Need for Marines

[reeb]

GOT to AGREE with The Humper on this subject.

COMMON SENSE ONCE AGAIN!!!!!!!!

enough........

[frisco-kid]

Ron, what you're talking about being done by the Rangers and SEALs isn't an Amphibious Assault, it's an Insertion. Getting a small unit of men ashore, usually in secrecy, isn't the same as getting several thousand Marines, and all their shit, into a heavily fortified and defended beach head. No more than puting a LRRP, SF team, SEAL team, or a handful of Rangers on the ground by helicopter is a Air Assault. You're comparing cantaloupes to water melons .

[Sgt_Tropo]

I agree that the Marines have not been used in the most effective manner during the past 20 or so years. Also, we have not had the need to storm any beaches (Kuwait excepted) since Korea. However, that does not mean we should scrap the Marine Corps.
The Marines operate under an entirely different set of rules than the Army and that is by design. When the President needs to send in an armed force in a rapid response scenerio, he uses the Marines. Why ? Because the Marines are tasked with being the immediate response and expeditionary force, available for deploymnet anywhere in the world on a 24 hour notice. The only other fighting forces capable of such a response are the SEALS and the DELTA force. However, these are very small teams that are not designed nor trained for major encounters with large enemy forces.
The SEALS and the DELTA forces are designed to work in 4 or 5 man teams, up to a 10 man squad-level force. Their main strength is in stealth, not direct engagement with the enemy. Although, I know I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of their encounter, no matter how many or few of them there are.
The Marines are designed to operate best in 10/11 man squads and up to the platoon size force, in most situations, with the occational company-sized force for major operations.
The Army, on the other hand, is designed around the altoon-sized force, as it's basic operational level. I know we operated in squads in many instances in Vietnam, but as a rule, the Army likies to use platoon and larger sized forces in virtually any and all operations. The reason is that the Army believes in over-powering the enemy with superior numbers. The Marines are taught tio use superior fire-power and manuverability.
You did bring up a true point in your post, however. That was the point that the Marines are not being used today in a manner that best suits their strong points. The Marines should not be used in defensive positions, but rather should be allowed to deploy and manuver in their squad/platoon level units to effect the most impact, both physcologically and militarily.
The Army Rangers and other specialty units MAY be able to accomplish most of the objectives of the Marines, but they will never have the world respect that the Marines have earned over the past 200 plus years. It's a fact that simply deploying a Marine unit results in serious second-thoughts on the part of the enemy. Why ? Becuse the world has come to know that the Marines will fight with a determination not found in any other fighting outfit in the world. Why ? Becuase that's what they have been trained to do! Every man in the Marines is first and foremost a highly trained infantryman. This includes the cooks, the clerks, the mechanics, etc. This is not the case in any other fighting unit, be they Army, Navy, Air Force or Coast Guard.
Ron, you know I served with the Fighting 4th in Vietnam, but I have seen firsthand the difference between the Marines and the Army. I am proud of my Army background and my Army brothers, but I also know the Army could never fill the shoes of the Marines in a rapid deployment force.
The Marines ar ethe unit I would want to lead any initial deployment / contact with the enemy, but I also know that the Marines would be the first to acknowledge that they need the Army to provide long-term engagement and support.

[Keith_Hixson]

However, the Army would have to have a Marines like training for a division of the Army. Why not just leave it the Marines? Unless just maybe having only one branch of service overseeing all infantry would make it easier for the bureacracy? Its more an administrative issue if it would be more cost effective and run smoother we probably should look at the issue.

Just a note: The Army had had amphibious landings in Africa and Italy during WW II. The Army could easily adapt if forced to do so. It wasn't just a Marine thing but again is there a real need to change? What would it accomplish? We need some data on cost and affects of the change before a decision could be made. I'm not totally convince yet it would be a good move though I am convinced it could be done if America wanted to do it.

Keith

[the humper]

Cost effective and smoother!!! Not at the cost of ONE Grunts' life. As the Sarge said, they operate under a totally different style. They were the first to create an offensive effort as a reinforced Regiment in the Pusan Perimeter. And they were gathered, formulated and thrown together from all over the world and on the ships,IN TWO WEEKS!!!!! And later, when it became a stand-off fiasco, they were moved west, north of Seoul, in a defensive position to guard that easy avenue of approach, and remained in that static position until the armistice was signed.
SF
NC

[wrbones]

Ayup. I like that Humper. BTDT and don't take no shit from nobody!

..two weeks to get every Marine they could find headed fer Korea and two weeks from that to make one the most difficult amphibious assaults in history. The Marines who saved the UN and US Army's ass on a funky little perimeter in the Southwest of Korea...

Naw... the Marine Corps is outdated and useless ain't it boys. Notice that we're not the ones takin' all the casualties in Iraq. Notice we're not the ones takin' the casualties in Afghanistan. We didn't take all the casualties in Somalia.

I do find it interesting that some folks kinda left out places like Grenada. Who's three divisions were locked in place while Marines were runnin' all over the island, and just how in hell did those Marines get on the island to start with? Ayup. Folks ferget about the Marine Corps til they need us. During peacetime they cut our throats, but we're always there. Do you realize the shape the Marine Corps equipment was in before, during and after Grenada? The Army had better stuff and better maintained stuff, 'cause our throats had been cut. We were operating on a shoestring and tyin' the damn thing together two or three different times. Korea was the same way, only worse.

Must be a flaw in strategy somewhere, do ya reckon? Normally, when Marines take casualties, someone goes with 'em to Vahalla!

When we're given ground to hold, we hold it. When we're given ground to take, we take it.

Give us a place to stand boys, and it's ours til we're ordered offa it.


Humper didn't mention that the Marines in Korea were placed in that easy avenue of approach with their butts hangin' out, did he?Not one Marine regiment had anyone on their flanks. They stretched us thin as an an old maid's purse, and we still held the ground.

[DMZ-LT]

Ya got a birthday coming up Bones ! My other best friend , Ron , is a 68 Dong Ha / Khe Shan Marine whose birthday is Nov 10. Gonna party this weekend. We used to joke the Marines got their equipment from the Boy Scouts after the Boy Scouts used up all the stuff the Army gave them. I worked with a Marine platoon once. When they joined us the only question their LT asked me was " Where are they ? " Course I never knew a Marine platoon had it's own organic photographer either !!

[wrbones]

I wondered what happened to that Army equipment we used when I was a boy scout. I swear to God I saw that same tent when I was inna Corps....

You boys have a great time, LT!! Don't do anything I wouldn't do!

Hell, LT. That seems like a reasonable question to ask to me!

[Desdichado]

It's a real shame the Marines' existence has been under attack for so long. It's not a new thing. They always looked so damn raggedy in the field because, unlike the Army, they never ever spent over budget, lest they incur the wrath of Congress. I often wonder how many of them paid the ultimate price for that stinginess.

I'm not ashamed to say I cheated and robbed the Army out of tens of thousands of dollars worth of parts and equipment, everything from boots to Lycoming hydraulics - equipment which would mysteriously turn up at the nearest HML squadron. If I needed a part, I requisitioned three and hoped to get two. I'd have stolen Westy's mattress if I could. Those guys looked so...homeless.

[wrbones]

Home is where ya dig it, brother. Home is where ya dig it.