in 40 days, for about 13,000 total casualties, or about 23.63 % casualties. The infantry divisions could not afford to take any more casualties than that in Normandy, because they knew there was no prospect for relief and withdrawal to a remote tropical island for rest and refit. No, the 1st, 4th, and 29th Infantry Divisions needed to get to Germany.

      But the Army can play that game too. The Army’s Marine Corps is its 82d Airborne Division. The 82d Airborne was the Army’s initial assault unit in Normandy, and accordingly, the 82d Airborne Division took horrendous casualties. The 8,000-strong 82d Airborne suffered 5,209 casualties in Normandy (60.51 %), with 1,282 KIA (14.98 %) and 3,927 WIA (46.14 %). After 33 days in the line, the 82d Airborne Division was relieved and withdrawn to England for rest and refit. But the 1st, 4th, and 29th Infantry Divisions did not enjoy that luxury.

      The 1st, 4th, and 29th Infantry Divisions stayed in the front lines for the next 11 months after Normandy. By the time they reached Germany in April of the following year, the 1st, 4th, and 29th Infantry Divisions had each taken twice the number of KIA, WIA, and total casualties of any Marine Corps division in the Pacific. That’s the long-haul. The slog. In the long run, a far more deadly way of war than rapid assaults.The Army can’t afford tactics that bring too heavy casualties in any one local fight. They most often have a war to fight, and thier war always extends far beyond the beachhead.

      Two different obligations, two different missions, and two divergent but respectively applicable operating philosophies.

    • 3rd brigade 101st Airborne ” rakkasans” were the first conventional force in Afghanistan, not the marines.

      • Negative. C and Weapons 1/1 were.

        FOB Rhino….

      • FOB Rhino Afghanistan, was established with 1000 Marines on Oct. 25. The buildup of forces in Central Asia led CFLCC to request further augmentation to position a command and control node closer to the actual fighting. CFLCC asked for the equivalent of a division tactical command post to serve as the CFLCC (Forward) headquarters, which would operate initially from the forward operating base at Karshi Kandabad in Uzbekistan. On 25 November the 10th Mountain Division (Light), stationed at Fort Drum, New York, and commanded by Maj. Gen. Franklin L. “Buster” Hagenbeck, received orders to deploy to Central Asia for the mission. Initially constrained by the number of forces already deployed in Bosnia, Kosovo, and the Persian Gulf and by the force cap in place for the Afghanistan region, the division organized a small, 159-man command post for the mission. On 12 December the 10th Mountain Division headquarters officially assumed duties as the CFLCC (Forward) at Karshi Kandabad. Working in the past closely with SF, Please do not even tell them they belong to the regular Army. Bad JUJU….

      • Tony – FOB Rhino was first occupied very late on 25 November and the morning of 26 Nov not October. The Rangers conducted a raid on 20 Oct. There were not a 1000 Marines on Rhino until 29 Nov.

        Check out the official Army history of OEF.http://www.history.army.mil/brochures/Afghanistan/Operation%20Enduring%20Freedom.htm

        Tthe 1st battalion of the 87th Infantry, 10th Mountain Division (Light), deployed to Karshi Kandabad.Uzbekistan starting to arrive on 5 October 2001. They were also among the first significant conventional force in combat deploying on 25-26 Oct as the QRF during the Mazar-e Sharif prison uprising and were in contact with the enemy (the first conventional forces to do so) with the special forces calling in airstrikes against the hundreds of armed Taliban and AQ. The rest of the BN closed on and secured Bagram airfield in the following days.

        Gene – the Rakassans were not the first conventional or Army troops in Afghanistan.

    • There is one obvious thing that the author missed in his whole “marines are not special” diatribe. The US Marine Corps is the only military force in the history of the world that guards the streets of heaven. I have no knowledge of the US Army doing that. We ARE special!

    • I think we should just support each branch equally. Who cares which one was sent in and who had more deaths. We worked together and it should not matter. I hate this war between the Army and the Marines. I want to join the Marines and my friends that are in the Army give me crap. I hate it.

    • Amen to this.

      • As a former Marine I can’t believe how many of you veterans out there have fallen prey to Piraino’s bullshit article. A. Scott Piraino is nothing but a left-wing puke who is stirring trouble to all of you veterans who fall for his bullshit. This Yoe Hoe also puts down Ronald Reagan with the same left-wing Marxist lies. The guy needs his ass kicked by every veteran who has ever served in all branches of the military. Get a clue people. Here is one thing that all of you veterans out there can agree with. There is only a tiny fraction of Americans who are willing to put their lives on the line to protect our country, our Constitution and Bill of Rights and that’s us veterans from all of the branches. Be proud of that. That’s what gets lost on all of you people out there trying to put each other down. Why don’t we concentrate on putting down A. Scott Piraino who is a maggot of the worse kind. Fuck that asshole! Semper Fi to anyone out there in all branches of the service who were willing to serve their country. We are all in a very small minority of Americans who believe in the same principals that is not shared by the majority of people who live in America. That makes all of us special Semper Fi to that.
        Mike, 0311

    • Wow dude, you sound like you got your PHD at the University at Moscow in the old U.S.S.R. Scott. First of all Reagan is not responsible for the deficit and neither is capitalism. What he inherited in 1980 (as all Republican presidents inherit) was the Democratic party’s legacy of big government and socialism. This country was already One Trillion in the Red when he took office and going up because of a ideology that has nothing to due with the foundation of this country. It’s that John Maynard Keynes-Karl Marx economic system of which recorded history, not you and not me, says is the worst economic system in history. You see when the Democrats (starting with FDR, then LBJ and now Hussein Obama) introduced all of the social programs to the American people which is based on socialism that Marx talks about in the communist manifesto is that they have COLAs attached to everyone of them which guarantees increases of which depending on where inflation can go – way up or down no matter who becomes president. Unfortunately when they go up in massive increases is when inflation is skyrocketing upwards like it did by time when Reagan took office in 1981. Inflation was at 13.5% and with no LIne-Item Veto he could not cut the massive increases in those social programs unless he had cooperation with the left-wing socialist democratic party of America. Unemployment was also at 10.5% and Interest rates were at 20.5% for a 30 year fixed loan – that is if you had good credit. You see what you fail to understand about socialism is that it creates deficits and mass poverty on a grand scale whereas Capitalism creates wealth not just for the rich but anyone who has ambitions to become wealthy no matter what class he comes from. By the way those tax cuts you said that were strictly for the rich under Reagan is flat out left-wing bullshit. I was a middle class worker driving a truck on a fixed income when Ronnie baby was president and saw my purchasing power increase with less taxation while at the same time getting pay raises during Reagan’s tax cut policy. Every class of worker did. You put Reagan down for our military spending which was 2.5 Trillion dollars over 8 years yet you failed to mention that before Reagan we had spent over 10 Trillion dollars on military spending along with two wars and no end to the Cold War in sight. In the Soviet archives they give credit to Ronald Reagan for ending the Cold War which started from the idiotic alliance that FDR made with the greatest political serial killer in the history of mankind and no doubt one of your political idols – JOE STALIN. Every country in the world that Ronald Reagan was not president of who has a socialist agenda like ours that was created by the Democrats are all in debt and will eventually implode on themselves just like the old Soviet Union and their satellites did. The only smart Marxist country of the bunch was Red China due to the fact that they have to many people they could not afford to have social programs like we have here with social security, medical, Medicaid, welfare benefits, benefits for illegal aliens etc etc . That is why they have real surpluses and we don’t. How ironic. We paid so much attention to ending the Cold War externally but forgot internally we have the same deadly political cancer that now has us at 18 Trillion in the Red and growing.

  2. you know what is sad….good men have died for an article that is biased against the Marine Corps to be published like this. All I can say is…the History’s Channels series “Great Military Blunders” does give the ARMY credit…watch it sometimes…I have never seen the Marine Corps on that show!

    • am billy, likely you never have seen ANY marine corps from any country at ANY time on that show.

      why? because marines, by nature, don’t win or lose wars.

      yes, marines have fought bravely, but no more so than soldiers. to think otherwise is laughably delusional.

      • You do not hear about the Marine Corps blunders on Saipan because Marine leaders blame the Army.

        Saipan was supposed to be secured in 10 days. It took more than 3 weeks. Marine General HM Smith had no idea of how many troops the Japanese had on Saipan, underestimated how well they would fight, had no idea of the terrain on Saipan. He and the Marine Corps did an effective job of scapegoating the Army’s 27th ID. Had the 27th ID not been on Saipan, the Marines would have never gotten off the Beach.

        Peleliu was such a bloody fiasco because 1st Marine Division Commander William Rupertus had his Marines making direct frontal attacks against Japanese positions which were impregnable to frontal attack. The Marines had General Rupertus awarded a Navy cross.They blamed General MacArthur for requiring the Marines to fight a bloody battle for Peleliu.

      • We win the battles that make it possible to win the war. Go ahead and laugh asswipe…..the arrogance, pride, cockiness of Marines affords you the opportunity to have your opinion.

    • “you know what is sad….good men have died for an article that is biased against the Marine Corps to be published like this. All I can say is…the History’s Channels series “Great Military Blunders” does give the ARMY credit…watch it sometimes…I have never seen the Marine Corps on that show!”

      That is because Marine PR and Marine PR keep Marine blunders out of the public eye.

      • fuck you turd…do I sound like a Marine now…..yes we have the best PR because we know the value of PR….just like the Army had their PR for Black Hawk Down moment when an oversealous commander was relieved of his duties for putting his men in harm’s way with faulty intelligence because he thought he was going up against second rate thugs…..

  3. Funny; I don’t see either of you refuting any of the FACTS stated in the article! Why is that, I wonder?

    • Well the numbers are off. The facts close, but slanted.

      I quote Jerry: “You cherry pick your facts IRT Korea. Remember the US Army on the West coast of Korea was getting their asses handed to them by the Chinese while X Corps including the 1st MARDIV made a fighting retreat from Chosun. Yes we had airpower, because we pioneered the use of close air support. Task force Faith had air support too, since the 1st Mar Div assigned them forward air controllers.”

      • One unit which nade 1st mardiv’s escape possible was the Army’s 31st RCT, which fought to the death on the East side of the Chosin reservoir taking out two Chinese divisions, one of them reinforced.

        “”The American Marine First Division has the highest combat effectiveness in the American armed forces. It seems not enough for our four divisions to surround and annihilate its two regiments. (You) should have one or two more divisions as a reserve force.”

        MAO ZEDONG’s orders to Chinese General Song Shilun”

        OP Smith, CG of 1st mardiv, claimed the soldiers did not fight, that they threw away their weapons and ran. If that were true, there would have been two, possibly three, Chinese Divisiohs advancing unfought down the east side of the reservoir, heading for Hagaru-ri.

        “The 1st Marine Division suffered 548 killed in action, 179 missing in action and 2,834 wounded. But casualties from the cold were also terrible, a total of 3,561 evacuated with frozen hands and limbs and exposure, total losses costing the 1st Marine Division nearly one third of its own strength. At Chosin the Army task force of 3,200 men had 1,500 evacuated with wounds or frostbite. Nearly 1,300 were killed or captured.”

        That
        is from General Matthew Ridgeway’s description of Chosin, More soldiers than Marines died extricating 1st mardiv from Chosin,

        “In all this planning there was one serious catch. The Chinese had blown out a twenty-four foot section of a bridge about a third of the way down the mountain. They could not have picked a better spot to cause us serious trouble. At this point four large pipes, carrying water to the turbines of the power plant in the valley below crossed the road. A sort of concrete substation was built over the pipes on the uphill side of the road. A one-way concrete bridge went around the substation. The drop down the mountainside was sheer. It was a section of this bridge, which was blown. There was no possibility of a by-pass.”

        This is from a lettre OP Smith wrote about the retreat from Chosin.

        Army engineers constructed a bridge which enabled 1st mardiv to cross the gap.

      • Umm, just for the record “Historian,” Nazi Germany pioneered the use if close air support in Spain, then perfected the concept in Poland.
        But, maybe I’m wrong, and your drill instructor was right.
        Now repeat after me, the Marine Corps invented close air support, the Marine Corp invented close air support.
        Now repeat after me, the Marine Corps wrote the book on insurgency war. The Marine Corps wrote the book on insurgency war.
        NO BOOT, the Army dud not defeat the Plains Indians. NO BOOT, the Army did not defeat the Philippinne insurgency. NO BOOT, the Army played no role in defeating the Boxer Rebellion. NO BOOT, the Army did nothing to defeat the El Salvador insurgents.

      • You say the Army re-built the bridge… I say both rebuilt… Don’t pick and choose… put the facts out…

        With the path to Hungnam blocked at Funchilin Pass, eight C-119 Flying Boxcars flown by the US 314th Troop Carrier Wing were used to drop portable bridge sections by parachute.[177][178] The bridge, consisting of eight separate 18 ft (5.5 m) long, 2,900 lb (1,300 kg) sections, was dropped one section at a time, using a 48 ft (15 m) parachute on each section.[179] Four of these sections, together with additional wooden extensions were successfully reassembled into a replacement bridge by Marine Corps combat engineers and the US Army 58th Engineer Treadway Bridge Company on 9 December, enabling UN forces to proceed

  4. Oh come on, don’t you have something better to do? If I wanted to be a soldier I would have joined the Army. I don’t want to start a war with the Army, we Marines like to say the US Army is the best Army in the world…. but it is still the Army :-)

    A couple of points about your rant. (This is too easy :-) :

    Continental Marines: The Marines were to be employed ships hence the term Naval Service. “Resolved, that two Battalions of Marines be raised consisting of one Colonel, two Lieutenant Colonels, two Majors & Officers as usual in other regiments, that they consist of an equal number of privates with other battalions; that particular care be taken that no persons be appointed to office or inlisted into said Battalions, but such as are good seamen, or so acquainted with maritime affairs as to be able to serve to advantage by sea, when required.”

    Yup, the Continental Army won the war – with a bunch on foreign professional officers and the FRENCH Army and Navy.

    Gee, no mention of the wars against the Barbary Pirates or Marines Storming Chipultipec….

    On the Civil War:
    If the Marines are abolished half the efficiency of the Navy will be destroyed. They are as necessary to the well being of a ship as the officers. Instead of decreasing the Corps, I would rather hope to see a large increase, for we feel the want of Marines very much.
    —RAdm David D. Porter in letter to Col Commandant John Harris, 6th CMC, 6 Dec. 1863

    On WWI:
    The deadliest weapon in the world is a Marine and his rifle!
    —General John J. “Black Jack” Pershing, USA
    And this:
    Why in the Hell can’t the Army do it if the Marines can; they are all the same kind of men, why can’t they be like Marines?
    —In a letter to HQMC, dated 12 Feb. 1918, concerning a inspection of Marines by Gen John J. “Black Jack” Pershing, CinC, AEF

    No mention of the Marines in the Boxer rebellion or the “banana wars” such as Haiti, Costa Rico, Nicaragua, etc. Weak.

    The Iwo Jima flag raising was not staged. Joe Rosenthal, who took the picture, repeatedly said it was not, and the reason a second flag was raised is that the first was too small to see from the beach and the commanders wanted the Marines see that Mount Suribachi was secured.

    You cherry pick your facts IRT Korea. Remember the US Army on the West coast of Korea was getting their asses handed to them by the Chinese while X Corps including the 1st MARDIV made a fighting retreat from Chosun. Yes we had airpower, because we pioneered the use of close air support. Task force Faith had air support too, since the 1st Mar Div assigned them forward air controllers.

    In reply to President Truman’s comment on Marines:
    I sincerely regret the unfortunate choice of language, which I used in my letter of Aug 29 to Congress McDonough concerning the Marine Corps…
    —President Harry S Truman, 6 Sept. 1950, letter to Gen Clifton B. Cates, 19th CMC

    Let’s not forget this about Chosun:

    I’m going to fight my way out, I’m going to take all my equipment and all my wounded and as many dead as I can. If we can’t get out this way, this Division will never fight as a unit again.
    —MajGen Oliver P. Smith, CG, lstMarDiv, Korea, 1950, to LtGen Ned Almond, USA, X Corps, who suggested Smith’s division escape the Chosin Reservoir by letting “every man go out on foot by himself.”

    You have a inferiority complex over Vietnam.

    Let’s mention Grenada:

    We have two companies of Marines running rampant all over the northern half of the island, and three Army regiments pinned down in the southwest corner, doing nothing. What the hell is going on?
    —Gen John W. Vessey Jr., USA, Chairman JCS, during the assault on Grenada, 1983

    One of My personal Favorites…

    Some people live an entire lifetime and wonder if they have ever made a difference in the world, but the Marines don’t have that problem.
    —President Ronald Reagan

    I participated in Desert Shield/Storm and OEF and OIF.

    Personally I – and I think the American people – like the way things are. Here is an idea. Absorb the US Army into the Marine Corps. Yes, that would do nicely….. I wonder if we can both agree we should undo 1947 and put the Air Force back under the Army? Now that is an idea!

    Now that you have me worked up I think I’ll go pick a fight with a sailor….

    • I remember the Marine companies were shooting each other in Grenada. This is why Gen Vessey made that statement. The marines were lost, shot each other, had to be pulled out and sent on their way to the mid-east. The individual marine is tough and brave, no doubt about it. However, their leadership is horrendous. They squander the treasure of young marines; every historical triumph of the corps is a miserable lesson in failed leadership made good by the individual marine. This is a “mob” mentality and is not sound tactically, in any service.

      • Well csm Smith, Your memory failed you! 2/8 spent 4 days running around on the island “Take’in IT” While the army was pinned down at point Salinas the whole time! And yes the Marines were pulled out after 5 days. Because it was over!

      • your quote; On December 11, 2011 at 4:04 pm Cpl Dudley (usmc) ret said:

        Well csm Smith, Your memory failed you! 2/8 spent 4 days running around on the island “Take’in IT” While the army was pinned down at point Salinas the whole time! And yes the Marines were pulled out after 5 days. Because it was over!

        the Army was pinned down because they were Air-borne troop that went into battle with what they have on their back. while Marine came ashore with armour, artillery, air and naval support. If the Army Mech. unit was there it would have been a cake walk, so don’t too excited. remember Marine were 5 to 6 late to Bagdad? does that mean Marine can’t fight? no

        Why is it that Marine love to spike the ball on the Army everytime they perform a little better on the battle field? if Army would have keep track of Marine screw up and poor performance (like Marine seem to do with the Army then teach it to new recruit) on the battle field we would have a very lenghty document, but then again the Army doesn’t care about that kind thing.

        if there was 100 battles and 3 of it was fought by the Marine you would know date, time, temperature, weather, and all slogan that came from that battle and the other 197 battles fought by the Army will harder get mention.

        Marine,
        win battles; (even if the Army and other branch fight along side) take all the credit

        loose battle; blame other branch, usually Navy but mainly Army

      • Spoken by a true hooah bitch. I’ve trained with the army. It’s a joke. All I need to say is Jessica lynch and the battle of fallujah. Where was the army then

      • Actually while the Marines were rescuing Jessica Lynch the Army was 140 miles north fighting their way to Baghdad.

      • fallujah? really? last I checked the marines LOST fallujah, FAILED to take it back on their own, and had to call the ARMY to help them take it back… not a good argument kid.

      • To the guy below mentioning fallujah and asking where the army was….

        2/2 Inf and 2/7 Cav kicked the door in. Sorry to burst your bubble hard charger….

      • I remember the Marines took over Fallujah from the 82nd, then the Blackwater men, took a wrong turn and got strung up on the Bridge, The Marines started taking over Fallujah then was stopped by Politics… Had they let them finish the job the first time the Army wouldn’t have had anything to do with Fallujah.

        The U.S. had gathered some 6,500 Marines and 1,500 Army soldiers that would take part in the assault. Everybody worked well and the Army 7th Cav was requested by the Marines to join them due to the armor they could support with. And because they were a well recognized unit by the Marine Corp, Actually after the battle they are the only Army unit that can wear a Marine Corp patch on their uniform.

        The U.S. Army’s 2nd Battalion, 2nd Infantry Regiment was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation for actions during the battle.Additionally, Operation Phantom Fury yielded two nominees for the Medal of Honor. Sergeant Rafael Peralta with 1st Battalion, 3rd Marines, one of the two, was eventually awarded the Navy Cross, the second highest military valor award.

        First Sergeant Bradley Kasal of 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines was also awarded the Navy Cross for his actions during the battle. Staff Sergeant David Bellavia of the Army’s Task Force 2-2 Infantry was also nominated for the Medal of Honor, though awarded the Silver Star, for his actions during the battle.

        Staff Sergeant Aubrey McDade with Bravo Co, 1st Battalion 8th Marines was also awarded the Navy Cross, the second highest military valor award.

        Corporal Dominic Esquibel with H&S Company, Scout Sniper Platoon, 1st Battalion 8th Marines was awarded the Navy Cross for his actions on 25 Nov 2004 in Fallujah. In a rare move, Cpl. Esquibel cited “personal reasons” and refused the award.

        In fact there were many Army and Marine units involved as well as Navy and Airforce. By saying the Army kicked in the Door is bullshit. They certainly played their part however if the 82nd had patrolled Fallujah as they should have to begin with their would not have been a second taking of the city or possibly a first.

    • “Gee, no mention of the wars against the Barbary Pirates or Marines Storming Chipultipec….”

      The assault on Derna was organized and led by retired Army officer William Eaton who had recruited a force of 500 mercenaries for the assault.He had 8 marines, Lt. Pressley O’Bannon, his Sergeant, and six privates. Marines did not play a significant role in the capture of Derna.

      Marines did not capture Chapultepec. The troops who scaled the walls and took the castle were Soldiers, not Marines. The Marines role in the assault on Chapultepec was to hold their position outside the walls and fire on the walls.

      • Eaton “was” a commissioned Army Officer until he became Consul to Tunis. In 1804, he was commissioned a Naval Lieutenant. He was a Naval Officer, commanding a detachment of Marines, commanded by Lieutenant Presley O’Bannon. The Marines distinguished themselves, and made history.

        Per Maj. Gen. Scott in his after action report to Sec. of War Macy – “The following are the officers and corps most distinguished in those brilliant operations: … portions of the United States marines, New York, South Carolina, and 2d Pennsylvania volunteers, which, delayed with their division (Quitman’s), by the hot engagement below, arrived just in time to participate under Lieutenant Reid, New York volunteers, consisting of a company of the same, with one of marines; and another detachment, a portion of the storming-party (Twiggs’ division, serving with Quitman), under Lieutenant Steele, 2d infantry, after the fall of Lieutenant Gantt, 7th infantry.” At least one Marine company was in the storming party, making your post erroneous. It’s right there, in black and white. Look it up, and don’t just throw out bu11sh1t.

    • “I’m going to fight my way out, I’m going to take all my equipment and all my wounded and as many dead as I can. If we can’t get out this way, this Division will never fight as a unit again.
      —MajGen Oliver P. Smith, CG, lstMarDiv, Korea, 1950, to LtGen Ned Almond, USA, X Corps, who suggested Smith’s division escape the Chosin Reservoir by letting “every man go out on foot by himself.”

      You do not mention that OP Smith abandoned the 31st RCT and then claimed they threw away their weapons and ran.

      • It was Almond that flew into RCT 3 on the west side of the Chosin and told that their forces were adequate and sent them North into the meat grinder. He and only he was in charge of both Marine and Army units. The Marines took their orders as usual from an Army General. If you claim the Marines left RCT 3, your totally mistaken, it was the Army LtGen Almond.

        Historians have criticized Almond for the wide dispersal of his units during the X Corps invasion of the north-eastern part of North Korea, in November–December 1950. This dispersal contributed to the defeat of X Corps by Chinese troops, including the destruction of Task Force Faith, and the narrow escape of the Marines at the Battle of Chosin Reservoir.[8] Almond was slow to recognize the scale of the Chinese attack on X Corps, urging Army and Marine units forward despite the huge Chinese forces arrayed against them. Displaying his usual boldness, he underestimated the strength and skill of the Chinese forces, at one point telling his subordinate officers “The enemy who is delaying you for the moment is nothing more than remnants of Chinese divisions fleeing north. We’re still attacking and we’re going all the way to the Yalu. Don’t let a bunch of Chinese laundrymen stop you.” As stated by a close associate: “When it paid to be aggressive, Ned was aggressive. When it paid to be cautious, Ned was aggressive” [9]

    • “Yup, the Continental Army won the war – with a bunch on foreign professional officers and the FRENCH Army and Navy.”

      The Continental Army won the Battles of Trenton and Princeton. Marine participation in the Battle of Princeton was minimal. No marines fought at Trenton.

      If not for Trenton and Princeton there would have been no Battle of Saratoga. The Continental Army’s victory at Saratoga is what convinced France to Ally with the United States. That alliance made possible the victory at Yorktown.

      it was Valley Forge which rendered George Washington’s Army capable of pulling off Yorktown.

      No Marines fought at Saratoga or were with the Continental Army at Valley Forge. The only Marines at Yorktown were 800 Royal Marines who were part of Cornwallis’ Army.

    • “Yup, the Continental Army won the war – with a bunch on foreign professional officers and the FRENCH Army and Navy.”

      The troops who won the Battle of Trenton were soldiers.

      In the prelude to the Second Battle of Trenton, a French officer named Fermoy was to command a brigade tasked to delay Cornwallis’ advance on Trenton. He got drunk and an American, Colonel Edward Hand, took charge. He conducted an effective delaying action.

      Washington’s Army repulsed Cornwallis when Cornwallis attempted to cross Assunpink Creek.

      Washingon’s Army of 5000, which included 141 Continental Marines but no foreign officers and troops, attacked and demolished Cornwallis’ rear guard at Princeton. The Marines played a minor role in that battle. It was the only time in the Revolution that Continental Marines engaged British troops in a pitched battle. The Marine Battalion took heavy casualties It was disbanded after Princeton and most of its survivors joined the Continental Army.

      Meanwhile, after three defeats at the hands of the Continental Army, the British withdrew from all of New Jersey except for a couple of outposts. The Revolution, which was on the brink of ending in December of 1776, continued. Trenton and Princeton, two of the most critical victories in American Military History, were ARMY operations.

      Trenton and Princeton made possible the third critical victory in American Military History, the victory at Saratoga. The American Army which won Saratoga had no foreign troops, no foreign officers AND NO MARINES. It was the victory at Saratoga which induced France to enter the war as an Ally of the United States.

      Two officers in the Continental Army had previous experience with the British Army, Horatio Gates and Charles Lee. Neither proved to be an effective officer in American service. Gates got credit for Saratoga, but it was his subordinates, especially Benedict Arnold, who fought the battle. Unfortunately, Benedict Arnold did turn traitor.

      The Continental Army did become an effective force because of foreign officers who served, particularly General von Steuben. The Continental Marine Corps never demonstrated it was as capable of the Continental Army.

      The French did not accomplish anything decisive in the Revolution until the siege of Yorktown. The Yorktown operation was George Washington’s brain child. I point out again, the only Marines at Yorktown were 800 British Royal Marines who were part of Cornwallis’ Army.

      Because of the foreign officers and with the French Army the Continental Army, WITHOUT ANY ASSISTANCE FROM THE CONTINENTAL MARINES, won the Revolutionary War. After the war the Marines were disbanded. The Army continued in existence

    • “If I wanted to be a soldier I would have joined the Army.”

      If you had become a Soldier, you would have become a part of the Armed Force which was the first Armed Force to fight in defense of the nation, a part of the Armed Force which won the most crucial battles of US History, Trenton, Princeton, Saratoga, Yorktown. You would have been part of the only Armed Force which has defended the nation continuously for 236 years, you would have been part of the Armed Force which assaulted and captured Chapultepec Castle.

    • If you increase the size of the Corps, you do away with the “FEW and the proud” and it becomes “the proud”. The Marines have their ego because of their size. Were they any larger, their ego would fade. Especially when they would have to shorten their basic training due to costs, like the Army has. I don’t know why the Army/Marine rivalry bothers me as much as it does, but I can’t stop being bothered by it.

    • Marines have some bad moments battle of kingfisher Vietnam they left marines behind..

  5. Great article.

    I’m glad to see I’m not the only soldier fed up with the blusterous braggadocio of the USMC.

    It doesn’t take some holy bath in ‘the crucible’ to be able to fight Americas enemies effectively. In fact, that is just a little too cult-like for rational people.

    Reduce the duplication, slash the corps!

    • Yes, Harry, if you were a Marine you could be one of those blusterous braggadocio. Until then, keep your fuvking mouth shut,,, pussy.

      • Why do the Marines try to claim credit for Army accomplishments?

      • Really? Such professionalism from a Marine. You go to boot camp for 13 weeks and come out thinking you’re such a badass. Don’t go around giving the Marines a bad rep dammit.

    • You should have maned up and joined the Corps. But, you probably thought it was too tuff so you settled. Sounds like the Army’s strategy. I am a Marine. I love Army guys. I kept 1 or 2 around to shine my boots. I have never hear a Marine say I almost joined the Army. But, usually every Army person I meet say I almost joine the Marine Corps.

      • There’s nothing tuff about joining the marines. Math and reading that would be tuff for a Jarhead.

      • My sister was a marine. Girls graduate from parris island.

    • the jealousy ofthe marines here is hilarious. yes. we are better and whats more, the entire nation knowsit. just ask a civilian. sorry that all the army guys on here are so upset they had to make a website trying to validate themselves. good luck with that. lol

      • Be careful. You might hurt yourself patting yourself on the back so hard.

        Uh, hate to rain on your self congrats but you might want to check yourself. According to Gallup the American people have rated the Army as the most important of all branches since ’04 and the Army has always been rated more important than the USMC since it got included in the polling.

      • i left the Army after 5 years active duty as a grunt with th e 82nd Division. I went to A University to prepare for another career. While serving as a squad leader in the Army Reserves we had a dozen Marines nearly 10 years younger than myself. They were unable to outperform me and my army buddies in basic physical fitness. the few and the proud were left in the dust. All hype and propaganda from the corps, Knock off the bullshit!

      • So you out ran weekend warriors after 5 years of active duty? Wow why an accomplishment, oh wait I smell bullshit. When did the marine reserves start training with army reserves. I’ve never heard of it especially during pt. Don’t give me this bullshit that you are in better shape. I’ve seen ten times as many fat soldiers than marines. In Kuwait, Iraq, back home. The physical standards are higher in the corps. The only idiots your convincing are the rest of the soldiers on here. And even if you did out run them they are civilians that play marine 2 days a month. Reserves don’t count.

      • Jealous of what? Any civilian that watch a marine commercial would get excited because they don’t know any better. Marines are no better than any other branch especially the Army. So keep walking around in your little cute uniforms yelling ooorah look at me I want attention. Sad

  6. Hey Buddy, you sound like there is a bit of penis envy on your part. I’ll start by letting you know the Marine Corps. Birthday is Nov. 10 1775. Actually a couple days older than the US Army. Check it out. It’s fact. I could do this all day on every one of your pointless statements. I’ll end with… Every man or woman who ever joined the Army knows in their hearts why they chose 8 weeks over 12 weeks of Boot Camp. Its because every kid whomever thinks of being in the Military has been told or learned during their decision that the Army is a more easily acheivable goal and that the Marines are the hardest and toughest and craziest fuckers of the 4 branches of service. So seriously, Dude, the next time you want to go on a tyraid agianst my Illustrious Marine Corps. You might want to make sure from people who were there that maybe it’s an embarrassing fact. You Army Pups retreated like a bunch of crying BITCHES at the FROZEN CHOSEN and left your Dead behind. Lucky for those greiving families back home, Chesty Puller and the rest of the Devil Dogs finished the job and brought back your wounded and dead back. Might want to check your facts. Quit being so gealous and make some of your own history. PS the Banana wars… yeah we were the stars of that as well. Good luck you FUCKING ARMY PUKE. You were right though… you are soilders and we are not. WE ARE WARRIORS!!!!!

    • “You Army Pups retreated like a bunch of crying BITCHES at the FROZEN CHOSEN and left your Dead behind. Lucky for those greiving families back home, Chesty Puller and the rest of the Devil Dogs finished the job and brought back your wounded and dead back. Might want to check your facts.”

      A little checking of the facts is indeed in order here. This is a myth which has nothing to do with reality. For the true story of the Army’s 31st RCT at Chosin, please read “East of Chosin” by Roy E. Appleman. In 2000, Task Force Faith was finally awarded a Presidential Unit Citation for its heroic actions in 1950. Among the men who helped push for this long delayed recognition were many Marine veterans of Chosin, including retired Marine Col. Robert Parrott, who said “Maybe I’m talking to you now because of what the Army did.” A Washington Post article states that “…a number of historians and some Marine veterans of Chosin now believe that the 1st Marine Division might have been destroyed had the poorly armed, ill-trained soldiers of Task Force Faith not brought time by keeping the Chinese from sweeping south. Chinese papers reviewed in recent years by military scholars have shown that the Army task force fought a significantly larger enemy force than commonly understood.”
      Many American dead, both Marines and Army, still lie in unmarked graves in Korea. Perhaps we should remember them and what they fought and died for instead of denigrating fellow Americans just because they serve in a different branch.

      • The 1st Marine saved no one but theselves, and that was with the assistance of the Army’s 31st RCT.

        What would have happened to the Marines had the Chinese taktn Hungnam? X Corps held Hungnam and formed a perimeter around Hungnam to keep the Chinese at bay while 1st Marine Division was embarked. They did not give up Hungnam until 1st Marine Division was safe.

      • The Facts…. The Army had very little to defend at Hungnam.

        By the time the UN forces arrived at Hungnam, MacArthur had already ordered the evacuation of the US X Corps on 8 December in order to reinforce the US Eighth Army, which by then was badly depleted and retreating rapidly towards the 38th parallel. Following his orders, the ROK I Corps, the ROK 1st Marine Regiment, the US 3rd Infantry Division and the US 7th Infantry Division had also set up defensive positions around the port. Some skirmishes broke out between the defending US 7th, 17th and 65th Infantry and the pursuing PVA 27th Corps, but against the strong naval fire support provided by US Navy Task Force 90, the badly mauled 9th Army was in no shape to approach the Hungnam perimeter. In what US historians called the “greatest evacuation movement by sea in US military history”, a 193-ship armada assembled at the port and evacuated not only the UN troops, but also their heavy equipment and roughly a third of the Korean refugees. One Victory ship, the SS Meredith Victory evacuated 14,000 refugees. The last UN unit left at 14:36 on 24 December, and the port was destroyed to deny its use to the Chinese and North Korean forces. The PVA 27th Corps entered Hungnam on the morning of 25 December.

    • Dear US marines:

      if you had even normal levels of mental capacity you would collectively know your facts and history much better. The US Army’s birthday is 14 June 1775(I even know this and I am a foreigner). It is odd you attempt to belittle the US Army as it founded the United States with George Washington at its helm. There would be no America without the US Army as the marines no role in Revolution of the US. As a foreigner, I find it unseemly and peculiar the manner in which US marines carry themselves. It seems the marines possess a large and pathological inferiority complex.

      For the record, I am a French military affairs writer and commentator for CNN and live in Lyon, France. I have no partiality as a foreigner but have done extensive research into the American military and its general history for more than 40 years. I have spent 8 months in Iraq and 7 months in Afghanistan. I witnessed the marine defeat at Fallujah I and fig-leaf withdrawal and replacement
      by former Sadam forces. In fact, it was the US Army that defeated insurgent and Al Queda forces and restored honor back to the US.

      Embarrassingly,US marines were the only allied force to have lost a battle in the Iraq conflict. They repeatedly called on US Army forces to save the day and spearhead attacks. Fallujah II is one case in point where the US army was called in to save the day for incompetent and feeble marines.The TV show “Return to Fallujah” a History Channel production is available on youtube for needing proof of my words. It shows the Army as victors in Fallujah II as the marines followed after the victory was already won.

      Also for the record, rants and personal attacks on Mr. Piraino are unethical and unfounded. I personally have checked his research and found it without error. Sadly, the facts he has compiled are embarrassing to the US marines but this does not make them untrue. Unfortunately, those rabid marines who attacked have little or no facts to back up there baseless assertions.

      Marines should be humble and professional and not falsely arrogant as many marines have shown themselves on this site. Shame on the US marines.

      Thanks to the US army for helping to keep the peace around the world. My research has shown the US Army to be the best ground force in the history of the world bar none. Marines should be intelligent enough to learn from the Army’s sterling example. Indeed, It is sad to see US marines die in disproportionate numbers due to their own incompetence and arrogance.

      • … You’re a retard who has provided no proof of who he is or what he is spewing. The Marines aren’t the be all and end all of military affairs, but they’re not third-rate third-world incompetent conscripts like you seem to suggest.

      • Nicholas,

        You are wrong, the Marines ARE the be all and end all of military affairs

      • yea im not sure where you got your facts from but they arent correct

      • Bullshit buddy. I was there. It was the marines the took over fallujah ass. I’m sure you’re a foreigner cause you weren’t there. The army had it then lost it. The the marines went in and killed over 1200 insurgents. Get your facts straight.

      • Bullshit buddy. I was there. It was the marines that took over fallujah ass. I’m sure you’re a foreigner cause you weren’t there. The army had it then lost it. Then the marines went in and killed over 1200 insurgents. Get your facts straight.

      • The Army lead the Marines in retaking Falujah with two mechanized battalions. Check your history. I have the Marine written history (and Army) posted later in the thread

      • Dear Nicholas, True, the marines aren’t the be all and end all of military affairs, and they’re not even third-rate, third-world incompetent conscripts, but the jury does still remain out on whether or not they are fairly comparable to second-rate, second-world conscripts.

        We will likley never know the marine corps’ true miltary prowess and worth. They staunchly refuse to deploy, even under emergency conditions, without overwhelming air and gun support. It has also been documented that the marine corps institutionally doctors its official journals and records. Given those two factors, it is likely we will never know the marine corps’ true combat worthiness. As an emergency expeditionary force, examples of marine corps ability and capability should be abundent, but none exhists. Given their mission, and lack of evidence to the contrary, the marine corps must always always be considered second-rate to the the Ranger battalions, and given its own documented achievements, the 82nd Airborne Division.

    • hey retard, the army birthday is june 14 1775. last i checked even marine calendars put june before november in order.

      one more reason why marines are all brawn, no brain.

      well not all are, but you definitely fulfill that “misconception”.

    • “Hey Buddy, you sound like there is a bit of penis envy on your part. I’ll start by letting you know the Marine Corps. Birthday is Nov. 10 1775. Actually a couple days older than the US Army. Check it out. It’s fact”

      The Continental Army was organized on 14 June 1775, approximately 5 months before the Continental Marine Corps.

      Before the Continental Marine Corps came into existence, troops who would form the Continental Army had fought the Battles of Lexington and Concord, had established the siege of Boston, captured Fort Ticonderoga, transported heavy artillery from Ticonderoga to Boston, and invaded Canada.

      The Continental Army, with no help from the Marines or any foreign power, won the first victory of the Revolution, the capture of Bodton.

      Like many Marines, you disrespect the Army while trying to take credit for Army accomplishments, You do this by lying about history,

    • “You Army Pups retreated like a bunch of crying BITCHES at the FROZEN CHOSEN and left your Dead behind.”

      The 31st RCT saved the First Marine Division at Chosin.

      Army dead were left behind Because Marine General Oliver P. Smith sacrificed the 31st RCT to save the Marines.

      And like a typical Marine, he went into denial that the Army actually saved the Marines’ butts.

    • “Quit being so gealous(sic) and make some of your own history.”

      The Army has made its own history, a lot of which the Marine Corps has tried to claim as its own:

      Fighting in the Battle of Trenton

      Anchoring Andrew Jackson’s line at New Orleans

      Storming the Castle of Chapultepec

      Single handedly turning back the German Army in the Second Battle of the Marne

      Defending the Bataan Peninsula

      Single handedly winning the Battle for Guadalcanal(more soldiers than marines fought on Gualdalcanal)

      Taking Okinawa(most of the fighting, bleeding and dying was done by Soldiers, not Marines)

      Single handedly saving Korea(Soldiers went into Korea before the Marines, fought well enough to establish the Pusan Perimeter and bought time for the Marines to be able to deploy their own ground troops)

      • To what I have already said, I add:

        The 105th Infantry, with no assistance from the Marines, defeated the final Japanese attack on Saipan, the Gyokusai on July 7, 1944. Marines claim a Marine Artillery uniit, 3/10 Marines stopped the attack.

        3/10 Marines was overrun by the Japanese, taking heavy casualties and losing all their guns. They were rescued by another Army Regiment, the 106th infantry. 106th Infantry recovered their guns

        To paraphrase: Marines, quit being so jealous of the Army and make some of your own history.

      • More soldiers than Marines Occupied Guadacanal. Not to say that they were not a major force, however they arrived on the canal 2 months after the Marines had been fighting and had taken the airfield and renamed it Henderson Field.

    • You go to BASIC TRAINING for only four more weeks and come out thinking you’re Jesus Christ or some shit. Get your shit straight dammit, don’t go around giving the Marines a bad image. You look down on the Army. The Army was in D-Day, biggest amphibious invasion in the last century, if not history. Army fought the SS. If you really want to be such a badass, try something like the Navy SEALs or Army Rangers. Those “pukes” will make you shit yourself without even touching you.

    • CPL the Army Birthday is 14 June 1775. You do know that June comes before Nov in the calendar?

      As for Chosin an understrength ad hoc Army regiment held the Marines eastern flank against a proportionally greater enemy (two Chinese divisions) than the Marines faced for three days and was decimated. In return they saved the Marine supply dump and assembly area which allowed the breakout.

      Read Appleman’s “East of Chosin”. The unit recieved a NAVY Presidential unit citaion. The commander was awarded the Medal of Honor. Just about every company commander and higher commander was killed.

      The rest of your rant reflects even worse on you than the above two errors.

      • Majrod,

        You’re in error about the 31st RCT.. Lt. Col Faith was not the commander until after Col. MacLean had been shot and captured by Chinese forces. Appleman’s “East of Chosin” is also a bit biased towards the Army side of things for the 31st RCT. While it uses recently released Chinese documents, the translation of them is a bit.. skewed in Appleman’s book to say the least. the 31st RCT did fight a tragic, heroic battle but ultimately they were done in by some poor leadership from Col. MacLean who did not prepare for any sort of attack even though he was warned of extensive enemy activity in the area by the 5th Marine unit he replaced – and after losing his own recon platoon after sending them out to scout the route of advance for the planned attack the next morning. They were deployed poorly with little to no thought for lines of communication or how the surrounding mountains would prevent their radios from keeping contact with each other. Lt. Col Faith and Major Storms did a valiant job in keeping the 31st together, but from speaking to soldiers who were there, the rest of the officer corps with the 31st left a lot to be desired. Hell, MajGen Almond still had them with orders to advance and attack on the third day when they were effectively incapacitated as a fighting force.

        Also, Appleman’s book somewhat de-emphasizes the role of the Navy and Marine Air Wings that provided support during the daylight hours. Marine Capt. Stamford’s F.O. radio was about the only link to the rest of the UN forces the 31st had. Between his calls for airstrikes and to get resupplied, it could be said the 31st would not have been able to stand as long as they did without that support.

        The whole thing is an ugly episode between the two services that seems to be perpetuated by those who weren’t there seeking to lay blame on someone other than the high command of MacArthur, Almond and to some degree Walker. The Marines, Koreans and Soldiers I know who fought at the Chosin certainly don’t have anything but respect and camaraderie for each other.

      • Mike, How is Appleman biased towards the Army? It was an Army fight. What Chinese translations exactly are skewed? After reading your comments I think you’re the one that’s biased.

        Yes MacLean was the commander of the 31st RCT for less than 36 hours of the action until he was shot four times, captured and subsequently died. LTC Faith took command of the task force from the morning of the 29 Nov until the early morning of 1 Dec. He commanded during the most desperate fighting.

        MacClean did not prepare for an attack? How so? Poor positioning? He occupied the Marine positions. Were they poorly situated? Artillery fires registered, LP/OP positioned, security set. Granted he didn’t expect an attack but everyone was surprised when the Chinese attacked. Securing his lines of communication? He was ordered to occupy the Marines positions while missing one of his three battalions making the Army regiment (already 30% smaller than Marine formations) another 30% understrength. BTW, the Marines didn’t secure their LOC either. That’s why they were cut off. It’s hardly appropriate to ding MacLean for not securing his LOC when the destruction of his unit is what gave the Marines time to secure theirs.

        Where is there ANY evidence that MacLean was warned of extensive enemy activity? The Marines captured enemy deserters who warned of enemy strength the day before the attack and sent the intel to corps but did not notify the 31st RCT.

        The men didn’t speak well of their officers? Specifically what officers didn’t do their duty cited by what soldier? It’s frankly incredible the number of awards for valor that were awarded to officers alone because they led at Chosin. LTC Faith was awarded the Medal of Honor, MacLean the Distinguished Service Cross (posthumously), along with MAJ Jones, LTs Gray & Jodan. The unit received a Presidential Unit Citation. All but one of it’s Bn commanders survived the battle unwounded. Most battalions lost ALL their company commanders and many of their LT’s. You won’t find one Marine BN that suffered the same casualties among the leadership that the 31st RCT suffered.

        As for Marine Air, Appleman cites it repeatedly. No one except LTC Faith is mentioned more than CPT Stamford the Marine who called in the air. How much more credit do you want in a battle that had 3000 soldiers and three Marines on the ground?

        BTW, the Marines didn’t wait to be relieved by the 31st RCT. They left their positions before the 31st arrived and did not hand off sector sketches, fire plans or any of the other customary coordination when a unit is relieved. The Marines never attempted to establish contact with the 31st RCT which is doctrinal (higher to lower). The Marines never attempted to relieve or break through top the 31st RCT and once they gained control of the 31st’ tank company forbade it be used to conduct a breakthrough or relief. Don’t think the Marines were to blame. They were in a fight for their lives but maybe they should be the last to throw stones

        Agree that many have inappropriately made much of Chosin. Your comments about the officers falls into that category as well as 20/20 hindsight as to what intel was available.

    • CHESTY PULLER, and I quote; “LEAVE THOSE GOD DAMN ARMY DEAD HERE.”

      Fuck You CPL of Marines, whoever the fuck you are. Fuck you! Puller abandoned the Army dead only because they were Army dead. So…Fuck You Cpl of Marines or whatever gay name you gave yourself.

      We Army “Pups” retreated like a bunch of crying Bitches?” And “Left our Dead behind?” Really? Who told you that? Let me tell you something, I was there.

      What infamously became known as Task Force Faith, and was officially titled Regimental Combat Team 31, was in fact only two battalions, the 1st Battalion, 32nd Infantry, and the 3rd Battalion, 31st Infantry, supported by the 57th Field Artillery Battalion. Our mission was to guard the right flank of the Marine’s advance.

      On the night of November 27 we were hit by three regiments of the 80th Chinese Division. The 1st Battalion, 32nd Infantry initially took very heavy casualties to the north on the hills north of Sinhung-Ni, while 3rd Battalion, 31st Infantry and the artillery battalion were nearly overrun to the west near the Sinhung-Ni inlet. With overwhelming numbers, the Chinese effectively carved RCT 31 into three seperated elements. At dawn, the remnants of 3rd Battalion, 31st Infantry counterattacked toward the inlet to allow 1st Battalion, 32nd Infantry a way back from the north. Subsequent information released by Chinese sources confirmed the Chinese 238th and 239th Regiments fielded about 600 effectives after the initial fight. But the Chinese had moved a second divison, the 81st, and its 242nd Regiment took Hill 1221, effectively sealing RCT 31 in along the far shore of the Chosin.

      At some point during the fighting, the 1st Marine Division was ordered to effect RCT 31′s relief. General Smith offered a half-assed attempt to save the Army unit by releasing only the 31st Tank Company. from Yudam-NI. They had but a handful of tanks, a tough mission,and were courageous, but when the Marine’s 31st Tank Company attacked Hill 1221 to open the road for the survivors of RCT 31, they were quickly and badly manhandled.

      Those Army “Pukes” eventually fought their own way out, taking a portion of Hill 1221, and fighting through s succession of Chinese roadblacks, all while fighting off constant flanking attacks from the surrounding hills.

      Yes cpl of marines, we “crying bitches” did leave many of our dead behind, because all our vehicles were destroyed in the savage fighting to the northeast of your amazing 1st Marine Division. And of the 2,522 “Crying Bitches” of RCT 31 that moved northeast to protect the 1st Marine Division’s flank, 1,472 were Killed In Action, 665 returned to “friendly lines” Wounded In Action, and 385 returned ready to continue the fight. The survivors were formed into a provisional battalion, and did continue the fight.

      And of course, your vaunted 1st Marine Division didn’t retreat from Chosin. What did they do? Oh yeah, they just advanced in a different direction. Right? Isn’t that what your learned at Parris Island? Keep telling yourself that.

      So, cpl of marines, your disparaging of brave American war dead and wounded is obsene. And don’t you dare speak of our grieving families back home, because you are singularly an absolute embarassmant to the Marine Corps. I have never met a combat veteran who has ever insulted combat casualties the way you have. Honestly, the only people I have ever heard talk like you talk, are rear area types who never carried a rifle into battle and watched friends die. During my tour in Vietnam with 7th Special Forces Group, we called people like you Garrett Troopers. In case your French is fuzzy, garrett is French for barracks. And as OUR song says:

      “Now I run into one the other day. Said he just got back from three days runnin’ fire against the Cong. Said he captured a lot of loot. Know what I saw when I looked down? A spit shine boot! Yeah, they’re troopers…Garrett Troopers.”

      That’s what you are cpl of marines, a Garrett Trooper. An ass-wipe phony, disparaging incredibly brave American servicemen heroically killed and wounded in battle. So, as I said before, Fuck You!

      Oh, and fuck your General Smith too, and your Colonel Puller, who probably killled more brave Marines on Peleliu than the Japanese. To quote a moron, “Check it out. It’s fact.”

      Very truly Yours…

    • Hey CPL of Marines:
      If you’re such a tough guy, why don’t you sign a 5 year contract with the La Légion Etrangère Française, and try to learn what its like to be a real man. You wouldn’t make the first afternoon in La Légion. People like yo don’t do well in a military environment. You talk too much.
      You’re a fucking pussy.

      But I like that nickname you all gave yourselves. It fits. Devil dogs are a dessert, soft and mushy.

  7. Boo Hoo! … the army does get as much respect as the Marines … waaaaaaaaaaaa!

    Thats all I just read …

    • The Marines who disrespect the Army try to steal Army valor and claim it as their own.

      • its sad but its true. theres this army fallujah fierfight video wheere its so clear that tehy are army because they have US Flags and unit patches on there shoulders, which the marines dont have. and bradly fighting vehicles which the marines dont have only the army. but still, you have marines on youtube claiming them to be usmc not army.

  8. First off I would like to point out that since I have been in the Marines time after time whenever I run into an individual in the Army, and this I would say is true about 75-80% of the time, they automatically start naming off every little thing they’ve ever done in the career like they have something to prove to me, why that is I’ll never know. Army soldiers are the ones that are constantly trying to talk themselves up to everyone in the room where as I personally as well as I can say 90%, you always have one or two, of the Marines I served with do not brodcast that we are Marines and go into regurgitating our service records books to the entire room. So if anyone needs to shut up in the room it’s soldiers. Secondly if the crucible is not a big deal, which really it’s not it’s just sleep and food deprivation as any Marine would probably tell you and I have never bragged about, “surviving” it, why did the Army adopt their own pussified version of it? For my part of the arguement I’m going to focus on Belleau Wood because I’ve actaully done research on the subject unlike the author of this article but will throw in some food for thought afterward. The assault through and capture of the Wood was conducting almost exclusively by the 5th and 6th Marine regiments. The exception would that of the period between June 15th and June 22th where the battalions in the wood pulled back to get food and much needed rest after pushing three quarters of the way into the wood. During that period the Army’s 7th Infantry came in to hold the line which they did well despite at various times lossing ground that the Marines had taken. On June 25th the Marines pushed the rest of the way though the wood and rendering 5 German regiments combat ineffective. As far as Purshing’s standing order to prevent naming of units and locations of the Army, go to historical New York Times and search Belleau Wood and you will find that that was simply not the case, correspondance included the Army and whatever small role they played in this assault. It’s not called the Battale of Belleau Wood and the surrounding area, it’s called the Battle of Belleau Wood. As far as Teaufelhunden is concerned I will concede that there is little to no offical record of that nickname however we do quotes from personal correspndance such as this, “the Americans are savages, they kill anything that moves!” from an unmailed letter to the grandfather of a German Corporal. Since the gloves are obviously off here I’m going to mention a few things. I would also like to point that the Army participated, did not make, participated in the largest beach landing in the history of Military warfare, it was a multi national force, you can apologize to the British, French and Canadians now. And since we are on the subject of particioation, Marines also took part in that one, just not on that grand of a scale. President Truman, a former Army Officer, I don’t imagine he would have a bias on the matter would he? Mogadishu first, problems arose in Mogadishu after the Marines, who ran regular patrols through the city in armored column and on foot, pulled out the soldiers replacing them did not and we saw how that ended up. Unlike some people, aminly the author here I do not see the need to trample on a mans grave so we won’t go further on that. Secondly I was in the First Marine Division in 2003 as part of Regimental Combat Team Five, twice our advance was halted for days because we had to wait for the Armies supply trains to catch up because they did distribute their supplies accordingly. Fallujah has been taken care of. I can only imagine that you are refering to the first attempt to passify the city which the size of the insurgency inside was greatly under-estimated. Possibly because the 82nd refusal to set up firm bases inside the city and conduct patrols accordingly. The second assault was completly successful containing the threat and ultimatly minimalizing it to where now the city is under teh control of the local Iraqi governemnt and police force. The Marines out of Camp Fallujah only take a supporting role when called upon and pass through on their daily missions. The city is no longer the threat it once was. Which is one hell of a lot better then it was when they took over for the 82nd who were from what I understand would not go into the city. Let’s talk casualties… when was the last time the Army swept rhough an entire city in Iraq in one operation? The author also has seriously done no homework on the defense budget either because if they had they would know that the Marine corps recieves sraps from the Navy’s budget and hand me downs from the Army. Also if you were to fold the Marines into the Army you would just have a bigger Army and be paying the same amount of money, way to think that one through though. That’s all for now but you can bet I’ll be back with more.

