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.
…
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.
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!
Funny; I don’t see either of you refuting any of the FACTS stated in the article! Why is that, I wonder?
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….
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!
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.
Boo Hoo! … the army does get as much respect as the Marines … waaaaaaaaaaaa!
Thats all I just read …
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 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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Oh yeah. It’s ok to harass each other. Just keep it respectful. You guys sound like a bunch of school kids.
wow…sounds like a bunch of kids and old men in here….who cares….
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 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.
p.s. please excuse the spelling and grammer errors. I never double checked, heh heh
…
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.
%-) genuinely interested by this website
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.
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.
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
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
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!!!
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.
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!
USAF Pararescue. Nuff said.
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.
….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!!