    • i disagree if you have ever talked to marines all they do is talk and talk this comes from someone who is in neither branch i find marines much more annoying army guys rarely talk about there time in the army

      • i would say its based more on the individual rather than what branch now if you ask marines which branch is better then yea they will start naming reasons why its better

    • Yes, i looked up into that as well and found that you are very right indeed. My father was in the Marines and retired as a Lt. Col. My Brothers are in the Army though and they really do just what you say. To be honest. Their bitching all the time had made me want to join the Marines and I think it would be the Best Thing In The World. Hoora!!!

      • In fact the marines say Oorah! Hoora is a army thing

    • In this forum, the first reply was a list of favorable comments about the Marine Corps. No other American Armed Service goes to the extent the Marine Corps does to compile lists of compliments about itself.

      The Marine Corps also distorts history to claim other services’ accomplishments for their own.

      That is why I particularly enjoy pointing out instances in which the Marines have falsified history to falsely claim Army valor.

      • False History…. Like the bloodstripe, devil dog, and so on an so on.

      • the problem with the article is its slanted towards the army and is misleading and is full of half truths its not very accurate

    • Both branches have different accomplishments and roles to play. I am a seven year veteran of the Army. I have loads of respect for the marines that I have served with, many of whom are good friends of mine. Outside of the normal shit talking, we are all professional enough to respect each other. The corps has a higher esprit de corps than the army as a whole, but combat units in the army are just as closely knit. My marine buddies, most of whom are 0300 series, are the first to say that the only ones who mindlessly talk down every other branch of service are the fobbits and kids just out of boot. Oh yes, and the force that conquered the western portion of the country was primarily army and not marines.

    • Former Cpl and now Officer Candidate Fish USMC, you’ll make an outstanding officer in the Marines. Apparently, you’ll believe anything.

      First of all, your “cruciable” of food and sleep deprivation is an Army practice dating back 70 years. It was a radical form of training FIRST designed and implemented by Brigadier General James Gavin prior to the invasion of Normandy when he was Assistant Division commander of the 82nd Airborne Division. Immediately after the war, it was adopted by, and became a staple of, The Ranger School. I suspect the Marines adopted the practice from experience of attending The Ranger School.

      Second, “The Army participated, did not make, participated in” the largest amphibeous landing in history. I have absolutely no idea what that means. But here is what I do know…

      The U.S. 1st and 29th Infantry Divions particpated in the amphibeous landings at Normandy. They did “Make” the landings. Not only that, in the opion of every historian known to mankind, they CARRIED those landings. Here is what else I know…

      The 1st and 29th Infantry Division assaulted the Omaha Beach through a bowl-shaped ring of dominating cliffs covered with the most sophisticated defensive fortifications from a mile out to sea to the tops of those cliffs, and beyond. It was, the most heavily fortified and prepared beach defense assaulted in history. Here is what else I know…

      The 1st and 29th Infantry Division’s overcame those formidable defenses, and took Omaha Beach with staggering casualties. Between them, they suffered over 2,000 Killed In Action within the first three hours on Omaha Beach. For the record, that is more KIA than the Marine Corps suffered on EVERY beach they assauled in the Pacific War COMBINED.

      That whole “DevilDog” thing. I like it. It’s cute. Sounds menacing. But it is entirely a figment of the Marine Corps’ propaganda machine in overdrive.The Germans never called the Marines Devils, or Dogs, or anything else of that nature. But, here is what else I know…

      A multitude of military organizations have given themselves fearsome knicknames like the Marines have. And most all of them refer to themselves as devils of some type or another. The Red Devils, the Green Devils, the Blue Devils, the DevilDogs, the DevilGhosts, the Devils’s Devils. But only one United States military formation in histroy has actually documented the enemy attributing a knickname to them. It was the Germans, and it was in reference to “devils,” but it surely wasn’t a Marine unit.
      No, it was the 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment on Anzio Beachhead.

      On March 5, 1944, a diary was taken from a young German lieutenant captured the previous night in patrol action by the 504th’s Company C. It contained the following passage: “Soldiers in baggy pants, parachutists, are opposing us here. We never feel safe. It seems that there are blackhearted devils all aroung us.”

      That’s a quote future officer of Marines. I have that diary!

      I won’t even touch the Somalia thing, because that’s way too complicated for you to ever grasp.

    • See. You talk too much.

    • Hey former cpl, the marine corps considers you officer material?
      Your a freaking illiterate. I guess that explains why they can never qualify for higher unified command. Spelling, grammar, and forming complete sentences are essential skills at thst level. I’m betting when you get your commission, the marine corps isn’t going to let you within 100 miles of their public affairs office.

  9. I am a military historian by profession and there is no doubt that for years the Marine Corps has done the best job of any of the Services in using our public relations folks to magnify our role in the eye of the American Public. The Marine Corps policy is to emphasize image enhancing “heritage” at the expense of actual “history.” With regard to “official” history, if we write anything that is even the slightest bit negative, it is edited before publication. In the words of the self-appointed father of Marine Corps history, BGen Simmons, the best way to ensure the continued future of the Corps is for “Marine Corps history to only be written by Marines.” Check and see who the authors are for most USMC history titles since WWII; 99% of them are written by retired or reserve Marines and support the USMC agenda. I was assigned at Quantico when the Army rolled into Baghdad while the Marines were bogged down, and the generals were screaming in frustration and anger until Colonel was relieved. Our “official” writings on the war don’t get published unless they are first approved by generals like Mattis or Conway. Like it or not, everything in this article is right on the money; if you doubt that, check with the Marine Corps History Division.

    • A military historian, yeah, and I’m Pope John Paul the IV.

      • You are not an historian of any kind if you brelieve the Marines captured Chapultepec Castle.

      • Take it up the ass just like every other one here. Instead of bitching and sitting, go confirm it. It’s true. Most of Marine Corps. books nowadays are written only by former Marines. It’s more convenient for them.

    • yea i dont know how you can say that its obvious this article is slanted pro army and the way the article is written is misleading

    • Semper Fi Mac..
      Great paragraph. I agree with you entirely, but fear as a military historian you fail to grasp the absolute danger in the Marine Corps’ methods. They are, in essence, propagating propaganda under the guise of official history. In that, the Marine Corps is building a heritage house of cards that will inevitably crumble to truthful fact. And when that fall arrives, it will be fast and far.

      I believe we are now seeing the beginnings of that implosion. And in my opion, it is directly due to the Marine Corps overplaying its hand. That those official “historians” have embelished much, if not most, of the Marine Corps’ history is undenable. It is also unimaginable. The Marine Corps has a fine record. Certainly they are not nearly what they portray themselves to be, but they possess a fine record. They have no need to embelish, and hide negatives. Worse, they have moral authority to propogate much of thier propaganda on the backs of the country’s other services, and blowback just may be a bitch.

      And that will be a national tragedy. When the Marine Corps does suffer its inevitable demise, blame should be squarely placed upon the pathalogical officer corps that has controlled the Marine Corps since World War II, and directly set the tone and direction.

    • LOL, hey semper fi mac, how do you like those responses by your fellow marines? And we actually entrust elements our country’s security to these marines. God help us.

  10. Well Mac I do agree with you on the ‘filtered’ history that the Corps presents, you cannot argue that the Corps is an inferior force when compared with the Army. However as much as I hate a controlled media I think that this doctored heritage serves a purpose to instill utmost pride, belonging, and discipline in every Marine.

    I am not here to bash on the soldiers. I have many friends in the United States Army. Many of them disciplined and fine citizens that I would be proud to fight with any day. There loyalty to their country and courage is not what I question. It’s their training and organization of the Army that I question. The army is not what it used to be. It’s grown week and politically correct. The army for some reason has come up with the idea to replace good training with high tech equipment.

    I would like to point out that before someone goes off spouting about Delta Force they need to remember that there are Marines in Delta. It is a multi-service SF.

    • Alright Delta expert…..once again someone talking about stuff they know nothing about. Delta is a 100% Army Special Operations unit. There may be guys n it that at one time were in the Corps, but if they are “Delta”, they are army. It’s called an inter service transfer. By the way…there are only a few former Marines there. Multi service SF…..negative.

      • I believe you are 100 % right Jim, that 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta (1st SFOD-D), is in fact total USA…or at least that’s always been my understanding of it. The 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne) support them, and from what I’ve read the screening process is very rigorous…including a 90 mile timed trek through mountains of W Va with heavy ruck…definitely some hard individuals….if you want to get some background on SF, check out whatever you can find about the 1st Special Service Force…the first SF bubbas, joint Canadian/USA that morphed into present state. Anybody that doubts Delta should read up on MSGT Gordon and SFC Shugart and their actions in Somalia that led to their posthumous MOH’s.

  11. US Marine Corps Defeat in Iraq

    ©2005-2008 QuikManeuvers. All Rights Reserved.

    Fallujah Battles, Iraq – Vol. 1

    US Marine Corps Defeat in Iraq
    © 2006
    216 pages; 11 chapters
    The American media has no understanding of wars, or the men who fight those wars.
    That deficit, along with an anti-military, pro-muslim imperialist prejudice common to
    most “journalists” should be factored into the reading of the constant propaganda
    drivel that they spew out. The media’s descriptions of the battles of Fallujah were as
    slanted as usual. However, they did get a few things right. Some news stories
    accurately described portions of the US Marine Corps defeat in the two battles of
    Fallujah. Fallujah Battles, Iraq is an e-book that honestly describes the corrosive
    influence in embedded US journalists. Although Marine Corps NCOs and enlisted
    men are excellent military material, in most cases they are poorly trained and
    incompetently led. In fact, the only bright spots of the battles of Fallujah were
    those brought about by Marine Corps NCOs who performed their tactical
    maneuvers in an excellent manner. Fallujah Battles, Iraq describes what really
    happened in Fallujah. The strange psychology of some US Marine Corps leaders
    is contrasted with the warrior heroism exemplified by others. There is no doubt that,
    properly supported by tanks and self-propelled artillery, three regiments of marine
    infantry could have conquered Fallujah with minimal casualties. However, the Marine
    generals have continued the tradition of not understanding how to use tanks, which
    has prevailed since World War II. A hard corps of strong Marine Corps NCOs
    cannot compensate for a lack of division, regimental, battalion, and company
    leadership.
    “Fallujah is a cancer,” said Major Gen Richard Natonski, commander of the 1st Marine Division, who would lead any
    ground attack. “We can’t have a sanctuary for the enemy and expect to make progress.” General Natonski, who the
    muslim Nazis condemn as a “Polish Jew”, understands the nature of the enemy that he is fighting. He said he had
    received no request from the Iraqi government to carry out military operations in Fallujah, and offered no opinion on
    whether a peaceful solution was possible. “I don’t know who they’re negotiating with.”
    He made clear that his men were ready for action in Fallujah. “It’s a rats’ nest, but if we have to go in and clear it out we
    will.” He urged the foreign elements in Fallujah and those loyal to Saddam Hussein’s regime to come out and fight.
    “We can take these guys on if they show their faces. Not a problem whatsoever. That’s why they’ve resorted to the tactics
    they have [suicide bombings and IEDs] because they know every time we face them we kill them.” ”

    US Marine Corps Defeat in Iraq
    © 2006
    202 pages; 11 chapters, and 1 appendix
    In Fallujah Battles, Iraq, Volume 2, the two battles of Fallujah are deeply
    analyzed. In addition, the unique psychological and organizational
    characteristics of the US Marine Corps, a light maneuver force with few
    tanks, are closely dissected. The reasons why marines don’t understand the
    employment of tanks is finally revealed. Although Marine Corps NCOs and
    enlisted marine infantry are excellent military material, in most cases they are
    poorly trained and incompetently led. The only bright spots of the battles of Fallujah
    were those brought about by those few Marine Corps NCOs, warrior leaders, who
    performed tactical assault maneuvers in an excellent manner. Fallujah Battles,
    Iraq describes what really happened in Fallujah. The strange psychology of some
    US Marine Corps leaders is contrasted with the warrior leadership exemplified
    by others. Fallujah Battles, Iraq discusses the fact that among the Marine
    generals there is an antiwar peacenik cult that impedes warfighting and
    abhors maneuver. Among marine officers there are too many men wedded to
    technology instead of the bitch goddess of war. There is no doubt that, properly
    supported by tanks and self-propelled artillery, three regiments of marine
    infantry could have conquered Fallujah with minimal casualties. However, the
    Marine generals have continued the tradition of not understanding how to use
    tanks, which has prevailed since World War II. A hard corps of strong US Marine
    Corps NCOs cannot compensate for a lack of competent Marine generals or a
    lack of regimental, battalion, and company leadership.
    “Some US military units recently rotated into Iraq left behind in America many tanks and other armored vehicles. The
    marines, for instance, initially used only 16 tanks in Iraq out of their inventory of 403. They have also deployed 39 of their
    1,057 assault amphibian vehicles (AAVs). The AAVs provide protection against light small arms but not rocket-propelled
    grenades. After many American vehicles were knocked out. The Army and marine generals began assessing whether or
    not to rush hundreds more tanks to Iraq, a process that would take weeks. During the past few years, America’s
    incompetent generals have covered up their stupidity by blaming everything on Donald Rumsfeld, the best Secretary of
    Defense that America has ever known or will ever know. Why has there not been a public outcry about the incompetence
    of American generals?
    Pentagon officials have acknowledged that $5.97 billion worth of new and modified equipment and weapons is required,
    mostly for added troop protection. The list is “unfunded,” meaning there’s no money in the budget for it, said Rep. Curt
    Weldon, R-Pa., a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee.
    In the Army, 4th Infantry Division troops who drive five-ton gun trucks in convoys that have been raked by Iraqi fire and
    roadside bombs have fitted their trucks with plywood “armor,” according to Rep. Duncan Hunter, the California
    Republican who heads the House Armed Services Committee. Plywood provides no protection, even against small arms.
    Hunter, furious that the Pentagon hasn’t been able to provide armor, last week thundered at officers called to account at
    a hearing, “You guys can’t tie your shoelaces!”
    Major General Buford C. Blount, assistant deputy chief of staff for operations, told Hunter last week that, “we must do
    better and I think the Army and the leadership of (the Pentagon) is committed to doing that, sir.” ”
    Excerpt from Fallujah Battles, Iraq – Vol. 2
    other books about Anti Terrorism

    other books about Light Infantry

  12. There is no doubt that a number of brave marine infantry men were killed and wounded in the battles of Fallujah in a
    wasteful fashion. Properly led, by well-trained marine officers, few marines would have died. A positive victory would have
    added to the glory of the US Marine Corps. Fallujah Battles, Iraq provides strong evidence that the US Marine Corps
    reputation was tarnished by the twin defeats at Fallujah. This e-book is offered with the hope that those proud and few
    US Marine Corps warrior leaders, who are strong and brave Marine officers and Marine Corps NCOs, will read this
    book and never lose another city fight again.

  13. I’ve noticed that so far that it’s mostly Marines who have responded to this article. Let me first say that I admire the Marine Corp and agree with many of their fundamental principals. There’s a lot the U.S. Army can learn from it. First, I could not agree more that basic training should be twelve weeks, not eight. For me, it ended just as it was just beginning to get interesting. Aside from that, each service has a different purpose; the role of the Marine Corp is very different from the role of the army. And I think the author of the article is wrong to advocate changing that role or ending the Marine Corp.

    However, what bothers me about the general responses to the article is that no one has really replied to what I see as its underlying complaint: The Marine Corp has gained a lot of its reputation by maligning the army. You do not need to denigrate the achievements of soldiers to bolster your own sense of accomplishments. We know you kick ass. Everybody does. But so does the army.

    The army did not need the Marines to breech the German defenses in Europe and North Africa, and it did so with a large number of conscripts. The German Army was second to none until they ran up against Patton. And yes, there were allies who helped, but they usually got in the way. You really don’t want to acknowledge the significant role played by Air-Cav and Rangers in Vietnam or the larger role the army has played in both Iraq and Afghanistan as far as that goes. Let me get this right, were one of you saying that the Somalia was a defeat for the Rangers? A few more defeats like that and all Africa would belong to the US Army Rangers. And if what the article says about Korea is true, then the Marines should acknowledge it. It is disgraceful to the memory of those brave soldiers who died buying time for a Marine retreat

    Oh yes, if the soldiers in the 82nd did not go out on patrols in Iraq, as one of you stated, it was only because they were ordered so. Just like Marines, soldiers follow orders whether they like them or not. I never questioned the tactics and strategies of officers who had a broader view of the problem than I. I don’t believe that Marines do either.

    Still there is a lot to learn from the army can learn from the Marines, like increasing basic training to twelve weeks. The army should put an end to political correctness and return to its traditions. Oh yes, the other thing the army can learn from the Marine Corp is PR. Yup, you Marines really have mastered it. You’ve got the best recruiting ads and the best slogans.

    • The Marine Corps has acquired its reputation not only for claiming Army exploits as their own. In World War II, they blamed two of their biggest foul ups on the Army.

      The problem on Saipan was not the 27th Id but Holland M. Smith who was a general inexperienced in high command, but a general who totally underestimated Japanese strength on Saipan. On Saipan, he expected understrength Army units to take out difficult objectives. He simply did not realize how difficult the objectives were. When the 27th ID did not rapidly overrun those objectives, he accused them of failure. By and large, Marine Corps writers have distorted the history of Saipan to blame the 27th ID for HM Smith’s ineptitude.

      The problem on Peleliu was that William Rupertus, CG of 1st mardiv, totally misread Japanese intentions on Peleliu. The Japanese occupied strong defensive positions impregnable to frontal attack. Rupertus got thousands of his Marines killed and wounded trying to take out those positions via the tactic of direct frontal attack. Post battle, The Marines awarded Rupertus a Navy Cross. They claimed 1st mardiv had to fight such a bloody battle because General MacArthur wanted Peleliu. Macarthur may have wanted Peleliu. But Peleliu was such a bloody battle because of poor generalship on the part of William Rupertus.

  14. Jerry from SD wow you know your stuff, lol motto xD the 82nd airborne was ordered to go into that city, they refused to! i would say alot more but um jerry pretty much hit it right on the spot. this article is very pro army…and most of the “statments made” are completely untrue.

  15. It is with great sadness that I read Soldiers and Marines trying to belittle each other rather than unite under one flag for one common goal. I have met many marines and some have this nasty attitude toward the army(not that our Soldiers dont add fuel to the fire). We have a great honor to have the Army and the Marine Corp fighting our wars, Myself included as I am a veteran. Lets focus on bringing the boys back and not on who failed in fallujah or who failed in Korea. Before you ask I was an NCO in the US ARMY.

    • I am Raj Roy, son of an officer in Indian Army.. Being so far away, i truly admired you guys (both Marines and Navy).. ofcourse first comes my Motherland India, but i really had that respect for you both.., You guys have played different imp roles in different places.. BUT, the respect seems to be a little lost now.. You guys are fighting against each other? Its like two sons of a same mother trying to prove to mother who is better rather than serving her! SHAME ON YOU BOTH!

      • I think it is more of the Marine Corps, the history of which is not as extensive as that of the US Army, trying to build a reputation which is not there.

        Much of Marine Corps history is fabricated and consists of claiming credit for what they did not do and blaming the Army for their blunders.

  16. Are you serious? What would posess a person to write such an article? A. Scott Piraino, shame on you. Brave men and women from both the Army and Marine Corps have died to protect your right to the freedom of speech and this is how you honor them? Pick up that pen and write a story of the great sacrifices these very same individuals have made to make this country so great. To my fellow Marines and Army brothers and sisters; instead of responding to this article, take the time to share something about a fellow patriot who you had the honor of serving with. God bless every US service member and their families for their service and sacrifice. Peace be with you.

    • How about the 105th Infantry on Saipan on July 7, 1944.

      Between 4000 and 5000 fanatical Japanese launched the fiercest suicide attack of WWII against the 105th Infantry. In spite of horrible casualties to ots 1st and 2nd Battalions, 105th Infantry stopped the attack. Another Army regiment, 106th Infantry then drove the Japanese back.

      One Marine artillery battalion, 3rd battalion 10th marines, was the only Marine unit to engage the Japanese. The Japanese overran 3/10th Marines, forced them to abandon their guns and form defensive perimeters. The Marines of 3/10 Marines were rescued by the106th Infantry, who also recovered their guns for them.

      HM Smith later commended 3/10 Marines for their courage. He called the Soldiers of the 105th Infantry, who actually fought and bled and died stopping the attack yellow cowards.

      Subsequent Marine authors have written that the soldiers broke and that 3/10th Marines stopped the attack.

    • Good point Texas Marine. But why don’t we start with the Marine Corps taking back every despicable word they have falsely uttered and written about the incredibly courageous men of the 31st RCT. Nearly all of whom died valiantly on the battlefield, only to be disparaged and disrespected as cowards by virtually the entire Marine
      Corps.
      That would be a good start. Especially since ChiCom records now being released expose the Marine Corps as the treasonous institution it is, and marines generally as the traitorous individuals they have been. the fate of the incredibly brave men of the 31st RCT deserve better than false accusations leveled at them by the Marine Corps. The information age is awesome isn’t it? I strongly suspect many more Marine Corps misinformation campaigns will be exposed.

  17. Wow! That is really the only word that can describe it. I was trying to figure out which branch of service to go into and I am sure of my choice now. After reading these complete lies about our Marine Corps it is pretty obvious that some pathetic human being has too much time on his hands. My grandfather drove tanks in the Army in WWII, but we all know who is the better fighting force of the 21st century. The MARINE CORPS! THE ARMY HAS NO FIGHTER/BOMBER AIRCRAFT or even a FIXED WING AIR FORCE like THE MARINES. THE ARMY ALSO DOES NOT HAVE ANY AMPHIBIOUS CAPABILITY WHATSOEVER. NO SUPPORT FROM THE NAVY AND NO ABILITY TO BE FIRST ON SCENE. NOT TO MENTION A TOUGHER 13 week BOOTCAMP. I ALMOST FORGOT THE MARINES CAN SWIM. Thanks for cementing your reputation I choose the UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS! TRUE DEVIL DOGS. TRUE HEROES. TRUELY CAPABLE WARRIORS.

    • Basic is the Marines and these are not all lies its someone who decided to defend the army and shed light on the Army. Marines are a great branch and if you join you will learn that very quickly that when your fighting with the Army this rivalry is a dumb joke

      • Why do the Marines try to claim Army exploits as their own?

    • Where were yhese “TRUE HEROES. TRUELY CAPABLE WARRIORS” at Trenton, Saratoga, Valley Forge, Yorktown?

      • You do realize that Marines were not a land force during the Revolution? They were almost exclusively deployed on Navy ships to fight in the mast tops and occasionally sortie ashore? So at Trenton, Saratoga, Valley Forge and Yorktown they were on board ship where they were assigned to be.. one could ask where the Continental Army was when Bonhomme Richard took the Serapis and Countess of Scarborough.. or where were they when the Continental Navy and Marines raided Nassau to garner desperately needed supplies for the Continental Army..?

        Even still, small detachments of Marines did serve with the Continental Army. At Trenton, they were stuck when the part of the attack they were assigned to could not cross the Delaware due to the ice. Not sure it’s the Marine’s fault their Army officer decided not to risk the conditions, not sure I’ve ever heard any Marines claim that the Marines fought there either.. or at Saratoga, Valley Forge or Yorktown (though it should be pointed out that there were British and French Marines there.. likely would have been Continental Marines there as well if deGrasse’s fleet was not completely French.

      • Where were they on the eastern side of Chosin Reservoir? Where were they at Lang Vei?

        Answer Number 1-running away.
        Answer Number 2- hiding inside their perimeter.

      • Man oh man, do you got to go back that far to worry about this.. WHO GIVES A SHIT….

    • Tougher 13 week boot camp?? Man, you sound like you love to feast on sugarcoated shit. I go to PT weekly and once in a while we’ll have a poolee return as a Marine and describe boot camp. He said honestly that swim week is a joke. Boot camp has gotten easier over the decades. They don’t teach you to swim, just to survive in an aquatic environment. Jump in with clothes on and blow air in your shirt. If that’s “learning to swim” then good for you. It’s not like Army doesn’t know how to swim. And most said that the first couple weeks is the DI’s yelling their ass off at you so you get used to it, first couple weeks are a waste. But you sound like some teenage kid that’s obviously all hyped up and little idea of what the hell you’re talking about. Both Marines and Army have their even share of things.

  18. This whole thread is absolutely hilarious. I retired from the Corps ten years ago and me and a bunch of my former service buddies from all branches crack up reading this kind of stuff. We all respect each other and harass each other to no end.

    Bottom line is that I agree with the comments regarding different roles. Further I agree that depending on viewpoint of the individual authors, various media types, leaders, historians, and others spew out skewed opinion. I am not advocating a group hug here, but you guys need to grow up and find something better to do with your time.

    All the services are necessary. Competition is good for improvement. Remember who the real enemy is and focus there. We’re all in the same family and remember that.

    • agreed

      • Roger

    • Never served. Greatest respect for both branches though Granddad served in France with Pershing and son is in Army. My much respected neighbor is a retired USMC General who enlisted in WW2 ! He stuck his neck out in WW2, Korea and Vietnam !!! I do have experience in law enforcement AND there is identical “my department is tougher, better, smarter than yours” rivalry, jealousy and competition. Mostly good-natured macho ribbing…keep it that way Army and Marines.

      I have to laugh. When the shit hits the fan Army and Marines will fight and die alongside each other. Guadacanal was hell for both. The wise veterans learn from the best of the other agencies AND there is always someone doing it better somewhere else ! Competition is good for the nation BUT waste is not. We got plenty of enemies without picking fights with each other or wasting resources. I am 100% against ending USMC though they ought to take their fair share of cuts. I used to say “there is plenty of crime to go around” so dont bitch about other agency.

  19. Oh yeah. It’s ok to harass each other. Just keep it respectful. You guys sound like a bunch of school kids.

  20. wow…sounds like a bunch of kids and old men in here….who cares….

  21. This is such a silly argument. Very similar to guys stuck talking about their college football teams and frat houses. Both sides living in the rear view mirror.

    • I couldn’t have said it better myself.

      • Actually, it’s been pretty informative. College football teams can’t make false claims or claim another team’s wins and frat houses cover themselves better.

        Yeah there are some ifdiots on both sides but there’s a lot of info here that is not common knowledge.

  22. I started off in the Marine Corps JROTC learning everything there was to learn about the Marines. I loved it. I loved the history, structure, dicipline, training and uniform. I loved learning and training with the Marines and fellow Cadets in Camp Penalton, I loved looking my sharpest during inspections, and I loved earning every Cadet promotion until I reached to the top as one of the top class Cadets. I always wanted to be in he military ever since I was a kid. I even had drill instructors training and yelling in my face at the age of 15. It made me into a finer teenager after I graduated the programs class. Community service was important to me, along with being a good person and patriot. Military, military, military. Its all I ever spoke and thought of. Not because of the glory. Because of the honor. Thats what its about. Honor, making a difference, and serving my country. Screw glory. So when I finally graduated high school, why did I choose the Army over the “Best”, the Marine Corps?

    Arrogence. I wanted to serve my country in a modest manner in a modest branch. The Marines dont do “healthy compitition”. They bash on the other branches. Especially the Army. I used to love the Marines. They were my role models. I almost joined them. But now I just respect them as fellow brothers in arms. I wont lie, I highly respect their warrior skills their infantry has over the Armys infantry. Thats what the Marines should be proud of. They have the best warriors. Thats what they are known for and thats what they were created for. To be Elite. The Navys infantry. Every Marine is a rifleman. No matter what occupation. Every recruit is treated the same in Bootcamp. I wish the Army did that, but we dont. In the Army, Bootcamp varies on what occupation you pick. For example, Im in a combat occupation so Bootcamp was harder. Whereas my fellow soldier, and friend, is a non combat soldier. So compaired to my training, his bootcamp was a little bit more mild. Do I put him down? No. Without him, infantry couldnt get supplies. Which brings me to my point.
    Face it Marines. You have just as much to be proud of as any soldier, airman, sailer and Coastguard member. No more. Know why? because youre serving the same team. The same ammount. The same way. No better, No worse. Soldiers are warriors as well. We have our pride. In fact, the Army has a hellava alot to be proud of. If it wasnt for the Army (National Guard in fact), the Marines and Navy wouldnt be established, and most of all, we wouldnt be living on this land. Instead, you US Marines would be serving in the Royal Marines. When we settled here, we created an organized Militia to protect us against the Brits. The Militia (Army Guard) provided protection from the 1600′s to 1775, when the regular Army and Marines were establised. And the Army guard still serves a large role in America to this day. Fighting in EVERY American war, Being the oldest part of the United States Military, and protecting the community. (Not to mention half of the Army Guard consists of formal Marines).

    I think this artical is pro Army, and although I think its good that theres finally someone defending us and our history for once, it should not put Marine Corps history down. They worked equally as hard as the Army did in US history. They have an honorable history. Chesty Puller is the Marine Corps Audie Murphy. So dont put down Marine Corps history. They are contributers to fighting the United States freedom (Even though many of them still think theyre better than us just because of a nicer uniform and sharper immage). But all in all, the US Army is one of the Best Armies in the world. We have great size, great training, and the best equipment. Marines may be the best light infantry warriors (though I beg to differ with our Rangers), they will always be the department of the Navy. They are the second smallest branch (Coastguard being the first), and the only thing they need to be proud of is their mindless brawn. Which is ironic because the Army also provides mindless brawn as one of our many many jobs. So if those reasons are not good enough on why a patriot should not feel they are inferior to be a warrior in the Army then a warrior in the “precious Marine Corps” then it obviously means a loyal close minded jarhead, a closed minded civilian or a recruiting add objects. Because if I were to think about joining the Marine Corps, and to expect being brainwashed to think Im better than everyone around me, I would rather join the “underdogs” anyday.

    (To all the Marines out there, I want to let you know that it is nothing personal. Im simply trying to defend my own Branch in the military, not to mention other branches. I also dont mean to catergorize. I have many friends in the Marines, including my greatest childhood mentor, Maj. Cross. But when a large majority of Marines, including some of them who commented on this page belittle your team, you will defend your team. Furthermore, I would like to conclude that I also disagree with this artical. We all need each other, and the Army would have a much harder time without the Marines watching our back. Healthy competition is good. But the rivalry? give me a break.

    • I agree dude i think Army infantry is equal but we have the same idea im in the marines 0311 MOS just finished Boot and had a great time. I was so annoyed about people in the barrack talking shit on army when they aren’t even full marines. Respect

      • You can just let any little Marine Private who has A Nerve in his fucking body to disrespect an Army Infantryman a couple facts. Please verify them for yourself, dont take my word for it. Private.

        U.S. Army, Task Force 2-2..1st Infantry Division, based out of Germany. Along with the 1st Cavalry, another of our Infantry Units was First into Fallujah in Nov of 2004. When you hear a Marine in your unit talk about Fallujah in Nov of 2004, if they dont admit that we went in First to clear a foot hold, before they even entered…they are bold faced Lieing.

        Now, please look this up as well, dont take my word for it. The first unit aside Special Forces, and the CIA- to see combat in Afghanistan was 187th Infantry, 101st Airborne Division – in a little battle called Operation Anaconda . Please look it up for yourself.

        This business about Baghdad in 2003, the U.S. Army’s 3rd ID was the first to Baghdad, basically clearing the entire city…and was stuck waiting on the USMC.

        And the Worst City in Iraq was not Fallujah, it was in Fact… Mosul. It did not get the same media attention due to the murders of the four black water contractors – which was made into a big stir- god bless those men’s souls. However, Mosul was a NASTY city, with Fire Fights happening EVERY day…did we, I say We being the U.S. Army have to pull out of the city, give it up to the Enemy…and Go back in and re-take it? No, no we did not. Because we do not do those things Private. Such as the USMC did with Fallujah. – they lost that city in 2004. These are facts, please verify for yourself.

  23. p.s. please excuse the spelling and grammer errors. I never double checked, heh heh

  24. My modest proposal, in light of our current economic crisis is the following: We need to consider streamlining and consolidating certain types of tasks in order to get more bang for the buck, while at the same time maintaining high standards. With regards to the Army and Marines, my proposal is to have all male recruits placed into a joint Army/Marine basic training program of 22 weeks of solid infantry training. A board consisting of an equal number of Army and Marine NCO’s would be responsible for maintaining and ensuring training standards. However, in order to preserve the respective espirit de corps of both forces as well as their individual traditions those who choose to remain as Soldiers would then go on to their MOS phase of training, while those who wish to become Marines complete some additional follow on training such as a basic amphibious warfare course, continued marksmanship training, a basic mountain warfare course, and a basic naval services universal course (in which both Sailors and Marines both participate and covers such things important to shipboard duty such as firefighting, basic naval terminology, etc.) Then upon completion of that training the prospective Marine would undergo a revised form of the Crucible lasting about two weeks in length complete with live ammo wizzing overhead, sleep deprivation, puking, long marches, various small unit exercises, and whatever else some sadistic cadre of instructors can come up with to pack into that period. Whatever is left can call itself a Marine and can have its picture taken with dress blues on and receive an eagle globe and anchor pin. After that, a brief respite to heal from the bumps and bruises and then its off to the six month MEU workup as a basic rifleman, followed by a tour at sea in that capacity. Once completed, then if the Marine wants to have an additional speciality such as a cook, mechanic, tanker, cannon cocker, or some other MOS then he would commence with that training after the initial standing down period with the MEU is completed. The idea behind this is that the Army will get to benefit from the iron sharpening iron of both an Army Drill Sergeant and a Marine Drill Instructor get the best basic infantry training possible, while still keeping the idea of becoming a Marine an accomplishment requiring intense dedication and determination that forces the cream to rise and the rest who wash out to either recycle, go back into the Army, or maybe get an assignment within the Navy’s NECC. Another rationale is that if every Marine is supposed to be a rifleman, then let them actually practice this by actually assigning them a “starter” MOS as a basic rifleman and doing a tour as such before moving on to some other specialty. Note: At some point I would like to see a career NCO exchange program between the Army and the Marines. It would work like this: A career Army NCO (preferably one who has served in an airborne or ranger capacity and has completed Ranger school) would be able to switch over to the Marines (completing all Marine prerequisites of course) and serve as a Marine for a prescribed period of time, say 3 years. Upon completion, the NCO would be encouraged to sign up for a hitch as a Basic Training/Combat Training NCO (and get a nice bonus to boot). On the Marine side, the Marine NCO who has served primarily in an infantry MOS would switch over and complete Airborne and Ranger school if not previously completed and then serve 3 years in a Ranger, Airborne, or other infantry unit. Upon completion, that Marine NCO would also go into the Basic/Combat Training NCO hitch and also get a nice bonus for his trouble. In time, a large cadre of very experienced and cross trained warriors would take over the responsibility of training all entry level male recruits. I also believe that in time this would be more cost effective since you would get an economy of scale and could consolidate more of the basic training installations (but still keep Benning and Pendleton no matter what), but still maintain the distinct identities of both forces.
    Does Captain Calzone’s idea sound half baked? You be the judge. I am always open to critique.

    • How about giving the Army their own Harriers and FA 18s for ground support?

      • Uh… you have the Airforce.. Let it go man…

  25. %-) genuinely interested by this website

  26. I think the Marines and Army should stay separate, However I think the USAF should be merged back with the Army. Since the Cold War is over I really don’t see a point in the USAF as a service since they mainly support ground troops. Also they have the Navy’s “Air Force” as it is.

  27. Actually the USAF has much larger scope of responsibility beyond the support of ground troops. For example, maintaining air supremacy in a theater of operations, air strikes, air intercept missions, strategic icbms, and now fighting the war in cyberspace. The USAF was formed because its mission was getting larger and could not fit in its Air Corps box any longer. Despite the ending of the Cold War, the USAF still has too large of a job to squeeze it back into the Army. Nevertheless, I still support force consolidation and there are many areas of operation where both the Army and the Air Force could still merge functions. I maintain that all airmen should undergo the at least the same basic training as the Army and that many Air Force and Army MOS training sites can also be consolidated. One final thought…just a thought…all German paratroopers (a.k.a. fallschimjagers) were part of the Luftwaffe, not the Army. What if the 82nd Airborne was transferred to the Air Force? Discuss.

  28. Another thought….

    Some of you may know that the Navy Seals are allowing a small number of Coast Guard personnel to go to their Basic Underwater Demoltion School (BUDs). So now there are Coastie SEALs out there. I don’t know the full story behind that move, but I suspect that it might have something to do with the Coast Guard’s role in providing Law Enforcement Detachment Teams to attach to Navy ships and units. If somebody out there knows what the deal is behind this I would love to know if I am right about my hunch or not. But here is my thought…If you can allow Coasties to serve in the SEALS, why not Marines? What if a SEAL team had a mixture of guys from each of the three sea branches, Navy, Coast Guard, and Marine Corps? Discuss

  29. Okay where should I start. Okinawa was the largest American amphibeous landing. Normandy was the Americans and British. I heard more about the Army during Desert storm. The Marines have to go through harder basic training than the Army. They take more casulties because the don’t have armor. thats not their fault. oh, not using airstrikes thats because they don’t want to kill civilians and turn everyone against them. They didn’t help the people in nam because they still would have been outnumbered and suffered greater losses. Now quit spouting Army propganda and do some reporting

  30. Patton and Puller were both cut from the same cloth, and in fact, they were distant relatives.

    I would have been equally as proud to serve under Patton as a dogface or under Puller as a leatherneck.

    Warriors are warriors. And pogues are pogues, no matter what. A pencil pushing pogue has no right to claim somebody else’s glory, nor should he dis the infantry of another branch (unless he himself has actually BEEN infantry once before, in the field against an enemy, an not merely in training).

    Once you grab your rifle, don your kevlar, and then face the enemy in hostile fire, you are the shit and all of this academic debate about “Quien es mas macho? Army or Marines?” becomes meaningless.

    Get in the shit and actually GET SOME!!!

  31. FYI -

    The Coast Guard deserves major props too, and should not referred to as mere “puddle pirates.”

    Having had the privilege to be a guest aboard the USCGS Rush, I have become a huge Coastie fan. Every day these people go out in seas that would make ordinary people loose control of their bodily functions and pluck out mariners in distress. Their sacrifices are largely unnoticed by the general public and the media.

    While there might not be an infantry in the Coast Guard, I still take my hat off to them. Semper Fi, meet Semper Paratus! And try not to lose your lunch on the freshly swabbed deck.

  32. Army Rangers can hold their own anywhere! Just look at how they performed during the battle of Mogadishu. The Marines can’t deny that the Rangers knew how to get some. And lets not forget the two Delta Force men who gave their lives defending a downed pilot. They the Medal of Honor for that. Delta and Rangers Lead the Way! Hoah!

  33. USAF Pararescue. Nuff said.

    • yea try US Marine Force Recon im not sayin USAF pararescue sucks but thats all you guys do Force Recon is alot harder because they do Deep Recon, Direct action, Search and Rescue, Unconventional Warfare, and alot of Ampihbious operations
      Plus we shoot way futher 500 yards buddy

      • Dear Oni,
        You’re an ignorant moron. And unfortunately, you perpetuate the impression that most marines are ignorant morons. I was in the Army’s 75th Ranger Rgt for about 2 years, then served in the 10th SFG for 4 years. I was at Koleezi in May 1978 with the French Foreign Legion, in Iran in 1980 for Eagle
        Claw, and saw extensive action in the Congo, Ethiopia, Somalia, Liberia, and several other otherwise nondescript African countries. That’s my resume, I was a professional soldier for 6 years, and I will tell you one fact of life straight out, because you have obviously never been a professional soldier. No one has more balls than those Air Force PJs. When they committ, the AO is usually hot, very hot. Hot going in, hot operating in, and hot during extraction. If you weren’t a blabbering clown, you would know that, and appreciate the job they do. Any recon unit is a walk in the bush compared with thier missions. By definition, Recon doesn’t even engage the enemy.
        You’re a circus clown, and you give the impression that all marines are circus clowns. Do the marine corps a service, and shut the fuck up.

  34. The Author proved his point with the coments above. The rattling of the Marine PR Machine by Jerry. Look Jerry every time I have heard a General give a pep talk they tend to butter up the troops. Like unit such and such could lick the entire Taliban hoard blind folded. General comets tend to be full of $hit!

    AS For “Cpl Marine”, how in the hell could the suvivors of the 31st Infantry regiment (385 or so) surrvivors retreve the bodies of the 2100 dead US Army brothers? The 31st Infantry saved the Marines 3 days of valuable time at Chosen for their retreat.

    • The worst retreat in the history of the U.S.:
      8th Army retreated 275 miles south to the DMZ

      The worst surrender in the history of the U.S.
      The Battle of the Phillippines over 100k troops surrendered by Army Gen Wainwright

      My father fought at the Chosen Reservoir with the 1st Mar Div and he helped retrieve the Army dead and the equipment that was abandoned upon the 8th Army “Bug Out Boogie” retreat.

      • The never leave anyone behind Marines abandoned the 31st RCT and then claimed the 31sr RCT did not fight.

      • The Army on Bataan surrendered after it had fought to the bitter end. It had been abandoned.

        It is interesting that although very few Marines ever fought on Bataa an(fewer than 100 of the 11,000-12,000 American personnel on Bataan were Marines) some Marines claim that Marines played a significant role in defending Bataan.

        To that I say again, Marines, concentrate on your own accomplishments and stop trying to claim what the Army has done as your own

      • “The worst surrender in the history of the U.S.
        The Battle of the Phillippines(sic) over 100k troops surrendered by Army Gen Wainwright”

        The largest surrender in US History was the surrender of US Troops on Bataan.

        For four months, US Army troops fought a bitter battle against the Japanese lacking everything an Army in the field would have needed to fight. The troops on Bataan surrendered because they had very gallantly fought under impossible conditions until they could literally fight no more. They had no ammunition, no food, no medication, and most of them were sick from disease and malnutrition.

        While Army troops were fighting so gallantly in difficult circumstances on Bataan, the 4th Marine Regiment remained on Corregidor, contributing nothing to the Defense of Bataan. That, nevertheless, has not prevented the Marine Corps from claiming credit for defending Bataan, another example of the Corps appropriating Army valor and heroism as its own.

        The Marines took thousands of killed and wounded in a poorly planned assault on Betio in the Tarawa Atoll. A year later, they took thousands of killed and wounded in a poorly planned, poorly executed assault on Peleliu. Marine generals were responsible for planning and executing the battle for Peleliu. That has not stopped the Corps from blaming the Army, specifically General MacArthur, for the bloodbath on Peleliu.

      • “The worst surrender in the history of the U.S.
        The Battle of the Phillippines over 100k troops surrendered by Army Gen Wainwright”.

        Marines have a lot of heartburn because General MacArthur did not recommend the 4th Marine Regiment for a Presidential Unit Citation when he left the Philippines. The Marines think the 4th Marine regiment should be commended for their performance in the Philippines but the Soldiers should receive no respect.

        The real historical situation is that the Soldiers fought a very gallant, bitter battle against the Japanese on Bataan. That was the main part of the defense of the Philippines. While that battle the 4th Marine Regiment sat on Corregidor completely out of the fight.

        The above quote is one of the greatest pieces of hypocrisy any Marine has ever spouted.

      • “My father fought at the Chosen Reservoir with the 1st Mar Div and he helped retrieve the Army dead and the equipment that was abandoned upon the 8th Army “Bug Out Boogie” retreat.”

        1st Marine Division was in no position to exert any effect on the Chinese who attacked 8th Army. There was a lot of impassable terrain between X Corps and 8th Army. 8th Army was routed. But it recovered to fight the Chinese on its own, no help from 1st Marine Division.

      • First, I have never heard a Chosen Marine ever claim that 31RCT didn’t fight, The never leave a Marine Behind at the time, every damn soldier from where ever was being over run, and call it retreat or what have you… The Marines at the time just couldn’t go up into that meat grinder to pick up fallen soldiers. That’s ridiculous, you change the words of Generals to fit your needs on this blog… If I was asked as a General to please go get my boys.. In that the Chosen, I would certainly have to let you know in probably better words that It just cannot be done to send up anybody till Spring.

        Again, I have never heard of anybody in the USMC claim that the Corp Played any bigger a role then the Army in defense of Bataan.. Never.. However there was a small Battery of Marines that with the sick and wounded continued to man their guns in defense of Bataan, they too were in the Death March…. Please do not put words into the mouth of the USMC, shut those up that give you false information. Quit your fight with false accusations. Marines were on Corregidor and with the entire fucking Japanese ship armada between them and Bataan, they could of never gone to the aid of those on the island. Mac Arthur and his entourage made it off the island that’s for sure…

  35. ….have any of you researched the ‘author’ of this ‘report?’ Well I have (just a little at least) and he is a kook; he writes stuff like 9/11 was a cover-up/inside job/Bush conspiracy, etc, etc, etc. And you would believe any of this B.S.? As a Marine who served in Iraq (infantry) in 2003 (invasion), 2005, and 2007/2008, I would have to say that 99.9% of his Iraq stuff is B.S. The Army’s doctrine was not to engage, the Marine Corp’s was to engage. What else can I tell you all….OUT!!

  36. All Ill say is “When they stop talking about you, you no longer matter” and the U.S. Army will always try and compare itself to the the Corps because the Marine Corps heritage and legacy speak for itself. Everyone knows the Army will take anyone and the Marine Corps will only take “The Few and the Pround” my father served at “The Chosin Resevoir” and he will tell you The 8th Army disgraced itself with its retreat while leaving their dead, wounded and equipment but 1st Mar Div. brought them out. I have read extensively about Fallujah and the Marines did a fantastic job in both battles and this straight from ARMY Lt Col. Ralp Peters Ralph Peters:
    FALLUJAH, Iraq – Fallujah and the Marines have some history. In 2004, one savage battle ended when the Marines were pulled out for political reasons. Later that year, they had to finish the job and a job they did well.
    I can only conclude the author of this article didnt make the Marine Corps cut or maybe his father didnt and this is where the animosity stems never the less his article is inaccurated and filled with fictitious statements but hey “When they stop talking about you , you no longer matter”

    Casey S. Shattuck

    • US marine Defeat in Fallujah
      Monday 3 May 2004.
      By Joaquín Bustelo
      With the withdrawal of American marines from their most advanced positions in the city of Fallujah, the United States is recognizing its first great defeat of the Iraq War.
      Late in March, U.S. Marines, which had recently taken over the Fallujah area from an army unit, staged a provocative raid into the City, which had been largely left alone for months by the U.S. commanders due to lack of forces.
      This was part of an overall escalation of aggressive actions by the U.S. occupation, including the banning of an Islamic paper and a kangaroo puppet court indictment of the Shia cleric that paper represented.
      What the United States forces were attempting to do was to retake the political-military offensive against the growing insurgency basing itself on what it imagined was a strengthened political position based on the agreement of Iraqi collaborationists to the rules for a quisling “sovereign” government after June 30. This, in turn, would set the stage for consolidating U.S. domination under “sovereign” control.
      At the end of March, in part in reaction to this raid, insurgent forces ambushed and the population —especially the youth—then lynched four heavily armed ostensible U.S. soldiers of fortune, who, for some reason that’s not been explained, were driving through what is essentially a town where Iraqi anti-occupation partisans operated freely.
      At least three of the four American operatives were experienced graduates of the regular U.S. special forces. This means they were well-trained —and as likely as not experienced— in counter-insurgency and operating behind enemy lines.
      That they simply decided to take a joy ride through Fallujah is unthinkable. The explanation that best fits what they were doing is that they were CIA or other intelligence officers on a recognizance or operational mission using “security contractor” status as cover. (The case of the captured Italians appears to be similar).
      Supposedly, they were driving to Jordan through no-man’s land in the middle of the night, a “cover” story that doesn’t stand the giggle test.)
      On April 5, the Marines started an attack on Fallujah, but met very strong resistance from a well-led, well-trained partisan force. Even with reinforcements and including “heavier” units, the Marines were unable to make much of a dent in the city’s defenses despite ferocious Marine fire that killed hundreds of civilians.
      At the same time, the U.S. faced simultaneous popular uprisings in a half dozen other major population centers. Both in Fallujah and elsewhere, the U.S. trained Iraqi police and military collapsed and dispersed without resisting the popular uprising.
      The sole exception that has been named were Kurd forces who have been collaborating with the CIA for more than a decade.
      Anti-U.S. forces were able to consolidate their control in two cities, Fallujah and Najaf.
      Unable to defeat the rebels militarily or to accept the high political cost of many thousand Iraqi civilian casualties from continuing to try through direct assault, the marines then laid siege to Fallujah.
      In Najaf, which lies to the South, the U.S. faced additional complications. This part of the country was under the control of U.S. allies who have no intention of letting their troops go much beyond traffic-cop duty.
      To fight the insurgents, the U.S. thus had to deploy its own forces to Najaf, and they met a well-coordinated campaign of harassment and sabotage of communications lines, which slowed their progress.
      The actual siege of Fallujah lasted for about three weeks. The U.S. variously described the situation as a suspension of its offensive military operations or even a cease fire agreement (to which the other side was not a party!), but it was in fact an attempt at a siege, a well recognized offensive military operation.
      It seems during this siege the U.S. forces also took very significant casualties. How many U.S. troops were involved it is impossible to know — the number that has been mentioned in one or another dispatch by the better war correspondents is 3,000.
      CNN reported yesterday that, of the 130 or so combat deaths the U.S. had in April, more than half were in Fallujah. This means at least 70 dead.
      Assuming the normal wounded-to-killed ratio in Iraq (between 5-to-1 and 7-to-1, depending on whether you include those who supposedly did not die in combat but accidents, etc.), this would mean total casualties in the 400-650 range.
      Anything close to even the lower figure means that quite likely, a number of platoons and companies were eliminated as effective military units and had to be replaced or reconstituted.
      The popular insurrections and especially the resistance in Fallujah have broken the back of the specific forms the U.S. had given its political project in Iraq.
      The multi-party coalition supposedly so laboriously stitched together by Bremer, who answers to Rumsfeld, has been dumped, and instead the political transition has been seconded lock, stock and barrel to Kofi Annan’s Lakhdar Brahimi.
      One indication of the crisis in the U.S. command created by its defeat in Fallujah were the contradictory reports in the past few days about the deal to end the Fallujah siege.
      The Marines officially announced the agreement late Wednesday or early Thursday through for-attribution statements by a colonel. But that such a deal had been struck was denied by the spokespeople for the top of the chain of command both in Baghdad and in the Pentagon, only to be confirmed 18-24 hours later.
      Supposedly, the U.S. Marines are handing over control to an Iraqi force of about 1,000 composed of what the U.S. normally describes as “regime remnants.” It is led by a former Saddam general who is described as being in association with several other Saddam generals.
      In reality, the U.S. is withdrawing from its most advanced positions within Fallujah, leaving the entire city in the hands of the rebels, except for a couple of vehicle checkpoints, because, of course, the most salient thing to notice about this new Fallujah Brigade or Fallujah Army is that *it does not exist.*
      It *may* exist in the future, for the here and now, the role it plays is simply a face-saving way for the Marines to disengage, retreat and leave the town under Iraqi rebel control.
      Another thing to note is that it represents a more-or-less open repudiation of the Rumsfeld-Bremer de-Baathification of Iraq and is of a piece with taking the political transition out of Bremer’s hands and giving it to Brahimi.
      The new unit has no connection to the Bremer-sponsored new Iraqi army/police/civil defense forces, and reports directly to the head of the Marine Expeditionary Force, not at all through any Iraqi chain of command.
      A third thing to note is that the agreement with the generals represents a defeat for Bremer in an additional way. He was the sponsor through his ventriloquist dummy government council of the talks with the “sheiks” and political parties and religious figures in Fallujah. The talks with the Baathist generals were a parallel track pursued by the Marine command.
      Put this together with the fact that Bremer has been fired (he is being replaced by Negroponte, eminence gris of the contra war against Nicaragua who reports to Colin Powell, not Rumsfeld).
      I think what this all adds up to is that I believe the U.S. is abandoning the goofy Rumsfeld-Cheney project of creating an Iraq client regime from nothing, and instead is going to try to turn back the clock a year and try to put together a state apparatus from pieces of the old regime.
      Whether this is now possible I can’t pretend to know; the U.S. was quite thorough in smashing the old Iraqi state and in doing so made a lot of enemies. An early test of whether this is really a new policy will be to see what the U.S. does in Najaf.
      But of necessity, this also means reaching an accommodation with many elements of the old Iraqi ruling class. And I would not be surprised to find that some of the Cheney-Rumsfeld pet “private contractors” suddenly find themselves in disfavor. Bringing in the U.N. means essentially dealing cards to the U.S. imperialist rivals/allies. Room has to be made for them at the table.
      The strategic objective of the new policy will be to split the resistance. It is clear from their operations in April that at least a large wing of the resistance is under a unified and competent general staff with extensive intelligence and other military resources. If U.S. intelligence estimates are right, the force in Fallujah (2000+) was the partisan equivalent of a brigade.
      Keeping such a force coherent in battle requires a significant cadre of officers. This means that people involved in the old army are probably involved in the resistance. This highlights the stupidity of the course the U.S. has followed until now.
      But this whole perspective is only realistic to the extent some measure of control is returned to the Iraqis. That is dangerous to the U.S., because a new Iraqi authority may well have no choice but to take a stance of demanding an end to the occupation if it is to have somewhat more credibility. And the resounding U.S. defeat in Fallujah only makes that more likely.

    • 100% agreed i know a guy a my chruch that was a marine that fought at chosin revosior and a Marine that fought on Okinawa, i always know an ex Force Recon and Marsoc Marine. And i knew another guy that was just Force Recon. and my teacher asked her Friend who was an Army Ranger to come sit down and talk to be so i know the Corps is the best.

      • Joaquin Bustelo is a fag.. His writings are bullshit on everything he believes in…

    • Marine Corps heritage is largely falsely claiming credit for what the Army did, such as fighting in the Battle of Trenton, defeating the British at New Orleans, capturing Chapultepec in the Mexican war, defending Bataan, saving Korea.

      • Sheesh Mike.. I’m ashamed we share a first name. I’ve never heard Marine Corps claim to have fought at the Battle of Trenton.. I’ve seen poorly researched articles mention it however. Also never heard them claim to have defeated the British at New Orleans.. only that they held the center of Jackson’s line there – which they did. Nor do they claim to have captured Chapultepec.. but they did help to storm the walls, being some of the first troops over the wall as part of Capt Casey’s storming party (about 40 marines out of a part of 250..). However, at that point the battle was a rout. Not sure why you have such a hard-on to discredit the Corps but set aside some of your obvious bias and read some history.

    • “…the U.S. Army will always try and compare itself to the the Corps because the Marine Corps heritage and legacy speak for itself.”

      Wrong.

      The Marine Corps has no legacy comparable to that of the US Army. It is the Marine Corps, which claims the Army’s history, e.g. First to Fight, 235+ years of continuous service to the US, playing the key role in all US Wars. Those all properly belong to the US Army.

      Between 1783 and 1798 the only armed force this country had were Army units. There was no Marine Corps those years.

  37. Cowardly Marines

    Posted on Wed, Jan. 30, 2002

    Capt. Jason Amerine and the men of his Army Special Forces unit were honored
    to be invited to Tuesday night’s State of the Union address.

    But Amerine can’t forget the heroes who weren’t there: men who lost their
    lives in Operation Enduring Freedom and an Air Force pilot who risked his
    life when he made the quick decision to fly into hostile territory and rescue
    wounded soldiers.

    “Yes, I’ll be glad when my 15 minutes of fame are over. We’re poster
    children for the war,” said Amerine, from his hotel room in Washington,
    D.C. “I can’t enjoy this because of the cost of the party.”

    In Kansas City, Bill McElhiney was proud that his son, Sgt. 1st Class Michael
    McElhiney, was among those singled out by the president. But he’s quick to
    say that his son is alive because of the helicopter commander who didn’t
    hesitate to answer a call for help.

    “As far as I’m concerned, that pilot should get a medal for saving my son,”
    said Bill McElhiney, whose son needed 17 units of blood. “People need to
    know what this guy did. His quick actions saved my son, and I’ll be forever
    grateful.”

    Until now, the pilot’s actions have gone unreported, one of the many untold
    stories of this clandestine war.

    Pulling together

    It was early December and almost balmy on that hilltop overlooking
    Kandahar. The Army’s 3rd Battalion, 5th Special Forces Group, also known
    as the Green Berets, had operated a successful two-month mission.

    With just 11 Special Forces men and dozens of newly trained Afghanistan
    anti-Taliban soldiers, the team had saved an entire town from being
    slaughtered by the Taliban. They had fought hand-to-hand in another area
    of Afghanistan.

    On Dec. 5, with a surrender from Kandahar imminent, the American soldiers
    were upbeat. Although they had missed Thanksgiving, birthdays and
    anniversaries, their mission was almost over. They were so close to being
    done. So close to going home.

    No one expected death to enter so swiftly.

    Even before the echo of the bomb disappeared, Amerine knew his best
    friend was dead.

    Sgt. 1st Class Dan Petithory’s body was still. His injury had been violent. His
    desert camouflage uniform was now splattered red.

    Tears began to sting Amerine’s 30-year-old face, but his training calmed
    him. What mattered now was to save those that could be saved.

    Must have been a friendly, he thought of the errant bomb. Amerine would
    learn later that an American soldier on the ground had made a deadly
    error: instead of giving the B-52s the enemy’s coordinates, he had
    accidentally given their own. The bomb dropped directly on their own
    position.

    Amerine looked again at his friend’s body even as he called for help. It was
    9:30 a.m. local time. He estimated that even though the 1,300-Marine Camp
    Rhino base, a remote desert airstrip commanded by Brig. Gen. James
    Mattis, was a one-hour helicopter ride away, it would take at least two hours
    for them to arrive.

    And flying in daylight is a risky mission for a pilot in Afghanistan. Air Force MH-53
    Pave Low helicopters make for easy targets to any Taliban member with a
    gun. Even one who’s a bad shot.

    The scene before Amerine was surreal. Wounded bodies. Dead bodies.
    Demolished vehicles.

    Amerine blinked back tears. He wouldn’t allow himself the luxury to grieve
    yet. Now, he needed to check on his men.

    He prayed that the leader of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, who was traveling
    with them, was all right now. Karzai had been a member of their team,
    negotiating with the Taliban for surrender and inviting other Afghans to fight
    with the Americans. Karzai was a friend to the Americans. They ate
    together. They drank green tea together. Now, they had bled together.

    At the point of the bomb’s impact were 10 Afghani soldiers, killed instantly.
    Two other Americans were dead or dying: Master Sgt. Jefferson Donald
    Davis, 39, of Tennessee, and Staff Sgt. Brian Cody Prosser, 28, of
    California.

    Dozens of others were injured. But Karzai, with just a small wound on his
    forehead, was already moving among the soldiers, trying his best to
    comfort those he could.

    Of all the wounded, one soldier seemed to be the most severely injured:
    McElhiney, a 1989 Hickman Mills High School graduate. His right hand was
    mangled. He was bleeding heavily on his left side. He struggled to breathe.
    His lower torso was hot, burned by the blast.

    “Man, you look like hell,” Amerine said to him. McElhiney mumbled
    something about looking pretty. Idle chitchat. Gallows humor. But it keeps
    panic away. And McElhiney, laying in a pool of his own blood, even
    managed to grin.

    After satisfying himself with the condition of his men, Amerine returned to
    Petithory’s body. Carefully, gently, he placed the body inside his own
    sleeping bag and zipped it up.

    A poem called “Futility,” by Wilfred Owen, floated out from some long-ago
    memorization. Amerine would have laughed except for its absolute perfect
    eloquence in this moment: Move him into the sun … Gently its touch awoke
    him once … At home, whispering of fields unsown …

    He looked again at the body. The tears came. And he let himself cry. He
    tried to purge his grief on Afghan soil.

    Soon, another soldier came over and joined him. Without saying a word, he
    too sat by the body.

    A saving grace

    Amerine spotted a small concrete outbuilding. Those who could helped
    transport the wounded to one side of the building. Amerine ordered that the
    dead be on the other side, out of sight of the wounded.

    Hours came and went. Three and a half hours passed. Finally, a wondrous
    sound from the sky grew louder. Flying low and slow, circling over the
    horizon, were two lumbering black helicopters.

    “They were beautiful, ponderous birds,” recalled Amerine, his voice almost
    a whisper. “They were so big. To see them fly is to see man defying
    gravity.”

    The helicopters were from an Air Force Special Operations Wing base in
    Pakistan.

    The Air Force helicopters left within 20 minutes after Amerine’s calls for help
    more than three hours earlier. Lt. Col. Steve Hadley, a medical doctor in the
    16th Special Operations Wing, made the decision to go. In order to make
    the long flight without running out of fuel and to make room for the
    wounded, he removed equipment to lighten the helicopters’ weight.

    Hadley was able to make the decision to leave so quickly because he had
    the authority and didn’t have to check with superiors. He tried not to think
    about how dangerous it was to fly in daylight over Afghanistan.

    The helicopters landed a safe distance from the wounded. Hadley, in a flight
    suit and a helmet, jumped out of the chopper before the blades had stopped
    whirling. He gave Amerine a hug.

    “Sorry to see you under these circumstances,” Amerine remembers his
    friend saying. The two were friends from previous missions. “I thought we’d
    be assisting in a transport. Where are the Marines?”

    Amerine couldn’t answer. His other men wondered too, as they loaded the
    wounded into the helicopters.

    In the days immediately following the rescue, Marine officers told reporters
    about their response to those injured by the friendly fire. It was a daytime
    mission, they said, flown during a period when all other flights in and out of
    the base were conducted only under the cover of night.

    Marines said their helicopters left Rhino to ferry out the wounded about two
    hours after receiving a call for help. Seven wounded Afghan soldiers were
    rescued by a Marine helicopter, accompanied by Cobra gunship helicopters.

    The Marines said in December that their slower response was because of
    time spent organizing the rescue teams and planning a safe route through
    what was considered hostile territory. At the time, nearby Kandahar had not
    yet fallen.

    Still, despite having to travel a much greater distance, Hadley’s crew
    arrived an hour before the Marines.

    “If the Air Force responded more quickly, I’m not going to dispute that,”
    said Capt. Stewart Upton, a Marine spokesman who was at Rhino at the
    time. “The bottom line is that everyone was doing the best that they could.”

    On Tuesday, U.S. Central Command in Florida, which overseas all the
    operations in the war in Afghanistan, would not release the times of the
    rescue flights.

    “The whole thing is still involved in an investigation into all the events
    surrounding the incident,” Navy Cmdr. Dan Keesee said.

    Looking back on Dec. 5, Amerine’s voice grows flat.

    “A trust was violated that day,” he said. “They didn’t come because they
    thought we had been overrun, and they were attempting to dissect the
    situation. Meanwhile, the Air Force launched to help us — immediately.”

    Hadley could not be reached for comment because he is in training. But Lt.
    Rosemary Heiss of the 16th Special Operations Wing at Hurlburt Field, Fla.,
    said no stories have ever been told publicly about the wing for a reason.

    “Their missions are secret to protect lives,” she said.

    Hadley was at the ceremony at Fort Campbell, Ky., a few weeks ago when
    the Green Berets received Purple Hearts and Bronze Stars for their service.
    A grateful Kansas City family shook his hand.

    “I wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t for Lt. Col. Hadley,” said Michael McElhiney,
    who is undergoing treatment at Walter Reed Hospital in the Washington
    area. “What can I do for him? If he hadn’t arrived when he did, I would
    have bled to death.”

    On Tuesday, as the nation watched its president thank three Special Forces
    soldiers, perhaps Hadley was watching, too.

    The Star’s Scott Canon contributed to this article.

  38. A Military Mission Gone Wrong-Marine Corps Disaster-The Mayaguez Incident

    ARLINGTON, Virginia, January 24, 2001

    Description:

    Less than two weeks after the Communist conquest of South Vietnam, forces of the Communist Khmer Rouge in Cambodia attacked and seized an American merchant ship, the Mayaguez, and captured the crew. President Gerald Ford reacted by sending in the Marines to rescue the crew.

    The Khmer Rouge released the crew, but not before inflicting casualties on the American force. A total of 41 Marines and Airmen died, with 50 wounded. See the links below for more detail on the actual combat operations.

    Casualties:

    U.S.: 41 total dead and missing. 18 Marines and Airmen killed in action/missing in action. 23 Marines killed in a helicopter crash during the operation. 50 wounded.

    Cambodia/Khmer Rouge: 60 killed (estimate)

    (CBS) In a two-part series, CBS News Correspondent Vince Gonzales reports on new information that casts doubt on the declared success of a 25-year-old military mission.At the motel where she works, the graveyard shift can be lonely. But Gail Hargrove has had 25 years of practice being alone.

    On the day of her wedding, she was 18, and her bridegroom was 23.

    Just 33 days later, she said goodbye to her new husband, Cpl. Joseph Hargrove, as he shipped out for the Far East.

    Two months later, in April 1975, the war in Vietnam ended. As Americans fled Saigon, Joseph Hargrove was thousands of miles away on a Marine base in Japan, writing love letters to Gail: “I love thinking of you. There’s nothing I’d rather do. And when this year is up, my love, I’m coming back to you.”

    But he never came back.

    Just two weeks after the humiliating defeat in Vietnam, Cambodia seized an American merchant ship, the S.S. Mayaguez. U.S. intelligence said the crew was taken to the island of Koh Tang.

    Cpl. Hargrove was part of a rescue mission ordered by President Ford. It was hailed as a success.

    At the time, President Gerald Ford announced, “The vessel has been recovered intact, and the entire crew has been rescued.”

    But, according to military documents and films obtained by CBS News and also according to interviews with veterans of the Mayaguez incident, the operation was an intelligence disaster that needlessly cost American lives.

    A Last Love Letter
    Just For You

    The day of the battle, May 15, 1975, was the last day Joseph Hargrove was seen alive. It was also his birthday. His last love letter to Gail, which she received a few days after he disappeared, was postmarked May 15, 1975. It included the following poem.

    I’d walk 1,000 miles.
    I’d swim across the ocean.
    I’d work all day and all night, too.
    These are just a few of the things I’d do just for you.
    I’ll make you as happy as anybody could be.
    I’ll make you a queen because a queen you are to me.
    I’ll do anything you ask.
    I would steal.
    I would lie.
    I’d be blue.
    I’d do anything you ask, darling.
    I would even die…just for you.

    Your loving husband,
    Joseph
    Jim Davis and other Marine officers planned the assault, even though no maps of the island were available. They didn’t even havproper aerial photos. Davis actually went up in a Navy plane and took his own photos, using a camera and film bought at a base PX. But the plane was too high and the fuzzy images were not much help.

    The Marine officers were told to expect 14 to 40 lightly armed pirates on Koh Tang Island. Instead, hundreds of heavily armed Cambodians were waiting.

    Incredibly, intelligence reports prepared two days before the assault accurately estimated as many as 300 heavily armed Cambodian soldiers on the island. But the Marines never saw those reports.

    Just before the assault began, as he was boarding his helicopter, Davis was finally handed spy-plane photos of the island. They showed fortifications and a Cambodian force that was dug in and ready for battle.

    Most of his Marines had never been in combat. Davis, as one of the few combat veterans, knew they were in trouble. He recalls, “Having been in Vietnam, I’ll be honest with you, what went through my head was, ‘Oh, Lord! Here we go again.’”

    Planes circling the island in the days before the attack took anti-aircraft fire and saw 30 to 50 campfires in the jungle below. Again, the information was not passed on.

    And the Mayaguez crew wasn’t even on Koh Tang Island. The men had been released at a different location before the Marines had even landed.

    As the U.S. Air Force helicopters carrying the Marines prepared to land on Koh Tang, the Cambodians opened fire.

    Most of the rescue mission’s helicopters were severely damaged. Three of them were blown out of the sky.

    The final toll: 15 dead, 50 wounded, and three missing, including Joseph Hargrove.

    “A few good men can’t do their job if you don’t give them a few good facts,” says Gail Hargrove.

    “It still wears very heavy on your mind, those that did not make it out, especially the missing. That part was a disaster,” says Davis.

    “It was a bad day,” concludes Gail Hargrove. “A real bad day.”

    The widow and the officer recently met at the funeral of another casualty of the Mayaguez incident. And they discovered they are bound together not only by sorrow but by a fear — fear that the three missing Marines were left behind.

    Alive.

    “I worry about the worst scenario, the fact that they could have survived for days,” says Davis. “They could have been captured.”

  39. Marine Caused Disaster of Operation Eagle Claw

    …Marine pilots, who ended up flying almost all of the helicopters, had little experience in long distance flying over land with night vision goggles. They were not special operations personnel, and had no experience with sand storm conditions. The incompetent US Marine Corp caused the whole mission to fail and disgraced the United States as a result

    Component training was mainly carried out in widely separated locations: Hurlburt Field, Florida for the Air Force; Yuma, Arizona and Twenty-nine Palms, California for the Marines; and Fort Bragg, North Carolina for Delta Force. Rarely did participants see members from other services, and there was no “full up” dress rehearsal. In fact, problems which surfaced during training tended to reappear during the actual mission. However, crewmen seemed satisfied that their individual parts in the operation would work as expected, and they were confident of success.

    The Marine Mission Dissaster

    After five months of planning and preparation, the Eagle Claw participants were deployed for mission execution. Just after seven p.m. on the 24th of April, 1980, the eight helicopters (called “Bluebeard”) departed from the Nimitz, nearly 60 miles off the coast of Iran. They had been preceded by the EC-130 refuelers (“Republic”) and the MC-130s (“Dragon”), carrying Delta Force, from Masirah.

    Less than two hours into the mission, Bluebeard 6 had an indicator light warn of a main rotor blade spar crack. This was often a false reading on RH-53Ds, but the crew landed (followed by Bluebeard 8) and decided to abandon the helicopter after inspecting the rotor blades. The two crews flew on to Desert One in Bluebeard 8. The mission was now down one helicopter.

    Penetrating deep into Iran, the fixed wing contingent ran into a phenomenon called a “haboob” – fine dust particles which obscured vision. A short time later they ran into another haboob which was much more intense than the first one. Kyle attempted to warn the RH-53s, but had no luck with his communications gear. While these presented minor obstacles to the airplanes, they upset the cohesion of the helicopter flight, which had to disperse in order to avoid collision. The helicopter pilots had never even been briefed on the existence of haboob conditions, or their effects on low-flying formations. In the middle of this, Bluebeard 5 had an electrical power problem which convinced the crew to abort back to the Nimitz. Maintaining radio silence, they were unable to alert Kyle or Seiffert that they were pulling out. The mission was now down two helicopters.

    A fuel truck burns
    A bus is stopped and a fuel truck burns after being attacked during Desert One

    The MC-130s and EC-130s arrived at Desert One after midnight without mishap and waited for the helicopters, over an hour past their scheduled arrival time. Delta Force debarked from two of the MC-130s which then, according to plan, departed from the scene. A Ranger team and Delta troopers set up security around the site and immediately had problems. A bus full of Iranian civilians had to be stopped and detained as it was passing through, and a fuel truck (probably run by smugglers) was shot with a 66mm rocket when it refused to stop. In the light of the burning fuel, the raiders could see the driver escape in a pickup truck which was following the tanker.

    Six helicopters out of the original eight made it into Desert One. However, Bluebeard 2’s secondary hydraulic system indicated failure, and Seiffert made the call that it was “no go” for that helicopter. With only five helicopters left, Beckwith was forced to conclude that the mission could not go on, as six had been the agreed minimum needed for the operation. In reality, five may have sufficed, but Beckwith knew that the operation was tight – down to the last button – and he could not afford to risk mission collapse by continuing with only part of the force. A disappointed Kyle radioed Vaught (who was headquartered at Wadi Kena) and Washington recommending mission abort. Astoundingly, within 20 minutes the word had reached President Carter and gotten back down to Kyle to abort the mission.

    As the force prepared to depart, Bluebeard 3 hovered into Republic 4 and started a conflagration which spread to other aircraft and killed eight men. In the confusion, Kyle made sure that all the live personnel were accounted for, released the Iranian civilians, and loaded up the surviving 130s to evacuate the area. Unfortunately some of the helicopters could not be reached for “sanitizing” and their classified material (including names of Iranians working for the Americans) fell into the hands of the revolutionary government.

    After somewhat harrowing takeoffs, the remaining 130s got airborne and returned to Masirah. The agent contacts in Iran went to ground, and the other aircraft and units assigned supporting parts in the mission stood down.
    Destroyed helicopter
    Debris of a destroyed helicopter in Desert One during the failed rescue
    Aftermath

    After the failure of Eagle Claw, another even larger and more ambitious rescue planning effort was started, but it would go nowhere. The Iranian hostages and Desert One would continue to haunt Carter and help to elect his successor, Ronald Reagan.

    Congress took an immediate interest in the flawed operation and both houses opened hearings. These faded rather quickly in favor of the Department of Defense’s Special Operations Review Group, better known as the Holloway Commission. This body examined some 23 issues and provided ten conclusions. While these highlighted some of the more egregious faults, they soft pedaled others. Sadly, the final conclusion is that the Marine Corp caused the Dissaster of Operation Eagle Claw.

    • Your a bull shitter man, once again another post to discredit the Marine Corp…

      Final conclusion, Retired Chief of Naval Operations Admiral James L. Holloway III led the official investigation in 1980 into the causes of the operation’s failure on behalf of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Holloway Report primarily cited deficiencies in mission planning, command and control, and inter-service operability, and provided a catalyst to reorganize the Department of Defense, and the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986

      What is the purpose? Bringing up false facts…

  40. JIM LEHRER: The trial of the Marine aviators involved in the Italian cable car disaster: Phil Ponce begins our coverage.

    gondolaPHIL PONCE: One year ago today, a Marine Corps jet on a low-altitude training mission in Northern Italy clipped an aerial cable at a ski resort in Cavalese, Italy. A gondola filled with skiers plunged about 360 feet to the ground, killing all 20 passengers. The plane was damaged, but the four-member crew returned safely to the U.S air base in Aviano. When officials learned that the plane had cut the cable and caused the accident, all four crew men were grounded. Residents who live nearby had often complained about fast, low-flying military planes. The Marines immediately launched an investigation and sent a team from the United States to figure out what had happened. On March 12th, they released their findings.

    MAJ. GEN. MICHAEL DE LONG, U.S. Marine Corps: The cause of this accident was not the weather or aircraft malfunctions or equipment failure, but the actions of the air crew.

    mapPHIL PONCE: Regulations listed a minimum flight level of 2,000 feet, but the crew claims they were told they could fly as low as 1,000 feet. The cable was about 360 feet off the ground when it was cut. Pilot Captain Richard J. Ashby and navigator Captain Joseph P. Schweitzer face court-martial and possible life sentences if they’re convicted. Both are charged with 20 counts of involuntary manslaughter and 20 counts of negligent homicide. Charges were dropped against two other crew members who were sitting in the back of the plane, away from the control panel, at the time of the accident.

    60 minutes interviewIn an interview last month on the CBS program 60 Minutes, the pilot, Captain Ashby, said, “Mistakes were made and that’s obvious, otherwise, it wouldn’t have happened, but they weren’t all our mistakes” – and “we never intended intentionally ever to fly below 1000 feet. That is the God saken truth.” Ashby insisted that the maps he was given for the training flight did not show the ski resort or the cable line. Jury selection in Ashby’s trial begins tomorrow in Camp LeJeune, North Carolina. The navigator’s trial is scheduled for March.

  41. Disgraceful US Marine Guilty in Teo Peter Death in Romania
    By Joshua, February 8, 2006 12:11 pm

    Marine Staff Sgt. Christopher VanGoethem faced four main charges: negligent homicide, adultery, obstruction of justice and making false official statements. “VanGoethem is facing charges that he committed adultery with an embassy official?s daughter the night of the accident, then obstructed justice and made false statements in an attempt to cover up his involvement with the woman.”

    Marine cleared in death of Romanian gets reprimand

    “…Marine Staff Sgt. Christopher VanGoethem [was] given a letter of reprimand for obstructing justice and making false official statements… he will be allowed to complete his contract, which has a year remaining. But because the two charges he was found guilty of are federal offenses, VanGoethem will not be permitted to re-enlist, effectively ending his 15-year career.”

    Here are the facts of the case, as reported by Stars and Stripes here and here:

    “In the early morning hours of Dec. 4, 2004, VanGoethem was driving an embassy-owned sport utility vehicle that collided with a taxi at an intersection in the capital, killing 50-year-old Romanian rock star Teofil Peter… a 50-year-old veteran producer and bassist for the rock band Compact, died after a collision that occurred in the early morning hours of Dec. 4, 2004.

    In his opening argument, lead prosecutor Marine Capt. Charles Miracle told the board that VanGoethem, the married father of two, ignored three stoplights and broadsided Teofil?s taxi. Then he lied to investigators about his whereabouts the night of the accident, Miracle said. The embassy official?s daughter, Ilse Wentworth, first corroborated VanGoethem?s version of events, but later admitted to Wilson and other embassy officials that the Marine had asked her to lie on his behalf, Wilson said.

    In his own opening statement, VanGoethem?s lead defender, Maj. Phil Stackhouse, told the board that Bucharest traffic is so ?chaotic? and the intersection where the accident occurred so confusingly marked that the Marine guard could not possibly have avoided the collision, even though he was driving under the posted speed limit ?and the taxi was speeding.?

    You can read an account of the traffic patterns in Romania’s intersection here. You can read my initial report here. About Romanian traffic laws, the court brought in “Romanian security officer Stefan Berciu, a senior investigator in the Bucharest embassy, [who] said that traffic in Bucharest is “very congested,” and that despite a lengthy licensing process that includes 30 hours of on-the-road training, many Romanians don’t obey traffic laws. “Do people park on the sidewalk in Bucharest?” lead prosecutor Marine Captain Charles Miracle asked Berciu. “A lot,” Berciu replied.”

    Note, however, that people park on the sidewalk in just about every Eastern European city, and was not an issue in that particular intersection. I have been in that intersection many times, and I know that it can be confusing, especially if you’re not used to driving it.

    What was the main reason why the marine was not charged? This is what caused a Romanian government official to term “bizarre:” The prosecution couldn’t prove that Teo Peter was there.

    Let that sink in for a moment. Teo Peter died in a car accident that night. However, “The chief defender… argued in court that none of the witnesses brought in to testify against VanGoethem actually saw musician Teo Peter at the scene of the fatal traffic accident on December 4, 2004…”

    How is that possible? “Examples of witnesses the prosecution could have presented but did not, Stackhouse contended, include a Romanian police officer who was on the scene of the accident, or the firefighter who helped free Peter’s body from the wreckage, or the ambulance driver, reported Stars and Stripes. “There could be stronger evidence” to show Peter was in the cab, [the judge] said after hearing Stackhouse.”

    Also, “Dr. Salem Abdo, who conducted the autopsy on Peter, told Realitatea TV that the defense had claimed there was no proof that Peter had been killed by the car driven by VanGoethem. “He had very serious injuries from the accident that caused his instantaneous death,” said Abdo.”

    As such, “The prosecutors were unable to counter the arguments of the defense team that Peter was neither riding the taxi, nor died in the subsequent accident.”

    Why didn’t “the taxi driver, the driver of the ambulance taking Peter?s body away from the crash-scene, the firefighter who got him out of the damaged taxi, and the policeman arriving first at the scene” testify?

    “The driver of the car in which Teo Peter met his end, Marian Chiru, says he was never officially subpoenaed in the VanGoethem trial, but he will involve himself in a possible civil lawsuit open by the victim?s family, if he is asked to do so. Asked if his testimony could have changed something in the decision made at the VanGoethem trial, Chiru said he considers himself ?too small? for such a thing. ?I tell you this, I didn?t think I could change anything, because I told to myself: I trusted America…,? Chiru declared… President Traian Basescu declared on Friday he cannot understand that a Romanian did not want to go to the USA as a witness in the VanGoethem trial, also considering this was a lack of communication from the authorities. The head of State explained he couldn?t blame the taxi driver, because he was not aware of how serious the situation was.”

    Was the trial conducted in a fair manner? According to the U.S., yes.

    “A parallel commission supervised the fairness of the trial. The commission was led by the commander of the fourth antiterrorist battalion at Quantico, Van Goethem was a member of. “Such supervision is intended to insure the trial was fair, and that the ruling stays final and unchallenged when such conditions are met,? explained a representative of McCormack & Associates, Attorneys at Law in the state of Virginia, specialized in military law. Sgt Sean Wright said the commission concluded the trial was conducted perfectly.”

    To many Romanians and to the Romanian government, the outcome is “bizarre.” The General Prosecutor of Romania, Ilie Botos, does not comment on the decision taken by the American court , but he is indignant, ?as a jurist and as a person,? with the result of this trial.”

    So bizarre is the result that the Romanian government will financially assist the family of Teo Peter “in order to open a lawsuit with a civil court from the United States.”

    • Why are you doing this? Does it make this article of Army vs Marines any better for you.. Do you think The Army asshole being it is 7 times the size of the USMC doesn’t have its fair share of personnel with major indiscretions, For instance just about all your Generals have been fired for one thing or another.. If we choose to research all of the things individuals do while they are part of a Military Service we could certainly find at least 7 times the indiscretions…..

  42. On 1 May 2004, Iraqi insurgents took to the streets of Fallujah to declare victory over the Marines. “We won,” an Iraqi insurgent told a reporter, explaining they had succeeded by keeping U.S. forces from taking the city.5 Newspaper and televised reports showed Muslim gunmen celebrating their “triumph” with weapons, flags, and victory signs. U.S. authorities explained that a new Iraqi Fallujah Brigade would assume security duties in the city and ultimately accomplish the mission.

  43. Impotent Marines Saved Again by the US Army in Najaf

    NAJAF, Iraq, Aug. 17 2004

    Acting without the approval of the Pentagon or senior Iraqi officials, the Marine officers said in recent interviews, they turned a firefight with Mr. Sadr’s forces on Thursday, Aug. 5, into a eight-day pitched battle, one fought out in deadly skirmishes in an ancient cemetery that brought them within rifle shot of the Imam Ali Mosque, Shiite Islam’s holiest shrine. Eventually, fresh Army units arrived from Baghdad and took over Marine positions near the mosque, but by then the politics of war had taken over and the American force had lost the opportunity to storm Mr. Sadr’s fighters around the mosque.

    Fighting here continues, and what the Marines had hoped would be a quick, decisive action has bogged down into a grinding battle that appears to have strengthened the hand of Mr. Sadr, whose stature rises each time he survives a confrontation with the American military. It may have weakened the credibility of the interim Iraqi government of Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, showing him, many Iraqis say, to be alternately rash and indecisive, as well as ultimately beholden to American overrule on crucial military and political matters.

    As a reconstruction of the battle in Najaf shows, the sequence of events was strikingly reminiscent of the battle of Falluja in April. In both cases, newly arrived Marine units immediately confronted guerrillas in firefights that quickly escalated. And in both cases, the marines failed to achieve its strategic goals, pulling back after the political costs of the confrontation rose. Falluja is now essentially off-limits to American ground troops and has become a haven for Sunni Muslim insurgents and terrorists menacing Baghdad, American commanders say as a result of gross marine incompetence and lack of combat power.

    In the end, the US Army comes to the rescue of the marines in both battles. The USMC should disbanded in my professional opinion.

  44. Subject: End of the Marine Regiment?
    oregon_x_marine 7/16/2003 4:33:45 PM
    In reviewing the order of battle for Gulf War I & II, it has become quite obvious that the traditional Marine Regiment is “too regimented” for modern combined arms warfare. I fear that the legacy and history of Marine units will be seriously diluted or rendered meaningless if changes are not made.

  45. Haditha Murders & Cover-up Committed by US Marines

    The Haditha killings (also called the Haditha incident or the Haditha massacre) refers to the incident where 24 Iraqi men, women and children were killed by US marines on November 19, 2005 in Haditha, a city in the western Iraq province of Al Anbar. At least 15 of those killed were noncombatant civilians, and the 24 were killed by a group of United States Marines. It has been alleged that the killings were retribution for the attack on a convoy of United States Marines with an improvised explosive device that killed Lance Corporal Miguel Terrazas.[1]

    An initial Marine Corps communique reported that 15 civilians were killed by the bomb’s blast and eight insurgents were subsequently killed when the Marines returned fire against those attacking the convoy. However, other evidence uncovered by the media contradicted the Marines’ account.[2] A Time magazine reporter’s questions prompted the U.S. military to open an investigation into the incident. The investigation claimed it found evidence that “supports accusations that U.S. Marines deliberately shot civilians, including unarmed women and children”, according to an anonymous Pentagon official.[3] On December 21, 2006, eight Marines from 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines were charged in connection with the incident.[4][5] As of June, 2008, charges against seven of the eight Marines had been dropped.[6]

    In the course of the Article 32 hearings, conflicting testimony has been presented, some of it rebutting the media-cited case made by accusers and prosecutors of the Marines. The investigating officer has told the prosecution so far, “The account you want me to believe does not support unpremeditated murder.” He conceded that the central issue was who is to be believed and that he was disinclined to recommend a trial when he thought it was unlikely any Iraqi would agree to come to the U.S. to testify.[7] On 9 August, LtGen James Mattis dropped the charges against Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt,and Lance Cpl Travis Chambers who had been accused of murder, and against Capt. Randy Stone, accused of failing to investigate the incident.[8] On 23 August, the investigating officer recommended charges against Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum be dropped as well[9] but on October 19, his commanding officer decided the charges should be lowered to involuntary manslaughter, reckless endangerment and aggravated assault.[10]

    • Wikipedia is not a citable source – do your homework before you tarnish the names of good marines who fought for your right to speak freely.

      • “Wikipedia is not a citable source – do your homework before you tarnish the names of good marines who fought for your right to speak freely.”

        Wikipedia is not invariably a reliable source. Wikipedia, for example stated that the Mexican cadets who died in the defense of Chapultepec fought US Marines. Soldiers, not Marines, stormed Chapultepec

      • Again to mike: both soldiers and marines stormed Chapultepec. I have never heard a marine claim they stormed Chapultepec castle alone. Then again, most marines probably don’t care.

  46. On November 20, 2005 a Marine press release from Camp Blue Diamond in Ramadi reported the deaths of a U.S. marine and 15 civilians. It said that the death of the civilians was a consequence of a roadside bomb and Iraqi insurgents. The initial U.S. military statement read:

    “A US marine and 15 civilians were killed yesterday from the blast of a roadside bomb in Haditha. Immediately following the bombing, gunmen attacked the convoy with small arms fire. Iraqi army soldiers and Marines returned fire, killing eight insurgents and wounding another.”[2][22]

    Eman Waleed, a nine-year-old child who witnessed the incident, described the U.S. Marines entering their house. She said:

    “I couldn’t see their faces very well – only their guns sticking in to the doorway. I watched them shoot my grandfather, first in the chest and then in the head. Then they killed my granny.”[2]

    The director of the local hospital in Haditha, Dr Wahid, said that the 24 bodies were brought in two American humvees [2] to the hospital around midnight on November 19. While the Marines claim that the victims had been killed by shrapnel from the roadside bomb and that the men “were saboteurs”, Dr Wahid said that there were “no organs slashed by shrapnel in any of the bodies”. He further claimed that it appeared that “the victims were shot in the head and chest from close range.”[2]

    Soon after the killings, the mayor of Haditha, Emad Jawad Hamza, led an angry delegation of elders up to the Haditha Dam Marine base allegedly complaining to the base captain.[2]

    The Marine Corps paid $38,000 to the families of 15 of the dead civilians.[23].
    [edit] Evidence about the killings

    Video shot by the co-founder of the Hammurabi Human Rights Group, Taher Thabet, which instigated Tim McGirk’s original Time magazine article [3], and cellphone photos reportedly taken by one of the Marines[24] the day after the killings have been put forth as evidence that the killings were methodical and without resistance.[2][25] In particular, the video shot by Thabet shows the bodies of the children and women with gunshot wounds, bullet holes in the interior walls of the house, and bloodstains on the floor. Insufficient evidence has come to light to account for insurgents hiding in the houses that first came under attack.

    the only AK-47 that was discovered that day—apparently a household defensive weapon, of the type that is legal and common in Iraq. No one has claimed that the rifle had been fired.–William Langewiesche in Rules of Engagement, Vanity Fair, November 2006

    McGirk’s first article online stated that the Hammurabi Human Rights Group had “coordinated with Human Rights Watch”. A correction was issued when no official links could be confirmed.[2] . Thabet shot video of AQ IED attacks which later were posted on YouTube. The Hammurabi Human Rights Group was founded by Abdul Rahman al-Mashandani, who told Reuters that [4] Hadithi, from Anbar province, was one of six board members, and 10 other administrative staff worked in 14 local offices across Iraq. McGirk, who is based in Jerusalem, declined to testify at the hearings.[26]

  47. Marine Impotence and the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing

    A smoke cloud rises from the rubble of the bombed barracks at Beirut International Airport.
    Location

    Date October 23, 1983
    6:20 a.m.
    Attack type Suicide truck bombs
    Death(s) 241 American servicemen
    Attributed to Hezbollah

    Lessons learned

    Shortly after the bombing, American president Ronald Reagan appointed a military fact-finding committee headed by retired Admiral Robert L.J. Long to investigate the bombing. The commission’s report found senior marine officials responsible for security lapses and blamed the marine chain of command for the disaster. It suggested that there might have been many fewer deaths if the marine guards had carried loaded weapons and a barrier more substantial then the barbed wire the bomber drove over easily.

    Following the bombing and the realization that insurgents could deliver weapons of enormous yield with an ordinary truck or van, the presence of protective barriers (bollards) became common around critical government facilities in the United States and elsewhere, particularly in relation to Western civic targets situated overseas.[33]

    An article in Foreign Policy titled “Lesson Unlearned” argues that the U.S. military intervention in the Lebanese Civil War has been downplayed or ignored in popular history – thus unlearned – and that lessons from Lebanon are “unlearned” as the U.S. militarily intervenes elsewhere in the world[34

  48. As a French military analyst and after decades of professional military research regarding this subject I set forth that:

    All real, impartial and competent military analysts conclude that the USMC should be disbanded due to its incompetence, criminality, impotence and waste of US tax payer resources. A tripartite service structure should be permanently set in place after a complete elimination of the the USMC. The new and much more militarily effective structure would include: smaller and much more UAV/robot oriented Air Force and Navy lead by a slightly larger Army bolstered by vast numbers of advanced UAV/robotic combat forces.

    Unfortunately, efforts to maintain the USMC as a component of the US military have historically and currently been based on emotion and not on military efficacy. As a component of the US government all military force must be efficient, potent and competent in order to protect and serve the American people. These then are the only reason for the existence of any military service as emotion need play no valid role.

    Stunningly, my research has revealed that the USMC’s war crimes and incompetence actually heighten the odds of terrorism in the areas around the world in which they are involved. Shockingly, the marines have given a black eye to NATO and the US people around the world due to the above mentioned reasons.

    • Please provide proof of your credentials and nationality, or you’re basically an idiot on the internet. Furthermore, the USMC has proven itself far superior to the Army in relation to its operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. In fact, I as an Arab would prefer them policing Iraq and Afghanistan rather than the United States Army.

  49. thepopulist.wordpress.com is the best. Thank your for this article. I enjoyed it very much.
    AAA Toronto Payday Loans 1172 Bay St #101, Toronto, ON M5S 2B4 (416) 477-2817

  50. G. Durant,

    You are french. You do not count. Your country got taken over in a month and is considered the most embarrassing event in the history of humankind. We all know what the Germans did to your women and they murdered your men. They were not casualties because that would mean they died or were wounded in combat and lets face it, well you know where I am going with that. You probably have sunburned armpits from surrendering you French idiot.

    • You’re an idiot. The French army at that time was one of the smaller, least prepared and disorganised armies it could have been. Much of the country’s military budget had been spent on the in-hindsight useless maginot line, their tanks were distributed in their infantry companies and unlike the Germans, they weren’t willing to mortage their future to create an all-powerful military. Put the Americans of the time or the Canadians in the same position and they’d have crumbled all the same.

  51. Wow!! This article “Never Faithful” is probably the most dishonest and disrespectful of the Americans who died for country and corps, that I have ever read.I would not even entertain the thought of a response to this if it were not for a sense of honor for my fallen brothers. Look up Abu Ghraib scandal and how many army personel have gone missing in Iraq if you would like to see a lesson in undiscipline. Anbar province went to complete hell when the army controlled it and when the Marines took it over it was the gem of the Iraq war. I would rather be accused of being overly aggresive than being a coward. I was there when army units refused to leave the wire until they had Marine escorts. I was there when we had to pick up extra missions because the army refused to do the job. I was shot at more by undisciplined army units than I was insurgents. And at the end of the day it doesnt really matter because even the army dogs are serving this country in ways you will never understand and dont deserve to. You owe your freedom to Marines and every person in the military, and have done this country a disservice by writing this article and also owe all of us vets an apology!

    • This country owes more to the Army than it does to the Marines.

      The Army won the critical battles of the Revolution whic enebled this country to come into existence, Trenton, Princeton, Saratoga. It was the victory at Saratoga which convinced the French to ally with the Americans. It was this alliance which resulted in the victory at Yorktown.

    • This country definitely does not owe its freedom to the Marines. Over the 235 years of this country’s existence, the US Army, sometimes with the assistance of the Marines, fought the critical battles which have kept the country intact, especially during the early years of this country’s history.

      I say again, the Marine Corps was not a significant part of the Military unyil Wrld WarII. In World War II, Soldiers were the troops who foughtGermany, the more dangerous enemy.

  52. I like how you provide no links or proof of whatever you say. Really. Especially when reading some of your other works and it turns out you belief in a Zionist conspiracy surrounding 9/11, and that Mossad planned it.

  53. As a former Marine and someone who graduated from Penn State with a degree in history, I can honestly say this is the most riled up piece of crap journalism I have ever read. None of this is true. Everything written is pure speculation and opinion. This article spits on the graves of many fallen Marines due to its underlying hatred tone. This individual should be ashamed and I would love to see him say these things to a Marines face. The pure uneducated hear say of this thing still dumbfounds me, and ad for the Frenchman bashing the Corps, you need to get a life. You’re French, you sit in your country and bash everyone in the world without lifting a finger to make it a better place.

    And as for the Army guys who say the Marines get nothing but good press, its because we fail to let our battle history (the REAL history) be forgotten. The Army has just as much publicity with movies like Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers, etc. So that finger needs to be pointed at yourselves also. That being said, if this article had been written about the Army I would still feel the same way. No branch deserves to get lambasted by lies and opinions from some shithead who never stood a post.

    • I say again, much of Marine push as their battle history is not history. It is Mrines falsely claiming credit for Army accomplishments.

    • Why have Marines spit on the graves of fallen soldiers and taken credit for their accomplishments?

    • “And as for the Army guys who say the Marines get nothing but good press, its because we fail to let our battle history (the REAL history) be forgotten.”

      Much of what is claimed as “REAL” Marine history is either fabricated history or Army History. Let’s go over the list again:

      Marines, contrary to Marine claims did not fight in the Battle of Trenton.

      Marines did not, via the raid on Nassau, provide the munitions needed by the Continental Army.

      Marines did not play any critical role in American Naval Victories in the War of 1812. A Marine sniper did kill Captain Henry Lambert, Captain of HMS Java in the Constitution-Java battle. That did not happen until the engagement had decisively turn in favor of Constitution.

      Marines did not hold back the British at Bladensburg. Sailors did.

      Marines did not capture the Castle of Chapultepec in the Mexican War.

      Soldiers played a bigger role in the Defense of the Marne River in World War I than did Marines.

      Soldiers, not Marines, defended Bataan in World War II.

      Soldiers played a much more crucial role in winning the Pacific War than the Marines did either at the Halls of Montezuma or at the Shores of Tripoli.

      More Soldiers than Marines fought and died taking Okinawa.

      Marines had a miniscule role in defeating Germany, the more dangerous enemy in World War II.

    • I hope you didn’t have to pay for that Penn St education, because your a feeling moron.

      Of course everything on here isn’t true, but very much of it is, and that’s exactly your problem. You are just awed like a little immature adolescent by the marine corps’ portrayal of themselves, and entirely incapable of accepting the facts that that portrayed may not be as accurate as your drill instructor led you to believe, and that the marine corps just isn’t all that. Until you mature a bit more, broaden your horizons, and perhaps earn an advanced degree at an actual accredited college, you’re just going to remain hopelessly blind to reality.

      And hey tell us the truth, parris Island was very much like Penn State’s football program, wasn’t it???

  54. I am Raj Roy, son of an officer in Indian Army.. Being so far away, i truly admired you guys (both Marines and Army as you both have played great roles for your country).. ofcourse first comes my Motherland India, but i really had that respect for you both.., You guys have played different imp roles in different places.. BUT, the respect seems to be a little lost now.. You guys are fighting against each other? Its like two sons of a same mother trying to prove to mother who is better rather than serving her! SHAME ON YOU BOTH!

  55. The Marine monument isn’t at the village of Belleau, it is at the battlefield within sight of the trenches.

  56. What a ridiculous argument! God bless service personnel from all branches who have served and continue to serve our country with distinction. And, may those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom rest in peace. There is glory and honor enough to go around….

    As a former U.S. Army soldier with two honorable discharges (one during the Cold War and one added much later during the War on Terror) it occurs to me that today’s military leaders consider the virtues of war fighting capabilites regardless of branch. The front line warriors (of ALL branches) understand and appreciate this. Despite overlapping capabilities, the Marines excel over the Army in many aspects of warfighting while the Army excels over the Marines in still others. Both branches draw from the same pool of American young people.

    As an example (and on a personal note), my son is proudly serving our country in the U.S. Army as a combat engineer and will soon be deploying to Afghanistan in support of the U.S. Marines fighting our enemies in Helmand Province. He is proud to serve with his brother Marines and I bet for their part, they’re more than glad to have the heavy lifting and enhanced mobility capabilities that the Army Engineers provide. The warfighting qualities and capabilities of our COMBINED military will surely lead us to victory on the battlefield. Let us hope and pray that our politicians do not let them and us down!

  57. Great read, and I agree w/ all of it.

  58. this isnt an essay on the rivalry between services. this is an unmitigated attack on the corps calling for its dissolution. and its a bunch of horseshit to boot.

    • I say a lot of what is published in this forum is how the Marines have distorted history

  59. The time has come to rethink our force structure.

    Why do Marines have Navy doctors, Navy medics, and Navy chaplains, but they still have a Marine JAG? That doesn’t make sense.

    Either all the professional and medical personnel are Marines or none of them should be.

    Is there some logical reason for this current arrangement between the Navy and the USMC? By that I mean one that is more pragmatic than traditional.

    I would appreciate a well thought out and candid response from any of you Marine veterans out there.

    Personally, I think it would be better to simply re-classify them. Instead of considering the Marines as a separate branch on the same par as the Army or Air Force, it should be considered a Corps of the Navy since “Corps” is part of its name and it is a part of the Department of the Navy.

    But then again, I also think the Air Force should have stayed a part of the Army as the Air Corps.

    But seriously, the whole branch division thing is really administrative since operationally the military is divided along the various “commands” like Northcom, Centcom, etc.

    The Canadians merged all of their military forces into one giant administrative whole, but they have three “environments” (army, navy, air force). But collectively they are the “Canadian Forces.” What if we modeled ourselves more like that? It seems more streamlined and unified. They even have their own unified basic training base in Quebec (Yes, that’s the French speaking part of Canada).

    The jobs that are pretty much the same across the board for all branches like military police and medics they refer to as “the purple trades.” It is not uncommon to CF medics with both army and navy assignments in their service history.

    Of course, in our situation we have too much tradition and history to ever come close to such a thing, although I think we should not be so dismissive of it.

    If we did this, Marines could still be Marines. After basic training, you could apply to a hypothetical Marine Corps Indoctrination Phase course (similar in concept to what the Army Rangers already have). Such a course would take a basic Soldier, Sailor, or Airman and turn him into a Marine. And then upon completion and graduation that Marine would have as his first post the MOS of basic rifleman in a MEU company for at least one evolution and one sea deployment followed afterward by MOS training in some other Marine MOS and another MEU evolution and sea deployment in that particular new MOS. As a result, every Marine would have actual rifleman deployment experience and sea service experience as well. How many Marines actually get to go to sea now? If Marines are not “marine” in nature then it gives more fuel to the argument that they are indeed redundant.

    So…in conclusion:

    1) Be a branch or a corps, but not both;

    2) Merge the services together more along the Canadian model for administrative uniformity, or at least create the same “jointness” at the administrative level that you already have at the operational level as seen with the various “commands;”

    3) Marines should be “maritime” as implied by their name. They should all be riflemen, not just in training but in actual deployment experience. Therefore, every Marine should serve as a basic rifleman with an at sea expeditionary unit before doing anything else in his Marine career.

    End.

  60. …A roadside bomb struck a Humvee traveling in the vicinity, killing one of the marines on board, and sometime later 24 Iraqi civilians were gunned down, many in their homes by US marines. The victims included women, children and grandparents…

    –Rep Jack Murtha–Former US marine

  61. US marines placed 90 camera men on Iwo Jima in order capture propaganda photos. Instead of propaganda they should have used the extra manpower to help stave off the bloodbath they created for themselves.

    The US army in the Pacific, by contast, were far more effective and had far few per capita casualties due to far superior combat tactics compared with marines. One must note that even Chesty Puller (although touted by the marines as their most respected commander) was nearly sent to prison for the wanton and incompetent slaughter to which he subjected his men.

  62. The Haditha incident occurred on November 19, 2005, and since then there have been differing accounts of exactly what took place.

    In November 2005 Murtha announced that a military investigation into the Haditha killings had concluded that U.S. Marines had intentionally killed innocent civilians.[39] Referring to the first report about Haditha[40] in Time magazine, Murtha said:[41]

    “It’s much worse than reported in Time magazine. There was no fire fight. There was no IED that killed these innocent people. Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood. And that’s what the report is going to tell.”

  63. ©2005-2007 QuikManeuvers. All Rights Reserved.
    I Corp US Marines in Vietnam & Major Battles Vietnam War
    Disgraced: Defeat of the Marine Corps in Vietnam

    Incompetent Generals of the 3rd Marine Amphibious Force
    © 2003
    302 pages; 19 chapters and 9 appendixes
    The US Marine Corps has always been a respected institution. During the Vietnam War,
    its personnel were always willing to fight for America. However, during the Vietnam War
    the US Marine Corps came under the control of some especially incompetent generals.
    As a result, the US Marine Corps was constantly outmaneuvered by the North
    Vietnamese Army, and defeat of the Marine Corps in Vietnam occurred. That failure
    of Marine Corps leadership was a major factor in the defeat of US Military Forces in the
    Second Indochina War. For the first time, Disgraced: Defeat of the Marine Corps in
    Vietnam, as the first part of a two-volume set, fearlessly describes why and how it all
    happened. Disgraced: Defeat of the Marine Corps in Vietnam provides impeccable
    evidence of the Marine debacle in Nam. From the Battle of Khe Sahn to other major
    Vietnam War battles, the US Marines were on the defensive and lost the initiative. The
    mistakes of Marine Corps leadership, training, operations and defensive orientation in
    Vietnam are laid bare in Disgraced: Defeat of the Marine Corps in Vietnam. The huge
    Marine Corps divisions stationed in I Corps were “trench divisions” forever on the
    defensive, more interested in pacification than fighting NVA main force units. In many major
    Vietnam War battles, failure stalked the US marines during the Vietnam War. It was
    not a failure of courage but one of leadership. Disgraced: Defeat of the Marine Corps
    in Vietnam catalogues the monumental waste of human life and resources that resulted
    from the wrong-headed policies and methods of the Third Marine Amphibious Force
    leadership in I Corps, South Vietnam (1965-1971). The US marines in Vietnam War never
    controlled I Corps, from 1965-72.
    Also see volume two of this set: Dishonored: Marine Corps on the Ropes
    Review Table of Contents
    “Marine units and their officers have traditionally and mistakenly thought that they were an elite, but they were not
    an elite in Vietnam. Neither by superior combat skill, training, doctrine, organization or leadership were the US
    marines in Vietnam marked by anything more than a strictly plebian record and very low marks in combat unit
    innovation, aggressiveness, and maneuverability. “…Something always went wrong somewhere, somehow. It was
    always something vague, unexplainable, tasting of bad fate, and the results were always brought down to their most
    basic element–the dead marine. The belief that one marine was better than ten Slopes (Vietnamese) saw marine
    squads fed in against known NVA platoons, platoons against companies, and on and on, until whole battalions
    found themselves pinned down and cut off…the Corps came to be called by many the finest instrument ever devised
    for the killing of young Americans. There were always plenty of stories…entire squads wiped out…companies taking
    75% casualties, Marines ambushing marines, artillery and air strikes called in on our own positions…””

  64. Why is it that the US army had 12-15 month deployments in Iraq while the marines only had 7 month deployments. Why is it that marines had 1 year break from ANY combat duties in Iraq but army had to carry their weight? Answer: The US army is a far more potent and important fighting force both today and historically. The US army is indispensable and the marine are not.

    From the time of the American Revolution when US army created the very United States with George Washington at its helm to the present this truth stands without dispute. In a relative sense the marines barely exist. The fact is the marines are merely a tertiary force and always have been. Without the existence of their rabid propaganda machine and incessant chest-puffed arrogance the marines would not exist. Reality would show us that the American army, navy and and air force would be much more effective without the operational drag levied on them.

    In deed, the marines’ very hymn tells the truth of their own insignificance. That is to say that the “Halls of Motezuma and the shores of Tripoli were never the linchpin of American nationhood. Oddly, the marine propaganda demons have turned an in significant song and corps into a leviathan by shear weight of artful propaganda repeated through the decades. Sadly, the most powerful force in the corps is its propaganda machine and NOT its military force.

    In the interest of military efficacy and fiscal responsibility for the US tax payer the US marines should immediately be disbanded.

    The following is letter issued by the marines admitting they were handed a stable and successful AO
    by the rotating army unit. Recent history tells us what an incompetent mess the marines made of the situation. Back in January of 2004, as the First Marine Division was readying for deployment to Operation Iraqi Freedom II, then-Division Commander MajGen J. N. Mattis delivered the following letter to his Marines:

    Letter to All Hands,

    We are going back in to the brawl. We will be relieving the magnificent soldiers fighting under the 82nd Airborne Division, whose hard won successes in the Sunni Triangle have opened opportunities for us to exploit.

    For the last year, the 82nd Airborne has been operating against the heart of the enemy’s resistance. It’s appropriate that we relieve them: When it’s time to move a piano, Marines don’t pick up the piano bench – we move the piano. So this is the right place for Marines in this fight, where we can carry on the legacy of Chesty Puller in the Banana Wars in the same sort of complex environment that he knew in his early years. Shoulder to shoulder with our comrades in the Army, Coalition Forces and maturing Iraqi Security Forces, we are going to destroy the enemy with precise firepower while diminishing the conditions that create diversarial relationships between us and the Iraqi people.

    This is going to be hard, dangerous work. It is going to require patient, persistent presence. Using our individual initiative, courage, moral judgment and battle skills, we will build on the 82nd Airborne’s victories…

  65. I am in the US Army and I believe that the Marine Corps is much more effective than the Army’s. They seem to care more about what they are doing. I wished I would have gone into the Marine infantry over the Army’s. If someone were to take a platoon of Marines and put them up against a platoon of the Army’s the Marines would Destroy us. I should have become a Marine.

    • B.S.! Read the above and get educated NOT brain washed by moronic marine propaganda. The USMC is a disgrace and danger to NATO.

  66. Thank you Mac for your honest insight of the false propaganda that is the USMC! Your comment is fully enclosed below:

    On April 22, 2008 at 7:10 pm Semper Fi Mac Said:

    I am a military historian by profession and there is no doubt that for years the Marine Corps has done the best job of any of the Services in using our public relations folks to magnify our role in the eye of the American Public. The Marine Corps policy is to emphasize image enhancing “heritage” at the expense of actual “history.” With regard to “official” history, if we write anything that is even the slightest bit negative, it is edited before publication. In the words of the self-appointed father of Marine Corps history, BGen Simmons, the best way to ensure the continued future of the Corps is for “Marine Corps history to only be written by Marines.” Check and see who the authors are for most USMC history titles since WWII; 99% of them are written by retired or reserve Marines and support the USMC agenda. I was assigned at Quantico when the Army rolled into Baghdad while the Marines were bogged down, and the generals were screaming in frustration and anger until Colonel was relieved. Our “official” writings on the war don’t get published unless they are first approved by generals like Mattis or Conway. Like it or not, everything in this article is right on the money; if you doubt that, check with the Marine Corps History Division.

  67. gdurant you definitely have extreme bias against the United States Marine Corps. The way you slander the Marine Corps is more than suspect. It’s like we took a sh+t in your cereal one morning and you never forgot. Everything you posted can be argued against; like the posts about crimes committed by US Marines. Every branch of service has those issues. But you know what the interesting part is? The media plays closer attention to when a Marine is involved when compared to the other services. The reason being, the people of the United States expect better from her Marines than anyone else.

    I guess it all comes down to doctrine. Understand that and you will begin to understand how a branch operates. Some people are just ignorant. But ignorance is a choice. I do understand that the United States Marine Corps is far from being perfect. But we are definitely not some third-rate chumps. And I still believe our history of kicking a** and taking names is second to none and not to be forsaken.

    Something else to bring up. The Marine Corps expects more from its’ Marines. USMC doctrine pushes leadership on its’ lower ranking individuals that would normally be reserved for those of higher ranks in the other services. This doesn’t always work out right away, (some people learn slower than others while others can’t be helped at all and should be left in an office pushing papers) but when it does, the results are amazing and when it doesn’t work out we just replace the individual with somebody more competent even if he does have less rank. Dig up more and you will find that there are other higher standards to be adhered to in the United States Marine Corps. And it just keeps getting tougher. Getting the chance to be one of us is an example. Other branches will accept individuals the Marine Corps will not take. Weight, tattoos(the nature and where they are placed), whether or not you have a high school diploma or GED + a few college courses, previous crimes committed and the nature of those crimes, etc. I had a few buddies back home who wanted to join the Marine Corps but didn’t get accepted because one or more of the issues stated above. But one got accepted into the US Army and another one got accepted into the US Navy.

    I’m done rambling now but this ignorant individual with his personal agenda to discredit the United States Marine Corps for a reason not known, had ignited the fury of one pissed off United States Marine. I hope to see you one day on an opposing sides’ force so I can put two shots in your thoracic cavity and one in your head. Thank you and have a outstanding Marine Corps day!

    • I have alerted Interpol about you you evil little scum bag. Their office is not far from me in Lyon and I know several of the agents. Your terrorist threat is an international crime. This site has provided law enforcement with your IP address. Your evil and criminality will not be tolerated! Have a nice day little USMC scum bag as the US FBI along with local law enforcement will arrest you when you least expect it.

      It appears the US marines are lacking in real self-confidence. After doing more than 35 years of research in the US (and many other countries as well). I am forced to conclude the USMC is not only completely incompetent as an organization but in some ways evil (as evidenced above). It is an institution that cares not for America or NATO but only for its shallow aggrandizement. Although I am French I have a son who was born in the US and is currently a US naval officer. He went to the US Naval Academy. He confirms ALL my accounts. He thinks the US army soldiers are the real heroes and always have been so. The USMC is nothing when compared with the army according to him.

      Tragically, the marines are most frightened of the truth. They are most nervous about their true feeble, incompetent and criminal history being revealed. These revelations are absolutely terrifying to them. As witnessed by USMC propagandist comments above the USMC can say NOTHING factual in their own defense; they merely default to evil emotional attacks of the lowest order and of NO substance. As a foreigner, I can attest that the US is the best country in the history of the world. It is only the USMC that is the only black mark against your country. Cut the USMC cancer out as soon as you can.

      • “I have alerted Interpol about you you evil little scum bag. Their office is not far from me in Lyon and I know several of the agents. Your terrorist threat is an international crime. ”

        Hilarious.
        And to think this same guy goes on to talk about self-confidence.

        And apparently he is French ?
        I guess that explains oh so much.

      • Nevermind shitting in his cereal, it sounds more like a Marine fucked this guy’s wife in the ass, then came on her face.

    • What! I spent a lot of time in Afghanistan. I was all over that country. We only had a small number of Marines. It was almost entirely Army run effort.
      Oh, and Iraq, The Army (3rd ID) was in Bagdad before any Marines. That being said, Who cares! But those are the facts. End of discussion.
      Also, are you that Marine I kicked the shit out oof? Then later, your NCO. F!@#ing blowharts!

    • You were mildly entertaining until that second last paragraph.
      You’re an actual imbecile. Seriously.
      And they made you sergeant?

  68. Marines seriously grow up its just an article its not a big deal lots of it is true. The Marines are the only ones who really seem to care about this rivalry and need to grow up i never see army guys run there mouths like you do making fun of how our men died the Marines are a great branch and people like you make them seem like shit. Marines are great but are slowly falling because people on this very website. Why do you think making fun of dead soldiers makes you a better branch grow up!

    • So,Max, if I call your momma a fat, stincky, slutbag, it’s OK,,, It’s just a comment?

      The Marines are the only ones who care,,,, because we are the only ones se slandered here.

      It’s easy to be a tough guy,,,, Max,,, when your just posting on the internet… Grow a pair and talk shit to a Marine’s face… PUSSY.

      • Eactly PUSSY QUIT TALKING SHIT ON THE INTERNET MARINE FAGGOT! I beat the fuck out of a faggot Marine like you at the bar last night…what are you gonna do bitch!

  69. I have the greatest respect and appreciation for all four branches of our armed forces. My little brother served two tours of duty in Iraq as a Marine. My (very) older brother was in the Navy during Operation Desert Storm. My father, in a time of rampant draft dodging, volunteered and served as an Army medic in Vietnam. My Grandfather was an airman who was shot down by the Nazis and survived for two years in a POW camp. As for myself I’m just a civilian egghead working for the DOD trying to serve my country in my own small way.

    I think a good idea to increase joint warfare effectiveness would be a special program open to junior officers of all branches who have made a firm commitment to a military career. They would do a small stint with other services and periodic joint warfare war gaming focusing on specific operational contingencies. For instance, is this war going to rely primarily on Airpower like the Gulf War, or Landpower like Iraq and Afghanistan, or a Seapower naval insertion. Once the general parameters have been laid each service would focus on the particular ways it can contribute to the overall operational objective. Once these young men become flag officers they will have had long and fruitful relationships with each other and can quickly respond to a number of possible contingencies efficently and without diffusion of effort or force. That’s not to say that a service should give up its priorites for the convience of another force. For instance, the Air Force should NEVER put more importance on CAS operations than Air Superiority despite Army wishes to the contrary. Though it may choose to undertake those missions when Air Superiority is in doubt all things are secondary to winning and maintaining control of the air.

    War is a team effort and the only thing these petty feuds do is deepen contempt for sister services and ignoring a relevent criticism when it could make things better. The end result is that the operational mission suffers as a consequence.

  70. after reading all of this, im gald i never joined a branch of any of the services. i was, at the time, dumb enough to think that americans fought as americans, but after reading all of this BS, im glad i didnt

    • We’re glad too John, you sound like a Fag.

      • hahahahahahahhaahhaahha, that was funny as hell…

        the clown that wrote this article has slanted it the U.S. Army way. its okay because Marine’s know the history of the Marine Corps and we don’t claim something that is now ours. lets start off with the Army, they represent the respective units. the Marine Represents his honor and commitment to the Corps. two different types of loyalty. you never see Army Shirts or Jackets, its always 82nd airborne or 101st airborne, Rangers, SF. when they put the uniform on they look like peacocks because of all of the different trinkets they put on the uniforms. im not knocking it, it looks kind of cool. but when a Marine puts his uniform on its all about the eagle globe and anchor. the commitment to the Corps is always within a Marines heart. the Army’s commitment is to his unit. sometimes you even wonder if they are in the Army or if they are in the 101st. or 82nd kind of confusing. now as far as gun fighting goes, those Army guys are tough, they know how to fight, and they should never be ashamed of the history they have amassed. I don’t quite understand the rift here. One turd puts out a slanted article and everyone goes ape shit. the Army doesn’t want their history distorted or taken over by those Marine Brutes, and the Marine’s don’t want the Army talking crap about them slandering the Corps. well I tell ya we have a situation here. If I were in the Army I would want nothing more than a Marine at my 6. if I were a Marine I would want nothing more than a Army Dogg watching my back. so we have come to a crossroads here, a bunch of pissed off Marine’s that feel they have been disrespected by this Army Turd that wrote the article, and Army Doggs that feel the Marine Corps gets way more publicity than they deserve. so what are we to do.

        Well I think everyone needs to take their dicks off the table and put them back in their pants. lets see. the Marine Corps has a totally different mission than the Army, the Marines fight battles and the Army fights the War. the thing that kind of gets me. the Army is soooo into their units why do they not compartmentalize the Corps? they want to talk as if the Corps doesn’t have folks that jump out of planes (we do) see we have the Army thinking so much about us being Marine’s they don’t talk about our boys that do daring missions and have been doing those types of missions since the Carson and Edson Raiders way before Army Special Forces exsisted. we have spec ops too until 2006 they just didn’t belong to USSOCOM. some ass clown on here tried to act like Force Recon and MARSOC doesn’t matter well if you knew your history you would know that Marine Force Recon taught the Navy SEALS Tactics and the instructors were MARINES. You are willing to big up SEALS but want to downplay Force Recon like they are not as capable as a Ranger? that my friend is straight bullshit and anyone that knows anything about Force Recon and what they can do thinks that ass clown is talking out of his rectum.

        Getting back to this pissing match between our Army Brothers in arms and the Marine Corps. we are both built a little different but that does not mean one is better than the other. I work at the VA and I see Vets on a daily basis. Army Doggs are a bit more laid back and smooth, Marines have a little bit more of an aggressive attitude, probably comes from the foundation at the various MCRD’S both fight like hell and win. so why are we on this thread giving this Turd a audience so he can sit behind his pc and laugh as the Army attacks the Corps and the Corps attacks the army. I think we should give the turd that wrote the article a big middle finger and tell him he can take his article and shove it. how about that.

        Semper Fi -

  71. Trash and lies!

  72. ok bro i like how you left out the Marine Corps Legends Vs US Army legends oh wait do they even have legends? i think they have 1 or 2 famous snipers that arent shit compared to Carlos Hatchock the Legendary Marine Corps sniper that had 93 confirmed kills and 300 possible kills one of them being a very important NVA general, another from sniping vietnams best sniper from 600 yards through his sniper scope hitting him in his eye, and lets not forget theabout him killing sumone from 1.4 miles away with a .50 cal machine.Oh yea you also forgot about “Manila” John Basilone who killed atleast ten thousand japs on Guadacanal with a .30 cal Machine and then turned down the offer of becoming an officer and getting a job in the white house because he’d rather be on the front lines fighting with his fellow Marines and ended up getting killed on iwo gima after being the first Marine to run up the beach, knock out an enemy bunker with a grenade and guided a tank through a mud field (sumthin like that cant remember clearly)and earned a Medal Of Honor and a Navy Cross. Also i believe black people were treated best in the Corps because black people in the navy werent allowed to fire weapons, and black people in the army were sent straight to the front lines to get killed during the vietnam war. and the reason why Marines always brag about joining the Corps is because they joined because they love it unlike you army assholes who join for the benefits and money because you guys are too damn stupid to become successful on your own and when you go to war you get scared and hide and watch in horror as your men get killed. in my opinion you cant even call a non spec op Marine a grunt because if you watch there training closely you’ll see them them doing some army ranger and Navy SEALs training. Also i told two army vietnam veterans that i want to join the Marine Corps and they were both surprised because of how tough Marines are and how well they do their jobs so you really need to stop all the bullshit and admit that Marines are better troops the soldiers
    OORAH!

  73. I find it funny that half the people talking shit on here…Army VS USMC are more than likely support. You will hardly find a O311 who will talk shit to a 11B and visa versa…the only bitching, comparing, and screaming i see is from POG USMC, and POG US ARMY. Its sad when you think about it chances are the pogs on the forum talking shit haven never sought out and engaged the enemy yet brag about the actions of their grunts….FUCKING POGS

    • Do you mean “F**KING POGUES” ? So what did you say your MOS was?

      • OK,,, one fault of the Marines,,, we don’t care about proper spelling,,, as long as we’re kicking ass! Now, shut up and say Thank You,,, for the freedoms you enjoy,,, and WE provide,,, bitch!!! And yes, I’m 0311,,, So,,, bring it,,, bitch.

  74. Very interesting read. Both the navy SEALs and Marines are known for their over-glamour in the media.

  75. READ ALL OF THE ABOVE INCLUDING THE ARMY GUY WHO WISHED HE BECAME A MARINE. MOST OF IT IS A TESTAMENT TO THE USMC

    • The way the Marine Corps tries to claim credit for the accomplishments of the US Army is a true testament to the Marine Corps.

  76. The guy that wrote this is totally misleading. He sounds prior army too. Carry on.

    • Your correct, he sounds prior Army and current faggot.

      • Dude your grammar does suck ass. You’re a Marine so you don’t care right? Shoot. I bet your EDUCATED CO’s don’t care either. Just care that you’re a grunt. Conventional and EXPENDABLE. Sad isn’t it.

  77. “The myth of the Marine Corps as a second army began in WW I”

    Your idea isn’t far off, but the historicity and facts are.
    The Marine Corps as a decisive fighting force existed prior to WWI, actively engaged in the Caribbean and Pacific.
    At the end of the 19th century, Marines were involved in *many* international disputes all over Asia, Caribbean, and South America.
    You are right that, until WWI, the Marine Corps was never a massive force relying on conscription like the Army. Rather, it remained as a professional small-unit arm under the Navy which resolved numerous issues decisively. It’s no coincidence that the origin of Navy SEALs coincides with the Marine Corps expanding from a mere 2 brigades to 6 divisions during WWII. Since then, SEALs have taken responsibility for the sort of missions performed by the Corps in the 19th century.

    However, the increase in stature of the Marine Corps is not so much due to myth. One only has to study history to see why the Marine Corps has gained it’s earned respect. I can trace this back to the landing at Guantanamo during the Spanish-American War (1900).
    There are two factors to this which play out over many different campaigns in widely varying conditions:
    1. The consistent performance of Marine forces.
    2. The inconsistent performance of Army forces.

    This is to say, that the current situation has as much to do with the Army either failing to accomplish mission objectives or being absurdly inefficient at doing so (see Grenada) as it does with the Marine Corps’ dogged determination to accomplish objectives at almost any cost.
    This is probably best exemplified by the Korean War. MacArthur, his staff, and his favored commanders ignored what everyone else knew was Chinese involvement late in October. Even when they finally admitted the enemy they were fighting were Chinese forces, he greatly underestimated their strength.
    This resulted in the decimation of South Korea’s II Corps, protecting the Army’s right flank. They received little aid from the Army either. Their flank exposed, the US Army hastily withdrew — some would say in a way showing lack of discipline and chaos.
    Meanwhile, the Marine Corps maintained and fought it’s way out of Chosin Reservoir — evacuating the wounded and dead, and not leaving equipment behind. Things the Army largely failed to do. And did so while entirely surrounded, heavily outnumbered, and all on it’s own. The US Army forces on the other side of Korea were of similar strength to their opposition, not including the Korean Divisions and Turkish Brigade they sacrificed. Meanwhile, 1st MarDiv was outnumbered more than 2 to 1.
    Don’t mistake me, however, for bashing the Army here. This debacle was not the soldier on the ground’s fault. It was the fault of Commanders like MacArthur who put politics ahead of performing his duties as a General and to his men. MacArthur promised the American public that our forces would have all of Korea subdued by Christmas. As a result, he pushed unrealistic expectations onto his subordinate commanders which left their units strung out with poorly guarded supply lines, and the most inexperienced units (the Korean divisions) guarding their Eastern flank.
    The CO of 1st MarDiv, General Oliver P Smith, however took a more cautious approach and ensured to advance at a pace that would not compromise his Marines tactically. Marines in Chosin Reservoir verified on their first day that they were fighting Chinese forces and did not underestimate the enemy. He was heavily criticized by the CO of X-Corps (which 1MEF was attached to), Army General Almond, but ultimately Almond could not touch a Marine General (Marine Corps leadership agreed with Smith’s assessment and believed Almond was overly aggressive.) This lead to the creation of Regimental Combat Team 31 (RCT31), more famously known as Task Force Faith, to advance up the East side of the Chosin Reservoir. In this way, MacArthur and his politician-generals hoped to give the Marine Corps less responsibility and let them focus on a smaller area to speed things up. On 27Nov RCT31 was over-ran and divided into 3 isolated units. Lt Col Faith, however, was ordered by Almond to continue advancing. Of about 2500 American soldiers in RCT31, 1000 died before reaching Marines desperately holding Hagaru-ri and only 300 were able to assist 1st MarDiv on fighting their way to safety.
    All because the Army Leadership put politics ahead of their actual job.
    There is little to no difference between the men and women who serve in the Army vs. the Marine Corps. The difference lies primarily in leadership and their priorities. On a second level in methodology, though this tends to reflect the point on priorities.

    I would also like to challenge your premise that “the United States has two armies”.
    This is a gross misunderstanding of what the Marine Corps does; and how the Marine Corps does it.
    The Marine Corps is designed to operate as independently as possible in “small”-unit environments (1 Division or less). The Army is designed to operate in Corps of multiple Divisions. While the Marine Corps today is organized into 3 mega units, each including 1 Aircraft Wing and 1 Infantry Division, it is not designed specifically to fight as an entire MEF. Those MEFs are predominantly holding units from which smaller contingents are taken out of, forming MEBs (Regiment + Group) or MEUs (Battalion + Squadron) that unify Infantry, Fire Support, Air support, Air logistics, and Logistics under 1 unified command with a singular Colonel at the top.
    When the Army wants to call for fixed-wing air support, they need to go through a General and interface with the Air Force. The Marine Corps has a different philosophy, and believes Air and Ground forces should be in bed together and interface at a much lower and organic level.
    This isn’t to say that the Army way is wrong. Both forces have their strengths and weaknesses. For a high-intensity small-unit conflict, the Marine Corps is preferred. Even for an immediate response to natural disasters, the Marine Corps is better organized to handle those.
    But for long conflicts that require staying power and beef, the Army is far better equipped and suited to the task. And while the Marine Corps may be better at immediate response in natural disasters, long-term aid is better suited to the Army.
    The Marine Corps has not changed so much since before WWI like you wish to say either. It has become larger, but again, this goes back to the 2 points I made above regarding the consistency of the Marine Corps versus the consistency of the Army.
    The Marine Corps has always been a professional small-tactics high-intensity lightweight maneuver warfare organization. And I stress professional. Through most of it’s history the Army has relied heavily on conscription and enticing citizens who are not necessarily inclined to warfare. People who join the Marine Corps, on the other hand, generally do so with the intent of being in a conflict. Various benefits are generally seen as perks of the job, not reasons to join.

    • Regarding the31st RCT, their stand on the East side of Chosin was a factor in 1st mardiv being able to break out. You have confirmed that more soldiers than maeines died at Chosin. OP Smith’s initial estimate was 400 marine kia.

      Again, OP Smith and the leave no one behind marines sacrificed the soldiers to save the marines. They then accused those soldiers of cowardice.

      • Mullah “Mike”, you and your “French” friend Durant should try reading Army historian BGen. S.L.A. Marshall’s book, “The River and the Gauntlet: Defeat of the Eigth Army by the Chinese Communist Forces November, 1950 in the Battle of the Chongchon River, Korea”. I get the impression two of you have a vested interest in the dissolution of the Corps. Are you afraid the Marines will finish the job of exterminating your jihadist friends (with a the help of our brothers in arms in the other branches of the US military and our true allies)?

    • To June 8, 2011 at 12:41 am reade who said:
      “Mullah “Mike”, you and your “French” friend Durant should try reading Army historian BGen. S.L.A. Marshall’s book, “The River and the Gauntlet: Defeat of the Eigth Army by the Chinese Communist Forces November, 1950 in the Battle of the Chongchon River, Korea”. ”

      Read the more current history, “East o Chosin” by Roy E. Appleman.

      Read what is said about the 31st RCT in ”
      The Gentle Warrior: General Oliver Prince Smith, USMC” by Clifton La Bree and Martin J. Sexton

      Finally read the casualty figures for the Chosin breakout. More soldiers than Marines died in the fighting that enabled 1st Marine Division to break out.

  78. For all who don’t believe this article, check out this video and you marines are saying we Soldiers are complaining? I don’t think so and this meathead just proves it

  79. I have spoken to several truck drivers who were in Iraq as independent contractors. They were never in the military and they said the difference in the Army/Marines were great. I recently saw a documentary film on the role of female Army soldiers in Iraq. There role as searching female Iraqis. When there army units finished there tour and the Marines took over they stayed on. They said the marines were much more “Attack” oriented. This was from Army soldiers. So I respect and admire anyone fighting for the USA. I think your article is simple jealousy. There must be a reason you are not fond of Marines. Not sure why. Marines have proven themselves with many witnessess many times.

    • It was the Marines being ore attack oriented that resulted in the bloody fiasco of Peleliu.

  80. This is the writer who wrote this article. Research his facts from various sources it will prove to be false. His journey to find himself is a youthful one that many of us take. As you get older and wiser you realize the ego-mania of the journey. It doesn’t make it wasteful just gives all our insights and discoveries a little perspevtive. i am sure his words are biased and he has this point of view for a reason. Maybe he got beat up in the navy by Marines. I love the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Army and have friends that served in both the Marines and the Army and they all say the same thing. “The Army has great schools but the Marines are tougher and more of a brotherhood”. That is what they said. Oh and here is one piece of fact of Iwo Jima: Of the 22,785 Japanese soldiers entrenched on the island, 21,570 died either from fighting or by ritual suicide. Only 34 were captured during the battle. The Allies suffered 6,821 deaths out of 26,038 total casualties. The number of CASUALTIES on the American side was greater then the number DEATHS on the Japannese side.
    As early as April 1945 retired Chief of Naval Operations, William V. Pratt, asked in Newsweek magazine about the expenditure of manpower to acquire a small, God-forsaken island, useless to the Army as a staging base and useless to the Navy as a fleet base … [one] wonders if the same sort of airbase could not have been reached by acquiring other strategic localities at lower cost.

    Pratt did not know, or else could not disclose, the need to take Iwo Jima for delivery of the atomic bomb. Iwo Jima was designated a crucial emergency landing point for the B-29s carrying the atomic bombs destined for Japan in late 1944, at least four months after the European D-Day (6 June 1944); The 509th Composite Group practiced mock emergency landings on Iwo Jima at its Utah base opened in December 1944.[25] B-29s were not entirely reliable, and engine failure was common. Due to the scarcity of materials and engineering complexity, replacement of the bombs could take many months or even years. Thus planners feared that the loss of the bombs into the Pacific would have delayed the end of the war and potentially forced a full scale invasion of the Japanese mainland. Due to the extreme secrecy surrounding the Manhattan Project, the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) could not disclose or even hint at the critical need to take Iwo Jima.[26]

  81. THIS IS THE WRITER OF THIS ARTICLE: A. Scott Piraino

    I am a writer living in bucolic Spokane, Washington.
    It wasn’t always this way, back in the day I was a restless wanderer. I left home and traveled to straight to Europe, came back and hitchhiked across America. I joined a carnival, then the Navy.
    After the Navy it was time for me to become an upstanding, educated citizen. I went to college, three of them to be exact, and I still don’t have a degree. Maybe I don’t have a Phd from and ivy tower university, but I do have street cred.
    I write because I am pissed off. I am incensed by the people who prevent us from becoming what we could be. Our country, and our world are in real trouble.

    We who know the truth, and seek the truth, can set each other free

    • No,,, The Marines set (keep) you people free. Shut the fuck up,,, and be greatful.

      • The Army has done much more to get us free in the first place and then to keep us free.

        Is any Marine aware that the Continental Marines were disbanded in 1783. The US Marines were organized in 1798. There is a 15 year period in this country’s history in which no Marine Corps existed to keep any American free.

  82. CASUALTIES AND DEATHS ARE VERY DIFFERENT

  83. “If I were King, I’d close Army entry training and send all future Infantry grunts to the Marines. The Corps still produces trained and disciplined soldiers who still know how to fight and make it on a killing field.” –Col David Hackworth, USA Army (Ret

  84. This article is very accurate.
    There is alot more shit that is not mentioned on here as well.
    The usmc is nothing but propaganda.

    • Bob,

      I just got finished propogandizing your wife’s ass.

      Thanks, it was great.

  85. Yes, USMC is all propaganda. They’ve never proved themse.. oh wait.

  86. there are things about the Corp the Army can learn from, but the problem i have is there culture of brainwashing, Narcissism, bad mouthing the Army to make themselves feel better and not dealing with facts and history is troublesome, in other word most Marine are so brainwash they lived in a fantasy world. A lot Marine and civilian thinks the Marine did most of the fighting and dying in the Current wars, which is not true, just Google death rate among the difference branches. Whether be a Marine or not, nobody like a big mouth, constantly talking about themselves geeze. Please take that first to fight bs out, i don’t remember when the Marine were first to fight, ever. Another example of PR by Marine is the Pacific War, most people believed Marine are only one that fought the Jap, again bs(there was about 20 Army Div. to 6 Marine Div in the Pacific).Again google battle of Okinawa, there were 4 Army division to 2 Marine Div. but yet hardly anyone mention the Army in that battles wonder why. The Army is definitely taken for granted.

    • Reality, your a fucking idiot. The US Marines are the First to Fight, because they are the only US military force the US President can send to any conflict without an act of Congress.

      And, just because there were more Army doggies in Oki, doesn’t mean shit (if even true). If there were more girls at a bar when there was a fight, it does not mean the girls won the fight for the men who fought it.

      The Marines do the fighting and destroy the enemies. They send in the Army, afterwards, to police and rebuild.

      • i believe you are idiot sir, your typical brainwash, delusional Marine. Give me historical facts and evidences where the fuck you were first to fight and not Marine mumbo jumbo?

      • In most of America’s wars, the Marine Corps has not been the first armed force to engage the enemy.

        It was not the first armed force to fight in defense of this country.

  87. I’m bored with the whole concept of this article as long as everyone is fighting and contributing that is all that matters in my mind. No matter how you look at it’s a little irrisponsible of us as the general public to expect 100% perfection or political correctness out of any given branch or service when there is honestly a metric shit ton of red tape keeping everyone in check all the time designed to immediately recognize and potentially exploit any given descision made. While people look into cutting costs and saving the nation a little money look elsewhere the military as a general whole already has their nuts in a vice, don’t spend time trying to get someone to cut these organizations of tradition and honor with a rusty bayonette too.

  88. It is funny how the internet has made tough guys out of everyone. I would love for any of you pussies to talk this kind of shit about the Marine Corps to the face of a Marine. You’d get your doggy ass kicked.

    By the way, I grew up wanting to be an Army Ranger, then I learned a simple fact. If I was prior Army (Navy or Air Force) and wanted to join the Marines, I would have to go through Marine Boot Camp; however, once I completed Marine Boot Camp, if I wanted to join the Army (Navy or Air Force), I would bypass Boot Camp and go straight to work.

    Obviously the brass knows who is the finest fighting force.

    In the Army, shock troops are a small minority supported by a vast group of artisans, laborers, clerks and organizers. In the Marines there are practically nothing but shock troops.
    —Combat correspondent John Lardner, 6 March 1945 report on Iwo Jima in New Yorker magazine, 17 March 1945

    Marines know how to use their bayonets. Army bayonets may as well be paper-weights.
    Navy Times; November 1994

    Why in hell can’t the Army do it if the Marines can. They are the same kind of men; why can’t they be like Marines.
    Gen. John J. “Black Jack” Pershing, USA; 12 February 1918

    I have just returned from visiting the Marines at the front, and there is not a finer fighting organization in the world!
    General of the Armies Douglas MacArthur; Korea, 21 September 1950

    We have two companies of Marines running rampant all over the northern half of this island, and three Army regiments pinned down in the southwestern corner, doing nothing. What the hell is going on?
    Gen. John W. Vessey Jr., USA, Chairman of the the Joint Chiefs of Staff
    during the assault on Grenada, 1983

    Lying offshore, ready to act, the presence of ships and Marines sometimes means much more than just having air power or ship’s fire, when it comes to deterring a crisis. And the ships and Marines may not have to do anything but lie offshore. It is hard to lie offshore with a C-141 or C-130 full of airborne troops.
    Gen. Colin Powell, U. S. Army
    Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
    During Operation Desert Storm

    You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth- and the amusing thing about it is that they are.
    Father Kevin Keaney
    1st Marine Division Chaplain
    Korean War

    The Marine Corps has just been called by the New York Times, ‘The elite of this country.’ I think it is the elite of the world.
    Admiral William Halsey, U.S. Navy

    I can’t say enough about the two Marine divisions. If I use words like ‘brilliant,’ it would really be an under description of the absolutely superb job that they did in breaching the so-called ‘impenetrable barrier.’ It was a classic- absolutely classic- military breaching of a very very tough minefield, barbed wire, fire trenches-type barrier.
    Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, U. S. Army
    Commander, Operation Desert Storm, February 1991

    I am convinced that there is no smarter, handier, or more adaptable body of troops in the world.
    Prime Minister of Britain, Sir Winston Churchhill on US Marines.

    The deadliest weapon in the world is a Marine and his rifle.
    Gen. John “Black Jack” Pershing, U.S. Army
    Commander of American Forces in World War I

    The American Marines have it [pride], and benefit from it. They are tough, cocky, sure of themselves and their buddies. They can fight and they know it.
    General Mark Clark, U.S. Army

    “The deadliest weapon in the world is a MARINE and his rifle!”
    GEN. PERSHING, US.ARMY

    “The more MARINES I have around the better I like it!”
    GEN. MARK CLARK, U.S. ARMY

    “I want you boys to hurry up and whip these Germans so we can get out to the Pacific to kick the s**t out of the purple-pissing Japanese, before the Godda**ed MARINES get all the credit!”
    Lt General George Patton, US Army 1945

    “People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”
    GEORGE ORWELL, on US Marines

    “I can never again see a UNITED STATES MARINE without experiencing a feeling of reverence.”
    GEN. JOHNSON, U.S. ARMY

    “Teufelhunde! (Devil Dogs)”
    GERMAN SOLDIERS, WW1 at BELLEAU WOOD

    “We have two companies of MARINES running all over this island and thousands of ARMY troops doing nothing!”
    GEN. JOHN VESSEY, CHAIRMAN OF JOINT CHIEFS

    “Panic sweeps my men when they are facing the AMERICAN MARINES.”
    CAPTURED NORTH KOREAN MAJOR

    There are only two kinds of people that understand Marines: Marines and the enemy. Everyone else has a second-hand opinion.
    Gen. William Thornson, U.S. Army

    The safest place in Korea was right behind a platoon of Marines. Lord, how they could fight!
    MGen. Frank E. Lowe, USA; Korea, 26 January 1952

    My only answer as to why the Marines get the toughest jobs is because the average Leatherneck is a much better fighter. He has far more guts, courage, and better officers… These boys out here have a pride in the Marine Corps and will fight to the end no matter what the cost.
    2nd Lt. Richard C. Kennard, Peleliu, World War II

    This was the first time that the Marines of the two nations had fought side by side since the defense of the Peking Legations in 1900. Let it be said that the admiration of all ranks of 41 Commando for their brothers in arms was and is unbounded. They fought like tigers and their morale and esprit de corps is second to none.
    Lt Col. D.B. Drysdale, Commanding 41 Commando, Chosen Reservoir, on the 1st Marine Division Division

    There was always talk of Espirit de Corps, of being gung ho, and that must have been a part of it. Better, tougher training, more marksmanship on the firing range, the instant obedience to orders seared into men in boot camp.
    James Brady, press secretary to President Reagan

    A Ship without Marines is like a garment without buttons.
    Adm. David Dixon Porter, USN in a letter to Colonel Commandant John Harris, USMC, 1863

    Freedom is not free, but the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share.
    Ned Dolan

    The raising of that flag on Suribachi means a Marine Corps for the next five hundred years.
    James Forrestal, Secretary of the Navy; 23 February 1945

    The Marines I have seen around the world have the cleanest bodies, the filthiest minds, the highest morale, and the lowest morals of any group of animals I have ever seen. Thank God for the United States Marine Corps!
    Eleanor Roosevelt, First Lady of the United States, 1945

    Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the Marines don’t have that problem.
    Ronald Reagan, President of the United States; 1985

    Marines I see as two breeds, Rottweilers or Dobermans, because Marines come in two varieties, big and mean, or skinny and mean. They’re aggressive on the attack and tenacious on defense. They’ve got really short hair and they always go for the throat.
    RAdm. “Jay” R. Stark, USN; 10 November 1995

    They told (us) to open up the Embassy, or “we’ll blow you away.” And then they looked up and saw the Marines on the roof with these really big guns, and they said in Somali, “Igaralli ahow,” which means “Excuse me, I didn’t mean it, my mistake”.
    Karen Aquilar, in the U.S. Embassy; Mogadishu, Somalia, 1991

    By their victory, the 3rd, 4th and 5th Marine Divisions and other units of the Fifth Amphibious Corps have made an accounting to their country which only history will be able to value fully. Among the Americans who served on Iwo Island, uncommon valor was a common virtue.
    Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, U.S. Navy

    Do not attack the First Marine Division. Leave the yellowlegs alone. Strike the American Army.
    Orders given to Communist troops in the Korean War; shortly afterward, the Marines were ordered to not wear their khaki leggings.

    “Marines are about the most peculiar breed of human beings I have ever witnessed. They treat their service as if it was some kind of cult, plastering their emblem on almost everything they own, making themselves up to look like insane fanatics with haircuts to ungentlemanly lengths, worshipping their Commandant almost as if he was a god, and making weird animal noises like a band of savages. They’ll fight like rabid dogs at the drop of a hat just for the sake of a little action, and are the cockiest SOB’s I have ever known. Most have the foulest mouths and drink well beyond man’s normal limits, but their high spirits and sense of brotherhood set them apart and , generally speaking, of the United States Marines I’ve come in contact with, are the most professional soldiers and the finest men I have had the pleasure to meet.”
    ~ An Anonymous Canadian Citizen

    “The raising of that flag on Suribachi means a MARINE CORPS for the next 500 years.”
    JAMES FORRESTAL, SECRETARY OF THE NAVY

    “The safest place in Korea was right behind a platoon of MARINES. LORD, how they could fight!”
    MAJ. GEN. FRANK LOWE, U.S. ARMY

    WE STOLE THE EAGLE FROM THE AIR FORCE, THE ANCHOR FROM THE NAVY AND THE ROPE FROM THE ARMY.
    ON THE SEVENTH DAY WHILE GOD RESTED, WE OVERRAN HIS PERIMETER, STOLE THE GLOBE AND WE’VE BEEN RUNNING THE WHOLE SHOW EVER SINCE. WE LIVE LIKE SOLDIERS, TALK LIKE SAILORS, AND SLAP THE HELL OUT OF BOTH OF THEM.
    WARRIORS BY DAY, LOVERS BY NIGHT, PROFESSIONALS BY CHOICE, AND MARINES BY THE GRACE OF GOD.

    • don’t have a heart attack, this is a free country you are allow to have an opinion, it only hurt when there truth in it. i lived in San Diego i seen Marine kick-ass and have thier ass kick, being a Marine does not make you a great street fighter, otherwise Marine would dominate MMA. yes i have said it Marine that they are not the first to fight.Couples of my friends are Marine but unlike you (from your respone) they real down to earth.

      • You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth- and the amusing thing about it is that they are.
        Father Kevin Keaney
        1st Marine Division Chaplain
        Korean War

        However, Marines sure exaggerate about what they have accomplished.

    • “I can’t say enough about the two Marine divisions. If I use words like ‘brilliant,’ it would really be an under description of the absolutely superb job that they did in breaching the so-called ‘impenetrable barrier.’ It was a classic- absolutely classic- military breaching of a very very tough minefield, barbed wire, fire trenches-type barrier.”
      Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, U. S. Army
      Commander, Operation Desert Storm, February 1991

      I was in theater watching General Schwarzkopf’s press conference. After praising the Marines, he had equal praise for VII Corps.

      VII Corps made the main effort in the ground war. The Marines made a secondary effort. Their success in part was due to their armored support, which was the Army’s Tiger Brigade, an armored brigade of the 2nd Armored Division.

      The story of the ground war is that VII Corps fought the Republican Guard. The Marines fought Iraq’s second line troops.

    • The reason JARHEAD the Army don’t send you to Basic/Boot again? They don’t see the point in teaching the same thing twice. It’s called “management”. They have no doubt, you can dig a Foxhole. No use showing you (charging the taxpayer) for you to be shown how you’d do it, again. -SSG. US. Army Ret.

  89. Does it really matter who has the best branch of the military? Were all americans here and all of the armed forces are fighting for our country. Soldiers in the Marines, Army, Air Force, and Navy all have died fighting for our country. Show some respect.

  90. “The United states has two armies.”

    — The USMC is not a “land army”. It is an amphibious force being USED as a land army because that is what is required of it. When was the last time the 82nd did a combat jump? Does that mean they arent paratroopers?

    “There were no Marines in the Continental Army that won the Revolutionary War.”

    –Flat out wrong. They just werent employed as they are today. In fact Marines participated in landings in England and the Caribbean as part of ships companies.

    “The fact is, for most of their history the United States Marine Corps was little more than a security force for the Navy.”

    - Exactly, as in the tradition of the Royal Marines, who were the exact same thing and the model of the USMC, and who have evolved into something else. Is it your position that because they were one thing over a hundred years ago, they should never evolve? For most of its history the ‘cavalry’ rode horses, why arent they now? Additionally, even though they were primarily used for ships company, that didnt prevent their limited use in the Mexican American War, the indian wars, and the Spainish American War.

    “The myth of the Marine Corps as a second army began in WW I. When the United states entered the war in 1917, over two million U.S. Army soldiers were deployed to France along with one brigade of marines, about ten thousand strong. Despite being a tiny fraction of the American forces fighting in WW I, the Marines managed to make a name for themselves at the U.S. Army’s expense.”

    -The reputation wasnt earned at the “Armys expense”, i rather believe it was made at the expense of the Germans.

    “Floyd Gibbons made no secret of his “friendship and admiration for the U.S. Marines”.”

    -And other reporters made the same relationships with US Army units, but you have obviously done poor research in not noticing them.

    “Today all Marines in basic training are taught that German soldiers in WW I referred to them as “Devil Dogs”. H.L. Mencken, an American writing in 1921, clearly states that; “The Germans, during the war, had no opprobrious nicknames for their foes…Teufelhunde (devil-dogs), for the American marines, was invented by an American correspondent; the Germans never used it.”

    – Clearly you are grasping. This is an admitted fact of the Marine Corps, but it does not take away from the fact that multiple German assessments of the day rated the Marine Brigade as shock troops. You also neglected to point out all the other fallacies we teach in boot camp that no one cares about, like our blood stripe and quatrafoil. We arent real fascinated by our uniform decorations or our ‘nicknames’. The purpose, in the end, is for Marines to realize they have a history to live up to.

    “Most Americans believe that the Marine Corps won the war in the Pacific, while the US Army fought in Europe. In fact our Pacific operations were hampered by a conflict between the Army and the Navy, that split the theatre in two.”

    –Poor research and a dis service to the Army more than anyone. It was actually in three parts, you neglect the completely Army led campaign through south east asia.

    “The Navy adamantly refused to place their fleet, (and their Marines), under the command of the Army. After five weeks of bureaucratic wrangling, General MacArthur was given command of the Southwest Pacific theatre, while Admiral Nimitz had jurisdiction over the remainder of the Pacific ocean. The result, in Macarthur’s own words, was a “divided effort, the… duplication of force (and) undue extension of the war with added casualties and cost”.”

    –Poorly researched, both Army and Marine Divisions, ships and aircraft fought in both regions. Macarthur was a known and recognized by all ego-maniac. Of course he wanted total control. You also neglect to point out that MacA made a good many mistakes in the beginning of the Pacific War to merit the questioning of his ability.

    “The US Army fought the main force of the Japanese Imperial Army in New Guinea and the Philippines. The Navy and Marines carried out an “island hopping” strategy that involved amphibious assaults on islands such as Guadalcanal and Saipan. General Macarthur complained bitterly to the President that “these frontal attacks by the Navy, as at Tarawa, are tragic and unnecessary massacres of American lives“.”

    – This line of argument is absurd and barely worth discussing, but because you brought it up, it will be addressed. To equate the New Guinea campaign with the island hopping operations is complete blindness to the difference in those operations. It also ignores the necessity of one supporting the other. Had there not been a Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Iwo Jima, etc there would not have been a Phillipines. Likewise, MacA HIMSELF used the same ‘island hopping’ once he was free of New Guinea. He was just mad his route from the south, which he was obsessed with returning to the Phillipines, was not the primary route. Furthermore, MacA was no stranger to sending Marines and soldiers into useless slaughter, it was his idiocy that led to the pointless battle for Peleliu. You also NEGLECTED to mention that the ANZAC’s were fighting in New Guinea as well and doing so very well and responsible for a good deal of that success.

    “The famous image of Marines raising the US flag on Mount Suribachi is actually a photograph of the second, staged flag-raising ceremony. The Marines raised the flag a second time to replace the original, smaller flag, and to provide the press corps with a better photo opportunity. That photograph has become one of the most enduring images of WW II, and served as the model for the Marine Corps Memorial statue.”

    -So? Whats your point? Does that somehow diminish or change what happened at Iwo?

    “In fact the Marine Corps was nearly legislated out of existence two years later. After the bureaucratic infighting that characterized inter-service relations during WW II, there was a strong desire among military professionals to unify the military commands. President Truman agreed, and in 1946 his administration proposed a bill to unify the separate service bureaucracies.

    The Navy and Marine Corps were determined to scuttle this legislation. Marine generals created a secret office code named the Chowder Society to lobby behind the scenes, (in opposition to their President and Commander in Chief), and thwart the unification bill before Congress. The Commandant of the Marine Corps even made an impassioned speech before Congress to plead for his separate service.

    It worked. Congress rejected the Truman administration’s unification bill, and instead passed the National Security Act of 1947. This Act guaranteed separate services, with their own independent budgets, and was a victory for the Navy and Marine Corps.”

    –Again, so.. It was, in the end, for the betterment of the country by preserving naval aviation. This only matters if you think the Carrier Battle Group has no utility or that amphibious force projection doesnt either.

    “In addition, the Marines succeeded in having their separate force structure written into the language of the legislation. It is very unusual for Congress to dictate the actual composition of a military service. Yet the National Security Act mandates that the Marines Corps must maintain “not less than three combat divisions and three aircraft wings and such land combat, aviation, and other services as necessary to support them“.

    President Truman was furious, and military professionals were appalled. General Eisenhower characterized the Marines as “being so unsure of their value to their country that they insisted on writing into the law a complete set of rules and specifications for their future operations and duties. Such freezing of detail…is silly, even vicious.”

    –And again. So. Like Truman is some sort of all knowing all seeing person whose opinions are without criticism? You neglect to point out that he was the same president who fired MacA who you also seem to quote without question.

    “The war between the Army and Marines would get more vicious in Korea. On November 27th, 1950 a division of Marines 25,000 strong, was ordered to proceed along the west side of the Chosin reservoir, while a much smaller task force of 2500 Army troops went up the eastern side. Waiting for them were 120,000 troops of the Chinese Communist 9th Army Group.

    The Army soldiers fought a running battle for three days against a Chinese force eight times their size, in temperatures as low as minus 35 degrees. Despite the death of two commanding officers, the task force lumbered south with over 600 dead and wounded soldiers loaded into trucks, fought through repeated ambushes, and was even mistakenly bombed by US Marine aircraft. Finally, just four miles from safety, the convoy was cut off by the Chinese and annihilated.

    385 men made it to the safety of American lines by crossing the frozen Chosin Reservoir.

    The First Marine Division, with the help of allied air power, managed to fight their way out of the Chinese encirclement. Marines claimed that the Army had disgraced itself, and passed on stories of US soldiers throwing down their weapons and feigning injuries. A Marine Chaplain even made statements to the press and wrote an article accusing army soldiers of cowardice.

    There were so few officers and men left from the Army task force that the Marine’s claims were accepted as fact. But newly released Chinese documents prove otherwise. The Army task force fought bravely against overwhelming odds before being destroyed, and their stubborn defense bought time for the Marines to escape the encirclement.

    Nevertheless, Marines to this day hold up the fight at the Chosin reservoir as proof of their superiority over the Army.”

    -You neglect MANY points. First, the Army’s reputation suffered not from Chosin but from the events at the start of the war and their being broken by the North Koreans (to their credit, it was NOT their fault – I dont choose to denigrate them like you seem to enjoy doing to Marines). The Marine Corps reputation was built again before Choisin by its actions in the Pusan Perimeter where the 1st Marine were used as a ‘fire brigade’ very successfully. And directly afterward, the landings a Inchon, again led by your MacA, brought more acclaim.

    Lastly, the Marine Corps has repeatedly acknowledged the valor of the 7th Infantry and changed its attitude toward them. To the Marines and Soldiers defense, NO ONE knew what happened to the 7th Infantry at the time except that they broke. The survivors you report on and much of the story wasnt revealed until well AFTER the war. Gen Smith and others only saw the result on their Marines and reacted as anyone might.

    “In Vietnam, a Marine regiment at Khe Sanh refused to come to the aid of a Special Forces outpost only four miles from their perimeter. On Febuary 7th, 1968, the camp at Lang Vei was overran by heavily armed North Vietnamese troops during an all-night battle. The Marines had earlier agreed to reinforce the camp in the event of an attack, but two requests for assistance were denied.

    General Westmoreland himself had to order the Marines to provide helicopters for Special forces personnel, so they could be airlifted into the besieged outpost. By this time the post had been overrun, at a cost of 208 soldiers killed and another 80 wounded.”

    – You neglect to mention that Khe Sahn was already heavily besieged by this time and unable to lend any help. Khe Sahn was not ONE base but several small bases surrounded a big base, each needed defending. The SOCFOR unit was as well apprised as anyone of the precarious situation they were in and chose to stay knowing the possible consequences.

    “Ironically, two months later this same Marine regiment would be besieged at Khe Sanh, and they would be relieved by Army troops of the First Cavalry Division.”

    –Neglect to state that the battle was already won by this time. The Cavalry arrival did nothing to change the situation at Khe Sahn at the time.

    “During Operation Desert Storm 90,000 Marines attacked Iraqi forces alongside over 500,000 US Army and coalition troops. Yet the Marines garnered 75 percent of the newsprint and TV coverage. This was not an accident.”

    –This was because the USMC was sent ‘up the middle’ and was repeatedly praised by Gen Schwarzkopf. As such, the Marines were more visible intentionally so as to conceal the ‘left hook’ of the Army. Likewise the Marines on ship were highly publicized for the same purpose.

    “The US Army performed a “Hail Mary” operation that trapped Iraq’s Republican Guard divisions and fought numerous running battles in the Iraqi desert. But no one saw them. Instead the press focused on Lt. Gen. Walter Boomer parading triumphantly through the streets of Kuwait City.”

    –So why dont you praise the Army units instead of denigrating the Marine Corps units that did the same thing, which included destroying over 300 enemy tanks as well?

    “When George Bush the Second launched his misguided invasion of Iraq, the Marines were once again included, and this time the goal was Baghdad. The invasion, which began on March 20th, 2003, called for a two pronged assault on Baghdad. The Army’s 5th Corps would advance from the desert west of the Euphrates river, while the First Marine division was ordered to cross the Euphrates and make a parallel advance through central Iraq.
    ….
    Colonel Joe Dowdy was relieved of his command the following day. The Marine Corps will never admit it, but he was fired because he failed to carry out the Corps most important mission in Iraq: Colonel Dowdy failed to upstage the US Army by being the first to reach Baghdad.”

    –Your history here is abysmial. You neglect to mention that the Marine Corps was ahead of schedule on almost every front, that the Army got bogged down in the Karbala gap, that the Marine Corps was never even supposed to go into Baghdad (I was part of OIF I and saw the plan, btw), and that on capturing Baghdad, the Army got stuck and the USMC had to send its forces north to take Tikrit, which was NEVER part of the plan. You also denigrate the actions of 3rd Infantry which fought beside the Marines for most of that drive. You failed to mention that the REASON the Marines faced stiff resistance in Nasiriya was an Army convoy that got lost and emboldened the Iraqis. You failed to mention that the Marines destroyed or rendered ineffective almost six divisions on their drive north including Republican Guard and Special Republican Guard units. Your ‘abbreviated’ at best reasoning for Col Dowdy’s relief leaves out tons of history before his actions around Al Kut and the fact that his ‘by pass’ of Al Kut enabled an Iraqi division to escape into the city.

    “The Marines would return to Iraq one year later, when the First Marine Expeditionary Force assumed responsibility for Al Anbar province, which includes the city of Fallujah.

    When their patrols came under heavy fire the lightly armed Marines had only two choices; Fight it out with the insurgents on foot, or call in artillery and air strikes. The inevitable result was scores of Marines killed or wounded, and hundreds of civilian casualties. The world was appalled by the carnage in Fallujah, and the Marines were called off.”

    –The world was ‘appalled’ by the trumped up carnage put on their tv’s by Al J and Al A, which you seem to swallow up without hesitation. Should I quote some Al J and Al A stories about the US Army? Do we need to bring up their prison management? Do we need to bring up Jesse Spielman? Do we need to bring up the COUNTLESS propaganda pieces about the Army in Baghdad by Al J and Al A?
    Your ‘source’ for information is as biased as you.

    “While Marines were fighting in Fallujah, the US Army was heavily engaged against militiamen loyal to Muqtata al-Sadr in cities throughout Iraq. But in contrast to the Marine’s failure to recapture Fallujah,”

    –Its funny how you in one paragraph say the Marines were told to stop taking Fallujah after ‘slaughtering civilians’, and next call it their failure… Which is it?

    “the US Army’s heavy armored vehicles could enter hostile cities with impunity. They brought al-Sadr to heel after two months of fighting, while suffering relatively few casualties.”

    –Except your memory seems to slip when it comes to the fact the Army took GREAT criticism for losing M1A1′s to RPG’s and having to re-engineer some of their armor to protect them from a cheap russian grenade launcher and the publicity that got the Army.

    “….
    In Fallujah and Najaf, inexperienced Marine units picked fights with insurgents, and in both cases ended up handing the enemy a strategic victory. Their failure to recapture Fallujah made the city a rallying cry for Islamic militarism worldwide, (that is until the second US assault rendered Fallujah uninhabitable). The Marine’s botched attempt to capture Muqtata al-Sadr has only strengthened his hand.”

    –The Marines were held back in Fallujah I, and wound up taking Fallujah when they were allowed to. Its reprehensible to blame political decisions on Marines or soldiers and even more so to blame them for the consequences. Your ‘selective’ memory of Najaf ignores the political situation throughout Iraq at the time and the facts on the ground (that Sadr’s Army was ACTIVE and intimidating the populace and engaging Marines).

    “Today there are 23,000 Marines in Iraq, out of a total 138,000 U.S. Armed Forces personnel. Marines are 17 percent of our total force, yet they have suffered 29 percent of all U.S. casualties; 530 of the more than 1,820 U.S. service personnel killed in Iraq. The Marine’s aggressive tactics combined with a lack of armored firepower has proven lethal, their bravery notwithstanding.”

    –Again you are ignorant of the Marine Corps, the USMC takes higher percentage of casualties to its overall size because it has a higher percentage of combat personnel. The USMC has no medical personnel, limited support functions, and many specialized units like the USAF, US Army, and the Navy. It is ultimately a fighting force and nothing else. So yes, they will take higher casualties percentages to their total force than the other services because a higher percentage are in combat! Armor, despite your obvious love for it, does not win insurgencies and cant win them. This has been proven time and time again and need not be debated here by me.

    “The United States Marines pride themselves on being better than the US Army. They are harder, more gung-ho, and they possess some magic that enables them to do things the US Army can’t do. If this is not true, (as recent events in Iraq suggest), then there is no reason for a separate Marine Corps.

    ….

    The truth is, the US Army conducted the biggest amphibious assault in our nation’s history when they captured the Normandy beaches. And neither the Army or the Marines have assaulted an enemy held beach since the Korean war, over fifty years ago. In every subsequent conflict Soldiers and Marines have fought in the same way, using similar equipment and tactics.”

    –Yet Marines have made landings time and time again and threatened such landings even more often. Vietnam, Granada, Panama, Kuwait, Lebanon, Somalia, and everywhere a MEU floats it threatens a landing.

    You also neglect the Marines ‘forcible entry’ capability that the Army lacks. Excepting the 82nd and 101st, but these units have become too heavy and require significant staging bases, which the Marines do not. See 2001 Afghanistan.

    “The Marines are in fact a second Army, and since they compete with the Army for funds, missions, and prestige, their real enemy is… the US Army.”

    Acutally, no, the Marines are in FACT not a second Army any more than the Army is all one big glob of tanks. The Army has tanks, atrillery, helicopters, infantry, veternarians, etc. Nor do they ‘compete’ with the Army for funds. Generally, the only funds that matter, R&D and procurement funds, are used jointly by the Army and Marines anyway because they both fight on land. The cost of maintaining training, living / bases, etc would still exist regardless of who they were part of. Its also ignorant to equate the two and a DISSERVICE to the Army as much as the Marine Corps to do so.

    “However, the Marine Corps has an unfair advantage in this competition. Since the end of Desert Storm the US Army has been downsized by one third, losing over 200,000 troops and eight combat divisions. By Contrast the Marines have lost only twenty thousand personnel. The reason is the National Security Act of 1947, which prevents any changes in the force structure of the Marines.”

    –No.. Again you show ignorance of the USMC force structure AND logic. The Army had more room to lose, plain and simple. Alternatively, the USMC did lose an entire regiment (the 9th) and gutted much of III MEF of most of its strength. The battalions of the 9th have returned but will go away again soon.

    “Today’s United States Marine Corps is only slightly larger than the US Army in Iraq. That war is stretching our Army to the breaking point. The obvious solution is to merge the Army and Marine corps into one service.”

    –This is the most ignorant part of your whole argument. The “obvious” solution to an overstretched Army is to incorporate and overstretched Marine Corps”??!?! Exactly HOW does that help?? Wouldnt the “obvious” solution be for the Army to commit more of its force structure to combat units and combine adminitrative services with the Air Force (its natural partner) and request increased strength to Congress? Why are you putting such a gutless position to your CoS as to be scared to ask for more personnel?
    Which back to my point, I noticed you neglected to say anything about the Air Force and the possible ‘redundancies’ that could be removed by unifying the Air Force and Army. Perhaps your service envy / enmity is too strong?

    “The savings would add up to tens of billions of dollars when their training, logistics, administration, and headquarters were merged. The personnel shortages that are now crippling both services would disappear. And so would the rivalry between the Army and the Marine Corps.”

    –Your financial ignorance is not worth commenting. And ‘combining services’ wouldnt change the number of missions that need fulfilled. Likewise, the ‘rivalry’, such as it is, from my perspective has been generally one of mutual respect (saving ignorant people like yourself) and beneficial by encouraging each to do better and be better.

    • Dam, seriously how long did it take you to write this? i bet your blood was boiling huh? wow, lol

      i would response to everything you wrote but never mind. i’ll just point out few things, amphibious landing in Vietnam, Granada, Panama, Kuwait, Lebanon, Somalia, is a joke, you forgot to mention Amphibious landing in Indonesia, Japan (humanitarian) and at San Diego beach,don’t forget to count those because every time you come on land from the ocean it consider a Amphibious landing.lol how difficult is it to get on a navy boat and run on the beach? for the record U.S Army have done more Amphibious landing than the Marine Corp. Airborne Operation were use in Iraq and Afghanistan just to let u know.

      The question for me is not the capabilities of the Marine, but that they are attention horde. look, if the Marine supposedly so much better than the Army, then i suggest we get rid of the Army completely. Corp is under 50,000 anything over is consider an Army, yes you are an Army.

    • “There were no Marines in the Continental Army that won the Revolutionary War.”

      No there were not, except for the Battle of Princeton. The Marine Battalion of 141 officers and men took 60 casualties.A small number of survivors escorted British prisoners to Philadelphia. The remainder joined the Continental Army.

      There were no marines at Saratoga, at valley Forge or at Monmouth. No Marines fought in Nathanel Greene’s campaign which liberated the Carolinas.The only marines at Yorktown were 800 British Royal Marines who were part of Cornwallis’ Army.

      • Also, there were no Marines at Trenton.

    • “The Marine Corps reputation was built again before Choisin by its actions in the Pusan Perimeter where the 1st Marine were used as a ‘fire brigade’ very successfully. And directly afterward, the landings a Inchon, again led by your MacA, brought more acclaim.”

      By the time the Marine Brigade arrived at Pusan the Army already had 4 divisions on the ground.

      At the start of the Korean War, the Marine Corps could not put troops on the ground. It took a number of weeks for the Marines to scrape the bottom of every barrel it had to organize one regimental combat team. While the Marines organized this RCT, soldiers were in Kporea fighting, dying, establishing the Pusan perimeter.

      Had the soldiers not fought effectively enough to form that perimeter, the war would have ended before the Mariners could intervene.

      • Mullah Mike, you again show your ignorance. The Marine Corps had to ‘scrape the bottom of the barrel’ because of the excessive demobilization and military downsizing after WW II. I suggest you look at “For the Common Defense: A Military History of the United States of America” by Millett & Maslowski. It’s only 650+ pages. Maybe you and Durant can read it to one another in a bubble bath?

      • “On June 8, 2011 at 12:59 am reader said:
        Mullah Mike, you again show your ignorance. The Marine Corps had to ‘scrape the bottom of the barrel’ because of the excessive demobilization and military downsizing after WW II.”

        What makes you think the Army was not affected by the post World War II downsizing?

        Marine admirers really savage the Army over its performance in Korea, claiming Army troops would not fight while Marines would.

        The bottom line was, in 1951, in spite of the downsizing, the Army could still put troops in the fiels on short notice, The Marine Corps could not.

        Had the Army been incapable of putting troops into the field, the Marines would not have gotten into the fight. Yet the Marines like to claim they single handedly saved Korea.

        One factor in comparing Army and Marine Corps performance in Korea is this: Army units had to fight alone and unsupported against numerically superior North Korean units. The Marines did not. By the time the Marines had gotten into the war, the Pusan perimeter had formed. Whenever the Marine Brigade went into action, it had friendly units on its flanks and support in its rear. The first Army units to fight in Korea enjoyed no such support.

    • The number of soldiers who served multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan exceeds the total strength of the Marine Corps.

    • Furthermore, MacA was no stranger to sending Marines and soldiers into useless slaughter, it was his idiocy that led to the pointless battle for Peleliu.

      Peleliu was such a prolongrd bloody battlenot because of MacArthur but because of Marine Generals William Rupertus and Roy Geiger.

      Rupertus got his Marines slaughtered ab having them make direct frontal attacks against positions which were impregnable to direct frontal attack.

      Geiger would not relieve Rupertus when it was apparent Rupertus was getting his Marines slaughtered.

      Army Generals tried to avoid the tactic of direct frontal attack against strong defensive positions. Had an Army General had direct control over Peleliu, the battle might not have been so bloody.

    • “The USMC has no medical personnel, limited support functions…”

      How many Marine Corps lives have been saved by Army Medical Department personnel?

      In the wake of the Beirut bombing Army Physicians did save a number of Marine lives.

      US Military medicine is the best in the world. It is mostly the result of Army Medical Department research and development.

      In 1982, all the interns at the Navy Hospital in Bethesda took off a week, went to Fort Sam Houston Texas, and completed the Army Combat Casualty Care Course.

      How about that Marines? You get the benefit of the best Military Medicine in the world, largely because of the US Army you so intensely despise.

    • Dennis,

      That was one of the best rebuttals ive read in any of these silly forums.

      Im a prior service 0313 who later crossdecked to the USA (money talks). Having seen both sides I have good and bad to say about both.

      Agree with just about everything you wrote, except your comment about the 82cd/101. Aside form those two, theres also the 173rd and obviously rhe 75th (which people tend to forget is Infantry, not the super secret squirrel boogeyman some make them out to be). All can absolutely ‘kick in the door’.

      So just comparing the two (MEU vs Airborne), whereas yes, the MEU can land reinforced with armour support and organic CAS…..thats only if they have a beach. As an 0313 (and this goes for my step brothers in tanks) were not getting off the boat unless something can take us there. Same as the cannon cockers. So unless thats available, youre left with the helo company 0311′s and the boat guys having to leave their boats and waiting for the lift helos to.come back. Once that happens….its all just rifleman. No real support, other than weapons Co.

      My point being is that its now on the same terms the 82cd guys will come in as.

      So in order for it to work as planned the MEU has to establish a beachhead. To be fair, thats just a fancy way of saying airfield….as in if used tradionally, the 75th and 82cd would take down an airfield, and within hours the heavier stuff would start coming in via C-17s and sooner or later you have roughly the same thing as a MEU

      One last thing id add that the airborne guys have as an advantage over the MEU…the MEU is forward deployed, absolutely. But it may not be deployed in the right place. So it takes time to get there even with best intents….the airborne guys can be on the ground (in perfect conditions) anywhere in the world in something like 18 hours.

      Good post though. Hope some of the harder headed slash retardeds on here read it and learn something

  91. LOL @ “The fact is, for most of their history the United States Marine Corps was little more than a security force for the Navy.”

    fact is, the marines NEEDED to justify their existance. it makes sense they’d take advantage of the chosin resevoir (i mean, saying that ‘the army saved out asses’ just doesn’t SOUND macho).

    facts are fact: world war 2 saw the army kill more japanese in the pacific theater, more ‘efficiently’ than the navy;

    the marines were essentially non-existant in the european phase;

    the army WINS wars, the marines ‘help out’.

    this is NOT, repeat, NOT a put down of the marines. they are american fighting men, and often are the first (by virtue of being on ships) to arrive on the scene. but their numbers alone mean they can’t win wars. the ARMY, by it’s sheer size and scope, gets the job done.

    what i’ve noticed is this: younger marine enlisted seem to be the loudmouths, and when they mature into sergeants, they tend to be quietly proud.

    so, let the young guys blow off steam and think they’re something special. they tend to grow up and know that as long as there’s an american next to him, doesnt matter if it’s a soldier, sailor or another marine.

    • The US Army did do a bit to save the Marines at Chosin.

      The Army’s 31st RCT covered the East side of the Chosin Reservoir. It fought to the death taking out two Chinese Infantry Divisions, one of them reinforced. Those Chinese divisions attempted to advance down the East side of the Chosin reservoir, get behind the Marines and take Hagaru-ri.

      There is information that more Soldiers than Marines died at the Chosin Reservoir.

    • Well said “regualr guy”. Well said. That’s exactly right, couldn’t have put it better myself.

  92. No idiot thats where your wrong! America wins wars!!

  93. The Army and Marines WIN BATTLES!! The U.S. Military (ARMY, AIR FORCE, NAVY, MARINES) and CIA/ Goverment contractors win wars..

  94. The Marine Corps claims credit in part or in whole for other services accomplishments. What follows is a list of what Marines, contrary to Marine claims, did not do:

    Fight in the Battle of Trenton in December 1776
    Hold back the British at Bladensburg in 1814(that honor belongs to Commodore Joshua Barney’s sailors)
    Anchor Andrew Jackson’s line at the Battle of New Orleans
    Capture Chapultepec castle in the Mexican War.
    Be the first US troops to fight ib WWI(3rd ID went into action 3 days before Belleau Wood)
    Play a major role in defending the Phillipine Islands in WWII
    Single handedly save Korea in the Korean War(Soldiers went in first and establish the Pusab Perimeter. Had that not happened the Marines woud never have gotten into the Korean War. At the outbreak of that war, the Marine Corps was noy capable of putting troops into the field.)

    • Mike – It would be REALLY helpful if you cited where “MARINES” made these claims. I may have missed it in this long thread if you’ve already included citations.

  95. To my last comment I add, the Marine Corps did not stop the final Japanese Suicide attack on Saipan, July 7, 1944.

    Marines claim 3rd Battalion 10th Marines(artillery) stopped the Japanese. 3/10 Marines was the only Marine unit to fight in that battle. The Japanese drove the Marines away from their guns and captured all there guns.

    • Both the army and the marines defeated the Japanese banzai attack. In fact, it’s not like the marines got all the credit. If you knew about the battle, you would know that 3 men of the 105th infantry regiment, an ARMY battalion, gained the Medal of Honor. It is actually considered one of the army’s greatest moments in the battle for the pacific.

  96. What I don’t understand is why do marines only use quotes and not facts when defending the Marine Corp? If this article is completely wrong then you should be able to name facts and dates, not just quote some general trying to butter up the troops.

    • Well, sometimes the quotes, especially from Army Generals, summarize facts.

      • The quote from Norman Schwarzkopf was distorted. It was presented as if General Schwarzkopf singled out the Marines for praise.

        I watched General Schwarzkopf’s speech as it was happening. General Schwarzkopf did not single out the Marines from all the troops who participated in Desert Sword. He praised all the troops, including the Army’s VII Corps which fought the Republican Guard while the Marines, with the support of the Tiger Brigade from the Army’s 2nd Armored Division, fought Iraq’s second line troops.

  97. I find this discussion to be interesting despite the silly and absurd comments. The bottom line is that we should honor and support the Soldiers and Marines who have and will continue to serve our nation and preserve freedom.

    In my experience I do find that Marines tend to be more boisterous and forceful in their arguing the superiority, grit or toughness of the USMC. This is consistent with their great PR and recruiting campaigns where they sell their service much better than the Army does. Some of that PR is based upon some hallow facts, “First to Fight” and “The Few, the Proud, the Marines.” Not sure when or in what wars the USMC was actually or will be the first to fight or that 200,000 can be considered few. USMC history also tends to ignore the contribution of Army units in such battles as Guadalcanal and Okinawa. The Army on the other hand struggles to identify itself, “Army Strong” or “Army of One”, uniform changes (berets, blues, etc.), and changing unit organizations (Brigade Combat Teams).

    This whole argument is flawed because of bias and over generalizations. What is trying to be defined here? Who is better, tougher or more combat effective? The Army vs. Marine Corps argument is over broad and can’t be won by either side.

    Let’s look individually. Can one seriously state that a USMC clerk is better, tougher or more combat effective than an Army Ranger or the Army cook is better, tougher or more combat effective than the USMC Force Recon Marine? The USMC has a bit of a different philosophy with training that has been mentioned here. They emphasize infantry skills and provide more infantry-specific training to all Marines as opposed to the Army. USMC basic is longer by three weeks. Maybe this is better or not. However, that doesn’t really have much relevance when we are talking about combat units. A soldier in an Army infantry battalion will receive much more infantry training than the USMC mechanic will and as much or equivalent to his USMC infantry counterpart.

    Let’s look at combat units. Combat effectiveness has more to do with training, TO&E, and combat experience and nothing to do with whether a unit is in the Army or USMC. Let’s look at each of these.

    A unit that receives training before going into battle will do better than one that does not. Hence, the lack of effectiveness of some Army units deployed in Korea at the start of the Korean War. Units rotating to war zones in Afghanistan and Iraq go through months of preparatory training before being deployed, which makes them more battle worthy. This training trend has not always been the case. Ill-trained replacements flooded Army and Marine units in Vietnam with resulting loss in effectiveness.

    A unit’s equipment and organization will dictate its success in certain circumstances, regardless of service. The Marines are mostly medium type infantry units that operate in self-contained grouping that facilitate rapid and independent deployments. Great for insertions, insurrections, Haiti, Caribbean, etc. However, don’t expect the Marines to be able to effectively conduct blitzkrieg operations due to the lack of operational and tactical land mobility and lack of armored vehicles. Hence why the Marines were not part of the armored thrust in either the Gulf War or Iraq invasion. They would not be able to keep up with a mechanized force like the 3rd Infantry Division. Look at the last battle in Fallujah. The Army battalions made quicker progress. Is this because the Army units were better? No, it had to do with their inherent armored vehicles that provided greater mobility and more firepower. Had the insurgents possessed better or more numerous anti-armor weapons, the effectiveness of the Army units would have been reduced.

    Combat experience is the third component. A unit that has combat experience will be more effective than one without it. Look at the 1st Infantry Division in WWII. This unit was highly combat effective because it had been in continuous operations from North Africa, Sicily, and Europe. Compare with how the 106th Infantry Division did in the Battle of the Bulge. Same TO&E but almost no combat experience.

    I find these types of arguments frustrating too as we tend to forget the contribution of some while glorifying that of others. Look at the Battle of the Bulge. We remember the exploits and heroics of the 101st Airborne, which held out and prevailed despite high odds. We don’t remember the exploits and heroics of the 28th Division during the same battle. The 28th had just engaged in ferocious combat in the Huertgen Forest (weren’t in reserve like the 101st) and had suffered huge casualties. They were exhausted and depleted. The 28th was deployed on the front in spread-out and small units in a supposedly quiet sector. They faced the brunt of the initial German offensive and fought valiantly. It was to their efforts that allowed the 101st to make it t Bastogne. So, who is more valiant? The 101st, which faced steep odds, fought, and won or the 28th, which faced overwhelming and hopeless odds, fought anyway, and sacrificed themselves?

    • “A unit that receives training before going into battle will do better than one that does not. Hence, the lack of effectiveness of some Army units deployed in Korea at the start of the Korean War.”

      Nevertheless, it was Army Units which took the field in the Korean War.As I have said in other comments, in 1950 the “first to fight” Marines were incapable of putting troops on the ground.

      Had the Defense of Korea been left solely up to the Marines, there would have been no defense of Korea.

      The Marines had time to train before they were committed to Pusan. The Army troops first comitted to the war bought time for the Marines to train.

  98. I was in the Navy and participated in the joking around. The Marines aboard my ship did a fine job. In fact everyone did a fine job. We scared the Soviets so bad that their country fell apart. I knew that I didn’t want to do the Marines job, and he knew that he didn’t want mine. I have personally seen Sailors and Marines band together to fight angry civilians in bars in foreign ports. The next day it was back to “sea going bellhops” and “swab jockeys”. Things are fine just the way they are

    • “We scared the Soviets so bad that their country fell apart.”

      The Soviets were more afraid of fighting Seventh Army in Europe.

  99. Also, The frog making the comments. Eat shit! The USMC is a highly trained force. I have worked with them and respect them. They are my brothers in arms. I have served with all the branches at one time or another. also, had many a bar room brawl with them, and after words had drinks with them. Real warriors. every Branch thinks there better. Truth is, we all need each other.

  100. holy shit….mike sparks is here too.
    guys just to let you know, this guy is arguing with himself. He posts 1 pro army post and then counters it with an anti USMC post. The guy is a nut case. Just trying to get people riled up cause he couldnt pass the swim qual back in basic.

  101. Mike Sparks is G. Durant and a couple of other people.

    this fucker talks about USMC being ungrateful when the early Continental Marines captured the first stores of ammunition and cannon for use by the Cont. Army from the British at places like Nassau.
    You have the Navy-Marine team to thank for all the powder you recieved for Trenton. When Washinton took over control of the army, his troops were down to 9 rounds of ammunition per man.

    The actions that helped propel USA to it’s superpower status were done by a highly mobile expeditionary force of the Banana wars. Army wasnt there either.

    Yes we were a small force, but we pulled alot of our own weight. We earned our bragging rights on the high seas in the 19th century, where Army was nowhere to be found. Army’s performance is still a matter of embarrassment when you consider how it performed during the war of 1812, or the mass surrenders it undertook during the early pacific campaign of the 1940s.

    You werent there during the Whitehaven raid of 1778 either, yet we dont bitch. It was only the first raid on English soil in 116 yrs. At this time von Steuben was merely teaching you how to march as a unit.

    • “You have the Navy-Marine team to thank for all the powder you recieved for Trenton. When Washinton took over control of the army, his troops were down to 9 rounds of ammunition per man.”

      More Marine Corps distortion designed to give the Corps credit where no credit is due.

      Read “Washington’s Crossing”. The Continental Army before Trenton was well supplied with ammunition and arms. Their equipment was either imported from France or manufactured in the US.

      The arms and ammunition captured at Nassau went to equip the Continental Navy which, with the exception of a few officers such as John Young, John Paul Jones and John Barry, was not very effective during the Revolutionary War.

    • “You werent there during the Whitehaven raid of 1778 either, yet we dont bitch. It was only the first raid on English soil in 116 yrs. At this time von Steuben was merely teaching you how to march as a unit.”

      The Army has never claimed to have participated in the raid on Whitehaven, as strategically insignificant as it was.

      On the other hand, Trenton was probably the most crucial victory in American military history. No Marines ever fought at Trenton. Yet the Marine Corps has claimed tha Marines did fight at Trenton.

      The munitions used by the Continental Army at Trenton DID NOT come from the Marines’raid on Nassau.

    • For what it is worth, I am neither Mike Sparks or G. Durant

    • Neither am I Scott Piraino.

    • “We earned our bragging rights on the high seas in the 19th century…”

      Who earned bragging rights on the high seas was the United States Navy. Read the accounts of the naval War of 1812. The role of the Marines in the victories over the British Navy was miniscule.

      Constitution, for example, defeated Guerriere, Java, Cyane and Levant, because of superior sailing and superior gunnery, not because of her Marine detachment.

    • “Army’s performance is still a matter of embarrassment when you consider …the mass surrenders it undertook during the early pacific campaign of the 1940s.”

      You are referring to the Defense of Bataan in which thousands of soldiers fought a desperate four month battle against the invading Japanese without adequate ammunition, food, medical support. The soldiers surrendered after they had literally fought to exhaustion, literally fought to the last bullet.

      While the soldiers fought the desperate Battle of Bataan, the 4th Marine Regiment, the only organized Marine unit in the Philippines, remained on Corregidor. One reason the Marines did not surrender on Bataan Is that they, unlike thousands of soldiers, were not tasked to fight to exhaustion.

      That has not prevented Marine admirers from claiming credit for the Marine Corps for the defense of Bataan, e.g. Chuck Lawliss in “The Marine Book”, Gregory J. W. Urwin in an article he wrote for “Military History”, How Marine POWs Hung Tough, whoever produced the 1943 movie “Salute to the Marines”.

      I say again, Marines disrespect the Army while claiming credit for what the Armynhas accomplished>

    • “Army’s performance is still a matter of embarrassment when you consider how it performed during the war of 1812…”

      Early in the War of 1812, the Army did not perform well. Like Korea, the Army did go into battle before the Marines.

      Later in the War the Army did perform well. Army victories were key to the US ending the War without any significant territorial losses.

      Jacob Brown’s forces, Regulars and Militia, defeated a British attempt to destroy Sacketts Harbor in 1813. Sacketts Harbor was Isaac Chauncey’s base on Lake Ontario. Loss of Sacketts Harbor would seriously compromised the American Naval effort on Lake Ontario. Accounts of the battle record no participation by Marines.

      The Niagara campaign in 1814 was a strategic defeat. Tactically it was a US victory. US Army forces, with no involvement from the Marines, won Chippewa and successfully defended Fort Erie. They fought the British to a bloody draw at Lundy’s Lane.

      There were no Marines at Plattsburgh. Thomas MacDonough’s “marines” were soldiers from Alexander Macomb’s Army.

      The British evacuated what was the US Northwest because of Oliver Hazard Perry’s victory on Lake Erie. Marines served on Perry’s Flagship, USS Lawrence. Lawrence was shot to pieces by the British. Perry won the battle by transferring his flag to USS Niagara, whose “marines” were soldiers from William Henry Harrison’s Army. After Lake Erie, Harrison defeated the British soundly at the Battle of the Thames, without any participation from the Marines.

      The Marines did not hold back the British at Bladensburg. That honor belongs to Commodore Joshua Barney and his unit of Sailors.There were no Marines at the Battle of Godly Wood. An outnumbered US Militia Brigade held off the British Ground Force, inflicting almost twice as many casualties than they took, including MG Robert Ross, British Army Commander. That had More effect on forcing the British to leave the Chesapeake thanBladensburg.

      Fort McHenry was an Army Post. The defense of Fort McHenryhad more effect on the British than anything the Marines did at Bkladensburg.

      Finally, at New Orleans, in January of 1815, Andrew Jackson had 4000 men on line. Only 58 were Marines. No Marines played any crucial role in New Orleans.

      The Marines’ story of the War of 1812 is another example of Marines distorting History.

    • “The actions that helped propel USA to it’s superpower status were done by a highly mobile expeditionary force of the Banana wars. Army wasnt there either.”

      Wrong.

      What propelled the US to super power status was World War II. The US Army did more to win WWII than the Marine Corps.

    • I looked up Mike sparks and it turns out he is a former marine and truth teller. Sad to say but the facts kill the the usmc and this exactly why they hate the former marine, Mike Sparks.

  102. Scott Piraino….Mike Sparks…G. Durant….dynamic para = nomorenarcissism
    all one person

    He/”they” never served anywhere
    He’s a used car salesman in Columbus, Ga

    • You are a spineless moron as we know nothing of this Phantom “Mike Sparks” of whom you speak of in your falacious diatribe. Real American patriots stand up for historical truth. The usmc is fraud so bow down you worm.

      • That would be Michael L Sparks. He pretends to be a US Army officer, and pretends to have been a US Marine Corps officer before that. The truth is that he works for a civilian towing company outside Ft Benning, when he’s not dressing up in the uniform he’s not allowed to wear for real and playing at being a soldier.

        Mikey got the boot from both the US Marine Corps and the US Army. See, Soldiers and Marines CAN agree on some things.

  103. Dan, you are supporting Piraino’s arguments with your unsupported bluster. Capturing and supplying ammunition for Trenton, Banana wars, Whitehaven? Really? How about at least Tarawa, Iwo Jima?

    I’d be careful about being critical and pointing fingers. Marines surrendered at Guam, Wake Island, the Philippines, and China at the beginning of WWII also and at Hell Fire Valley at the Chosin Reservoir.

    I don’t consider these embarrassments or dishonor but the actions of troops abandoned, cut off, and in hopeless situation, like their brother Soldiers in the Philippines you choose to denigrate.

  104. “The myth of the Marine Corps as a second army began in WW I. ”

    Interestingly the Marine Corps has consistently denied this status as another army throughout its history to the present day.

    Not too many years ago, Marines self-described their limited role as “We make Marines. We win battles.”

    This is a clear declaration of their limited and unique role.

    The Army has never taken on (well) the role of a force in true readiness.

    The design of the Marine expeditionary forces (MEU, MEB, MEF) which most people don’t understand, was an entirely Marine idea..and the Army is still trying to mimic with the overweight Stryker brigades. Ask the recovered AF pilot who went down in Libya whether the Marine Corps is “faithful”.

    Here’s what an Army General said:

    We have two companies of Marines running rampant all over the northern half of this island, and three Army regiments pinned down in the southwestern corner, doing nothing. What the hell is going on? [Gen. John W. Vessey Jr., USA, Chairman of the the Joint Chiefs of Staff; during the assault on Grenada, 1983]

    • “The Army has never taken on (well) the role of a force in true readiness.”

      In Korea in 1951, the first priority was to get troops on the ground to oppose the North Koreans. The first troops put on the ground were soldiers. They were not particularly well trained but they did get on the ground to fight the North Korean Army and did establish the Pusan Perimeter.

      At the outbreak of the Korean War, the Marines were not prepared to put troops on the ground. The Army troops which first fought in Korea, bought the Marines time to get into the fight.

    • “The Army has never taken on (well) the role of a force in true readiness.”

      During the cold war, who was on the front line ready to oppose a Soviet Invasion of Europe? Not the Marines.

    • “Not too many years ago, Marines self-described their limited role as “We make Marines. We win battles.’”

      Only twice in their history have the Marines won a Battle unaided, Betio and Iwo Jima.

      In the Battle for Belleau Wood, the Marine Brigade was supported by the Second Engineer Regiment

      The victories on Guadalcanal, the Southwest Pacific, Saipan, Guam and Peleliu all required commitment of Army troops.

      Seventh Infantry Division was significant to the victory of the Inchon Invasion.

      At Chosin, the 31st Regimental Combat Team successfully covered the East flank of First Marine Division. In fact, more soldiers tha Marines died in the Chosin Reservoir fighting.

      The Army, without any involvement from Marines, has won hundreds of battles.

  105. You’re grossly under-informed and distorting You said: “On March 30th, General Conway told a reporter that “There’s no place in our area of operation that we won’t go, and we have taken some casualties in the early going making that point“. The next day four civilian contractors were killed and mutilated in Fallujah, and five Marines also lost their lives. The Marines sealed off the city and attempted to reassert control over Fallujah, but the insurgents proved to be more determined than expected.”

    If you’re trying to lay the deaths of the Blackwater personnel on Marines or on Gen Conway, you’re smoking crack. Marines at the ECP told the Blackwater personnnel not to go into that area yet…in the manner they were planning to go (alone). But they did.

  106. “The Army has never taken on (well) the role of a force in true readiness.”

    Well, the 82nd Airborne is probably the most, true ready and rapid large force available, Army or Marines. However, you are correct that the rest of the Army is not that nimble.

    “The design of the Marine expeditionary forces (MEU, MEB, MEF) which most people don’t understand, was an entirely Marine idea..and the Army is still trying to mimic with the overweight Stryker brigades.”

    I think I understand it and it has historically been a good concept. However, the expeditionary force concept may be outdated, along with the old Army division structure. There has not been a need in a long time nor do I foresee the need to conduct large scale amphibious landings. Air insertion via helicopter or plane is more efficient and timely. Marine expeditionary forces take weeks to reach destinations via ships, hence why the first force into Saudi Arabia was the 82nd following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

    The Army BCT concept is an evolutionary process and we’ll see how it plays out in the long run. It is prompted by the need to meet varied missions, to include being mobile enough to be inserted and handle insurgencies, peace keeping, and combat roles. I feel the concept does detract from the Army’s overall ability to fight conventional wars versus such opponents as the North Koreans. However, who knows exactly. Our military’s high skill, performance, and technology have kicked the snot out of everyone it has faced since Desert Storm so maybe the change isn’t a bad one.

    “We have two companies of Marines running rampant all over the northern half of this island, and three Army regiments pinned down in the southwestern corner, doing nothing. What the hell is going on? [Gen. John W. Vessey Jr., USA, Chairman of the the Joint Chiefs of Staff; during the assault on Grenada, 1983]”

    This is the same kind of nonsense stated above to further inter-service rivalry. Each side can come up with its list of incidents and events, Grenada for you and Saipan for someone else. Come on, give it a break.

    • If that were true, why is the 82nd very very rarely used for embassy evacuations, short notice humanitarian assistance / disaster relief, port and airfield seizures, VBSS, etc. etc. It’s medium term response.

      • Because it doesnt really work that way. Evacuating an embassy would require the means to get people and leave….it would be tough, I imagine, to load the 82cd guys as well as…..their helicopters, into the back of a C-17….as in they could jump in but not evacuate from an equipment perspective. An MEU can do it simply because it has its heliopters, but it would have to get the ship close enough to do it.

        Say you had to evacuate an embassy in california, and the Marines were off of Seattle….theyd be as powerless to help as the 82cd

  107. Most recently…in addition to providing strikes on Libya (and flood relief to Pakistan the earlier in the deployment, and preparing to evac 3 embassies)…the Marines were being their “never faithful” selves….read this snippet.

    “Harney’s rescue came more quickly. He stayed in communications with another F-15 pilot still in the air over Libya. Eventually an MV-22 Osprey carrying Marines who were part of a Tactical Recovery of Aircraft and Personnel, or TRAP, team landed near his position.

    “As that back door opened, I see a group of young Marine recon units jump out, and that was probably the best feeling I’ve ever felt in my entire life,” Harney said. He was flown to the USS Kearsarge for a quick medical check then a short time later sent home with Stark to RAF Lakenheath, where friends and family welcomed them with hugs and a rendition of “God Bless America.”

  108. Just with respect to being available and able to handle very short notice contingency operations….here are some non-quotes. Just from the 1970s forward.

    June-July 1976, Lebanon: 32d Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) evacuated 160 American citizens and 148 other foreign nationals.

    24-25 June 1982, Lebanon: 32d MAU evacuated nearly 600 American citizens and designated foreign nationals.

    August 1982, Lebanon: 32d MAU aided in the evacuation of 12,000 PLO fighters and supporters.

    October-December 1983, Grenada: 22d Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) (in conjunction with other U.S. and Caribbean forces) intervened to protect and evacuate American citizens and foreign nationals, neutralize Granadan and Cuban forces, maintain order and assist in restoring democratic government.

    25 May–9 January 1991, Liberia: 22d MEU protected US Embassy and evacuated over 2,400 civilians.

    2-11 January 1991, Somalia: 4th Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) evacuated 260 U.S. and foreign citizens from the American Embassy in Mogadishu.

    April 1994, Rwanda: 11th MEU provided force to perform NEO; 241 citizens evacuated.

    April-August 1996, Liberia: 22d MEU evacuated U.S. citizens and foreign nationals from Monrovia, Liberia.

    March 1997, Tirana, Albania: 26th MEU evacuated 877 American citizens.

    April 1997, Kinshasa, Zaire: 26th MEU evacuated American citizens.

    30 May-2 June 1997, Freetown, Sierra Leone: 22d MEU evacuated 451 American citizens and 2,058 foreign nationals.

    6 June 1998, Asmara, Eritrea: 11th MEU evacuated 105 American citizens and numerous foreign nationals.

    June 2003, Liberia: 2d MEB aboard USS Kearsarge evacuated American citizens from Embassy.

    February 2004, Port-au-Prince, Haiti: Fifty Marines from a special detachment of the 4th Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) landed in the Haitian capital of Port-au-Prince to secure the U.S. Embassy and help evacuate American citizens.

    July-August 2006, Lebanon: Marine Security Force Company, Bahrain and 24th MEU participated in evacuations of American citizens in response to the increased hostilities between the Hezbollah militants and Israeli Army.

    The 26th MEU just came back and in that time prepared 3 embassies for evacuation due to the “Arab Spring”

    • In 1991, in Desert Saber, US Army units demolished Iraq’s front line armor units while the Marines took on Iraq’s second line units.

      • Better stated, it was the usmc who took on all the wimps who did not fight at all! It was the US Army who did ALL the tough fighting to be truthfull. Ask all the Republican Guard units who got their heads handed to them by the US Army! Bow down you lowly usmc dogs!

      • Actually the air force did that stupid. I’ve never seen so much crap made up by one person.

      • You might want to read some history and look at seventh corps ops. They didn’t have the luxury of correspondents.

        http://www.3ad.com/history/gulf.war/feature.pages/correcting.myths.htm

  109. “If that were true, why is the 82nd very very rarely used for embassy evacuations, short notice humanitarian assistance / disaster relief, port and airfield seizures, VBSS, etc. etc. It’s medium term response.”

    Look back at my prior post in regards to mission, TO&E and the like. Of course, the Marines are the ideal force to conduct evacuations and these other missions because they have the inherent support and logistics from off shore vessels. You wouldn’t drop a brigade of the 82nd in to evacuate an embassy. Where are the evacuees going to go?

    I thought we were discussing combat operations weren’t we? Wasn’t that the whole discussion here for those who would argue the superiority of the Army or the Marines? First to Fight, not First to Evacuate.

    Seriously, the 82nd is the most rapid deployment force for combat operations. They can be just about anywhere in the world within a day. That is why they were landed in Saudi Arabia following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. They didn’t have to fight but were first there.

    First in doesn’t mean most combat capable. Without armored vehicles and support, the 82nd is at a disadvantage in the desert when facing armored forces. Fortunately, US airpower was on hand to balance it out.

    I am not going to impugn the honor of either the Army or the Marines, unlike many previous posts. Both have illustrious histories but have different missions and capabilities.

  110. To whoever said the Marines, when they invaded Nassau, captured the munitions that equipped the Continental Army is wrong. This is another case of the Marines distorting history to exalt the Marines. The Continental Army was fighting before the Marines ever came into existence.

    Militia under Ethan Allen and Benedict Arnold captured Fort Ticonderoga in May of 1775, months before the Continental Navy and Continental Marines were established. Their artillery fcame rom Fort Ticonderoga, not Nassau. Army Colonel Henry Knox transported Ticonderoga’s artillery to Boston in the winter of 1775-1776. Most of the Continental Army’s small arms and ammunition was either imported from France(see “The Winter Soldiers” and “Washington’s Crossing”) or manufactured in the US. Boston fell on March 17, 1776, after heavy artillery from Ticonderoga was emplaced on Dorchester Heights.

    The Battle of Nassau took place in early March of 1776, only about two weeks before the fall of Boston. The Marines Nassau for about two weeks. The squadron which carried the Marines who invaded Nassau was still at sea in April of 1776(the engagement between Alfred, squadron flagship, and HMS Glasgow took place on April 6, 1776.

    The arms captured at Nassau by the Marines went to fitting out ships of the Continental Navy. The Continental Marines did not play any crucial role in the American Revolution.

  111. “At this time von Steuben was merely teaching you how to march as a unit.”

    Before Von Steuben was instructing the Continental Army in an effective way of fighting, the Continental Army was, with minimal to no contribution from the Marines, was winning the battles of Trenton, Princeton and Saratoga, which kept the Revolution going. Saratoga brought the French in on the American side. Had that not happened there would have been no raid on Whitehaven. John Paul Jones’ Ranger was based in France at the time of the Whitehaven raid.

    The Whitehaven raid ultimately failed in achieving any significant objective. John Paul Jones intended to burn a number of British Merchantmen. That never happened. He attempted to capture the Earl of Selkirk and exchange him for American Prisoners of war. That failed.

    In any event, what happened at Valley Forge was a lot more important to winning the Revolutionary War than anything the Marines did at Whitehaven.

    Like Trenton, Saratoga, Valley Forge, Yorktown, the battles that drove the British from the Carolinas, there were no Marines at Valley Forge.

  112. “There were far more army than Marines in the Pacific.” No shit, there are far more soldiers than Marines. The fifth corps would attack from the north and the first marine division from the south. 1 marine division approx. 19000 men. 1 army corps is up to 47000 men. If the point of this story is to illustrate the army is way bigger that the Marine Corps, mission accomplished. btw i was in Iraq, the reason we stopped is we ran out of supplies because logistics couldn’t keep up. It had nothing to do with the enemy we “underestimated.” Research from a 3rd hand source, even a general who was back in washington getting briefed on the situation, is not as reliable a source as experience. I fought along side amry units and no doubt they are a formiddable force. But as somebody a few comments up posted, political correctness is seeping into the forces and the army is taking the brunt of it. Their standards, even from say 10 years ago, whether they like to admit it or not, are dropping. If you don’t believe my biased opinon, ask an army SSG or SFC. And as far as this whole amphibious thing goes, WWI was supposed to be the War to end all Wars. Just because it hasn’t happened in decades, doesn’t mean it won’t. You don’t stop training for contigincies just because they haven’t happened in awhile.

  113. “There were far more army than Marines in the Pacific. No shit, there are far more soldiers than Marines.”

    Right but I think the point is that the Army fails to get credit for their contribution. Who thinks about the Army when Guadalcanal and Okinawa are mentioned even though their contribution was essential to securing the island in the former and they provided twice as many divisions to the battle in the latter (the 2nd Marine Division remained offshore as a floating reserve). Also, don’t forget about New Guinea and the Philippines.

    “The fifth corps would attack from the north and the first marine division from the south. 1 marine division approx. 19000 men. 1 army corps is up to 47000 men. If the point of this story is to illustrate the army is way bigger that the Marine Corps, mission accomplished. btw i was in Iraq, the reason we stopped is we ran out of supplies because logistics couldn’t keep up. It had nothing to do with the enemy we “underestimated.”

    Not sure I understand the point here. The offensive to Baghdad was two pronged, with one division attacking from the south (1st Marine) and one division attacking from the southwest (3rd Infantry). Other units supported the two drives. The Marines do lack the logistics infrastructure support that the Army possesses. Both prongs achieved great success so I don’t see any point of contention here. We won and our Soldiers and Marines performed admirably.

    “Their standards, even from say 10 years ago, whether they like to admit it or not, are dropping. If you don’t believe my biased opinon, ask an army SSG or SFC.”

    This assertion is without any basis and merely supports the argument that the Marines boast and brag without factual substance.

    “And as far as this whole amphibious thing goes, WWI was supposed to be the War to end all Wars. Just because it hasn’t happened in decades, doesn’t mean it won’t. You don’t stop training for contingencies just because they haven’t happened in awhile.”

    True but there are limited resources and we must plan to face likely contingencies. The Army downsized heavy armored forces considerably after the Cold War to reorient to other more likely missions. The Russians could still attack Western Europe but not very likely. The need for a large amphibious operation is also very unlikely

    • dave, you and I are nearly on similar pages. Again, they could provide many divisions because they are well over double in size. I will concede the “This assertion is without any basis and merely supports the argument that the Marines boast and brag without factual substance” although i don’t consider it bragging to maintain one’s standards. I am now stationed at an Army base and have to listen to all my counterparts complain about dropping standards, but again no real stats to back it.(but I could find some, I bet) As far as down sizing, I think that its coming, and I can’t say that I don’t support it. But you can’t completely eliminate it, becuase you will be starting from scratch in the event you need that capability. Unlikely, yes, “very unlikely,” not really. Keep up the good work all forces.

  114. Just stumbled across this article, Wow! BS, name calling and just plain immaturity aside the discussion is good. Former Army Infantry Major here with most of the bells, whistles, awards etc.

    I vehemently disagree with disbanding the Corps and rolling it into the Army. Reinventing the MAGTF and Marine warrior culture isn’t worth the expense or risk of doing it wrong.

    That said, the primary point seems to keep getting lost and that being too many Marines promote THEIR service at the cost of their brother service the Army.

    I have a great respect for the Corps and Marines but that behavior is just pathetic.

  115. Yet another article that reveals just how jealous the author is of the mystique that surrounds the United States Marine Corps.

    The only thing articles like this are good for is starting never ending arguments between members of two honorable institutions.

    Happy 4th of July a$$hole.

    • The Marine Corps and its admirers have a history of embellishing the “mystique” of the Marine Corps by falsifying its history, by claiming credit for what the Army did.

      In 1921, The Marine Corps Gazette(an official Marine Corps publication) published an article which claimed, falsely, that Continental Marines played a key role in the Battles of Trenton and Princeton.

      In 1943 a movie starring Wallace Beery, Salute to the Marines, was released. What the Marines were saluted for was defending the Philippines. The Marines in the Philippines in 1941-42 played a miniscule role in defending the Philippines.

      The first part of “The Battle History of the Marines”, a documentary authored by a Marine officer presented on History International, it is said that a Battalion of Marines fought at Trenton. No Marines fought at Trenton.

      Author Chuck Lawliss, in “The Marine Book” published in 2002, made a statement that the Marines who were defending Bataan resented General MacArthur for staying on Corregidor during the finding. The Army, not the Marines, defended Bataan.

      Former Marine Donald Belissario, producer of JAG, in one of his episodes had a character described as a former Marine tank commander who lost a foot at the Battle of Medina Ridge. Medina Ridge was an Army battle, 1st Armored Division against units of the Republican Guard.

      Regarding the Marines Hymn, Marines say “the Halls of Montezuma” refer to the Marines’ assault on Chapultepec. According to the Marine Corps publication, Marines did not assault Chapultepec.

      The PBS documentary The Marines refers to the Marines as the most ancient of the Armed Forces. The Continental Army was established 5 months before the Continental Marine Corps.

      Marines claim the Marines have been always there to guard the United States. The Continental Marines were disbanded in 1783. The US Marines were not established until 1798. The Continental Army was disbanded in 1783, but a unit of the Continental Army remained in existence to guard stores at West Point. The US Army was established in 1784.

      • With regard to the 1921 Marine Corps Gazette article, no Marines ever fought at Trenton. One small Battalion of Marines did fight at Princeton, but played no critical role in winning that battle.

  116. Mike;

    When a bonafide Marine takes credit for an Army exploit the “taking credit” charge against Marines makes sense. You really can’t fault the Marines for things people in the media do though you are totally right to correct it.

    E.G. In the movie Heartbreak Ridge w/Clint Eastwood, the rescue of students, calling CAS with a credit card phone call and even the Korean War battle of Heartbreak Ridge are all inaccurately attributed to Marines. I don’t fault the Corps for those inaccuracies unless Marines start making claims based on the movie which says something about scholarship. FYI, actually had a Marine MAJOR saying Marines rescued students at Grenada on a military.com discussion thread.

    BTW, these inaccuracies and worse all add to the “mystique” of the Corps. Marines shouldn’t be upset about them being corrected. Could one imagine the screams and derisive laughter if the Army tried to take credit for Iwo? Double standard?

    • Has any official Marine Corps spokesman ever spoken up to correct the distorted history which created this Marine Corps mystique?

      • Only you and your hooah bitches thinks it’s distorted. Two weeks ago I ran into a WWII vet that had a hat on saying iwo jima. I said Semper Fi to him and he said “I wasn’t in the marines, I was army”. I told him thank you for your service. Then he replied “it wasn’t that bad, we just cleaned up after the marines” he wasn’t just at iwo jima. This coming from a soldier actually in the pacific with the marines. I dont care what book you read… Books and the media can be misleading, in DDT history books don’t tell the whole truth. So unless you were there quit your bitching. Give credit where credit is due… And apparently it’s given to the marines.

      • To the guy below talking about the Rmy vet from Iwo saying ‘we just cleaned up after the Marines’. Id say thats very accurate.

        That said, did you ask his MOS? Because IWO was one of the very few pacific landings the Marines were involved in where NO Army combat elements were involved. Somple support types, and in very small numbers. So while thats a cool story, it doesnt prove much about IWO, or about anything else.

        It would be like someone else saying rhey ran into a Marine vet wearing a Normandy hat. And the Marine, who was simply security forces for whatever navy ship he was on, replied ‘it wasnt bad. The Army did all the fighting.’

        By the way im not a hooah bitch, im a prior service Marine. Semper Fi and welcome home. And remember both sides have their wars….and wars are all the same…

  117. Mike;

    You can’t attribute all of the Marine Corps mystique to distorted history.

    What level of effort should we hold the Marine Corp to in correcting the record. Is there a standard? Do we really want to go there? The Army can afford to be the “bigger” man.

    Not saying we should allow Marines to twist history or make it up but I think your trying to hold the Marines to an impossible standard and hurting your case. Suggest sticking to what can be documented. You’ve done a very good job so far.

    “Follow Me”

    • What is impossible about rendering an accurate account of history?

    • A lot of Marine attacks on the Army are malicious and libelous.

      In his memoir, Coral and Brass, Holland M. Smith stated that, on Makin, he had to order men of the 165th Infantry to recover the body of their commander, Colonel Gardner Conroy, and bury it. Colonel Conroy was killed by a Japanese sniper shortly after the 165th Infantry landed on Makin. HM Smith claimed that the regiment allowed his body to lay in the field for three days.

      The truth is, Col. Conroy’s body was recovered and buried on Makin the day he died.

      HM Smith fabricated this episode. He lied.

    • If Marine Corps’ institutional historical accounts are repeatedly exposed to show inacuracies, or worse, outright fabrications, then by any reputable historical standard, their entire record is brought into question and doubt.

      The most knowledgable on this thread are obviously aware of the fact that the Marine Corps maintains a very aggressive public relations operations, and a very large part of that is its historical branch. The Marine Corps is always a willing participant in any book or documentry, or movie in development, and will actively and aggressively support those projects only so long as they are complimentary to the Marine Corps. In those processes, they certainly exercise influence.

      I spoke with one former Marine Corps major recently who was working on a book, and his research was increasingly showing evidence of Marine Corps mistakes at the highest level, and even cowardess in the ranks during one particular incident. He was quickly shunned by the Marine Corps, and institutionally prevented from any further access of their records.

      To your point majrod, the Marine Corps has established its own standard. It is just finding it increasingly difficult to live up to that standard. It is revealing now that since 2008 the Marine Corps is de-emphasizing the term “Devil Dogs.” Do you think the exposition of that nickname as being a total fabrication has anything to do with that? And perhaps by extention, are attempting to preserve the record of their conduct in Belleau Wood? That record by the way, is becoming increasingly under assault by legitimate historians.

      An institution that won’t allow historical examination of warts and all, has many, many warts to hide. And the Mrine Corps has built itself up so high, it has a long, long way to fall.

  118. Mike;

    There’s absolutely nothing wrong with correcting history especially when its hateful. There’s nothing wrong with holding a Marine or the Marine Corps responsible for stating or restating something libelous.

    I complement your scholarship and well done research. The only thing I’m saying is when someone outside the Corps says something untrue its unfair to hold the Corps responsible.

    As for correcting the record, official statements, publications etc. have a responsibility to correct the record. Should the USMC correct PBS? It’d be nice but I won’t hold them to standard for doing it (unless they are the source of misinformation). Is the Corps going to monitor all media? Do we do that in the Army?

    I think you’ve already shown an OVERWHELMING amount willful misinformation to demonstrate a level of ill will towards the Army in Marine Corps culture. Quoting things beyond the Corps control is overkill. We can afford to be bigger men.

    BTW, it would be helpful if you cited where the TRUE history is. It would equip us in helping correcting the record out there and maybe over time the Marines inclined to bash the Army might realize they’ll be called on it. And remember, I’m on your side.

    • Specify exactly what is beyond Marine Corps control.

      There have been claims that Marines defended the Bataan. Is it beyond the control of the Marine Corps to say the Marines did not defend Bataan?

      My experience has been, when I point out how Marines have distorted history to glamorize the Corps, I am subjected to a number of rather vulgar personal attacks.

      MG Ralph Smith never personally attacked Holland Smith(except maybe for HM Smith’s claim about Col. Gardner Conroy). He maintained a great deal of dignity following the Smith versus Smith affair. Unfortunately his silence resulted in HM Smith’s allegations about the 27th ID being taken as gospel.

      Only recently, in books likeHarry Gailey’s “Howling Mad Versus the Army, Francis O’Brien’s “Battling for Saipan” and Harold Goldberg’s “D Day in the Pacific: The Battle of Saipan”, has it become better known how valiantly the 27th ID did serve on Saipan. I add, these fairly recent books also show that HM Smith was not a particularly brilliant ground commander.

      On the other hand we have “Semper Fi: The Definitive Illustrated History of the U.S. Marines” authored by two retired Marine Corps Colonels, published in 2010. Their account of Saipan is very simplistic: the two Marine Divisions advanced; the 27th ID did not; HM Smith was forced to relieve the commander of the 27th ID.

      Marines are still trying to distort history, Someone should point out those distortions and ask why they occur.

  119. Let this whole post die out. This guy claims he knows more about history than the huge preponderance of historians. Let him go boil in his own tiny and lonely teapot.

    • I know more about Marine Corps history than most Marines do. Most Marines believe, incorrectly, that Marines captured Chapultepec.

    • What do you know about Marine Corps History?

    • What historians, other than Marine Corps historians, claim that the Marines captured Chapultepec.

  120. Mike;

    Was trying to be helpful. Will use some of your research but the never ending Marine bashing hurts your message.

    My bottom line is the Marines have a distinguished history. They should be able to make their point without disparaging the Army or taking credit for Army exploits.

    Of all the sevice I believe the Marine Corps culture comes closest to the Army’s. I look upon the Corps as our closest brother and have several good Marine friends. Its a shame most Marines don’t feel the same way.

    • I am sorry you consider it Marine bashing. Marines bashing the Army is a much more common phenomenon.

      I say again, the Marines’ distinguished history includes a lot of fabrication and embellishment.

      One instance of embellishment is what the Marines claim about the Battle of Bladensburg(referrence to http://www.barneyfamily.org/docs/article_03.php).

      The people who held off the British were a unit of sailors commanded by Joshua Barney. It was Commodore Barney’s sailors who impressed the British, not the company of marines who supported them.

      • “I am sorry you consider it Marine bashing. Marines bashing the Army is a much more common phenomenon.”

        Mike;

        I’m agreeing with you! What I’m saying is you never “throw them a bone” or use an occasional weaker point (like PBS inaccuracies are the Marines fault and their PAO office should correct the record) which is contestable. It allows those that don’t want to acknowledge the TRUTH behind your research to characterize you as a “hater”.

        Trying to help you be as effective as possible. For way too long no one has contested the Marine PR Juggernaut. I’ve applauded your efforts and refrencing it so it can be confirmed. You are trying to bat 1000 and come across as less than likeable when 900 is good enough and sounding reasonable.

        This will be my last response ref the issue as it seems you have to have the last word.

        BTW, check out “Operation AL FAJR: A Study in Army and Marine Corps Joint Operations by Matt. M. Matthews. Its out of Leavenworth and does a very good job of bringing out the Army contribution to successfully taking Fallujah largely ignored in the Marine history. You might be able to use it.

      • My Last word to majrod(comment of 5 July 2011)

        Thank you for your commentary. I have no more to say now.

  121. I was in operation al fajr. The Army provided a valuable blocking force to the south, and a tank task force on the east. Team Tank was on the east side of the city clearing (to some extent) the industrial area.

    The individual foot mobile Marines did all the heavy lifting, clearing, back clearing, and nearly all the dying.

  122. With an obviously outrageous title for this thread, you’re obviously someone with some substantial issues that history won’t help.

  123. By the way. Your intro piece has a factual error. Marines lost exactly 1 Marine at umm qasr. You said “heavy casuLties”.

  124. Bill;

    Not to contradict your perception, the article is worth reading and available on line for free. The commanders were quite complimentary of the Marines they helped. They did say that they could have done more but the Marines steadfastly refused to use them suffering more casualties than necessary. (Knocking a house down with 25mm, TOW and 120mm is helpful). Marine commanders repeatedly said they didn’t need them. The Army commanders attributed it to the marines being unfamiliar with mechanized forces in an urban terrain.

    No doubt the Marines did the most bleeding at Fallujah as the Army has done in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last decade. May I recommend reading House to House by Bellavia (sp?). He recieved a silver star in the fight and the Army units lost a company commander, BN SGM attesting to the resistance in their sectors.

  125. I am a Marine, every time i see the Army i feel sick because they are nasty and trully sad. They dont care about how they look or act. the sad thing is they take that same attitude with them to war.

    • THAT was productive and a great reflection on you personally. Its a good thing most soldiers understand that one individual idiot Marine doesn’t mean all Marines are idiots.

      Hope the next Army MEDEVAC pilot doesn’t know how you feel. Then again it wouldn’t matter, he’d still save your life.

    • you low-life scum bag; 23 times as many army troops have died to keep your ignorant ass free than you have brain enough to cognate, Bow down you low life little usmc bitch!

      • Yeah that’s because your army training sucks and gets more of you killed. Plus there are more

  126. Ed,

    I doubt that you are a member of the United States Armed Forces at all given your attitude and lack of spelling and grammar skills. You obviously don’t care how moronic you sound.

    Why don’t you take a look at the below listed site and see how your argument, “nasty and trully sad” stands up.

    http://www.army.mil/medalofhonor/

  127. Guys, Marines are meant for small unit battles. They can be PART of a strike force. The United States Army is the best Army in the world. The Marine Corps is the greatest Corps in the world. Together they make one kick butt machine. I have a feeling that when I get to heaven that the streets will be guarded by United States Marines but will switch off duties with their brothers, the United States Soldiers. We are all brothers, united against defeating the enemies of democracy. The Marines uniforms are amazingly reverent and their history is rich as is the United States Army. When we go to battle, I don’t care who is covering my back a United States Soldier or a United States Marine. All I can say is they are my heroes and both put their life on the line for the greatest nation on earth, The United States of America.

  128. Obviously a running dog yapping with an agenda. The author(s) of this piece had only one intention. And it obviously was to write a completely biased, one sided and idiotic depiction of one our armed services. Oh, by the way, while there were no Marines in the Revolutionary Army, perhaps if you had explained that Marines were assigned to ships, operated as both an infantry/security force and participated in several battles/operations your analysis might have suffered. (They were never a part of the Army so why should they have fought with it?) As it would in almost every depiction of the Marines and their operations that follow.

    • The Marine Corps Gazette, in 1921 admittedly, published an article claiming that 600 Continental Marines reinforced George Washington’s Army and were what made possible the victories of Trenton and Princeton. The Marine Corps Gazette is an official publication of the US Marine Corps. The claim was absolutely false.

      The Continental Marines participated in only two ground campaigns during the Revolution, the Trenton-Princeton campaign and the Penobscot expedition. In neither campaign did they distinguish themselves.

      It is fiction that the Marines were in the forefront of every American war. Much of what the Marines claim as their illustrious history is not history but fiction. Much of it is the Marines claiming credit for Army accomplishments, e.g. the victories of Trenton and Princeton.

      • Mike:

        Thank you for your excellent scholarship in exposing the monstrous usmc fraud. Can you tell me how may Army troops have died in US service since the Army founded America? Can you give a break-down by service in actual numbers? I am certain from my research that US Army sacrifice is near 1000 times that the disgraceful usmc. We French helped a small bit but all intelligent persons recognize it is the US Army that is the greatest military force in world history.

        All the best to you.

  129. I was part of an Army battalion who went to relieve a Marine brigade, due to poor planing on the greater military party, because the replacement Brigade did not overlap with deployment times. We were supposed to be there 30-60 days.
    Within our first 2 weeks of being there, we had installed new faith with the local population (they no longer ran off the streets when a US force drove by) and driven out local Ba’ath Party insurgents. We gathered enough support for our actions that we were left to control the area for 6 months, with one third the size unit the area should have had.
    We were going to stay in the area for our whole 15 months deployment until we had been picked by General Petraeus to conduct air assault raids during the “surge”.
    During the replacement we informed the incoming Marine unit that they would be losing vehicles due to the numbers of IED’s in the area and should plan on having a strong resupply planned for replacement vehicles and vehicle parts. His reply was that they would not loose vehicles, they’ll lose Marines.
    Rivalry aside, this bothered me more than anything. These men joined to serve their country, our country, against it’s enemies. Not die needlessly to prove that a Marine is tough and to build their own PR.
    More than anything, the valor, the history, and the prestige of the Marines is built on the deaths and needless endangerment of it’s men. Good men, who, like me, joined to serve their country, not build up the name of one branch or the other.

    There are a lot of things wrong with both sides of this card. The Army has become soft, for the most part, but the infantry units, and other combat units, still strive hard to keep their units and men above the rest.
    The Marines have become bull headed, and feel they always have something to prove, usually at great cost.

    You do have to consider one thing though. When I talk with another service member from another branch, there is always some good spirited bashing back and forth, but there is always respect back and forth. Except for the Marines, who show no respect, and in turn, earn no respect.

  130. You lose all credibility from the get go. A Marine brigade would never replace an Army battalion. A Marine Brigade is a task organized force. We don’t have standing brigades, like the Army has. The deployed brigade size is normally between 4K and 16K Marines and Sailors.

    As such a Marine brigade would never ever replace an Army battalion (850-1000, even overstaffed like the Army likes to do things).

    So you strike out in one pitch.

    I met an Army medic who had been attached to Marines in Al Fajr. He said he was so glad to be put with Marines. He was confident that he’d be protected and he wouldn’t die from accidental discharges the way so many soldier do. Said those 3 weeks were the proudest moments of his 12 year career…and he was most proud when the Marines referred to his as doc, like they do our Corpsman.

    • Bill, you’re an imbicile.

      “Overstaffed like the army likes to do thing?”
      An army division is about 15,000 troops. A marine division is anywhere between 20,000-25,000 troops. An army regiment is about 3,5000. A marine regiment is about 5,000-6,000. An army battalion is about 900. A marine battalion is about 1,200-1,500. An army rifle squad is 9. A marine rifle squad is 12-15.

  131. gDurant: Acccording to the Congressional Research Sevice 1,243,687 Americans have died in combat from the Revolution to Feb 2010. 1,107,239 were soldiers. 48,314 were Marines.

  132. The numbers are not surprising given the USMC did not become a large land force until WWI. Even then, I believe there was just one brigade sent to Europe and it was assigned to an Army division. The USMC role in WWII and thereafter became much larger but still smaller than the other services. I was reading somewhere that more men died in combat in the 8th Air Force of the US Army Air Corps during bombing campaign against Germany than the total number of USMC combat deaths throughout the war. The role of the USMC in combat operations has increased since then and the margin has dropped. However, you will see more soldiers dying in battle than marines because of the overall numbers committed. It is unfortunate to see so many men and women dying. The costs of defending our nation and freedom are very high.

    • Dave – I don’t disagree. Casualties are always correlated to how many are committed to combat. Even today Army casualties run three times higher than Marine casualties (about the same correlation of forces) and MUCH higher when Marines were relatively rare in Afghanistan 2004 – 2008. Media coverage unfortunately is not evenly distributed nor is the credit. MANY more soldiers died in the Pacific than Marines but most would believe it was a Marine show.

      All in all its good to bring up these stats as symbolic of the sacrifices each service has made for our nation. I’m just looking for some fairness beyond anecdotes and quotes.

  133. Majrod: Your point on the media and perception issues are on point. Many are ignorant of the Army’s contribution in the Pacific for a number of reasons. The Marines have better PR, continuously tout their prowess, and have traditions that the Army has lacked since WWII ended. How many Army slogan, uniform, and organization changes have we seen?

    Hollywood has also helped. I always will remember John Wayne in Sands of Iwo Jima and others. Amphibious landings also spark the imagination. However, I felt the recent Pacific series was terrible and portrayed the Marines in a poor and inaccurate way. Seems there has to be some agenda in modern films. The main characters have to be flawed, their bad sides outweighed by their commitment to diversity or the environment, etc. Even the “bad guys” can’t be bad. How many films that portrayed the German military (Das Boot, Stalingrad, etc.) included characters who were not really Nazis and thought Hitler was a fool. Hollywood can’t just tell the true story, even though actual history is usually a much more compelling account.

    This issue is common elsewhere. Think about Europe in WWII and everyone points to the Airborne or the Rangers. Today, it is the Special Forces. Everyone one seems to forget that it is the line Soldier or Marine who wins battles and wars. Look at the casualty rates in Europe. Line divisions sustained more than the 82nd and 101st because line units were in almost continual operations while the Airborne was frequently inserted and pulled out when an operation ended.

  134. great points

  135. Hell, I used to want to be a Marine when I was a kid, I thought that they were the most bad ass out of all the branches, but than I started to realize many in the Corps have a very strong superiority complex over the other branches, and I decided that I did not want to be associated with a group that believes they are better than everybody. I learned that I could become equally a bad ass by joining the Army. When I went to MEPS there was this one kid who thought he was better than everybody else because he was going to the Marines, he wouldn’t shut up and had such a cocky attitude. What was even worse that day was that there was one kid who was going to join the Army, who started talking to one of the Marine recruiters there. He told the recruiter how he was thinking about joining the Marines but instead chose the Army.The recruiter than said in a very sarcastic tone “So you chose to join the Army become Army Strong, and Be all you can Be. If you want a real challenge join the Marines.” Neverless…this kid was giving himself a challenge by going Army Infantry and then Airborne School. Luckily I know this is not how all Marines act, but it’s usually the cherries and pogues who always have to express how they feel they are better than everybody because they are a Marine. One of my best friends is a Marine, who has been to Afghanistan and knows what combat is like. He has his usual jabs at the Army every once and a while but does not blatantly disrespect the Army like many young Marines do. The Marine Corp should be kept as a separate branch, but there needs to be a more common respect for each other rather than constantly putting each other down, because both the Army and Marines kick ass.

    • I have read a recent article on Iwo Jima, Worth the Cost? Justificaton of the Iwo Jima Invasion By Robert S. Burrell who wrote “Ghosts of Iwo Jima”. I read that the planners for Iwo Jima expected that taking the Island would take three days, two days to break the Japanese resistance and one day to mop up. The belief was, the combination of naval gun fire, air support and thousands of battle tested Marines would prove irresistible.

      The same was applied earlier in the Pacific War. Planners of the Betio invasion expected that the Marines would easily take Betio. HM Smith expected the Marines would take Saipan and Guam both before the end of June of 1944. Planners of the Peleliu invasion thought it would take 3 to 4 days to break Japanese resistance. In each of those cases, the battle lasted much longer than the Marine planners expected and cost more casualties, dead and wounded than expected.

      Professor Harry Gailey briefly touched on this in his book, “Peleliu 1944″. Marines, especially Marine leaders, believed that the Marine Corps had this intrinsic superiority that would awe any particular foe and break his resistance. It lead to very costly battles in terms of lives. What I can not understand why the Marines planned Iwo Jima this way after three previous campaigns in which this strategy did not work.

      This rather inappropriate assumption of superiority on the part of Marines led to rather profuse bloodshed.

  136. Gents,

    Firstly, I was a Marine Infantryman (LAR) in the opening phases of OEF, and later an Army Cav Scout a few years after. I have seen both sides, so I probably have a little better understanding of the argument.

    Firstly, Marines brag, that’s what we do. Some is based on reality, some based on mystique and ‘indoc’. I will be the first to admit, theres tons of legends about the Corps which are false, or falsly reported. Some is to blame on Marines, other parts on Marine ‘nutswingers’. That said, The Marine Corps down to the individual is very locked on, and very good at what he/she does.

    The Marines will always have a slight leg up on the Army based simply on basic training being equal accross the board for all Marines. The Army waters down training to the POG’s, which it should not do. That said, the Marines have just as many of these POG’s…theyre called ‘Sailors’. Marines refuse to admit it, but Marines are simply the ground combat side of the Navy. The Navy, as large as it it, takes care of the majority of admin duties for the Marines. This is where the ‘nasty army’ talk stems from.

    The Army could learn a LOT from the Marines. That said, the Marines could learn a LOT from the Army. The 13 weeks of Marine boot camp are intense, but let’s face it, most of it is fluff. The last 3rd of it gets real, and later SOI is the real training. The Army (at least in the combat arms side) does away with a few weeks of basic by eliminating the several hours/days/weeks of D&C, learning that Archibald Henderson banged a 17 year old (Dirty, er, GRAND old Man of the Corps), etc etc. Tha Marines wish to keep the tradition, and so I can understand retaining the D&C and heritage. I think the Army could use more of it, personaly. However, the Corps can also learn to lean some of it out and focus on fighting skills. (Also, Soldiers at OSUT are trained by NCO’s of that MOS….Infantry training INfantry, not air wingers and motor T heroes training potential 03′s).

    As much as I enjoyed the intillment of Marine history and lore, even as a young boot, I could see how much slant there was to it. I ask any Devil Dogs reading this to dust off their green monster and look up the history section. WW2 was an all marine affair, no Nazis ever existed, etc etc. Later, read about Marines who parachuted into Panama (?), and Marine AC-130′s who supported them….

    As for Fallujah, there is a lot more to the story. The rumors I see here of the 82cd ‘refusing to patrol’ is false. In fact, it was the 82cd’s aggressive tactics which the Marines claimed caused the insurgency within Fallujah. At the handover in early 04, the marines openly pointed fingers at the Army, and said they knew better how to fight ‘small wars’. They tried a different approach, which later led to the creation of the ‘Fallujah Brigade’….armed and trained by mrines, left to patrol the city…and later turned out to be the core of the insurgency. A COMBINED Marine/Army team later routed it. Both sides played an equal and significant role in doing so.

    Another common complaint from Marines is the lack of skill of Air Force CAS. Well, where are the 18′s? I feel strongly, the first step, should be the elimination of multi-role fighters from Marine Air Wings. Marine Air should be dedicated to supporting the GCE, not being the jack of all trades master of none it is now. The argument of ‘we get the scraps from the Navy and army’ is only partially correct. The Corps chooses to retain expensive fighter aircraft and has not shot down a plane in 50 years), and continues to do so with the future F-35. But how many more tanks and fighting vehicles, new rifles and machine guns (our bread and butter) could be purchased by not purchasing more and more Phib’s? I promise you the Army has nothing in the inventory equal in cost to one LHA/LPD etc. And we continue to buy more so we can take a beach…how often does that occur?

    The Marine Corps should remain as is. The authors suggestion of merging the two branches is lame. SWhy not merge the Airborne and Armor branches then? Marines are light, forward deployable, and very good at rapid deployment for follow on forces. The Army light structures CAN do the same, but Marines are slightly better based on their combined arms set-up. That said, the Army is far better equipped/trained for large scale operations. In short, both have unique purposes. Either COULD do what the latter does, but as we stand today, why?

    Lastly, all Soldiers should recognize what the Marines have done and are doing. That said, all Marines need a reality check and do the same. Both have shit the bed, both have made history. The Navy adn Air Force are in the same boat.

    • Hey man thanks for your service to our country and god bless you. You definently know what your talking about and seem to be one of the very few people on this website that is able to bring your opinion to the conversation without a personal bias. I agree that both the Army and Marines can learn many crucial things from each other, but the problem is that their egos will never let them. Hopefully one day their will not be so much of a rivalry between the Army and Marines and each branch will realize that it is much more productive to work together rather than fight among each other on who is better than the other.

  137. MOTO – Good post. Agree with most of what you said. The services definitely have their own capabilities and traditions and should be maintained as two separate forces.

    Minor correction Army Infantry basic is completely done by 11 series just like the tankers/scouts only have 19 series drill sgt’s. The rest, well the Army does have a problem instilling a warrior ethos across the force.

    Both branches can learn from each other and I think do. FET’s though claimed by the Marines were started by the Army and in fact the Army lent female soldiers to the Marines as they stood up the program.

    I would also state that the Marines are primarily responsible for fueling the current rivalry. Talk with most Marines long enough and the inferiority complex comes out. There’s no reason for it. The Marines have much to be proud of it just seems that most of their self avowed accolades have to do with trying to diminish the Army.

    This article goes far in busting the myths and outright lies.

  138. The latest posts are well-considered and fair, much different from earlier ones. I don’t have much to add but would like to address a bit of myth with Basic Training.

    I’ve heard the argument several times that the longer Marine Basic Training is superior to the shorter Army Basic Training and that translates into super combat skill or performance. This argument greatly overstates the reality and worth of basic training.

    Basic training is just that, basic. It is an introduction to the military and an immersion into common duties and tasks. Combat-related skills are taught and certainly longer training provides more knowledge and exposure. However, basic training is still rudimentary at best, longer or shorter.

    The first real step toward combat proficiency comes afterwards with MOS-specific training where focus and repetition instill skills. Even then, the new Marine or Soldier is still lacking to a large degree.

    I was an Artillery Officer in the Army (Battery XO) so will share my experience from that perspective. It took weeks of field training for new Soldiers (after basic and MOS training) to get up to speed on their jobs and their role in unit operations. The greatest proficiency came after Soldiers began to work with their cannon crew members directly and learn from experienced NCO’s. Unit cohesiveness, familiarity, and repetitive training forged them further.

    I am so glad we learned from the Vietnam War where new Soldiers and Marines were simply fed in as replacements. They had little opportunity to learn and be proficient. Basic and MOS training were not enough. Gladly, it appears we have departed from this practice and now rotate whole units into and out of war zones. New personnel are assigned, assimilated into units, and have an opportunity to train before being deployed into a combat zone. My son, an Army Tanker, trained for four months with his unit before being deployed to Iraq. Even then, his battalion was not initially posted to a “hot zone” and had several weeks of training operations in the theater beforehand.

  139. One issue which is discussed on the web is Marines not serving in the ETO in WWII. The Marine explanation, in a few words, is that Army jealousy of the Marines kept the Marines out of the ETO.

    I have been reading “Master of Seapower”, a biography of Admiral Ernest King. In WWII, the Marine Corps was subordinate to the Navy. Ernest King controlled where the Marines were deployed. George Marshall, while functioning as a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, did not have the authority of a today’s JCS Chairman. He could not order Admiral King to make King’s Marines available for the ETO.

    In spite of the Germany first strategy, Admiral King was determined to go on the offensive in the Pacific using his assets, including his Marines. By the time of Operation Torch, 1st, 2nd and 3rd Marines were all committed to the Pacific offensive which started at Guadalcanal.

    Planning for Overlord began in 1943. In 1943, the 4th Marine Division was organizing. 2nd, 3rd and 4th Marine Divisions were all committed to the Central Pacific offensive while Overlord was being planned. The Marines at that time did not have the capability of organizing additional divisions for Overlord. If the Marines were to participate in Overlord, the Divisions would have come from the Pacific. Taking Marine Divisions from the Pacific would have meant the Central Pacific offensive would have had to be put on hold. Admiral King would have never countenanced that.

    The largest, most complex amphibious assaults of the War happened in the ETO and in the Mediterranean. Marines were not involved because Admiral King kept his Marines for the smaller offensives in the Pacific. He would not release them for the ETO.

    This Marine explanation is another example of Marines distorting history to glorify the Marines, nothing more.

  140. Marines have distorted history when it comes to the War of 1812.

    At this web page, http://cramberry.net/sets/3925-marine-corps-history-significant-battles, what is claimed is:

    “Battle of New Orleans In January of 1815, Marines under the command of General Andrew Jackson soundly defeated British Forces that were attacking the city of New Orleans. The British lost approximately 2,000 men while American losses were less than 100.”

    Andrew Jackson had between 4000 and 5000 men on line at the Battle of New Orleans. The number of Marines was 58. Marines played a very small role in defeating the British at New Orleans. They may as well not have been there at all. We have this Marine Friendly web site trying to credit the victory exclusively to the Marines. If this is not an attempt on the part of Marine admirers to claim credit for the Marines which the Army accomplished, I don’t know what it is.

    The Marine account of Bladensburg is that the fighting qualities of the Marines so impressed the British that they refrained from burning the Marine Barracks and/or the Marine Commandant’s house out of respect. According to “Commodore Barney at the Bladensburg Races”, an article published in US Naval Institute Proceedings, the dialogue between Commodore Barney and the British leaders, MG Robert Ross and Admiral George Cockburn was this:

    “Admiral Cockburn and General Ross soon came upon Barney where he had fallen. The two exchanged kind words with the commodore, inquiring after his wound. “I am really very glad to see you, Commodore,” General Ross said at last.

    “I am sorry I can not return the compliment, General,” said Barney.

    Ross smiled and turned to Cockburn. “I told you it was the FLOTILLA MEN(emphasis added).”

    “Yes,” Cockburn said, “you were right, though I could not believe you—they[the flotilla men] have given us the only fighting we have had.”

    The British leaders never specifically mentioned the Marines. The people they complimented after Bladensburg were Joshua Barney’s sailors.

    I say again, much of what the Marines claim as their history is fiction, not history.

    • so then why were they not burned the barracks and Commodore’s house.

      • Why didn’t they burn the barracks or Commodore’s home? DUH!!! Why would they? The Brits already burned the White House down. They had made their point.

        The hubris of Marines and their fans knows no limits. Your comments are like a taking credit for D-Day because there were Marines on some of the ships or some dimwit that claimed the Marines led the landings in Africa and captured an airfield when a detachment of Marines landed a day after the area was secured.

        “Good Grief”, said Charlie Brown with a facepalm.

    • Hate to burst your bubble, but of all the numerous contingents present on the New Orleans battlefield, only TWO were smaller (as they were back then) Regular Army regiments, along with a detachment of the 1st US Dragoons (held in Reserve along with a militia unit). The vast majority of the American force consisted of formal state militia units, informal (back woodsmen / frontier men) militias, combined with pirates (mainly used as cannon gunners on cannon wrestled thru the swamp from Lafitte’s own pirate navy FLEET ships) and an ad hoc unit of black slaves who had escaped from British controlled areas and thrown on the line after just a couple weeks training!

      Just another example of the Army taking credit for the accomplishments of others!

      http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Orleans_American_order_of_battle

      Note references… Which I note are extremely rare on this site – especially amongst the fanatical, vicious Marine hating posters!

  141. Another issue with Marines is that General MacArthur left the Philippines, he did not recommend the 4th Marine Regiment for a Presidential Unit Citation. He had recommended Army Units. Marines ascribe this to General MacArthur’s dislike of the Marines.

    The Army Units which General MacArthur recommended were fighting this heroic, desperate battle against the Japanese on Bataan. They had achieved a significant strategic result of throwing the Japanese timetable off balance. The Japanese expected to secure the Philippines in 50 days. Although they were short of food, ammunition, medical supplies, the Soldiers resisted for 4 months and did not surrender until they were almost out of ammunition, suffering from malnutrition and from disease.

    When the 4th Marines arrived in the Philippines in December 1941, they were understrength(2 Battalions, 800 men) and had just spent 17 years on garrison duty in Shanghai, by all accounts not a tough assignment for most of that time. When they arrived in the Philippines, General MacArthur assigned them to the defense of Corregidor, not because he thought they were his best troops and he wanted them guarding his headquarters but because he did not think they would be effective ground combat troops. The 4th Marine Regiment remained on Corregidor while the Soldiers defended Bataan.

    That might have had a great deal with General MacArthur’s reluctance to recommend them for a PUC.

    I think a lot of Marines believe, mistakenly, that the 4th Marines did fight on Bataan. According to the account in Marine Colonel Robert D. Heinl’s “Soldiers of the Sea”, the 4th Marines did not.

  142. “We have two companies of Marines running rampant all over the northern half of this island, and three Army regiments pinned down in the southwestern corner, doing nothing. What the hell is going on?
    Gen. John W. Vessey Jr., USA, Chairman of the the Joint Chiefs of Staff
    during the assault on Grenada, 1983″

    Personally, I doubt that General Vessey ever said that. The Army does not field regiments as tactical units. General Vessey, an Army General, would know that.

    The force that invaded Grenada was about 7000 men. Judging from the size of an Army Regiment in WWII and Korea, 3 regiments would be 10000 troops.

  143. Looks like more Marine advertisement…lol… ^

  144. Looks like a smartass… oorah… ^

  145. I like that the Army always feels the need to tell everyone how they are underrated and just as good as the Corps. Marines just assume they are the best and public opinion seems to follow (including the enemies) That’s the Corps’ greatest asset, its reputation for ferocity.

    • Is that the repute the impident USMC had when they were blown up in disgrace in Beirut by Hesballah in 1983 and defeated in many battles in Iraq? You are a moron and need to pull your head out. Immediately stop your propagandist support of the disgraceful and insignificant usmc as has been innumerated above.

      • I treated casualties of the Beirut Bombing. In spite of my statements with regard to the Army versus Marine Corps, I say it is unfair to call it a disgrace that the Marines were blown up in Beirut, except maybe for the star level leaders who imposed the rules of engagement on the Marines which left them unready for the bombing.

        It is wrong to call the defense of Bataan a disgrace to the Army. it is just as wrong to call Beirut a disgrace to the Marine Corps.

      • To my last reply I add, a number of Marines came through the Beirut bombing and continued to serve in the Armed Forces. I remember a number of Army Reservists called up with the Hospital Unit with which I served in the Gulf War of 1990-1991. The situation was not strenuous and minimally dangerous. A number of those Army reservists were grumbling that they had not signed up for that kind of duty and were going to resign the first opportunity they got.

      • durant – You’re losing it dude. Getting blown up isn’t disgraceful. You realize how many troops have been killed though no fault of their own? You’re also out of line in calling the Corps disgraceful or insignificant.

        Just want to be sure as an Army vet I separate myself from those comments. I have a great deal of respect for the Corps despite the off the chain boasting of some Marines or the twisted history you’ve documented.

        That last post was over the top and as an Army officer can admit when my service makes mistakes as the ROE was in Beruit. That doesn’t reflect on the Army as a whole or the soldier individually. Be specific or be correctly labelled and marginalized as a Marine hater.

      • First of all we didn’t lose any battles in iraq… Name one. Secondly all I have to say is Jessica lynch. Who went to go save their army asses. Not SF, not soldiers, but marines or and how many soldiers have been capture compared to marines in Iraq? And let’s not forget I’ve personnaly have seen soldiers run as marines advance. We have an ego because we earn it.
        If any other service member wants to join the corps the have to go through boot camp. But if a marine goes to any other service they usually get promoted and a bonus. Who is at the white house and every US embassy throughout the world? Marines, yeah with 1/3 of the men. There is a reason why we are there and not soldiers.

      • The marines in Beirut had no ammunition in their rifles. Plus, they blew up a barracks, it wasn’t like they defeated them in combat.

      • Agreed with mike. The defense of Bataan was brave. The army was cut off and overrun, yet they held out for months. That was not disgraceful. In fact, they should be commended for that.

  146. James – The Army doesn’t go around extolling its accomplishments or history. It truly is an egalitarian and humble organization. In contrast this thread is full of marines keeping track of anecdotes and quotes attesting to the superiority of the Corps. That smacks of an underlying inferiority complex. The overwhelming majority of this thread hasn’t been attacking the Corps but its tendency to exagerate or take license with the truth.

    The Corps does have a great reputation. Public polls consider it the most prestigious branch. The Army is considered the most important. Hmmmmm, so much for public opinion?

    Reputations are great and I’m glad Marines “assume” they’re the best. Most of us know that saying about “assume”…

    BTW, I’m no enemy of the Corps and you shouldn’t consider everyone that disagrees with the . I have a great deal of respect for my fellow service. I just don’t buy the propaganda and am just as proud of my branch and its “longer” and more illustrious history. :)

  147. What was the purpose of writing this article?

    It reads like a bad episode of the “Brady Bunch”.

    I can see it now, here is a guy who didn’t get accepted into the Marine Corps, so now he hates them so much he starts sounding like Jan Brady.

    “Marcia, Marcia, Marcia…”

    • The article identifies many myths claimed as marine accomplishments. It tells a story of organizational hubris and self promotion. You haven’t refuted one fact. The Marines had good reason in ’48 (60+ yrs ago) to fear for their existence. Since then they’ve overcompensated. I’m a true blue retired Army infantry officer. I’d never go as far as disband the USMC. I have a tremendous amount of respect for the Corps as a whole and for marines individually but many Marines go out of their way to treat my service with disrespect.

      I don’t condone some of the off the wall comments made about Marines in this thread and commented so but there is also a very unhealthy relationship between the Army and the Marines and since Korea USMC culture has embraced it.

      That alone is a good reason to write the article.

      I’d be interested if anyone can correct any factual inaccuracies made by the author as to claims of Marine Corps feats that actually are untrue. Haven’t seen anyone do that yet.

    • I think that if he isn’t the infamous Marine hating “Mike Sparks” (google name for his weird articles and very viciously slanted anti Marine rants), then he has been highly influenced by him… Either that or thrasher man or durant or one of the other fanatical posters is actually Mike Sparks (he loves posting and doing reviews under aliases)

  148. I will right away take hold of your rss feed as I can not in finding your e-mail subscription hyperlink or newsletter service. Do you’ve any? Please let me know in order that I could subscribe. Thanks.

  149. -Fallujah NOV 2004. Task Force 2-2 Entered the City FIRST. Thats right, the U.S. Army cleared a Hole to get into Fallujah. And if any Marine on here denies it than they simply are Lieing, and were NOT there. Soldiers of 1st Infantry Division, and 1st Cavalry entered that city first…and created a strong hold. Marines followed behind and helped clear the city. That is the simple fact.

    Now, the worst city in Iraq was NOT in Fact Fallujah, It WAS IN FACT Mosul, which recieved HALF the Attention, due to the Blackwater Contractors that were killed and hung up. Mosul was Completly over ran by insurgent when “Deuce Four” 2/4 showed up, SBCT. No Marines were there, and the SBCT did not half to pull Out of the City and surround it like Moron’s, like the USMC did in Fallujah. Despite being attacked Heavily everyday with IED’s, VBIEDS, and Small Arm’s Daily.

    My Last point, 187 Infantry 101st ABN was the first conventional ground unit to hit combat in Afghan, No Marines were there. For any Marine to deny that is simply a Lie. Operation Anaconda, LOOK IT UP JARHEADS. YOU WERNT THERE! You arnt first to fight, you arnt first to Baghdad, You wernt First into Fallujah in Nov 04′. YOU never went to Mosul, YOU did not take Tal Afar. You called for help like squealing pig’s in Najaf, and 1st Cav had to come down & clear that shit up. You didnt Quell Sadr City, Shit? What the hell have you done? Those are all fact’s gentleman. Please look them up before you spit propaganda. Those are FACTS!

    Yes I am a Grunt, and a Drill Sergeant. 8 Years Active Duty- Yes Ive been there, ive done all there is to do. And If you think you are better trained than our unit’s. I’ll put our Bradley’s & Dismount’s up against those Stupid ass AMTRAK amphibious things that dont even have a main gun, or your LAV’s…Those would get demolished by a TOW missle or 25mm so quick. Thats why we took Baghdad, Thats why you idiots were bogged down & Pinned down. Fox 1-3 OUT!

    • Your comments are spot on as I witnessed all phases of the usmc defeat and the subsequent us army victories there as a NATO correspondent. Bravo in putting forth the truth about the fraudulent and criminal usmc!

      • Thank you. I respect all Infantry, as an Infantryman Myself I know how tough of a life being a Grunt really is. Its not all hollywood. Any Grunt knows that.

        Task Force 2-2 Was the First Into Fallujah, That is a FACT. They were Specifically requested from the USMC ground commander to come over, due to the Superb job they did in coming down to Najaf. Sadr City, did we pull out of there and surround it like the USMC did?? NOO.

        MOSUL – Did we get pushed out of that city and have to Surround it, and Go back in and Re-Take it. NO. MOSUL WAS the Worst city in Iraq, Worse than Fallujah. The SBCT & follow on Units did a SUPERB JOB in quelling that city, without being FORCED out.

        Aadhamiya Baghdad, again one of the Worst Neighborhoods in Iraq, Where I was at with 11th ACR 2005. Recieved no media attention. There are so many small battles and cities that we controlled it makes me sick to hear this crap from these Jarheads about Fallujah. THE BLACKWATER contractors garnered so much Hype.

        NEWS FLASH MARINES- YOU WERNT FIRST INTO FALLUJAH, TASK FORCE 2-2 U.S. ARMY WAS! ANY MARINE THAT WAS THERE WHO IS NOT A BOLD FACED LIER WILL ATTEST TO THAT!.

        Now, we all know the first unit aside Delta/Ranger/Seals/CIA to see combat was 187 Infantry, 101st ABN. Also there was a small amount of 10th MTN.

        NEWS FLASH AGAIN, JAR HEADS. -OPERATION ANACONDA – YOU WERNT THERE…..THAT WAS THE FIRST UNIT TO “FIGHT”, a claim which you make all the time.

        Any Jarhead with the amount of integrity left in his body that it takes to admit they were NOT first into Fallujah in Nov 04′…Were Not first into Assghanistan, NEVER WENT TO MOSUL – THE WORST CITY IN IRAQ.

        Hell, Lets talk about Desert Storm. The unit that went farthest North actually INTO Iraq was 187 Infantry, 101st ABN. Who Air Assaulted across the border. I mean, come on.

    • I’ll beat your drill Sergeant ass.
      You weren’t in fallujah cause it wasn’t the 1st Calvary it was 2nd.

      Located approximately forty miles west of Baghdad, Fallujah was effectively surrounded by US forces by October 14. Establishing checkpoints, they sought to ensure that no insurgents were able to escape the city. Civilians were encouraged to leave to prevent being caught in the coming battle and an estimated 70-90% of the city’s 300,000 citizens departed. During this time, it was clear that an assault on the city was imminent and the insurgents prepared a variety of defenses and strong points. The attack on the city was assigned to the I Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF).

      With the city cordoned off, efforts were made to suggest that the Coalition attack would come from the south and southeast as had occurred in April. Instead, I MEF intended to assault the city from the north across its entire breadth. On November 6, Regimental Combat Team 1, consisting of the 3rd Battalion/1st Marines, 3rd Battalion/5th Marines, and the US Army’s 2nd Battalion/7th Cavalry, moved into position to assault the western half of Fallujah from the north.

      They were joined by Regimental Combat Team 7, made up of the 1st Battalion/8th Marines, 1st Battalion/3th Marines, and the US Army’s 2nd Battalion/2nd Infantry which would attack the eastern part of the city. These units were joined by Iraqi troops as well. With Fallujah sealed, operations began on at 7:00 PM on November 7, when Task Force Wolfpack moved to take objectives on the west bank of the Euphrates River opposite Fallujah. While Iraqi commandoes captured Fallujah General Hospital, Marines secured the two bridges over the river to cut off any enemy retreat from the city.

      A similar blocking mission was undertaken by the British Black Watch Regiment south and east of Fallujah. The next evening, RCT-1 and RCT-7, backed by air and artillery strikes commenced their attack into the city. Using Army armor to disrupt the insurgent’s defenses, the Marines were able to effectively attack enemy positions, including the main train station. Though engaged in fierce urban combat, Coalition troops were able to reach Highway 10, which bisected the city, by the evening of November 9. The eastern end of the road was secured the next day, opening a direct supply line to Baghdad.
      So since you weren’t there shut your hooah ass up and stop making shit up. It was coalition forces led by 1st MEF.

      • Thank you for a detailed, historically TRUE accounting of this battle. Very refreshing as compared to the psychotic, venomous post (full of falsehoods, twisted “facts”, and an unbelievable hatred) by those such as durant, thrasherman, and a couple of others who are clearly psychotic patholic liars in desperate need of psychological help!

      • Fid you just copy and paste that? (You dod. Dont bother answering, I was being rhetorical).

        The ACR guy above is right. You arent. 2/2 Inf and 2/7 Cav were part of both RCT’s when they breached. And they were there as a request by the MEF

        Seriously dude, if you werent there, dont cite wikipedia and play it off like you were

        USMC 0313

  150. After reading the article and the comments, I could not leave without addressing the issues…

    As a former Marine (both enlisted and officer) and well read on our Corp’s illustrious history, my response to much of the tendentious detail pointed at discrediting this history through its exposure of embellishment is the time honored Sea Service response…

    No shit!!

    Of course it’s embellished, in some cases the facts may have even been rearranged to reflect a different outcome! Obviously the idiot savant author despite his service in the Navy has never heard a sea story before. I doubt if the young lad has ever left the pier much less been shipboard, otherwise he would have known straight away after any decent research that the lily has possibly been gilded in some instances. To think a history written by a Marine might be shown in a favorable light to the advantage of the Marine Corps should not leave one incredulous.

    I would submit that we tread carefully by labelling some of these examples as lies. Never an outright lie (that would be disrespectful to refer to any of our shipmates as liars!) but stirring and heroic deeds to inspire the young Devil Dogs to go in harms way in various climes and on distant shores as their predecessors have done. Smedley Butler, Herman Hanneken, Dan Daly, Chesty Puller, John A. Lejuene, John Basilone, Dakota Myer…such tales, such accomplishments!!

    Who has not sat spellbound at the boots of some grizzled veteran (Soldier or Marine) and heard these sacred words:

    “No shit, there we were…” SImply spellbinding.

    Now, I dearly love the Marine Corps and an early observation by one of my Army brethern clearly points out the tendency of a Marine to wax poetic about the glories and abilities of himself and his fellow Marines. Some would characterize this as abrassive, nay boorish.

    I concede the point.

    We were not recruited for our mastery of the language, but the mastery of our craft and talent in bending the enemy to our will through direct and violent means. It is a minor vice that should accepted as a part of who we are. I can only apologize for behavior that will never change in the same manner that Marines will be forever required to master such arcane knowledge as Archibald Henderson, sword drill and the mysterious contents of the Base flagpole truck.

    You say we lack respect, that we feel inferior and must over compensate. Oh that we were that sophisticated and operated on such a subtle level. The truth is we are simple creatures. Focused on our tiny band’s mission to the exclusion of the delicate feelings of our sister services.

    You say that we don’t include you in any of our stories…well of course not. We’re really not paying any attention to you. As I have said, we are focused on ourselves. We are tiny service and we gaze in awe at your Homeric disorganization, chaos, activity and patches, tabs and badges. Stupefying to the point of hypnosis!

    Deep down though, we really like you all (Army, Navy Airforce, Coast Guard, Reserves, National Guard.) Why I myself hold the Army, Navy and Air Force in the greatest esteem just from the enormous amount of materials and equipment that you have provided for myself and my fellow Marines at numerous installations and only noted by the many empty spaces that mysteriously manifested themselves all over your facilities whenever we were in proximity. Such magnanimity and unselfish support. Of course nothing can be proved that we were ever there.

    Remember, you can choose your friends, but you can’t choose your family. And we are family!

    We might not have the flair and elan of our beret topped special forces, and airborne prodigies. You would be right, we are a more practical soberly dressed bunch. Not given over to the fashions of the moment. We are a traditional and hidebound group that has not let progress interrupt tradition no matter how ill found it may be (the blood stripe, the quatrefoil, the eagle, globe and anchor) A note about Chapultapec, I have never claimed to have taken the fort. Marines were there, shots were fired, but no charges were brought. I can safely say all ended well. Much the same with Belleau Wood, Saipan, Iwo Jima, Korea, Khe Sahn…you get the picture.

    (As a side note, I am surprised that no one has dredged up Gooch’s Marines of the 1740s, but I digress…)

    We have not the technology and latest advanced machinery of our mechanically oriented teamates of the Navy and Air Force. Rugged, basic tools designed for mayhem and chaos are our implements. We prefer simple operation and endeavor to be models of efficiency AND effectiveness without being spendthrifts.

    I feel the anguish and discomfort of the Soldiers’ comments at the slights and disrespect that they feel they have faced over the historical record of the Army’s accomlishments. The response from fellow Marines must only serve as further torment and for this I am truly sorry. For I tell you this as a Marine who has also read your history, yours story is rich! Revel in that!

    Our Marine Captains and Sergeants in history are an eccentric bunch with colorful backgrounds and not fully accepted in polite society. That is how we prefer it. That is why we joined. We like a fight! Not the massive Napoleanic brawl on the gloabal strategic scale, but the small vicious, intimate dust up that only our best friends and best enemies get invited to.

    You my respected Soldiers are our Nation’s Army! Be proud of the legion of generals that you’ve provided!

    Washington
    Grant
    Sherman
    Sheridan
    Pershing
    MacArthur
    Marshall
    Eisenhour
    Patton
    Ridgeway
    Schwarzkopf
    Petreaus

    How can you not read that list and say, “These are MY guys!!” Tell your story and tell it your way!! The details aren’t as important as the intent.

    For the young and old veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan who have commented on this site, Soldier, Sailor, Airmen or Marine…you have done us proud in what was the toughest and dirtiest damn fight to come down the pike in the longest time. You have honorably added to our story. I am humbled by your sacrifice.

    As for this Durant fellow…surely Sir you are still grieving for your beloved France falling so short to Germans and so quickly in that tragic summer of 1940. The latent bitterness has clouded you judgment in weighing in on a discussion of which you have nothing to offer but ill considered opinions, and half-truths. Leave this discussion to the professionals and those who have an actual and active interest.

    • 90% of Marine NCO’s were killed in Chapultapec that is how we earn the blood strip on our uniforms when we become NCO’s it is to remember them. How thoughtless and disrespectful. You are totally uneducated on the pacific war. It was McAuthor who chose the Marines for the korea landing, because the Army was getting hammered down south. It was Army General Bunker that relieved 22 regiment/division whatever they are called. They could not advance. Bunker replaced them with the 6th Marines mission accomplished.

    • Great post Simple Marine, great post. Well said. A Marine with intelligence, and even literate. Who knew!

      But you should explain to some of your boys its not the braggadocio which chaffs, not even the embelishments. It’s just that it’s so unseemly to disparage war dead and wounded of another service. It’s just in so very poor taste, it’s impolite, dare I say…uncouth.

      P.S. could you please add Jim Gavin to that list? And maybe even Terry Allen. Two superstars who had the spine to pay the ultimate professional price.

      Thanks, you’re almost wittily literate enough to restore my faith in the present day version of your Marine Corps.

  151. Simple Marine – great response. I think your lighthearted monologue explains much and I hope it quells some of the viciousness coming from both sides.

    Unfortunately I have to differ on one point that you overlooked. MANY Marines especially the young, those that served only a couple of years and others that never grew up to learn to question everything they read/hear actually believe everything they’ve been told. They actually believe the vile things they say about their fellow services and while I can forgive them being proud and believing their service is better I won’t accept their crap. I wouldn’t expect a Marine to if the situation was reversed.

    There are things one doesn’t even say to one’s brother. Too many Marines routinely cross that line and its not helpful to either service or the nation we love.

    I accept your apology gracefully. Be happy to buy you a beer. I can only pray your brethren read a little before they start talking.

  152. Majrod

    I appreciate the feedback. Our Marines tend to operate from a position of supreme self-confidence which as you know in battle is a valuable thing. No apologies for this. I would rather have a Marine who thinks he’s the modern day Achilles to the point of offending others rather than the doubting Hamlet that I see so often in the civilian world and the other Services. The difference is in youth, the Marine’s confidence springs from his accomplishment of joining our august organization and its history, accomplishments and traditions which we have in spades despite what the author may say. In maturity and age the confidence of the Marine comes from experience and service.

    This disparagement and disrespect is not a one way street. Even I have been on the receiving end of numerous insults from my fellow Soldiers and have given as good as I got while letting it roll off my insult proof back. That is because I know what I and my Marine Corps are about. Unfortunately to the uninitiated we are a puzzling organization, and the assertion of the author and several commenters that the Marine Corps is a second Army shows this misunderstanding.

    “The United states has two armies. Today we take this for granted, and don’t question the reasons for funding both the United States Army, and the United states Marine Corps. But it wasn’t always this way.”

    To the amateur eye we have two organizations that have infantry, artillery and tanks thus they are the same and so there must be duplication of effort. The purpose for both organizations is distinctly different, but here is where the author’s real argument lays hidden: military funding and the scrutiny of that funding. Unfortunately for the reader the proof and support for this argument lacks no substance. The few instances provided are so paltry, selective and ineffectual. Had I taken the opposite tack and argued for the disbanding of the Army I could have taken the same approach (although I would have left out the embellishment of deeds charge because we do tell a better story!) So much is taken out of context historically.

    If the Marine Corps have done such a horrible job over the years why do we keep sending them regardless of the purpose of the mission? Why does the public perceive this organization in such a favorable light? There is no amount of branding and publicity that will overcome a bad product or poor performance. Surely there must be something there that works.

    “There were no Marines in the Continental Army that won the Revolutionary War. During the Civil War, Congress authorized less than 3,200 men for the Marine Corps, this while the Union Armies totaled nearly one million men. The fact is, for most of their history the United States Marine Corps was little more than a security force for the Navy.”

    There were Marines in the American Revolution. I personally have never read nor heard any assertions from my fellow Marines that the Marines were THE pivotal force in our gaining independence or in single-handedly defeating the British. The same goes for the Civil War. At the time the Marine Corps, like the Army lost a significant number of officers and NCOs to the confederacy. The structure and function of the Marine Corps up to the 1900s would be typical of the ship based marine units in other navies of the western powers. Let’s go to the 1900s shall we.

    “The myth of the Marine Corps as a second army began in WW I. When the United states entered the war in 1917, over two million U.S. Army soldiers were deployed to France along with one brigade of marines, about ten thousand strong. Despite being a tiny fraction of the American forces fighting in WW I, the Marines managed to make a name for themselves at the U.S. Army’s expense.”

    This chimerical myth the author keeps referring to is one perpetrated not by the Marines, but by those inimical to the organization’s existence. The United States didn’t start out with two million soldiers. In fact, at the outbreak of war we were ranked very low worldwide, somewhere in the region with Portugal as a military power. Given the state of our military and the urgent need for troops it only stood to reason to make use of all of our military capability regardless of the branch’s mission and doctrine. We had just completed a difficult expedition into Mexico under General Pershing that was inconclusive and exposed many shortcomings in the Army’s planning, logistics and operations and our Army had a long way to go in mobilizing from a very small peacetime organization to a large one that numbered in the hundreds of thousands.

    The author makes the point that despite being a small overall percentage of the US forces committed to war in France that the Marines were recognized for their efforts over and above the actions of the Army. Way to go Marine Corps! Good job on standing out in a crowded field. The record shows that the Marines and the Army were victims of good press. The Army was very upset that the Marines didn’t try more to correct that perception. I assert this was sour grapes and the Marines had no incentive to do so based on the treatment by General Pershing and the Army establishment prior to Belleau Wood. As much was done to prevent them getting into combat as was done to get them into combat. A sad state of affairs and poorly reflects on General Pershing despite his stellar, unblemished record.

    Let’s get some proper points on the table first. At the declaration of war, General Barnett the current Commandant of the Marine Corps lobbied unmercifully and quite successfully to get his Marines into the fight. When you are a professional soldier leading other professional soldiers, that is a most honorable thing to do. Your country needs men to fight and you have those resources to provide, you step up and raise your hand. Just as vigorously, General Pershing resisted all efforts to have Marines participate or be assigned to the theater of operations in a combat role, a perfect case of inter-service rivalry at the sacrifice of making use of well-trained combat forces. The Marines at the time were ready for duty just as much as the standing Regular Army at the time. In fact the overall assessment of the Marines’ participation in WWI and as a joint partner with the Army is rated very high. There are multiple instances both within the 2nd Division and without of Army troops being led by Marine Officers and Marine units being led by Army Officers. Performance is the ultimate arbiter and the Marines gave good and great account of themselves when and wherever they fought.

    All I can say is, damn Floyd Gibbons for being an effective as a reporter and writing stories that sold newspapers to a nation beginning to come into its own as a world power!

    As to the Marines’ performance at Belleau Wood. It stands on its own merit, a tough fight against a tough enemy. Did we have support? Youbetcha! Did we do the heavy lifting. Youbetcha!

    “Floyd Gibbons helped enhance the image of the Marines, but the United States Marine Corps as we know it today came of age in WW II. Most Americans believe that the Marine Corps won the war in the Pacific, while the US Army fought in Europe. ”

    The author skips a very seminal and formative period of the 1920s and the 1930s for the Marine Corps. This is where many of the storied officers and NCOs of the “old Corps” cut their combat teeth. (If the author wanted to make a point about inept leadership as another reason for cutting the Marine Corps to save a dollar at the expense of the country’s security why didn’t he dig in here? Let’s not cherry pick.) The development of amphibious landing doctrine and its execution find it roots during this time. You talk about the perception that most Americans believe the Marines won the war in the Pacific is challenged mostly by the fact that our general public’s knowledge of such history has atrophied to the point of non-existence. I doubt that this is the case anymore as those memories outside the military become more blurred and watered down in the teaching of military history at our public institutions. The same could issue could be raised for those Soldiers who fought the Italian campaign or the British or the Russians who could claim that we have created the perception that WWII won on the beaches of Normandy at Point du Hoc to the exclusion of everyone else. Further still little is ever said by anyone of those US forces that fought in the India, Burma, China Theater outside Stilwell and Claire Chennault’s Flying Tigers.

    “The Navy adamantly refused to place their fleet, (and their Marines), under the command of the Army. After five weeks of bureaucratic wrangling, General MacArthur was given command of the Southwest Pacific theatre, while Admiral Nimitz had jurisdiction over the remainder of the Pacific ocean. The result, in Macarthur’s own words, was a “divided effort, the… duplication of force (and) undue extension of the war with added casualties and cost”.

    This was an Army-Navy issue and pre-1947 so I am not clear as to what points the author wishes to make. While MacArthur was certainly a brilliant military mind, he was not infallible and not above political infighting and maneuvering to gain a self-serving objective (in this case fighting to avoid becoming a backwater of the war.) Both the Central and Southwest campaigns were critical to the overall success of the war against Japan, and unlike the war in Europe and the battle for the Atlantic aside, the Pacific was as a more a naval oriented theater. Simply to get from point A to point B in sufficient force was going to require significant sealift and associated warships for protection and support. Now the author is advocating that we subordinate the Navy to the Army.

    “By way of comparison, General Macarthur’s Army killed, captured, or stranded over a quarter of a million Japanese troops during the New Guinea campaign, at a cost of only 33,000 US casualties. The Navy and Marines suffered over 28,000 casualties to kill roughly 20,000 Japanese on Iwo Jima. Even then, the Army played a greater role than Marines like to admit; the Army had more divisions assaulting Okinawa than the Marines.”

    The Pacific was a bloody conflict, no argument. We were fighting an enemy that culturally approached death and self-sacrifice in a much more apocalyptic fashion than was encountered in the European theater. They were tenacious fighters and in island fighting there isn’t a great deal of maneuver warfare and in most instances this was the island that was needed in the next step of the campaign. Many of the decisions were made above the heads of Marine ground unit leadership. The Marines’ responsibility was to execute and achieve the objective. When your only alternative is to go through the front door of these small central Pacific islands, then you do so as vigorously and as violently as you can. It doesn’t make it easier when your enemy knows it as well.

    The author overlooks the the Philippine campaign and the enormous casualties on both sides as well as the tremendous civilian casualties. This was a MacArthur campaign that could have easily been avoided by taking Formosa instead, but was ultimately made to fulfill MacArthur’s commitment to liberate the Philippines.
    I would disagree with author’s assertion that Marines don’t like to admit that the Army played a greater role in the Pacific than is given credit. I don’t think we care that much. We tell our story, not anybody else’s.

    “In fact the Marine Corps was nearly legislated out of existence two years later. After the bureaucratic infighting that characterized inter-service relations during WW II, there was a strong desire among military professionals to unify the military commands.”

    This is an excellent example of the diatribe against “those damn Marines.” The effort was principally from the Army-Air Force leadership. The Naval Services (both Navy and Marine Corps) faced serious challenges as to what military doctrine and structure the country was going to pursue in new emerging nuclear age. The Navy and Marine successfully fought that challenge using the very tactics applied against them. Sour grapes my friends. Force projection from the sea, protection and interdiction of the sea lanes of commerce and traffic has served us well since then.

    Again, the Marine Corps is not a second army. If the author purports to know so much about the history of the Marine Corps he would also know that since the turn of the last century the doctrinal direction of the Naval Services and the Marine Corps in particular has been littoral warfare for both quick and sustained projection of force from the sea. This is best illustrated in numerous instances from the development of amphibious landing doctrine and close air support developed pre-WWII, expeditionary unit organization and deployments since the early 1900s, and the numerous post-Vietnam advances to include pre-positioned equipment and shipping.
    The comments and reactions from the Army leadership and the President at that time were unfortunate and beneath their stature as leaders of this country, not to mention short-sighted.

    “Nevertheless, Marines to this day hold up the fight at the Chosin reservoir as proof of their superiority over the Army.”

    In reading the history – including those accounts not written by Marines the 1st Marine Division’s operations and conduct still stand as a testament on how to overcome disastrous strategy inflicted on them and the 8th Army as how not to. If it were not for the discipline of the Division’s leadership in keeping it together as a coherent combat unit leading up to and throughout the engagement it would have disintegrated quickly as evidenced by a lack of command cohesion in the 8th Army operations.

    In this case, yes we were better than the Army in dealing with this situation.

    I have served with Soldiers and as individuals, no finer human beings. The issue isn’t the individual soldier. They are as dedicated, brave, and just ass kicking as any Marine I’ve met when properly led and trained. The issue lies mainly with the Army’s philosophy, doctrine, training and leadership, but our systems are different and I chalk that up to difference of mission and purpose. The Marine Corps way of doing things to accomplish its mission works for the Marine Corps. The Army’s approach and the culture is very different from ours. The Army as a larger more diverse (in many ways and functions) organization and is more challenged than the Marine Corps as a smaller more consistent and cohesive organization. Their challenges in managing this complexity are not ours. When the Army goes in, they have to be prepared to conduct a campaign for the long haul. We are designed for short, sharp engagements. We are such different organizations that I am constantly amazed when the attempt is made to compare the two as apples to apples.

    How the Marines have been deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan has more in making do with combat forces you have at hand than the long term strategic choices we are discussing here.

    I will leave the comments on both these theaters and analysis to those who were actually there. I have heard and read enough to know that like any similar conflict such as these two there will great deeds done and regrettable actions taken.

    It is not about whether the Marines will be storming the beaches as we did at Tarawa. In this age of firepower and munitions, there isn’t an enemy that would put themselves in front of that steamroller (at least not the smart ones). But to project a significant force along coastal areas from sea-based assets is a need that will only become more critical as we are forced to decrease our land-based presence in other countries.

    Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics. Projection ashore is a logistics intensive exercise and that expertise rests with the Navy-Marine Corps team that has been perfected over the last 20 years and not easily replicated overnight.

    If the author is basing his argument on historical performance and the fallacious assertion of a myth generated by those who know so little about the workings of the Marine Corps as a second army and an intense rivalry as justification to eliminate the Marine Corps he has fallen short. He’ll need to show the whole scope of history of both organizations and not just a few selective pieces based on hearsay, anecdote and hyperbole.

    • Simple Marine – Please read my posts before and after this one. I don’t support the merging of the Corps or its disbandment. . My comments have to do with other issues and if you want to make the case for why we need a Marine Corps I’ll join you (within reason).

      Read what I said in a post below ref the USMC as a second Army. The fact is today we can “float” 30,000 marines yet the force is at over a quarter million. That’s quite a bit more than is written in law which ONLY the Marine Corps has seen fit to successfully lobby for. Not a second Army?

      My biggest issue with Marines/the Marine Corps is taking credit for things they haven’t done and almost always having to denigrate the Army to make themselves bigger than they are. Your defense is you haven’t seen that. That claim is nearly incomprehensible in light of your elequent prose and thoughtful debate. I suggest you look harder. The author has cited official Marine histories, publications and websites where Marines have “embellished” their record. The Marine Corps Gazette and official website differ with your observation.

      As you would likely agree, taking credit for things you haven’t done is pretty despicable.

      As or the second issue, “denigrating the Army” I can handle some good natured fun but some Marines have taken this to extremes so I’ll just have to use your term in kind and say “sour grapes” when Soldiers react with appropriate vitriol and cite sources substantiating the truth and showing those that have promulgated lies for what they are. Blowhards at best and slime for taking credit for army achievements at worst.

      There are MANY examples here of Marine feats that don’t exist or were actually Army accomplishments. I’d be deeply ashamed and apologetic if it was the other way around.

      In defending the existence of the Marine Corps (not something I disagree with) you use the same tactics I’ve been railing against. Is it part of Marine DNA?

      Pershing’s attempts to keep the Corps out of Europe were wrong. It did not keep the Marines out of the fight, leave them unsupported or justify ignoring orders to seek publicity.

      Don’t know what the interwar period has to do with the gist of the story but I’d like to remind you that the Army not the Marine Corps was tasked by the JCS to develop doctrine for SUSTAINED amphibious ops. The Army stole Marine tactical employment doctrine added logistical doctrine, created “Engineer Special Brigades” under the Engineer Amphibious Command and is largely responsible for the fewer Marine Amphib ops that earned the USMC such acclaim. After the war the Marines took it all back and claimed they invented it. Let me remind you at this point, “Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.” You and the Corps are welcome!

      ref:http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/download/csipubs/boose.pdf p 4- 38

      If you take the time to read the reference above you’ll find abysmal treatment of the Army by the Marines/Navy in attempting to prepare for amphibious requirements. That easily translates into lives. 1948 didn’t happen in a vacuum (though I still don’t agree with it).

      Your rejection of the incorrect perception that Marines won the Pacific campaign single handedly because our students don’t learn it today is laughable. We aren’t debating civilians here and that doesn’t change history! MARINES are officially taught only a twisted version of history. Comparing that with D-Day, Italy and Burma defies logic.

      As for Chosin, you can cite it as an example of Marine superiority against 8th Corps but characteristically of Marines you do it without acknowledging the Army Regiment east of Chosin that was destroyed in detail while fighting more Chinese than any comparable Marine unit west of Chosin buying the Marines time to withdraw to Hagaru-ri and eventually Hungnam held by Army units. So yeah, “we were better than the Army in dealing with this situation” should be caveated with “as long as we can sacrifice an Army regiment to consolidate” and “the Army can hold a beachehead for us to withdraw to”. Chosin was an impressive feat of arms. It wasn’t done in a vacuum and again I personally don’t appreciate the “Marine, spiking the ball” on a field of dead soldiers.

      And so let’s come full circle to your, “Again, the Marine Corps is not a second army. If the author purports to know so much about the history of the Marine Corps he would also know that since the turn of the last century the doctrinal direction of the Naval Services and the Marine Corps in particular has been littoral warfare for both quick and sustained projection of force from the sea.”

      Contrast that with a quarter million man force that can only deploy 30,000 at a time. Not a second Army? The numbers and use over the last decade (at least) say different and I missed the case for why Marines have a requirement for “sustained projection of force”. That sounds a lot like a second army…

      Appreciate the cordial and intelligent discourse. Any offense was unintended. Take my exuberant passion as frustration over old arguments resting on false facts or deductions by those applying a double standard to the truth. The Army isn’t blameless in this controversy but the marines have kept it going for the last 60 years. I think it’s time for a rest.

    • “There were Marines in the American Revolution. I personally have never read nor heard any assertions from my fellow Marines that the Marines were THE pivotal force in our gaining independence or in single-handedly defeating the British.”

      In 1921,the Marine Corps Gazette published and article which claimed the Continental Marines were the key to the victories at Trenton and Princeton. The article may be reached by doing a google search for “Marines at Trenton”.

      Trenton and Princeton were the most crucial victories in American Military History. If not for Trenton and Princeton, the Revolution would have ended and there would have been no United States of America.

      The Continental Marines, according to genuine history, played an insignificant and unimportant role in the Battles of Trenton and Princeton.

  153. i personally don’t think Marine should be eliminate, there a need for it (navy need infantry). With that said, a big part of the reason the Marine still existed i believe it mostly of because of a great PR campaign. we all know how powerful it can be (i.e Hitler) image and reality are two difference thing. Marine can definitely sell themselves. It not true that Marine only talk about Marine history because Marine seem to know quite a bit about Army history as well, mainly failure and negative stuff. how do i know this? because i ran into many Marine that like to remind me of the Army screw up. unfortunate the Army does not teach much about it history or Marine. Soldier that are resentful of Marine because it seem the Marine like to built pride at the expense of soldier image. Trying to take credit and dis-credit your brother in arm is not cool.

    take away the smoke and mirror the Marine is a second Army, title is just that title. Marine mission and Army mission is the same, attack and take enemy ground, So where is this difference mission or purpose that Marine do the Army don’t?

  154. the main sea power, logistic and force projection is mainly our Naval force not Marine. Although it nice to have Marine on board i believe if replace by Soldier (working together with Navy might bring the two branch closer too) it wouldn’t be any difference as proof by D-Day.

    Marine pride themselves being superior to Soldier, but from actual history and some of the posting stated, there many time Marine fall flat and needed and request Army help (i would imagine it hard to ask for help from someone who you consider so inferior, must be hard) or when Army unit perform better than M.C, Army doesn’t not make a big deal about it or claim to be superior and of course Marine will not mention it because it disgraceful (we just tell side of our story). But the few times where Marine help/assist Soldier, look out they will never stop talking about it and will put it down in their history as proof they are superior.

    speaking of ww1 Marine go against general Pershing order by talking to Media and making a big stink about it is the reason why they stand out more? congraduation! but there was three more week of intense fighting in Belleau Wood (which is part of a larger operation) by the Army after the Marine left which no one seem to know. i can’t blame some Army commander not wanting to fight near a Marine unit because they will get all the credit as usual just like Fallujah in Iraq and i bet other battle too and yes it true Marine very good that story telling.

    • No, I’m a former Army officer (Infantry) and can see no reason to disband the USMC or role it over into the Army.

      First, by law it has its own air assets which provides it a major advantage as a combined arms force. Marine Air does CAS the best. Not just because the Marines own it but Marine pilots are taught to think like grunts first.

      Second, Marine culture promotes a warrior spirit across the whole organization. Not so in the Army and I even as an Army officer would not want to risk losing that though we should sincerely try to inculcate that in Army culture. Currently it primarily resides in the combat arms and some combat support specialties.

      Third, it takes a lot of assets to maintain an Airborne capability and truthfully we’ve let it flounder a bit over the last en years. I’m not confident the Army would maintain an amphibious capability as well as a force devoted to it and with a long term relationship with the Navy.

      I would say that the marines have become a second Army. It doesn’t take a little more than a quarter million force to man three divisions and threee air wings. The Marines cultural fear of being disbanded and ambitious desire to grow beyond their traditional role drove a top notch lobbying campaign resulting in being the ONLY SERVICE that has their size dictated by law. Quite ridiculous considering we have a maximum capability of deploying 30,000 Marines by see. What’s the rest for? A second Army to challenge Army roles and ensure the Corps’ continued growth and mystique.

  155. to be fair, some of these attitude toward the Army is brought on by the fact Army commander have tried to dis-band them since their existence.

    • Sorry Steve. You are referring to ONE period in 1948 (over SIXTY years ago) and even then it was a move to merge the Corps into the Army (not something I’ve ever supported). “Multiple” attempts by the Army to end the Corps is simply not true but is a convenient excuse for the insecurity, inferiority & meanspiritedness that fuels a constant Marine diatribe against the Army.

      Now that I’ve disproven your hypothesis what’s the next excuse for the shabby treatment Marines try and heap on the Army?

  156. I would just like to re-iterate on something. Fallujah – you were not the Primary Assault Force there. 2/7 Cavalry, and 2-2 Infantry were.

    Now, again – Mosul, a worse city than Fallujah. Yet we were able to quell the city like true warriors. Without Pulling out, losing it to the enemy totally – as in the case with the USMC in Fallujah; and having To have 2/7 & 2-2 Go in and punch a hole into Fallujah.

    Our superiority in Mosul, Tal Afar, Sadr City, Aadhamiya, Baghdad- Allowed us to quell those city’s, without having to re-take them entirely like in Nov 04′.

    When Marines were not even in Afghanistan , atleast not in any number 02-08 era…Our Units were kicking ass, and getting not one minute of time on the news; because you Moron’s over in Fallujah were getting Pushed out of the city.

    Those AMTRAK amphibious vehicles; On land – ARE SHIT, PERIOD.
    Bradley Fighting vehicle is the most capable, destructive, Fast, legit peice of equipment that this nation has in its arsenal. Period.

    Thats why we took Baghdad in 03, That and I believe our Tanker Crews are beastly, and can outgun any force on this planet in an Armored battle. Too include the USMC. Look at the only major tank engagement of Desert Storm; Because it wasnt the USMC that was involved.

    I do not pretend that the USMC doesnt have some hero’s. Butler, Basilone, and others are true warriors. However, you simply cannot compete with our great unit’s such as the 82n’d ABN, 101st ABN, 173rd, 3rd Infantry, 1st Cav, 11th ACR, These unit’s are Legend; and have done more for this country than any other single unit.

    1st MAR DIV – They have some history; not near that of these others. The Pacific, again, we (ARMY) were the primary force down there. Which im glad to see some of you jarheads have acknowledged.

  157. We can argue all day long about the Marine Corps vs. The Army. There are things in our collective history that have been accepted as fact that may or may not have been embellished (spelling). The only thing that is of any importance is that todays front line war fighter is the most lethal intrument of death on any battlefield in the word. Whether that warrior is wearing an Army uniform or a Marine Corps uniform is of no consequence.
    Both services are unique in their defined mission there is none finer in the world. So rather than waist time and band width bickering of which service is “better” we should pray for our front line warriors and draw comfort that no nation on earth can stand againts the most lethal organization ever devised by man.

  158. You armchair generals all bitch at each other back and forth on the internet…

    AND NOT A SINGLE FUCK WAS GIVEN.

  159. God, this article just RADIATES Army butthurt.
    It screams it at the top of it’s lungs.

    Bonus points for all the fake Army vets in the comments section.

  160. booze – Some posters from both sides are “butthurt”. The author doesn’t do a good job of making the case for merging the Marine Corps into the Army.

    The article and thread do a good job of documenting many cases of the Corps taking credit for things it hasn’t done. That’s pretty embarrassing.

    lanl – maybe not by you but I bet many Marines won’t be claiming things their branch never did.

  161. @majrod… You sound like a dickrider.. You should ETS out the Army and join the Marines… your opinion is isolated.. If you dont have team cohesion with the men around you and you feel excluded from your soldiers? then that is your problem and you should blame that on yourself because like I said, “your a Marine dickrider”… gtfo and join the replica infantry you fucking maxi pad. The cohesion and brotherhood in the Army is there but for some reason you didnt “fit in”… Im guessing youre a fag and you should join the Marines so you could find out that your going to get the same treatment if youre not willing to conform. Maybe the replica infantry will accept you since youre willing to get on your knees and suck their cock.

  162. Davey – That butthurt comment must have hit a nerve! What’s a dickrider sound like? You know some? You overcompensating? If you really doubt my sexual orientation I’d be happy to entertain any of the women in your life. hehehe…

    I don’t have any issues with my service or branch. We actually have a longer and if not, more distinguished history. BTW, Army Infantry was first. You “copied” us.

    I have the greatest respect for Marines. I’ve disagreed with some posters here who have attacked Marines generally or believe the corps should be disbanded.

    Ex-Marines like yourself realy don’t deserve my attention or have an opinion that is worthwhile. I’m sure many of your peers are ashamed of you as well. Great example though of how low some Ex-Marines are. I bet your a REMF to boot. Army NCOs and officers would pale if a soldier ever addressed a Marine offficer like you tried. Must be an Army thing?

    Simple Marine – How do you explain this sorry excuse?

  163. I’m married moron, and I was Army infantry not no damn Naval replica infantry… Like I said your a fucking dickrider. Go choke yourself with some marine cock.

  164. common people this is a respectable site. what up the with the dickrider comment? first time i ever heard that. lol

  165. Davy – So now you’re a soldier? Doubt it. If so your post makes no sense. At no point did I disparge the Army, the Infantry or the Marines. Do you have a comprehension problem? What are you upset about. Did he say no to you?

    I’m thinking you’re a closet commando. Your dad’s efforts would have been better spent against a public bathroom wall.

  166. Lol.. Fuckin fruit basket.. Youre just mad because somebodies telling you to go suck some marine dick, and from what Ive “comprehended” you said that the marines have jets and their pilots are the best because they think like grunts.. Lol.. Have you ever heard of the Air Force??.. Lol.. Fuckin retard.. Marine cocksucker in the Army.

  167. I am a Marine, and yes I am proud of that fact. I have friends that have served in every branch, and yes there is interservice rivalry but it is all good clean fun. The point at the end of the day over beers is that we all served. I see points from all sides here. Agree on some, disagree on others. There are bad leaders at all levels in every branch just as there are great leaders at all levels in every branch. My question honestly is, what are all of you trying to prove?

    From all the facts and quotes from history I say….History is written by the victors and more times than not it is written to use as propaganda. Yes we must all learn from our history so as to not repeat the mistakes of the past etc, etc, blah-blah-blah. I’m not here to state what has already been said. Hell, I’m not really here to understand because I know given the text I have read that there is no changing the mind of the proud posters!!!!

    What I will say is that I served, was proud to have served and even if we weren’t in the same branch of service, I am proud of your service if you served with honor. Yes, my fellow Marines and I share a bond that cannot be understood by most but that is because of the lingo and traditions we share. However my Army brothers and I know what it is to sweat and bleed and I am proud to call them my friends and brothers as well.

    Sure when I was younger I had that mindset that “Squids, Doggies and Flyboys” were nothing compared to Marines. Well I grew up. We are a nation that has separate branches of the service and they all have a mission to do. The end result is all the same, protect our nation. How we conduct it depends on the branch. I have no political clout so I’m not going to get bogged down into a discussion about funding and service size and all that jazz.

    Maybe I am just rambling and this isn’t being well written or put together very well. I can’t dispute history that I wasn’t involved in either. I guess my last thought will be…please grow up, let it go, move on and thank your fellow veterans, despite branch of service, despite MOS. Most history, military or not was written to make someone or something look good.

    • Thad – Good post.

  168. [...] [...]

  169. Good shit Thad.. You’re right.

  170. The perfect wedding speech will be remembered for years. But there is a lot of pressure to say the right things, whether you are the bride, the groom, the best man, or the maid of honor. You want to do your part to make the day as special as possible.

    It is best to think about what you want to say or even rehearse. And if you are not sure, you can download great wedding speeches online to get ideas.

  171. US Marines deny exaggerating deeds of war hero: More lies

    http://news.yahoo.com/us-marines-deny-exaggerating-deeds-war-hero-070549889.html

  172. US Marines deny exaggerating deeds of war hero: Again Marines take credit for something that didn’t happen.

    http://news.yahoo.com/us-marines-deny-exaggerating-deeds-war-hero-070549889.html

    • That story is a losing proposition. It’s too much like BAE trying to tarnish Meyer.

      The writer that was present admits in the end that Meyer still did plenty to have earned the MOH. Well heck why write the story? Just the press looking to engineer the next controversy.

      As for this thread/subject, there’s PLENTY to show the Corps plays fast and loose with facts/history and accomplishments. This issue just makes folks look like haters.

      • With regard to Sergeant Dakota Meyer, there is something else which disturbs me.

        The US Courts have decided masquerading as a war hero, i.e. stolen valor is protected free speech. Does anyone doubt that heroes like Sergeant Meyer got the valor thieves this right to express themselves, as imitation heroes?

        It is pitiful that this country, or at least its courts, seem to think the imitation hero valor thieves deserve more consideration than the actual heroes

      • to me whether Meyer deserve or not is not the point it the fact that he/Marine like to embellish their accomplishment, which is one of the main point in this article. The Corp have a history of doing this, exaggerating their roles in any war they been in.

        i was watching Okinawa the lost evidence on history channel. at the end of the show you would think the Marine did majority of the fighting. They interview five Marines and two Soldiers, most of the air time was on the Marine, very little was on the soldiers. It leave the impression to viewer to thinks the Marine did practically all the fighting but truth be told it quite the opposite.

      • You have no idea what you are talking about on Okinawa. Army General Bunker relieved the entire 22nd army regiment because they could not advance. He replaced them with the 6th Marines. Objective taken shortly afterwards. Most medal of honors issued in a single battle. All going to Marines. Fact check it partner. The 6th Marines won the northern part of the island then was sent to the south as the 22nd regiment was ordered to withdrawl and be replaced by Marines.

  173. I can’t believe this….. Sounds like two sisters fighting over the same dress. I believe both forces are necessary. There are many things the Marines do far better than the Army and many things the Army does that the Marines can not. Both are brave and havie died for our nation. Next time you walk through Arlington or any other sacred cemetery where our heroes lay, think about their sacrafice and our freedom. I’m willing to bet you’ll realize how petty and “bar room” this sounds. Army National Guard Soldier

    • i totally understand your statement but in real life things are not in black and white, it a lot more complicated then just can’t we get along?

      • I think some statements have been WAY OVER the line but the thread was very educational. There is a propensity for Marines to only read their history and not doubt it.

        I never want the corps rolled up into the Army and the author of the original article does a very poor job of making that point but his other point about inaccurate history and claiming accolades that weren’t earned is solid.

  174. Get your army head outta your ass and websters books! You have no clue what you are talking about! You are a complete moron! The Marine corps wins the battles your right! The Army doesn’t win the wars! They have to be there first of all! You are an idiot! The Marine corps is a 1/4 the size and has been responsible for all the victories that Army General claim! Get your facts straight! You are a disgrace to this country to think your freedom isn’t the work of the U.S.M.C….. You probally served in Vietnam which the Marine Corps saved the Army’s Ass and ended up Taking the Heat for! Or your a POG!

    • Who are you talking to? Which battles are you discussing? Vietnam was a team affair at Hue and Khe Sanh Army units came to the aid or broke the seige of Marine units.

      Don’t try and sound as ignorant as many of the posts here.

      BTW 11B here…

      • Actually, when the army relieved the marines at khe sanh, the battle was over. The marines already won. And hue, whilst defintitley a team affair, most of the fighting was done by marines, as they were the tip of the spear. Now I am not vehemently pro USMC, like some people, and I have great respect for the army. But don’t downplay moments in the corps history like the army saved their asses.

  175. this article is very pro army which is fine take pride in your branch theres no problem with that. what i do have a problem with is this article has a ton of half truths and the phrasing of the majority of it is purposely misleading. i was in the marines for 4 years 2003-2007 i was a rifle man i was in the first battle of fallujah i replaced the 82nd airborne. first off the reason why the first battle was unsuccessful was because we were pulled out of there for political reasons there was an iraqi general who said his army could handle the problem which is why we were pulled out around the middle of June 2004. obviously the iraqi general and his troops didnt get the job done hence forth the marines were sent back to in to do what they initially were going to do and that is clear the city of insurgents which is what they did in november of 2004. now im just guessing here but i also think we were pulled out early and had iraqis try and clear the city due to the fact that it was a re election year for bush and he didnt want a huge battle going on in a country that he had declared all major combat operations had ceased after he won the election less than a month later here come the marines back in fallujah. also i will add this about the 82nd i have respect for them but they turned over a nightmare to us right away you couldnt go more than 500 yards into that city without getting into some type of firefight. the 82nd also wouldnt set up firm bases inside the city the marines would. also the author conveniently leaves out the army’s mistakes the marines are by far not perfect we do make mistakes but to think that we are the only ones is completely absurd. the 82nd some time around may-june 2003 had shot up a bunch of kids in front of a school killing several i dont know the exact details but needless to say the iraqis were upset and may-june 2004 there was this huge firefight where 2 marines had been killed this firefight happened on the anniversary of the kids being shot at the school. so yea the marines have dirt of them but i would say the army has the same amount if not more dirt just due to the size of the army. another point im going to make is this i have several friends who decided to go into the army after being in the marines and i have asked them how is it compared to the marines. they have all said pretty much the same thing which is the army is very undisciplined and too relaxed and not as tough the mentality is different. better equipment in the army thats about the only good thing that was said about the army was better equipment. also this country wouldnt save money by combining the two you would still have the same amount of people. the marines are good at bragging and telling the world what they do (yes they do embellish sometimes i’ll admit it) the army gets way more money from the dod than any other branch so they have all the public relation stuff at their disposal too its not the marines job to tell the army’s story. last point the marines get their funding from the navy not the dod so we get whats left over in other words

    • Won’t disagree with a lot that you said except towards the end. The Army is the biggest branch. Bigger than all the other branches combined but it gets 31% vs. 50%. If you look at a per capita expenditure all the services except the Marines exce4ed the Army and the Marines number is distorted because much of its support comes out of the Navy and Army’s infrastructure.

      PR? The Marines have all the branches beat hands down. Just look at the recruiting commercials and the embellishment you acknowledged.

      Finally, it’s NOT the Marines job to tell the Army story but they shouldn’t be stealing it or taking all the credit. At Falujah the Army provided more than 30% of the manpower and the overwhelming majority of armor. Noticed you griped a little about the 82nd handover but not a peep about the help.

      • He wouldn’t be a Marine if he admitted that the Army Help them in a battle or that the Army did anything better or perceive to be better. it would defeat the purpose of being Marine. Marine are taught to think they better than everyone else and to look down on the Army as being inferior, it their culture.

        The Army have to spend more effort on their PR, (maybe hired civilian like the Marine do) and try not to fight along side the Marine as they will get all the credits as usual.

      • ok ill admit it i have no problem admitting it the army did and does work along side the marines and we help each other out as far as the army providing the vast majority of the armor i have heard that and i wont deny it because i did read an article in some magazine while i was over there about the army bringing in their tanks to help the marines (hows that for pr) like i said i dont know about the vast majority i know they were there but there were some marine tank battalions too. the army gets 31% of the budget while the marines gets 4% of the budget the marines get their money from the navy and alot of our equipment is from the army. alot of times it will even say “property of the army” i know from experience on that one. so my point of that one is the marines do put forth effort on recruiting and having a good public image but the army gets almost 8 times what the marines get budget wise so they have alot more at their disposal and have alot more influence on the news and how they are portrayed in the public. i guess its more of an opinion type thing i think the marines should tell their story and the army can tell theirs thats all. now i will disagree with you on the army providing more than 30% unless you can prove it i am going off of wikipedia it stated that the army totaled 1500 which is 12% so if you can give me a credible source im going to say your data on that one is incorrect. but like i said before its all a pride thing too nothing wrong with thinking your branch is the best in fact i believe it makes every one work harder and do better the main point i was making was the article is extremely inaccurate and doesnt tell the whole story in most of its slide and tells half truths designed to make the marines look bad

      • the point i was trying to make with somalia was not that the enemy was more afraid to engage the marines vs the army. the point was that the somalia publicly is somewhat of a black eye for the army the mission was not a success it was an utter disaster still brave men fought and died nothing but respect for those guys. the author leaves this entire thing out of his article which backs up what im saying is the article is conveniently missing facts about the army screwing up. also he states the invasion of iraq didnt go well for the marines. why did it not go well for the marines they made their objective his rationale for it going well was because they had to engage the enemy the marines were in the biggest battle during the engagement which was nasariya. to say that it didnt go well and to imply the army could of done a better job is flat out misleading. now onto fallujah the marines replaced the 82nd and when we took it over it was a hornets nest. the 82nd didnt really patrol in fallujah and wouldnt set up firm bases. yes in the first battle the marines didnt realize how bad it was based on intel from the army turns out that intel was wrong and fallujah was the deadliest city in iraq at that time. so when we started to go in we did need armor and yes we requested the army give us armor. now for the second battle im not sure but i believe there was the same amount of marine and army artillery and i believe there was more marine armor than army i got all this from wikipedia so thats what im basing it on. there is more but i will leave it at this for now so you can state your case.

      • Minsky – You missed the autors point. He isn’t cataloging battlefield errors. He lists accomplishments that the Marines either embellish or “appropriate” from Army history. Is there an example of the Army claiming Marine history as its own?

        Secondly, how was Somalia a disaster? Was the mission not accomplished? Did the Rangers not though wildly outnumbered evacuate their dead and wounded and kick ass? Yes casualties were suffered but considering the odds the Rangers gave a heck of a lot more than they took. If there was any defeat it was a political one. Saying Mogahdishu was a disaster would be the same as saying Wake Island was a disaster.

        And as for Nasiriyah I would remind you EIGHT AAVP7s were lost and there was a friendly fire incident when the marines called in an airstrike on forward elements. More marines were killed at Nasiriyah and less casualties inflicted by a whole RCT than one Ranger company and a Delta detachment in Somalia. Also the Marines relieved the RCT commander four days later. Now I don’t think Nasiriyah was a disaster but it sure didn’t go any better than Mogahdishu so you may want to reconsider qualifying what you mean when you call Somalia a disaster. BTW, how many Medals of Honor were awarded at Nasiriyah?

      • Sounds to me like the Army went through Iraq making truces with the enemy. Giving them freedom to roam the city. Finally the Marines were sent in to face the enemy. While the army was sipping tea and looking the other way when coming across the enemy’s house. Letting the enemy have all that time and freedom of movement probably contributed to many Marines losing their life’s. That is all the argument you need to see the difference between the army and Marines. One branch decided to avoid the enemy at all cost. The other branch Marines decided to engage the enemy at all cost. I believe you army boys should take a moment of silence for those lost Marines.

    • ok ill admit it i have no problem admitting it the army did and does work along side the marines and we help each other out as far as the army providing the vast majority of the armor i have heard that and i wont deny it because i did read an article in some magazine while i was over there about the army bringing in their tanks to help the marines (hows that for pr) like i said i dont know about the vast majority i know they were there but there were some marine tank battalions too. the army gets 31% of the budget while the marines gets 4% of the budget the marines get their money from the navy and alot of our equipment is from the army. alot of times it will even say “property of the army” i know from experience on that one. so my point of that one is the marines do put forth effort on recruiting and having a good public image but the army gets almost 8 times what the marines get budget wise so they have alot more at their disposal and have alot more influence on the news and how they are portrayed in the public. i guess its more of an opinion type thing i think the marines should tell their story and the army can tell theirs thats all. now i will disagree with you on the army providing more than 30% unless you can prove it i am going off of wikipedia it stated that the army totaled 1500 which is 12% so if you can give me a credible source im going to say your data on that one is incorrect. but like i said before its all a pride thing too nothing wrong with thinking your branch is the best in fact i believe it makes every one work harder and do better the main point i was making was the article is extremely inaccurate and doesnt tell the whole story in most of its slide and tells half truths designed to make the marines look bad

      • about Falujah, curious did you know that the Army unit recieved the Presidential citation and not the Marine? That are telling you something but yet every document i’ve seen on TV mentioned zero about the Army.

      • yea i knew that the army got a puc and no marine unit got one i mean thats good i give them credit for that, also did you know that two marines were awarded the navy cross which is second to the medal of honor. again i give the army credit i dont think they are worthless. my problem is with the author who thinks the marines are worthless and his argument for his stance is so full of holes its ridiculous. also how is it the marines fault that the tv documentaries dont give the army credit thats not the marines job or fault to make sure the tv mentions the army. a reason for it maybe because the army only comprised of 12% of the forces in fallujah although i’ll say it the army deserves credit where credit is do

      • Minsky – recheck your math. If you believe 6500 Marines (which sounds like it includes marines outside Falujah) and 1500 soldiers were in Falujah (not counting the Army BDE that was isolating Falujah, which is a double standard) the numbers are around 19% (a lot closer to 20 than it is to 12). That’s also looking at it from a manpower not combat power comparison where things like half the artillery was Army artillery and the majority of armor was Army armor are kind of important.

        As for documentaries if the USMC provided tech support it should correct the record. The author also pointed out numerous examples of official Marine history that is inaccurate.

        I think the author goes overboard. He makes zero case for rolling the Marines into the army based on false claims but he does adequately support a pattern of Marines mistating history or claiming Army accomplishments.

        I think you’de make a better case for your point by IDing where the author is wrong vs. a blanket statement because alot of what he says is historically accurate.

      • I did not hear the author talk about the Army’s whole 22nd regiment being relieved of duty in southern Okinawa because the could not advance. That’s right army general Bunker relieved the 22 regiment because they could not advance against the enemy. Guess who he replaced them with 6th Marines fresh from conquering the northern part of the island. 5 days later Marines took Sugar loaf hill with little heavy weapons support. I would also like to point out that that single battle yielded more medal of honors than any other single battle in history. The most fortified position in all of world war 2.

    • Minsky: “…its not the marines job to tell the army’s story. ”

      I wholeheartedly agree. What I object to is the Marines claiming parts of the Army’s story as their own, e.g., claiming to be the first Armed Force to fight in the nation’s defense, fighting in the Battle of Trenton, winning the Battle of New Orleans in 1815, capturing Chapultepec in the Mexican War, defending Bataan. I also object to such things as blaming HM Smith’s failures on Saipan on the 27th Infantry Division, blaming the casualties on Peleliu on General MacArthur rather than on the way the Marine Corps star level leadership, Roy Geiger and William Rupertus, planned and executed the Battle.

      • i do give you that there are some things especially the earlier marine corps history that is embellished and some of it flat out made up i give you that. my biggest issue is just how lop sided and slanted this article is he commits the same thing he rails against so its just hypocrisy at its finest in my opinion. i love how the marines in solmalia had no problems there but pull out and the army had black hawk down and his whole iraq arguments are completely wrong. the flag raising at iwo jima it wasnt staged it was just the men replacing the first flag and someone happened to snap a picture while they were doing that its a very famous story even has a book and a movie written about it. the marines in my opinion are the best branch i admit im biased i was in the marines 03-07 i was a rifleman but i still give the army credit they are the worlds best army and i like them. i think the marines are a better organization and are more capable of inflicting greater damage to the enemy

      • Minsky – It helps when you list specifics.

        Agree on Iwo photo. What other examples are your referring to that are “lop sided or slanted”?

        Somalia? When did the Marines go into the center of Mogadishu? When did they conduct ANY combat operations to capture Aidid gunmen ANYWHERE? It’s just silly to say the Marines “intimidated” the enemy because they didn’t have any significant contact. If that were the case there are numerous examples of quiet “Army” sectors in Iraq becoming active when the Marines relieved them (e.g. Falujah I, Haditha, Anbar province etc.) or what about Kafji in Desert Storm? No problem when the 82nd was on the border. Where the Iraqis “more afraid” of the 82nd? Of course not. The enemy gets a vote as to when they attack. Making claims of greatness because the enemy decided to attack after a relief is childish boasting.

        As for “i think the marines are a better organization and are more capable of inflicting greater damage to the enemy”. That’s opinion without specifics. Considering it’s been the Army inflicting the most casualties in every major conflict there’s a lot of factual numbers that prove the opposite.

        You really can’t say the Marines can inflict more damage. They are primarily a light infantry force and the Army has had more than it’s share of battles where it fought outnumbered and won. You can “feel” that it’s just the history doesn’t support it IF you read any history besides Marine history.

  176. This reads like a bunch of sour grapes Army jealously over the Marine Corps greatness. Face the facts. The Marine Corps is where the big boys go and they back their reputation with actions.

    • Someone who’s name is “Cobra Commander” is judging who the “big boys” are?

    • To repeat, it is more about the Marine Corps claiming Army exploits as their own, blaming the Army for Marine charlie fox-trots in the Pacific.

      • Sounds like there are a lot more army guys than Marines. Hundreds of thousands in the Army. Less than 200000 in Corps. Based on those numbers involved here. I would say based on size of force the Marines have killed more.

      • There’s actually more than 200k Marines.

        Prove your “opinion” that the Marines have inflicted more casualties. I bet you’ll start taking credit for Army accomplishments.

  177. lol, face the fact huh? that is the problem actual facts and is what the article is trying to point out, Marine have to no actual fact to back their claim, just Marine fairy tales just like your username. BTW Cobra Commander never win a battle with G.I Joe (aka Army) lol

    • This author has no facts nor do any of you whiny soldiers. Whose to say your history isn’t made up. You weren’t there so you’ll never know.

  178. i have heard that Somalia claim before from many Marine i run into, it laughable.Over 20,000 plus Marine with all it support elements that landed in Somalia was there to hand out foods, medical, and water, it was a humanitarian mission not combat. later on there was a change in the presidency and a change in policy (Aidid and his gang was taking all the freebee) that when Clintion send in 1 ranger company to go after the general Aidid and no the Ranger did not loose the battles. The screw up part was the higher up refuse to send any Armour which was requested but was denied by Washington, could have save a lot of soldiers.

    i heard the same thing from Marine about Iraq and Afghanistan and that is the Taliban and Insurgence are afraid to attack the Marine and would rather wait to attack the Army instead because the Marine are so scary.

    • there was not any where near 20,000 marines in somalia there was one meu which only has at most 3000 marines and thats being very generous i do give you that its b.s. to say the insurgents are more afraid to attack marines than army

      • At least the Marines attacked the enemy. Sounds the army was afraid to go to the enemy’s house. You guys settled with the bad guys there in Iraq (informal treaty). Finally those in charge got fed up with cowards and had to call the Marines in to fight the enemy. While the Army was letting them run freely to set up ied’s. Sounds like the Army is probably responsible for some of those Marine deaths. The reason we still have a Marine Corps is because America still needs men that are willing to do the tuff and necessary actions that war requires. The fact that most people join the Army because they are scared of Marine Corps boot camp automatically tells you that even your best are second best. I am horrified. The only comparison the Army has for the Marine Corps might be the rangers. But, I have seen all branches while in the Corps and I have not met a branch with more pride, tradition and respect among ranks as the Marines. So you guys can be haunted all you want for the joining the Army, but Marines rock. That is why we guard the everything of importance to the US including the president. If Presidents are smart enough to know that when it goes down they want a platoon of Marines between them and bad guys. Because no truce will be mad.

      • dxman – Marines guard the President? Uh, that’s the secret service dude.

        Guess you got tired of stealing Army accomplishments.

        As for Marine basic and calling the Marines in that’s simply unsupportable with any facts, just an uneducated opinion.

        BTW, when the Marines finally decided to go into Falujah gues who they called to lead the way? Yep, 2-2 & 2-7 Infantry (Army) and a WHOLE Army BDE to make sure nobody got out. Look it up.

      • I believe those are Marines standing beside that helicopter and all other entry and exits to the white house. T

      • They are CEREMONIAL. They salute and open the door! They are not armed. That constitutes “guarding”? What are they going to do to a threat? Kill them with harsh language?

        Thanks for proving the point AGAIN about Marines embellishing their history.

        This as hilarious as Marines participated on D-Day because the Navy ships had a contingent of Marines on board.

      • OK lets discuss a true joint landing on Okinawa. As history has it Army General Bunker a great man by all accounts. Well Nimitz was busting his chops because the southern half of Okinawa was as a stand still. The Marines had already captured the Northern portions of the island. The Army in the south was dug in an fighting a stalemate war of attrition. Nimitz told Bunker he had 5 days to advance. The first thing the Army general did was replace the Armys 22 regiment with the 6th Marines regiment. The my friend made all the difference. This is historically documented that he Army units being replaced were essentially refusing to advance on the enemy. When the Marines arrived it took them 5 days to over run sugar loaf hill which was a critical link in the enemy’s defense at the Shuri Line. Many Marines died in the single battle for Sugar Loaf Hill 5 Marines received the Medal of Honor and 1 Marine received the Navy Cross (second to medal of honor). In this fighting Marines recovered the Army dead. While doing this no Marine dead or wounded was left behind despite horrific concentrated and accurate fire. The Army’s 22nd was humiliated. Bunker’s hope was in his Army, but in the end he had to give in to the calls for Marines. He was a great man from WW-1 on. He was killed on Okinawa. There was a bay on the island named for him. this is all historical. It is also well documented that the war in the pacific was way worse than that in europe. The Germans would surrender the Japanese would not. It was hand to hand man to man. The most horrific war of Europe was the air war over Germany. The Air Force lost more that all Army casualties combined.

      • hey dxman, you want to hear some good stories about cowards? I got about 5,000 good coward stories. They were all stationed at Khe Sanh with the 26th Marines, and affraid to leave their perimeter to save fellow Marine and Army Americans.

        Be careful the way you talk. Everyone has their own version of coward stories. But after reading your post, I know you have no first hand coward stories, because no one who was ever shot at, and shot back, derides anyone else who was ever under fire.

        You’re just another garrett trooper who went to parris island and think your forebears actually tamed the world for the rest of us.

  179. Congrat, you finally find one incident to back your claim of Marine superiority, feel better now? out of hundred of Army regiment that fought in the ww2 you found one. you need to dig up other battle that took place in the pacific like Burma, Philippines, Aleutian islands, Solomon island, new guinea. Speaking of the Japanese being more brutal we all know that there were more soldiers fighting the pacific than the Marine right? i thought the Marine only tell their story and could careless about other branch unless if the Army screw up then it get recorded in the Marine hall of record.

    speaking of battle, what about Guadalcanal and peleliu? in Guadalcanal the Marine did not finished the Japanese, it was the Army that come in and finally defeated the Japanese it was not a mop up operation, and Peleliu the Marine could could not defeated the Japanese until the Army came in and finished the jobs, as i remember the Marine beloved commander quote, “i do not want to see Army green on this island” but Army green did come in. As far Okinawa 99% of the Japanese troop was in the south the Army Sector, yeah the Marine have no problem clearing there northern sector because there hardly any resistance.

    Yeah getting kill mangles up, facing heavy firepower with better weapon and equipment from the German and get burn up in a tank is less brutal than getting shot in the pacific or facing banzai charge. it been proven that the German are not as tough as Japanese even though it took the Russian, Britain, France, Poland etc.. and finally U.S to defeat them. Not to mention the Russian crush the Japanese Manchuria Army within 2 weeks yet the Russian have difficult time with the Nazi.

  180. The russians did not beat he Japanese in Manchuria. The 32 army Japans finest was transfered from Manchuria to defend Okinawa. Japan defeated the Russians, that is established historically. I believe the Army has great men as well. But, the author of this article clearly set out to attack the Marines. You should know that Marines don’t do well being attacked. Some army units had stellar performances at the Shuri line.

  181. This whole thing is pretty stupid. All services serve a specific purpose. No one wants to steal the Army’s valor. However, for the ENTIRE history of the Marine Corps, someone has been trying to get rid of it (to include presidents). In order to survive the Corps has gained public support via a propaganda machine. No one is saying the Army can’t do the same. In order to be an effective fighting force, the Corps created the MAGTF so they roll into an area, they are there, with all aspects of the warfighting arsenal, to be victorious or at least hold the line until the larger occupying force (read Army) gets on deck. That is the Corps nitch.

    HOWEVER…if we really want to do this “who is the better force” sort of argument let me ask you this. Have you EVER had a Marine say, “you know I wish I had/I was gonna join the Army but…”? Further, why is it that non-straight leg army types (Rangers and the like) are often the first ones to express their respect for how the Marines do business and their dislike of the regular army? In addition, why have Americas enemies intentionally avoided fighting the Marines (i.e. “don’t f&*K with the black boots” in Somalia refering to the Marines who wore speed laces while the Army wore deserts) and instead hit what they felt was a weaker force? Hell Marine’s don’t need to brag. For the last 22 years I have heard members of EVERY OTHER SERVICE doing it for them.

    • J8 – “In order to survive the Corps has gained public support via a propaganda machine.” That’s a heck of admission. America would love the Marines without the propaganda. No need to embellish or borrow another service’s accomplishments.

      As for never hearing of guys going over to the Army what difference does that make? Why do you “Marines uber alles” types have to rely so much on anecdotal evidence to make your case when there are tons of materics that refute them. BTW, I’ve got a close friend who was a scout swimmer instructor who became a soldier and during my career have served with many Marines who became soldiers. I never took it as an admission that the Army is better. Just meant we’re different.

      I’m one of those non straight leg Army infantry types and I respect the Marines I’ve served next to tremendously. (BTW, 0311 Marines are straight leg infantry buddy) They were mostly 0311s and MARSOC types. It’s the marine clerk talking about being a rifleman or superior to Army combat arms types that even cause their brethren 0311s to roll their eyes.

      If you get any Rangers or such talking bad about the Army they are the young guys who have the same “issues” many Marines have that CONSTANTLY disparage the Army. As an Infantryman I have more in common with most Marines’ mindset than some support guys in the Army. Big deal! That doesn’t translate into the Marines are “better”. Different mission, sometimes different scope. I can’t do what I did as a grunt without the Army support guys and the Marines sure couldn’t do what they’ve been doing for a decade in Iraq & Afghanistan or did in Vietnam (Hue and Khe Sanh were relieved by the army), Korea (Pusan and Hungnam were held by the Army) or WWII (there were VERY few Marine ONLY landings) without teh Army or the support structure it provides.

      The whole Somalia black boots thing is laughable. When did the Marines go into downtown Mogadishu and seize Aidid’s lieutenants? Heck when did they ever conduct a COMBAT patrol? Saying the Somalis had less respect for the Rangers resulting in the battle holds as much water as saying Saddam thought the Marines were a joke and is why he went into Khafji after the 82nd pulled back. Ridiculous! It’s this kind of BS that just throws oil on the fire.

      I don’t for a second believe the Army is “better” than the Marines but you’re smoking something I never would if you think I’m going to let Marines systematically disparage my service and smile about it. You guys are upset because you aren’t used to being proved wrong in believing ALLl the BS you’ve been fed. Your reaction is to lash out instead of look at the facts. I would fight alongside you if anyone said roll the Corps into the Army. Dumb move! The Corps has some core competencies and culture that would not survive such an ill conceived concept. On the other hand when you promote the opposite or disparage my service to make you feel better about yours it’s hard to stay friendly. The Army and the Marines have a heck of a lot more in common than the Navy or Air Force nothing against those guys either. Marines inferiority complex is their worst enemy.

  182. to no slack

    There are only 2 kinds of people that know Marines. Marines and their enemies.

    November 10, 1775 Marine Corps Birthday

    Army Birthday? – No one knows

    There in lies the difference between army and Marines. You have no history. Marine Corps instead of complaining about a lack of history they make it. Maybe the Army should consider that.

    • Dx – Well you are doing a good job of teaching us about “some” Marines.

      The Army’s birthday? June 14, you probably don’t know that’s the same as Flag day. Using your logic the flag isn’t important becaue you don’t know the day it was adopted huh? Again, when you only read Marine history you only know what Marines think is important. BTW, who really knows what day the Marines B’day is? Do your own informal poll asking those that aren’t Marines.

      As for the Army’s history you’d get farther if you knew some of it. It’s longer than the Marines, has more battles, victories, attacks, defenses, campaigns, wars, amphibious landings, airborne drops, helicopter assaults, armor battles, distances traveled, nations invaded/defended and we didn’t have to borrow ANY Marine accomplishments to make us look better nor do we have to talk bad about the Marines to make ourselves feel better.

      I don’t support anyone that talks bad about the USMC but it seems you guys can’t do anything but talk about the Army in comparison and do it in a disparaging ways.

      Sure sign of an inferiority complex.

  183. Your history is way off, Japanese defeated the Russian in 1905 not 1945. Marine don’t like being attack but it ok to attack the Army right? The respond i got just proof my points, you guy will make up stories and say anything to protect your precious image. You can dish it out but can’t take it.

    No i do not care to understand Marine, but i do care when the branch i served is being degraded. Anyway this stuff is getting old.

    • your grammer is getting old too take an english class man

  184. What is history? Something you can learn from that happened in the PAST. As a former Sgt of Marines, history to both is ridiculous who cares what branch inflicted the most pain in what war. I watched a soldier leave a SAW in condition 1 outside a chow hall at any ghraib prison. Is this indicative of all soldiers stupidity and lack of situational awareness? NO. In a firefight, I don’t give a shit what a branch tag says on someone’s blouse. As long as that person is putting rounds down range. I joined the corps to fight the enemy as everyone else did. I joined because of family history and pride they had. Not bc of some dragon slaying commercial or the silent drill team throwing weapons. We need both branches separately. Marines are floating on every sea in the world ready to strike or help when needed. We all don’t always fight but what happens when a natural disaster strikes and marines are handing out water and food to families who lost everything. Where’s that side? Why would we want to combine them both? Both have illustrious history. The Marines I know and fought beside are proud of being Marines and not cocky about it bc we know what we did in the war and that’s all that matters to us. So SEMPER FI to you all…or does did we steal that too.

    • The authors article is an attack on the Marine Corps history and traditions. That is my point. Most people on this site are bad mouthing Marines including the Author. I too was Sgt of Marines. Best title I have ever had. General Pershing said the deadliest weapon in the world is a Marine and his rifle. That is not made up. The Army has their role and so does the Marine Corps. All said anyone who served deserves respect. But it is unfair to attack Marines and their history/traditions. I am sure before joining the Army you knew of this bravado that Marines carried. These histories and traditions are what motivates Marines to perform. Not being critical of the Army but you guys use terms such as battle buddies. In the Marine Corps it is all for one, does not matter who is beside you in the fox hole, there is an understanding. I think it is great that the Army is changing their indoctrination to establish the warrior ethos. Some statements above claimed that Army boot camp was shorted because they did not have the amount of history lesson the Marines have. Perhaps that is not a bad thing having more history.

      I have just returned from visiting the Marines at the front, and there is not a finer fighting organization in the world!
      General of the Armies Douglas MacArthur; Korea, 21 September 1950

      The safest place in Korea was right behind a platoon of Marines. Lord, how they could fight!
      MGen. Frank E. Lowe, USA; Korea, 26 January 1952

      There are only two kinds of people that understand Marines: Marines and the enemy. Everyone else has a second-hand opinion.
      Gen. William Thornson, U.S. Army

      Google up famous Army or US Army quotes and see what you come up with.

      The Marine Corps keeps track of history right, wrong or whatever. The purpose is to keep repeating that history that is taught. General Krulac said the MArine Corps has 2 purposes. Make Marines and win battles. When your most senior commander sums up the purpose of the Marine Corps in 1 sentence that is awesome. Even the hardest critics out there smiled at that statement. The Mission of the Marine Corps is even better summed.

      The mission of the Marine Corps rifle/fire team

      “Locate close with and destroy the enemy, or repel the enemies attack by fire and close combat”

      They teach every Marine this boot camp. It is branded in your brain. No long statements. Just cutting straight forward frank orders.

      Every Marine reading this regardless of how balanced you want to be is smiling right now. Probably some of you army guys to. That is fine we welcome all with open arms and promise to fight to the end for everyone.

      • Most post here were Marines making vile attacks on the Army.

        Army quotes – “Duty, Honor, Country”, “Nuts”, and one of my favorites from Sgt Makuch and his recovery crew who were in a furious firefight surrounded by the remnants of an Iraqi company (-) trying to withdraw from the position we just obliterated when I asked him for a SITREP in the middle of a firefight, “Let me get back to you Sir, I’m fuckin’ ‘em up!”

        Marines don’t have a monopoly on history.

        BTW, that mission statement was originally penned by the Army’s infantry. “The mission of the infantry is to close with the enemy by means of fire and maneuver to defeat or capture him, or to repel his assault by fire, close combat, and counterattack.” Ten companies of riflemen were authorized by the Continental Congress Resolve of 14 June 1775. So even the army’s infantry is older and has more “history” than the Marine Corps.

        Every Soldier reading this regardless of how balanced you want to be is smiling right now. Probably some of you Marines to…

  185. My goodness, what a mean-spirited attack on the Marine Corps. The account of Lang Vei is spectacularly superficial and misleading. Nice try, but I think the Marines’ place in history is secure.

    • What is inaccurate about the Lang Vei account?

      The Marines at numerous meetings promised to send a relief force should the Army base be attacked. They did not. They did send reliefs to various Marine outposts. The Marines even refused to lift Army troops into Lang Vei after the attack was over. They had to be ordered.

      It’s actually quite detailed. Is it “mean-spirited” because it’s accurate?

  186. Wow, you have a serious case of Marine Corps envy. Don’t let it get you down though, the Army has made some great strides throughout the “War on Terror” over the last 10 years. Overall, the Army has become a little tougher, a little leaner, a little meaner, and is once again part of the US Military. For a while there through the 1990s, one had to wonder if the Army had become a liberal political machine instead of a war machine.
    The Marine Corps is not an army, nor was it ever intended to be. If one goes back in history, before the name “Marine” was coined, Marines were referred to as “naval infantry” and fought ship boarding engagements as well as coastal raiding to seize whatever was deemed necessary. So, lighten up Francis, the Army is 20 times bigger than the Marine Corps, has 50 times bigger budget, and still dictates weapons development. Marines are bad asses because as a small force, usually outnumbered, they have to be. The Marines also hold with honored traditions and build upon Esprit de Corps. The Army has plenty to be proud of but they don’t seem to build on it, they always seem to lean to whatever political wind is blowing. Let the Army take a lesson from the Marines… celebrate victory, it comes at too high a cost to forget.

    • Tom – The Army has performed admirably the last decade. Only those that are ignorant of Army history would think it’s any tougher, leaner and meaner than it has been throughout its longer history. Ever heard of Valley Forge?

      As for it being some liberal political machine you might want to check your six. Murtha and McGovern were Marines as well as notorious San Fransisco Marine Scott Olsen. here’s a picture of him with his poodle… http://weaselzippers.us/2011/10/28/iraq-war-veteran-injured-at-ows-oakland-founder-of-ihatethemarinecorps-com/

      So lighten up Marie. We’re all proud of our respective branch though I’d agree that the Army spends less time building on their accomplishments than the Marines. Might be because we’ve been busy paying 80% of the bill in blood throughout our history to toot our horn.

      • like i have been saying dont have a problem with the army i just have a problem with the way the article is slanted against the army a good example is the way he states it in ww2 the marines are just island hoping causing problems with the progress in the war where as the army is doing the real fighting and the marines are just running around getting themselves killed which we both know thats not the case but lets just say it is the case the author later states the army is fighting along side the marines a few paragraphs later during the island hopping campaign so would that mean the army is just as stupid as the marines for running around hoping on islands and getting killed like the marines no of course not he states how much of an awesome job the army did hoping from island to island its just an anti marine article and therefore slanted against the marines and paints them in a bad way using half truths and inaccurate stories also yea marines do throw quotes in peoples faces but tell me this those quotes are all true the author talks about gen. pershing in ww1 yet leaves out what pershing thinks of the marines also he says president truman wants to get rid of the marines i wonder if thats because truman was an army officer and there was a bit of a rivalry there

      • Minsky – The article is not slanted. It does not support its conclusion but it’s not slanted. You are misstating and mischaracterizing what was said in the article and don’t prove ONE degree of “slant”!

        The article doesn’t say the Marines were “just” island hopping or “causing problems”. Nor does it slight the Marine contribution to the Pacific. It makes the point that the Army was there, it captured/killed many more Marines and ran more efficient operations. The fact you walked away with a totally different understanding is just further proof you can’t share a spotlight or make your case. Debating the decision to have a split effort in the Pacific and the wisdom of CERTAIN island campaigns like Tarawa is not “slanted”. It’s “analysis”.

        What Pershing said about the Marines (which you should specify) has nothing to do with the fact that the news blackout (an order) was disobeyed and did result in an inaccurate account of the campaign and the Marine contribution. That’s not slanted! That’s the truth!
        Finally, whether Truman hated the Marines or not doesn’t make the article slanted. He’s reporting facts.

        The ONLY point that is inaccurate in the article is saying the second flag raising at Iwo was staged. It was not. It was replacing the first flag with a larger one.

        Everything else is an accurate retelling of HISTORY. The only way one can say it’s “slanted” is if you don’t know your history or are upset with the truth and don’t want to acknowledge it so you call it something else, “slanted”.

        The better argument is the article doesn’t support the conclusion which I’d agree with. The fact that the Marines have engaged in the wholesale rewriting of history or taking Army accomplishments as their own doesn’t mean they should be rolled into the Army. Just because one lies doesn’t mean one shouldn’t exist.

        The Marines’ forte is as a unique sea based expeditionary force. There’s plenty of history to support that and the case can be made that the Army could not do it more efficiently or maintain that capability with so many other competing requirements.

      • It is a slanted article. Of course you don’t think so because you’re a hooah pansy. It doesn’t matter about the history cause you can’t prove it. The only fact is, that the marines are better now, so end of discussion.

      • You’re only showing you’re shooting blanks by not providing any contrary facts.

        Pansy? I’d place my record next to yours any day “leg”. Let’s not get personal when you can’t win the argument?

        BTW, here’s one for Marines are better now… http://www.military.com/news/article/gay-marines-homecoming-kiss-goes-viral.html

  187. Its superb as your other articles :D, regards for putting up.

  188. I had origianlly put together a long list of refutations with supporting cites to counter what was said in the original article.

    Then I realized that the author is so biased against the Marines that it wouldn’t make a difference to him.

    So in short: I am very proud of my service to this country as a Marine and it means just as much to me as any Soldier’s, Sailor’s, or Airman’s.

    And you should really be ashamed of yourself for being critical of every day Americans who served their country in the Corps. I don’t think any less of someone who chose the Army. You shouldn’t be critical of those of us who chose the Corps.

    • i wish you would put up that list from one marine to another semper fi

      • I would like to have seeen it also. Might not make a difference to the author but as someone interested in the facts I’d like to know where the author got it wrong because everything except the “staged” Iwo flag raising is well documented.

        I suspect as one tried to refute the author’s facts that one learned they were facts. Subsequently one takes refuge in the appropriate pride of wearing a uniform of the United States.

        Uncle Sam, I apologize for those small minded individuals that attacked the choice of an American to join the Corps. Unfortunately many more attack Americans that choose to join the Army.

  189. which bother you more was it the grammar or the statement? probably the statement. i see you have Nothing to dispute what i wrote.

  190. whats up, love your blog about small business vehicle deductions

  191. Wow I don’t know where you’re getting your info but you’re full of shit. One way I know Is that the marines don’t have chaplains dump ass.
    Obviously your probably some pansy ass soldier that has beef with the corps cause you know they are better.
    Merging the marines and army wouldn’t do shit for cost. The navy, army, air force get a certain amour of money in their budget. The navy gets more money simply because of the marine corps. The army only wants to merge with the marines is for the extra money. Standards would be lowered if they merged. The united states needs marines just like we need special forces.

    • Who are you talking to?

      BTW, Marines don’t have medical personnel either. Is there a point there?

      Who (name a name please) in the Army wants to merge the Army and Marines? Are you being frightened by one article that doesn’t support that conclusion very well?

      • The author talks about a marine chaplains… So obviously he doesn’t know what he is talking about. It’s a one sided argument that isn’t backed by any factual evidence. Anyone can make shit up. Whether or not marines took credit for army accomplishment doesn’t matter cause he can’t prove it. As well as army can do the same thing. How do I know army history isn’t bullshit? It’s probably the worst blog I have ever read and just as pointless.

      • Unfortunately I’m not allowed to release certain information. However in a more recent account the army leaders has been wanting to get the marine with them, not merging but a department of the army so that they would receive more money. For all I know that report is false but a buddy of mine at the pentagon has told me something along those lines. He is a soldier by the way that always tells me he wished he would have joined the corps around the time I did.

      • I don’t agree with the author’s conclusion nor does he do a good job of making the case for rolling the Corps into the Army.

        On the other hand a strong case can be made for the Corps claiming achievements it didn’t earn. If you place USMC in front of any of the following battles you’ll find untrue claims of Marine achievement: Battle of Trenton, Anchoring Andrew Jackson’s line at New Orleans, Storming the Castle of Chapultepec, Defending the Bataan Peninsula and many more discussed in the thread. Those claims are in some supposedly reliable pubs like the Marine Corps Gazette yet after some cursory cross checking there are some pretty large fibs. If nothing else for that alone the thread is worth reading though it really has devolved into the trash heap sometimes.

        As for current efforts to roll the Corps into the Army I wouldn’t stress over it. It’s not going to happen for a myriad of reasons. Rumors like that are always kicked around and it really shows a level of insecurity in one’s service to take them seriously. The Marines aren’t going anywhere.

        BTW, I know a force recon CPT who came into the Army and is very happy as a SSG in Special Forces. I also have a friend I respect tremendously who left the corps as a scout swimmer instructor and came to the Army where he was hurt in a jump ending his career. A real shame. GREAT GUY! So anyway, don’t believe everything and everyone you hear.

      • With the city cordoned off, efforts were made to suggest that the Coalition attack would come from the south and southeast as had occurred in April. Instead, I MEF intended to assault the city from the north across its entire breadth. On November 6, Regimental Combat Team 1, consisting of the 3rd Battalion/1st Marines, 3rd Battalion/5th Marines, and the US Army’s 2nd Battalion/7th Cavalry, moved into position to assault the western half of Fallujah from the north.

        They were joined by Regimental Combat Team 7, made up of the 1st Battalion/8th Marines, 1st Battalion/3th Marines, and the US Army’s 2nd Battalion/2nd Infantry which would attack the eastern part of the city. These units were joined by Iraqi troops as well. With Fallujah sealed, operations began on at 7:00 PM on November 7, when Task Force Wolfpack moved to take objectives on the west bank of the Euphrates River opposite Fallujah. While Iraqi commandoes captured Fallujah General Hospital, Marines secured the two bridges over the river to cut off any enemy retreat from the city.

  192. Wrong again. They weren’t leading anything. They came from a different direction but 1st MEF was in charge of the operation.

    • One 2-7 Cav was in front of 3/1 on its axis of advance, it led. 2-2 IN let 1/3 use its breach point because the Marines were bogged down. It later was held up at F PL Fran and again at PL Heather so 1/8 Marines could catch up and then 2-2in conducted a passgae of lines through 1/8 Marines at 1710 13 Nov. A passage of lines by definition is one unit passing through another to continue the fight. 2-2 was in front of 1/8. It’s that sim[ple.

      I’ve cited the history. If you want to say 1st MEF “led” because it was in charge I would remind you and Army General commanded in Iraq at the time so I guess he “led”. You’re twisting yourself in knots to not admit Army units were in front of and in contact with enemy units.

  193. I’m sorry but if your bitch as decided to join the marines you would have to go through our boot camp. If I decided to go into the army I would probably get promoted. Oh and with 1/3 the size of the army somehow we protect the white house and every U.S. Embassy in the world. Our physical standards are higher and our training is longer. Trust me I spent 3 at months at fort sill. The trainig I saw there was a joke. Please let me here your argument on why the army is better and don’t tell me because of sheer numbers.

    • Never said the Army was “better”. That’s a silly argument. We do different things. As for Embassy’s, big deal. The White House is guarded by the secret service. The Marines aren’t armed. They are ceremonial and they look good standing there. The Army guard’s the tomb of the unknown soldier. The Army flag is farthest to the right in ceremonies. They march first in parades. SO WHAT!!!

      PT? Only the run is longer and depending on what unit you are in the Army the standard varies.

      Boot camp is longer? Again so what and why? More attention to dril and ceremonies and history. Big whoop. It’s cool but that doesn’t make you “better”. You can jump up and down and whine. It’s not going to make a difference. Number of battles, awards, decorations, contributions etc. matter. You’re brain washed.

      And as for the gay Marine, consider the equivalent of what you saw at Sill. A stand alone example.

  194. What does a gay marine have anything to do with being better?

  195. Typical army answer. Beating around the bush and not really answering the question. I’m saying equal numbers same gear marines win in a fight. Because marines are better trained you didn’t mention anything about the army being better at anything. Leading in parades doesn’t make army better.

    • Hard to find an example of what you’re saying. Combat is never the same. Marine and Army units aren’t the same. Marine units are 30% larger. Our equipment isn’t the same. E.G..AAVP7s vs Bradleys in Falujah.

      If you insist that they are why did the Army get to Bagdad before the Marines?

      I agree about parades. It’s just as silly as saying one “guards” the White House “unarmed”. BTW, Marine detachments at embassies work for the DSS who provide for the personal security of the Ambassador and dictate what Marine detachments do at Embassys. I’d really not recommend hanging my military prowess at guarding embassies though. Where were the Marines when they blew up the Beruit, Kenyan and Tanzania? Who was guarding the embassy at Tehran when it was captured? I don’t think any of those debacles reflect on the Corps as a whole but you wanted to discuss guarding embassies.

  196. First of all I don’t consider embassy duty the reason why we are better, but it must stand for something…why not use soldiers. Your argument on the army being better now because they took Bagdad is stupid. First of all it was 1st marines that lead the way into Iraq and paved a clear path for the army to take Bagdad. Of course the marines could have taken it but Army Gen Tommy Franks wouldn’t allow the marines to take it when his beloved army could. So he did what any army general with marines under his command would do; let the marines do the dirty work and then let the army finish, to take credit for the victory. I find it funny that this article talks about the marines taking credit for army accomplishments but the army did that with the Iraq invasion. If you think I’m making shit up maybe you should watch HBO’s mini series called Generation Kill. 1st marine recon was the furthest unit north in Iraq. Where was the army? Thats right, behind the Marines like they usually are.
    Oh and your defense on the Jessica Lynch topic about the army not saving her because the were too busy going to Bagdad is crap. She along with 5 other soldiers of the 507th maintenance were captured on march 23rd. You guys didn’t reach Bagdad until April 4th and secure it until April 9th. Those 12 days couldn’t provide you time to rescue your fellow soldiers. The truth of the matter is: the United States military sent in the Marines for 2 reasons. One, they wouldn’t risk the lives of Navy Seals nor any other special forces unit to save the lives of 6 Army Maintenance Goo Rouses that could easily be replaced by an 18 year old moron. So the 2nd reason would be that it would leave it up to army grunts or Marine grunts and obviously Gen Franks trusted the marines more. Also on the topic of Jessica Lynch and the 507. I cant think of one time where a marine unit ran away from a fight or any marine being captured in this war. If you know of any please let me know. The fact is 33 soldiers were apart of that convoy. 11 unfortunately died, 6 were captured, that means 16 of them ran away leaving their fellow comrades there to die. I don’t know what is more of a disgrace. The fact that they weren’t combat ready, running away, or lying about the entire thing. I would love to hear what you have to say about this.
    I don’t even know why I’m so worked up over the comments of someone who is probably an army specialist that has been in for 2 years and done nothing but sit behind a desk.

    • Negative on a bunch of fronts hard charger. It probably starts with using generation kill as a historical document….1st Recon can say they were the furthest north. Well, no. That would have actually been the 173rd. Now you can say ‘different fight’ and you would be correct.

      To suggest the Army (as well as the Britts) didnt have their own screen forward of the MLR is ridiculous. And at the small unit level, theres no way ANY line guy and a rolling stone reporter are going to have ANY clue about who the hell os where…especially a completely different task force…

      As far as the embassies comment, its pretty simple. TRADIOTIONALLY the USMC is Americas forward deployed force. As in Americas extended reach. This goes back to the original drafting of the constitution stipulated no standing Army, but made full provisions for a standing Navy. It has nothing to do with ‘whos better’.

      Lastly, about Lynch. Firstly, to call her comrades shameful is wrong. A bunch of poorly armed POGs who had never seen combat got schwacked. 18, 20 year old kids whod never been in a fight, nor any NCO’s who had, were outgunned simply. As far as who saved her, look at the map…..whos AO was she in when they got her? Saying the Seals couldnt be bothered, but the Rangers could? Either way, rhe whole rescue of her was overkill and almost theater. Was anyone even guarding her? So lets not make it some huge battle streamer…..if you want to mention the Apache guys 3rd LAR saved in Iraq thats a difderent story (which im suprised no one has mentioned….then again I het the feeling the majority here arent connected, just scouring google for ammo….)

      Bottom line, a lot of these simple questions about who does what and why they do it are explained quite simply. Why doesnt the Marine Corps have an airborne element? Why doesnt the Army have a seaborne element? Why does the Army train Marine tankers and artillery guys? (Because the schools are already in place, it saves money).

  197. Hey stop crying, it just an article, even though it is mostly true there no needs to get butt hurt over it. hahaaha

  198. I’m not arguing the Army is better. That’s the SECOND time I’ve said that to you specifically, retention an issue? YOU brought up the embassy guard duty. I just reminded you of some stellar events. You can’t have it both ways. Claiming it makes one better and not explaining what a great job Marines did at the mentioned inidents doesn’t fly.

    As for the Marines “blazing the way” to Baghdad… uh, you know they were on the other side of the euphrates?

    As for Franks keeping the Marines from getting to Bagdad first, how did he do that exactly? Why did Gen Mattis relieve COL Dowdy for not moving fast enough? That’s the army’s fault? Generation Kill? You really want to cite that as a source? Some really great officers in that unit according to that story. BTW, the 173rd was in northern Iraq as well as the Rangers in Haditha if you want to talk about where units where let alone the front line trace of Army recon elements.

    Jessica Lynch? You’re totally ignorant and have no concept about what happened. You’re making it up so bad that you are just out and out lying (which is what this whole thread is about, Marines lying).

    Read The Battle of An-Nasiriyah by Colonel Rod Andrew Jr., USMC

    TF Tarawa planned to take Nasiriyah 6 Feb p.6 (that’s 2 MONTHS before the 23 Mar Nasiriyah battle started!). Btwn 15-17Mar plan was upgraded to “be prepared” mission p6. 22 Mar Gen Natonski recieved orders to execute “be prepared” mission AND relieve the 3rd ID unit at the bridge EAST of Nasiriyah.(p7) Relief conducted at 0300. The 3ID tank company raced to catch up with the lead elements of the division which were 130 miles NORTH of Nasiriyah. (p8).

    The Marines weren’t sent to Nasiriyah for the 507th. They were ordered to go there before the 507th was even ambushed. You would have the world believe the Marines were psychic and knew the 507th was going to get ambushed? Too bad they didn’t know the situation at Al Kut. That kind of intel would have saved some Marine lives.

    507th wasn’t part of 3rd ID. It was maint co for a Patriot Bty (Corps asset). It was traveling at the tail end of a 600 vehicle convoy when it lost contact AND commo 22 Mar. How would 3ID let alone the rest of the Army magically know a Corps asset had been ambushed in the Marine AO w/no commo w/the convoy let alone the unit? So Gen Franks could order the Marines to the rescue eventhough they had been orderered to the city already? BRILLIANT!!!

    First unit to learn 507th’s fate were 1-2 Marines because it happened in THEIR sector. The first and only units besides the 507th involved in any fighting in Nasiriyah were Marines that were already enroute to take Nasiriyah. The orders to rescue the 507the came from Gen Natonski who pulled LTC Grabowski (1-2 USMC CDR) aside and said, “Rickey, you have to do whatever you can to find those missing soldiers. They would do it for us, and we need to do it for them.” p8

    Gen Franks wasn’t in the decision cycle.

    NOTE: I used a Marine source because it’s obvious you can’t read anything else and put you in the position of having to say a Marine officer is lying or doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

    • Oh, you’re getting worked up because I’m taking apart your arguement lie by lie. No one likes getting caught BSing.

  199. I’m not crying. The author is being a whiny bitch just like the rest of you hooahs. There is no historical facts backing his statements. I bet you wouldn’t have the balls to say that to my face.

    • Is this the part where everyone rolls up their sleeves and turns in to internet tough guy?

      I just want to know so I dont get punched through the internet. Which could totally happen any of us type the wrong thing

  200. Did you even read my statement moron. I didn’t say anything about the marines going there for the 507 or rescue them from an ambush. I said they rescued them from being captive. Gem Frank was in charge of all operations in Iraq. The only one he took doers from was Bush. Are you telin it was impossible for him to tell those belong to make sure they got to bagdad first. And first marine recon was at the tip of the spear when it came to the invasion. Were there Other units… Yeah no shit.have you even been in the military or are you some army brat that sits in his parents basement playing MW3 all day. And I’m capable Of reading things other the marine corps material. I know all about the 507 and I figured since you know everything (because you were there right) I didn’t have to fill in every detail. Sounds like to mean you suffer from diarrhea of the mouth and marine envy.

    • You want to focus on my credentials vs the issue at hand? What are your credentials sweet pea? Be assured I know what I’m talking about from firsthand experience, over 20 years in uniform and quite a bit of study. Contrast that with I’m betting you aren’t even an 0311 and if so have all of two years in uniform and one deployment. Let’s not compare records. You are going to be embarrassed.

      You have a writing AND retention problem. You did mention Jessica Lynch. “She along with 5 other soldiers of the 507th maintenance were captured on march 23rd. You guys didn’t reach Bagdad until April 4th and secure it until April 9th. Those 12 days couldn’t provide you time to rescue your fellow soldiers.” Remember?

      Again, the majority of the Army was north fighting the war. Delta, SEALs, PJs and Rangers rescued Jessica Lynch when the Marines got intel of a location beyond enemy lines. The rest were rescued by Marines. Why would the Army stop and send troops into the marine sector to find the other five if first no one knew where they were and secondly there was little doubt the Marines couldn’t handle it? Making this sound as some black mark against the Army would be like saying the Marines couldn’t handle the raid at Cabanatuan so the Army did it. Get real. The Marines were occupied elsewhere. Only a moron would think it’s not the right thing to rescue American troops whatever uniform they are wearing. Just because we work together doesn’t mean one side is weak. The fact that the Army assited or relieved Marines at Khe Sanh, Hue and Falujah doesn’t mean the Marines are weak. Only denying it makes one sound weak.

      Your Franks point is ridiculous. You can’t cite one fact as to how he slowed down the Marines or why Gen Mattis fired Col Dowdy. Let’s say your twisted logic is right. I guess the Marines were led by the Army at Falujah because they were working for Gen Metz US ARMY in late ‘04. See, I told you, the Army led the marines in Falujah! (That’s sarcasm just showing how silly and ridiculous you’re being).

  201. This whole article is a lie. I’m sorry but you know Wikipedia isn’t a reliable source right?

    • Uh true, niether are you by the lack of facts you present.

  202. Well ispent 4 years in the marines but couldn’t reenlist due to having 2 lung surgeries and knee surgery. I deployed 3 times and served with men that were part of the invasion. No I was not part of it but new a lot of men that were. At least none of us surrendered, ran away or was captured. The army can’t say that. You know what I don’t even care anymore. I didn’t even have beef with the army until I read this stupid blog. I just think its funny that you soldiers talk shit behind our backs and online, but when face to face kiss our ass and talk about how great we are. I know cause my sister is dating a formal soldier right now and dated 2 others prior to him and she says they all talk shit to her when I’m not there. But none of them had the balls to say it to my face.

    • Well on one hand I appreciate your service even if you want to malign the Army. I guess it takes all types.

      There are examples of Marines breaking contact or withdrawing e.g 7 Aug “04 Najaf. To the marines credit there have been no examples of Marines surrendering but like I said no battle is the same. No Marine maintenance unit has been engaged in a fight where they were outnumbered and the enemy had tanks. I do know a heck of alot more soldiers have died for America than Marines ever have but who’s counting right. They’re just soldiers right?

      Don’t want to bring your sister into it but you did note she’s “dating” soldiers even when her brother is a Marine? I’d be happy to share my perspective face to face if you ever get down to Columbus Ga. or Ft. Benning.

      I would have likes to have kept this a respectful conversation. You might want to go back when you aren’t so upset and note where you started becoming insulting when you were losing the argument.

  203. You’re a joke. I can’t believe you think that the marine is so one sided and biased and lies about everything but the army is so truthful an honest, and could never lie. I’m the one that is brainwashed. You’re ass has been supporting mediocrity for 20 years. Hell your football team has lost 7 years in a row to navy. Sure does show your future officers physical superiority. The last time army’s football team was good was around the same time the actually army was any good.

    • Yes, football teams have a real bearing on the matter. You know the Army has beaten the Marines specifically for 20 years in a row in boxing. Ever heard of the sport? What was that about mediocrity and 20 years?

      Getting back to the matter, no I never said some in the Army weren’t biased or less than truthful. My only point has been that the Marines have at times taken credit for things they didn’t do. It’s that simple.

  204. So far all I see is half-truths and almost everything is taken out of context. First off I can tell NONE of you are among the more “Elite” groups you talk about. Here is how I know:
    1) You will not find Special Forces, Rangers, ID Recon, Pararescue, SEALs, or Delta Force talking this kind of trash to each other.
    2) 75% of the people in all branches hide behind the accomplishments of the above listed groups; taking the glory as their own.
    3) History and current events are always up to interpretation depending on where you are viewing the issue from.

    For reference my MOS is 68W-W1 and I really do not care which branch you are in as long as you put your mission and team first. As for the mouthy Marine and Marine want-a-be’s, I suggest you not talk like this to any seasoned Vet from any of the fore mentioned groups to include your fellow ID Recons as they will forcefully put you in your place for disrespecting any member of the fore mentioned groups.

    • Doc – The Spec Ops have done yoeman’s work but they aren’t the only ones. Dogface Infantry along with the other combat arms have been carrying the lionshare of the load over the last decade’s fight. You failed to mention them and their 12 month tours. There’s plenty of battles where the “glory” belionged to folks not in the spec ops community (Anaconda, Wanat, the march to Baghdad and dozens of cities in Iraq and Afghanistan). They just don’t worry about the press,

      I agree with you that many non combat arms types “cheer” the victories of those you mentioned. I just wouldn’t limit it to those. Spec Ops types are studs but there are quite a few that don’t live on the FOB and do the up close dirty work day in and out. Some get recognized for their service like SSG Guinta, PFC MCGinnis and SFC Smith (all Medal of Honor recipients and not a ranger, delta or SF between them).

      History has a certain level of interpretation to it but there are some facts that just can’t be interpreted. I’ve tried to be positive in all my posts here. not everyone has and at times I may have been guilty of reflecting some troll’s attitude.

      I don’t think this thread has been all bad. I do think some good has come of it. I don’t dislike Marines in general and have several friends that wear the EGA. I’d agree though that those that have seeen a green tracer or two have a bit more respect for sister branches.

      Appreciate all you do. Gotta love our medics. – a retired Infantryman

      • Majrod, I agree there are a lot of truths being distributed in this thread. However, anyone who has actually participated in a few campaigns will see that not all the facts about a given situation ever reach light. Most of the time it is the ones in political position deciding what will be considered “truth”. Personally I respect everyone who puts on the uniform and does their job with professionalism. As for the history of events, I am seasoned enough to say this, I was not there and can only truthfully account for what I have witnessed.

        In regards to Infantrymen, they deserve quite a bit of acknowledgment from all branches not enduring the rigors of a combat arms unit. With that said it is usually the basic infantry man looking up to the more “elite” and sharing in their pride: Infantry to Airborne Infantry to Rangers to Delta and base Marine Infantrymen to Recon etc.

        Being an Infantryman is something to be proud of Majrod, especially since every MOS sings cadences about your merits and always will; never forget that.

        RTLW

      • I can absolutely agree there’s two sides to a story and interpretation has a role. The relief of Gen Smith at Saipan is an excellent example.

        I think for the first time marines have been hearing the army side in this thread in regard to many Marine achievements/accomplishments. The Marines have a lot to rightly be proud of. They don’t need to make anything, take credit for Army achievements or make a point to not discuss the Army when we accomplish things together.

        The thread has gotten heated because some on both sides just don’t want to acknowledge it. Though I honestly have to say Marines are more guilty of it. They have a lot of esprit and pride and sometimes that doesn’t come out in a positive manner. It’s a shame too many think they are the only ones that are proud of their service.

  205. Well if that’s what you and this author believe that’s fine. Children believe in Santa claus, because their parents tell them he is real. However the parents themselves do not believe it. Some marine corps stories aren’t factual but who says that the marine corps claims it to be. Just cause some dumb columnists writes something in a magazine or paper doesn’t mean the marine corps claims it. That would be like the army claiming what this guy says is factual

    • That’s probably the most reasonable thing you’ve said.

      Don’t agree with everthing you just said because some of those over the top and/or untrue claims are in official Marine pubs (you gotta take responsibility for an official document).

      BTW, I have problems with some of the author’s points and conclusions and have stated so several times. It’s all good. Glad you could see it my way :)

  206. She dates soldiers because it’s either that or airman. No navy or marines unless they are a weekend warrior. Plus she would never dare date a marine. Her ego is big enough. I respect all service members even you. I have a close friends in all branches except coast guard. I know more soldiers have died because they have been a larger force since their existence. Of course more are gonna die in wars, but I don’t find it amusing that you mock their deaths. When I talk about the Jessica lynch thing I said unfortunately 11 died. I didn’t mock their sacrifice. And I told you I didn’t have beef with the army before this. My best friend just got out if the air force recently and he is the one who sent me this link. He said I would find it amusing. All it did was piss me off. It wasn’t just the authors view that pissed me off it was the comments made by your fellow soldiers. Then it from me wanting to have an educated debate to just wanting to talk shit and you happened to be the one to respond first.

    • I wasn’t mocking their deaths. I was demonstrating your absurd views about the Army (do I really need to quote some of the things you’ve said?).

      True the Army has been a larger force. It has rarely been 80% of our total armed forces yet has suffered 80% of our fallen for over 235 years. Why not just give the army credit vs. having to minimize it in some way? Your sister isn’t the only one with an ego.

    • Granted some soldiers have made very stupid comments. They are dwarfed by the number of Marine comments that were just as stupid, low or just hateful. You have to get past the “Marine Uber Alles” thing. It’s not only wrong when soldiers talk crap. One can never expect a standard from others if one isn’t first willing to live it. You know that.

  207. I didn’t take anything away from the army. I’m not the one saying army’s history is false and misleading. I’m not being egotistical… I’m being defensive. And like I said it turned personal and I was just looking to fight. I know you are going to say that is having an ego but I’m not the only sounding like I have an ego

    • This is a good post Cltmstrmn. Keep in mind this though, although you are not saying the Army’s history is false or misleading you are also not defending the Army either; goes both ways. There is nothing wrong with the pride (or ego) you carry, just be careful not to let it make you biased or you become guilty of the very issue you are accusing the Army guys of.

      Here is an example of why this thread has provoked a defensive reaction on both sides, “Marines are first to fight”. Only true if you disregard the multiple SOCOM forces behind the lines before anyone else knew there was a need for the Marines. See how taking a portion of the truth out changes the context? Marines are typically the first to respond (depending on the mission and terrain) due to their increased size over SOCOM units and they can be sent anywhere for a short period of time before War must be declared. After that the Army’s massive combat groups become the dominating force; supported by both the Navy and Air force. So do Marines deserve credit? Yes. Do they deserve to take all the credit by implying they are always the “first to fight”? No

      • Doc – It’s not just SOCOM. Desert Storm had the 82nd, Panama had the the 7th, 5th IDs and Separate brigades, Korea had TF Smith (24th ID).

  208. I agree and most of mine have be asinine. However, the article is what started the whole thing. Its slanted pro army and anti marine. How do you expect marines (who thrive on the history and other things) to react to something like this that d

  209. I agree and most of mine have be asinine. However, the article is what started the whole thing. Its slanted pro army and anti marine. How do you expect marines (who thrive on the history and other things) to react to something like this that doesn’t actually have any factual evidence proving what this autor claims. To me it’s just hear say.

  210. Majrod, you get the idea for the statement I was targeting and I never said SOCOM was the only ones in before the Marines. Not to mention I was not going to draw in another historical debate over one slogan.

    • Nah, just making sure the “ordinary guy” tabbed grunts get some love.

      I’m quite confident you personally have no issues with the combat arms types of the “big Army” but if you read the thread there are some Marines that separate the Army special ops community from their general derision of the Army. My comments are targeted more at that group of mental midgets. The ARMY deserves the same level of respect marines expect of their branch. Plain and simple.

  211. Majrod, on that note the Army need to put in more effort on their PR image, more emphasis on tradition and history. whether you want to admit it or not the Marine is running a PR image race with the Army. some of the reason are to justify their existence, get better funding, to get support from the public, which is a huge a moral booster, (majority of the public definitely have more love for a Marine than soldier that for sure) and to get recruit to join with less benefit. all of which is working for them. they know how to sell themselves.

    my evidence of low moral in the Army is when the general decided to go all out the on black Barret for regular joe, which to me is indication of the issue.

    The Marine culture of belittling and not giving credit to the Army, down play our contribution does have it effect on regular Army troop, not all but it there.

    what your thought on this?

    • Great issue. It’s always bothered me also. I concede hands down the Marines do a much better job at publicity. No doubt! Everything they do from recruiting commercials, to ensuring media coverage in combat, to OKing projects with Hollywood and playing the political games of Washington demonstrates their clear superiority in getting publicity and managing their image.

      IMO the Army’s deepest cultural values have much to do with this lack of emphasis. The Army was THE vehicle that secured the nation’s freedom. When George Washington was offered control of the nation by the Army he turned it down and forever established an apolitical tradition and relationship of the Army being the nation’s ultimate guardian. This is actually quite unique considering every other nation’s history on the planet. The Army will never be a threat to its civilian masters and goes far and beyond what other services do to keep itself from getting politically embroiled. Consider when the Marines were foolishly being considered for incorporation into the Army they went as far as to create a committee to work against the commander in chief. The Navy did something similar when airpower was threatened. The Army has endured MASSIVE cuts and even the relief of icons like MacArthur (not a personal favorite) with barely a whimper. We still do. The Army is paying the overwhelming majority of the drawdown bill both as an individual service and proportional to all the services. In fairness to the Marines and the Navy there are ways to reach out to the American people. How they did it was questionable.

      Next, the Army is the most egalitarian of our services. We welcome everyone. Of all the services it has the least elitist attitude. One can see this tradition throughout our history with its composition often including the least desirable of Americans e,g. the Irish during the Civil War, Blacks served on the frontier when they had few other opportunities and even Japanese when they were nationally excoriated after Pearl Harbor.

      Accordingly the Army has never devoted resources to marketing itself as an elite organization or anything else but guardians of the constitution and the nation. Not sexy but that’s who we are and as an organization the Army is quite happy to fall back into its traditional role out of the limelight.

      Another contrast in culture can be demonstrated by comparing the two services mottoes. The Marine motto is Semper Fidelis. From the official Marine.com site “Semper Fidelis distinguishes the Marine Corps bond from any other. It goes beyond teamwork—it is a brotherhood that can always be counted on. Latin for “always faithful,” Semper Fidelis became the Marine Corps motto in 1883. It guides Marines to remain faithful to the mission at hand, to each other, to the Corps and to country, no matter what.” Note the priority, mission, each other, Corps and THEN country.

      US Army motto? “This we’ll defend.” Pretty simple! Not much emphasis on the individual or the service in the least. Not really a driving force to glorify the Army, track its accomplishments, publicize them etc.

      I’ll address the other issues in separate but shorter posts.

      • Major Rod,

        Been a long time since my last reply. Been out earning a living. I have been following from a far and finally have time to respond. It’ll take a couple of posts to get back in the thread so bear with me.

        The article presented has raised some great issues for discussion (all the name calling aside.)

        In this time of Defense reassessment and budget issues, all the services are having to do some soul searching about their reasons for existence. Again, great issues to explore hear amongst professionals.

        Also, I’ve seen some poor posts mostly from those purporting to be Marines.

        To those Marines: if you have nothing intelligent to contribute to this thread keep your soup coolers closed. If you have nothing to support your assertions then do some research and add your voice and acknowledge when a point has been made. If you’re just going to call someone names, sack up and go down to the local bar and do it face to face with someone . This is an intellectual conversation between professional Soldiers and Marines.

      • Major Rod,

        Agree with you on the recruiting, public relations and politics. Over the course of history there have been many successes. In recruiting, it’s always the organization that best captures what it is all about in its communications to prospective recruits seeking that environment. The Marine Corp’s message has been we’re selective, we have a high standard, and we like to fight

        “First to Fight” has always implied to me the culture of the Marine Corps to always be the first to raise your hand to go in where there is trouble, to go towards the sound of the gunfire rather than away. With that said, I won’t argue the point of the historical validity of who has been the first to fight in every conflict. Going back to the author’s starting point of the World War I as the genesis of friction between the Army and the Marine Corps however, does prove my point of the aggressive nature of the Marine Corps culture. General Barnett, the Commandant worked every bolt to get the Marines in the fight as soon as possible. He achieved this over the objections and refusal of the American Expeditionary Commander, General Pershing. (This is definitely a separate discussion as to why an American General would refuse trained and organized combat troops when we scrambling to assemble forces to send to Europe?)

        Other Recruiting slogans follow that same line:

        “Ready, Join”
        “Want Action, Join”
        “Let’s Go”
        “The Few, The Proud, The Marines”
        “We Never Promised You a Rose Garden”

        But, let’s be clear – these aren’t slogans without accomplishments to support them. These are a reflection of what our organization stands for and symbolizes.

        In the last portion of your post you state something that needs some clarification

        “Another contrast in culture can be demonstrated by comparing the two services mottoes. The Marine motto is Semper Fidelis. From the official Marine.com site “Semper Fidelis distinguishes the Marine Corps bond from any other. It goes beyond teamwork—it is a brotherhood that can always be counted on. Latin for “always faithful,” Semper Fidelis became the Marine Corps motto in 1883. It guides Marines to remain faithful to the mission at hand, to each other, to the Corps and to country, no matter what.” Note the priority, mission, each other, Corps and THEN country.”

        I don’t see in the statement that it says “here is the priority starting with greatest to least.”

        I am always faithful to my mission as so ordered by the superiors placed over me
        I am always faithful in service with my fellow Marines
        I am always faithful as a member of the Marine Corps and title holder of Marine
        I am always faithful in service to my country both as a Marine and as a citizen.

        I wasn’t trained and neither were my fellow Marines that any of these were in conflict or came before the service to my country.

        The Army Motto “This We’ll Defend” is excellent and in line with the purpose first envisioned as a “Citizens’ Army. We as all citizens should have that same view as well.

        To say that “Semper Fidelis” is a self-serving motto goes a bit far -To be faithful – Strict or thorough in the performance of duty – true to one’s word, promises, vows, etc…steady in one’s allegiance, or affection, loyal, constant – reliable.

        There would be confusion however given some of the Army’s recruiting pitches like “Be All You Can Be” (implying live up to your potential, but not ours) and “Army of One..”

        The general public cna readily identify those slogans (both Marine and Army) and are familiar with the Marine Corps motto. I would bet good money they would not know the Army’s motto.

      • Major Rod,

        The middle portion of your post I think is dead on – the Marine Corp’s strength (like the Navy) is sometimes being so hidebound to tradition. You see that carriedthrough generation to generation – Old Breed to New Breed. Not always good, not always bad!

        The Army is the nation’s Armed Service. When we go to war, we mobilize and the Army is the largest. When we demobilize, the Army tends to shrink the most.

        The Army is the most egalitarian. The Marine Corps being the last of the Armed Services to integrate African Americans reflects poorly. SInce then however, the culture has become and has been for the longest time that “we’re all green.”

        The Armed Services as a whole have tended to lead society at large in social change issues.

        I think we both agree both services have different purposes in their organization and deployment. As with you, the Army has a great story to tell, I don’t understand why they don’t tell it.

        As you stated the Army isn’t always in the limelight, but it is the constant – we will always have an Army and we will always need an Army.

      • Simple Marine – Great posts. Singlehandadly you raise the level of discourse. I’d add my comments to yours to the few brash out of control soldiers who cross the line to bash Marines with invective and hate. It’s not productive and I’d encourage them to return to the rear where most of them served when and “if” they wore the uniform (it’s a fact that those that served in the safest locales are often the loudest).

        Agree with much of what you said but I will speak to “Semper Fidelis”. It’s a great motto and I have no doubt you have your priorities straight but not so for many in the Corps. E.G. The out of control bashing of other services does place the Corps above others but is NOT helpful to the nation as a whole. It’s never positive when someone bashes another service to elevate theirs. Professional respectful discussion of roles is valid. We’re way past that.

        Some of this misguided priority culture has fueled some of the worst behavior by the most senior Marines. The formation of a secret committee to counter the CIC is a sin (even if Truman was being an idiot). If not where does one draw the line? Disagreeing with the CIC when asked by Congress is required by our duty ethic. Secret Committees? No. Gen H.M. Smith’s attitude about the Army, lies about the tardy recovery of a COL Conroy at Makin and his relief of Gen Smith at Saipan can be seen as stemming from that Marine ethos of USMC Uber Alles. He never commanded troops in combat again and published a highly critical biography (even when fellow Marines asked to edit it). This one man’s impact has been felt for half a century as only recently has the Army has ever placed its troops under a Marine General. COL Lownds abandoned soldiers at Lang Veigh and Gen Cushman had to be ORDERED to send helicopters. Gen Mattis refused to send Marine helos to MEDEVAC an SF ODA decimated by an errant bomb early in Afghanistan.

        This behavior can be seen again when it comes to crediting troops. Army Generals go out of their way to recognize Marine contributions (this thread is full of quotes). Where are Marine acknowledgments of respect? The Tiger BDE provided most of the armor for the Marine thrust into Kuwait in Desert Storm, hardly any mention. The Army led into Falujah and one BN went from a supporting effort to the main effort, hardly any mention. I’m a fair guy, I give Gen Oliver Smith the benefit of the doubt in not helping the 31st RCT when it was destroyed in detail holding the east side of Chosin allowing the Marines to secure the route of withdrawl but he did NOTHING to stop the rumors of cowardice that Marines have heaped upon the 31st RCT which subsequently received a PUC and whose 2nd commander (the first was killed) received the MOH. The same unit whose utter and tragic destruction provided his unit the critical time it needed to fight its way out of Chosin and become a legend. (READ East of Chosin and you’ll understand how dishonorable Gen Smith’s lack of recognition is.)

        As an aside, Pershing had his flaws. Not wanting Marines in WWI is understandable considering the time and place. Where’s the beach at Belleau Wood? Why dedicate resources to bring Marines over when one is challenged to get the Army into the fight in a MAJOR land war? Based on the self serving release of Marine exploits after the fight in direct contravention of orders and its impact on the larger force was he so wrong? The Marine total disregard to the news blackout is also understandable when viewed in the dysfunctional light of “Semper Fi”.

        “Semper Fi” is a great motto and very VERY well deserved in many ways but the evidence demonstrates a clear negative aspect of the “Semper Fi” culture. By all means it’s not all bad but when it’s darker aspects become dominant in how Marines treat other services it’s a matter of concern especially if you’re a soldier.

    • Black Beret – One general making a very shortsighted decision. Shinseki was a tanker. Since WWII tankers have been trying to get the Black Beret which the Germans established as their traditional tanker wear. Shinseki was at a Ranger demo, saw the beret and figured he could make everyone feel special, get the tankers their beret and make his impact on the Army in one swoop. Dumb. If you look back to the 1890′s you’ll see for a short time the Army actually had a spiked helmet like the Germans. Dumb.

      BTW, morale was low in the Rangers the rest of the Army just drove on and dealt with it like many dumb decisions before and more to come.

      America is fickle when it comes to its Army. There was a time when towns outside bases refused to serve soldiers and it was looked downupon to be dating a soldier even an officer. Lived it in the 80′s at Ft. Benning. Right now there’s a threat and we’re popular. It won’t always be that way. Americas treatment of the Army was shameful during the revolution and several times thereafter. Like a good dog we remain loyal even if we are made to sleep on the porch in the rain and our master ALWAYS comes first.

      I’d like to see the Army do some focusing and internal soul searching. We don’t have a consistent message to the nation we serve exclusively and often to our own detriment. There are risks to promoting ourselves.

  212. First of all, ” first to fight” was a recruiting slogan used by the marines. An as we all know recruiters don’t always tell the complete truth. Not saying the slogan was a complete lie, it just wasn’t the complete truth. You can’t include SF units in the topic first to fight. We have SF units in countries that we don’t have any conflict with yet they are doing missions.
    Secondly you can’t be mad that the general population thinks what they think. Most civilian can’t tell the difference between a soldier, marine, sailor, or airmen or be able to identify the uniforms. I know there were more soldiers in the pacific than marines but most people know about the battle of Iwo Jima and the famous flag raising on Mt Suribachi.

    • I agree with your point that most civilians don’t know squat and we can’t hold Marines responsible for everything said by them. The problem is when Marines say it and believe it to the exclusion of anything else. Then we have a problem.

      BTW, I listed conventional Army units that were “first to fight” in several recent conflicts.

  213. Stupid phone. The fact of the matter is, most civilians are ignorant when it comes to military affairs. They will believe anything Hollywood puts out there or any other crap the media puts out. It’s not like the army ever disputed the marines claim of “first to fight” n

  214. Stupid phone. The fact of the matter is, most civilians are ignorant when it comes to military affairs. They will believe anything Hollywood puts out there or any other crap the media puts out. It’s not like the army ever disputed the marines claim of “first to fight” nor did they ever dispute any other claim at the time.

  215. The Army is definitely taken for granted. i have relatives and friends that tell me that it doesn’t seem that the Army is doing any fighting, that the Marine is doing all the fighting (current war). i ask them what make you say that? their respond is we only hear about the Marine (recently SEAL also) on the news and nothing about the Army. i’m not blaming the Marine but image of Army in civilian eye fall way short as compared to the Marine.

    The Army at time seem confuse as far as their identity, Be all you be, Army of one , Army strong, black Barret, blue Barret, wonder what next? IMO they should have stay with be all you can be or maybe U.S Army guardian of the nation.

    • Feel your pain. I’m well prepared to respond to folks that only let the media educate them. This thread helps a bit unfortunately there have been some really hateful comments made by both sides.

      I also agree the Army needs to quit letting civilian advertising firms generate our message.

      Don’t get wrapped around berets. Personally I can’t stand any of them besides the green beret. Our forefathers in WWII wore service caps with a paraglider patch. That should be good enough for us now. The same for the Rangers. By God we have a tab, we have to have special European style headgear? If so we should be wearing the style worn by Roger’s Rangers and nopt copying European style.

  216. I believe that all of this banter is of complete ignorance. I have worked with some outstanding Soldiers and some crappy ones. I can say the same about Marines, there have been Marines that I believed they should be shoveling manure and now where near a weapon. The last decade of fighting in Afghan, Iraq, and the Horn of Africa has shown that even though we are separate branches of service, we reliant on the support of each other’s iron sights, wings, and ships.

    The fact is, as we start to see our defense budget decreased, Joint Operations, will be the way ahead. All services will have to get use to the idea that we are going to be completely reliant on each service and other Allied Nations. Each service is cutting number. The Marine Corps is aiming at just over 180,000, that is smaller than the Army Reserve Forces. This means that if another conflict begins, the MAGTF (Marine Air Ground Task Force) will have to rely on other services for support and vice versa. No one service can win a war alone, no one service has ever won a war without the interaction or support from another service.

    As a Marine, I fully embellish in our Esprit de Corps, because it is what my life and career has been dedicated to. I will support and defend my Marines with my life, and I can assume a Soldier will say the same and I pray they will. I honestly believe that if all of the energy exerted into the banter above was redirected into letters to congress or fundraisers to support our troops and to educating our government, then are service members would have a higher quality of life.
    Think about it, you have accomplished absolutely nothing or meaningful from these rants.

    V/R
    Stephen W. littlewood
    Warrant Officer
    US Marine Corps
    Okinawa, Japan

    • Gunner – I disagree. There has been some real hateful stuff said by both sides and it would be good if this format had an editing option. The more mature of us should see that and correct our own (and the other side if the old hands won’t).

      Back and forth embellishment and banter between services is as old as when the first legionaire talked smack to the first Marine. Wait! There weren’t any back then! (See, I’m chiding) Then again Hollywood is making a fictional movie about modern Marines going back and taking names so we’ll see. FTR, Legionaires served as the Army and the Marines in the Roman Empire.

      As an aside I think much of the anger and viciousness demonstrated by Marines in this thread is because they’ve never been corrected about some of their history. Some of that blame might even be the Army’s fault because it does not do as good a job of teaching its history I’ve learned quite a bit in this thread. Specifically what really happened at Trenton, Chapultapec, Derna, Saipan, Chosin, Mazzaar e Sharif, the 507th Maint Co ambush, COL Dowdy’s relief and Falujah.

      In all seriousness, there are things that we as warriors shouldn’t be saying to each other if we respect each other. Taking credit for another services accomplishments is one of them and something we punish severely if those that we served with wore awards they hadn’t been awarded.

      Secondly there are positives to debating the dumb idea of rolling the Corps into the Army (and vice versa). Too many on both sides fail to realize how dumb that actually is.

      REALLY appreciate your thoughtful and respectful input.

      Much respect and regards,

      MAJ (Ret) W, Rodriguez
      Infantry, USA

      • Sir,

        I was not saying either side is correct. I was stating that both sides are completely out of line with disrespectful banter toward each service. If there is one person here that can back their statements with sources, which no one has done, then they should publish these pieces in journals like the Marine Corps Gazette. If someone wants to set the history books straight, then a well positioned, non bias, research paper should be developed and published. All these rants just make both services look like complete Jack Asses. Both the Army and Marine Corps have high standards and codes of conduct. Both have thrown them out the window in this essay.

        If either side wants to prove themselves then publish your work! Make me a believer with sources I can validate for myself as well as the rest of the community. As an Intelligence Officer I love facts and military history from all around the world. I can say that there are many “facts” stated by both sides that are completely false.

        Marines and Soldiers are proffesional warfighters, all I am asking is for both to act like it. Brute force equals empty threats in cyberspace. So all of the name calling and harsh language posted so the whole world can see is unbecoming of both services.

        V/R
        Stephen Littlewood
        Warrant Officer
        US Marine Corps

      • Stephen (if you don’t mind the familiar), jerks are everywhere and yep there have been PLENTY here. None the less I learned a lot and I’ve gone back and double checked some the citations I wasn’t sure of (e.g. Trenton, Derna, Chapultapec, etc.). It’s not very hard. I encourage you to try. I’ll do one for you… http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/american-marines-battles-trenton-and-princeton Go to the bottom and read the comments and citations. The sources are readily available.

        Just because some are jerks doesn’t mean to stop trying to find the truth or throw the baby out with the bath water. It’s been my experience that troops & leaders can bitch in pretty unprofessional ways. AFTER correcting one’s subordinates the responsibility to get to the bottom of things has not been relieved of the leader if he cares about his troops and his unit. Leaders don’t get to quit because something is hard or distasteful. That’s especially so for officers.

        It’s because the author and many of the facts presented here ARE accurate that no one has gone back and refuted the author’s facts. (Though his conclusion about the future of the Corps is a huge leap and unsupported and I’ve said so repeatedly, for what that’s worth).

        I’m considering getting into the professional writing side. Who know what the future may hold but the venom has been extreme on this thread and the overwhelming number of personal attacks have been by Marines though there have been several scuzzy soldiers rolling in the mud also. Maybe if the more level headed among us tried to restrain the more exuberant or immature?

        Good luck to you. Keep the faith and I look forward to hearing more of what you have to say.

  217. Major Rod,

    You raise the first issue that the interservice rivalry has passed the point of good natured ribbing (I paraphrase so correct me if I don’t capture your point.) In my years of service and interaction with my network of fellow veterans and current active duty members across all branches I don’t see this. The postings on this blog are more a phenomenon of trolls versus reality. My personal experience, which I assume you are using as a basis for your position (I have served with all branches over a 14 year period in all manner of environments.) I don’t think we’re on the brink of organizational break down nor did I see or do I hear now that there is a built in organizational bias that encourages the individual Marine to disregard the other branches. There is the post-bootcamp mentality of invincibility that wears off after a certain point and this attitude isn’t tolerated by veteran, long-service Marines. As with all situations there are exceptions to the rule. One train wreck does not make all trains bad. The examples you cite, I think have nothing to do with the sinister motives you infer on Marine officers, for if their motives were to be true as you infer, you would have to infer the same sinister motives of other senior leaders in the other branches and specifically and most certainly the Army as being just as guilty (and by extention being the larger, senior service more guilty). To cite intent based only on observable action out of context doesn’t allow for good analysis nor does it lead you to solid conclusions.

    World War I

    As this is the author’s starting point for the genesis of interservice issues between the Army and the Marine Corps, I’ll start here. (There are plenty of excellent histories that address these events in great detail that I found illuminating and reinforced my pride in the true legacy of the both the Army and the Marine Corps – way beyond the “Devil Dog” and “First to Fight” legends.)

    Your argument that the Marine Corps had no right to be included because the conflict wasn’t amphibious misses several points:

    - The Marine Corps that evolved over the 20th century was primarily as an expeditionary ground combat force that specialized in forced entry landings (WWII being the exceptional time where that was the key quality needed in the Pacific theater.)
    That it had the capability to conduct forced entry landings (not a fully developed capability until after WWI), and seize advance naval bases is only one aspect and not relevant to the circumstances of fighting in France as a part of the Amercian Expeditionary Force.

    You ascribe evil intent for the Marines always looking for some way to stay a relevant participant just for the sole purpose of their existence and I assert that the Marine Corps like any great innovative organization is always working and striving to remain relevant in order to participate and serve our country, our constituion, and its citizens. (Incidentally, you could infer either side of the argument for each branch – I prefer to assume positive intent and the latter argument for all the branches of the armed forces.)

    When Pershing said he didn’t have shipping to get the Marines to France, the Marines provided there own. AT each turn the Marines overcame the objections to get to the goal of being in the fight.

    When Pershing relieved the Marine commander of the 4th Marine Brigade, he placed a less senior Army officer in command over a more senior Marine officer on site. (You didn’t see us getting whipped up over that and that happened before Belleau Wood). In fact the Marines created a special bond between themselves and their Army general. General Harbord was treated with less courtesy from his own service after he spoke very favorably of the performance of the Marine Brigade. Later General Lejuene commanded the 2nd Division and there were many instances of both Marine and Army officers successfully commanding formations from the other services. These two stories (Harbord and Lejuene are overlooked and overshadowed by the petty press release.) are the more important one. I encourage you to look closer at these two professionals especially Harbord who was treated with great respect by the Marines.

    The big issue of the publicity was a press release that was in no way shape or form pushed out by the Marines. This was done by an independent journalist and the journalist’s friend who sat on the censorship board in Paris and thought his friend’s dispatch would be his last due to mortal wounds suffered at the front. Pershing’s misguided policy of press censorship only hurt the Soldiers of the other units by not informing the American people of how well THEIR Army was doing. Pershing could have easily solved his own problem by releasing information on the progress and successes of the other units – HE was the AEF Commander – where is his responsibility in this?

    These are great examples you provide and I will comment on them as well.

    Just read Frank Church’s history of Guadalcanal – I highly recommend it – great scholarship, analysis and commentary.

    Major Rod – to re-emphasize – I enjoy the discussion of the history and legacy of both the Army and the Marine Corps – it is the richest military history around. I hope through our discussions here that we can get beyond hyperbole and hubris and bring that history to light. I will work to tell both sides of the story.

    More to follow.

    • Simple Marine – Woah Woah Woah!!!! Reread my post!

      NEVER ascribed any dysfunctionality to ALL or even MOST Marines. No we are not at the precipice of collapse based on interservice rivalry. I NEVER inferred sinister motives on Marine officers (as a group). I wholeheartedly agree with your “one train” metaphor. That said, my comments are based on 20+ years of joint service and the incidents I discussed were not painting the whole organization. They were illustrating a phenomenon that crops up on occasion. Discussion of organizational groupthink displayed at The Cuban Missile Crisis or The Challenger Disaster doesn’t mean the Oval Office and NASA are groupthink type organizations but it sure as hell says they need to be wary of it.

      As for WWI, just becaue the Marines “could” get to the fight doesn’t mean they should. Don’t think launching the 82nd or 101st into a mission because “it can” validates doing it. Large picture here? Every warrior wants into the fight. You have to look at the whole situation. On the other hand it just made sense to get the Marines into Afghanistan in Nov ’01.

      What I am saying are the few cases that do occur have impacts on the force that are far beyond those involved realize and eventually have impact on the mission. I sense your strong reaction is somewhat of a kneejerk reaction. No vet likes to hear something negative about their branch.

      No doubt there ARE organizational culture dysfunctionalities in the Army caused by it having to be the largest organization. I detest the way the warrior ethos is watered down in support units. The Army made a very haphazard effort to fix the problem after the 507th debacle (e.g. increased combat training in basic which has over time been watered down). The Black Beret fiasco was RIDICULOUS! A symbol of “specialness” doesn’t mean much unless you had to do something special to earn it. Finally, the Army’s size infects it with a corporate mentality at times that just makes for a climate that doesn’t value pride, appreciation of history etc. (as an aside we see those things reinforced at the division and branch level vs. Army wide).

      Maybe my approach rubbed you wrong. “Semper Fi” has been the rallying cry for so many Marine achievements that you may have taken my point as sacriligious that it could be dysfunctional. No offense was intended. “This We’ll Defend” can be dysfunctional if we apply it as a shield to avoid change and we allknow from history that evenpeace loving religions can sow harm when taken to an excess.

      • I read the article from the gazette. It doesn’t say anything about the marines taking credit from the army’s accomplishments from the revolutionary war. It simply states there were continental marines at the battle of trenton. Not that they played a pivotal role in the battle. So I still don’t see anything that shows the marine corps taking credit for army accomplishments. I don’t see what all this bitching is about.