U.S. Army vs. U.S. Marine Corps

reply to post by sweatmonicaIdo


First let me say you are way off base. Army Basic is 11 wks. 1 wk shorter than Marine Boot Camp. Rangers vs. Marine RC. Come on Marines have no clue how to secure an air field and a Marine RC is not Jump Q'd. Rangers specialize in this area. All Army soldiers are trained in CQB, MAC (Modern Army Combatives) and are as a whole better leaders. If a Marine has to go to Jump, Dive, HALO, HAHO or any other school other than Recon he goes to an Army school. Marines are good at what they do but face they help support the Army mission. The only major combat operation since WW1 the Marines have done without Army support has been Iwo Jima. Every major combat operation in U.S. history has been led by the Army or an Army commander. Ask the average joe on the sreet to name one, just one major Marine commander and they can't. Ask the same guy to name three major Army commanders and they'll nail it. As a whole the Army is stronger and better at what it does than anybody else in the world. The Army shoots, moves, communicates and leads better than any other branch, services or military hands down. Since 2001 the Army has won and or placed in the top 3 in the International Sniper Comp.
The Marines have not placed in the top 5 duing that time. Army shooters are almost always on the Olympic Shooting Team. And don't get me started on Best Ranger Comp. No Marine or Marine team who entered the event has finished much less won. Tell Marines to charge a MG position and they will even if it cost 85% casualty rate. Tell Army soldiers to do the same and they'll tell you were to stick it and call in CAS and achive the same results with 2-3% casualty rate. What's the difference between the Army and Marines? The Army produces a something the Marines don't even know. Individuals. Because of this the Army has better leaders and followers. On a typical mission not every Marine knows everything about the mission as a whole. But his Army brothers do. The Army teaches that every soldier should know the other soldiers job. So that if something happens to the other soldier his battle buddy can pick up the slack the mission drives on. This even applies to officers and NCO's anll the way down to the private. Hey, drive on if you saying the Marines are the best makes you fill better then say it. I'm just looking at history and facts not opinions.

reply to post by Anonymous ATS


The marine dont do well cause they have cheaper weapons im a Cpl in the marines and we win all the time cause of the fact that we are all rifleman and train better and longer then all the other military. Its like in the movie 300 when lionitus (not a very good speller sorry) asks the greek guy how many warriors they have that whole part well we are def the spartans of the US military we are all trained to be basic rifleman first you could take any marine that passed boot and send them straight to war no more training needed just tell him where to point his rifle.

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by Anonymous ATS

 

The marine dont do well cause they have cheaper weapons im a Cpl in the marines and we win all the time cause of the fact that we are all rifleman and train better and longer then all the other military. Its like in the movie 300 when lionitus (not a very good speller sorry) asks the greek guy how many warriors they have that whole part well we are def the spartans of the US military we are all trained to be basic rifleman first you could take any marine that passed boot and send them straight to war no more training needed just tell him where to point his rifle.

If you were to do a comparison of an average non-combat arms Marine vs. an average non-combat arms Soldier, this might be a valid point. The problem is that once you start comparing infantry, armor, artillery, etc... units, there is far less distinction between the 2 services. Then it comes down to unit training, and the relative experience of the members of the unit.

I served in HQ, 75th Ranger Regiment at Fort Benning from 1985 to 1987. Attached to Regimental headquarters was a Marine ANGLICO team.

The Rangers I served with were some of the best trained, motivated and professional people that I ever served with.

The Marines I served with were some of the best trained, motivated and professional people that I ever served with.

Now can somebody please lock this thread because it's giving me a headache. If I want to endure pointless bickering, I can go downstairs and spend time with my 6 and 8 year old.

RLTW

Army Vs Marines? Marines defiantly, I'll tell you why

After everyone talking, the one thing that stands out about each is that The marines are "Go in, kill everything, don't give a s**T, just go go go!" And the army is like "Come on sarge? Do we have to?" Army is for the long, boring operations that take a while, and need someone to keep a watchful eye. But who came in and wiped out almost all of the resistance? THE MARINES! Who comes in and takes the credit? The army... If you've ever seen the military channel, the marines are ALWAYS the first to go in, ALWAYS, don't question that at all, don't EVER QUESTION IT. The marines are always in the first, they're always killing the first, if they're not, then it's a Navy Seal, Delta Operators, or whatever special forces there are. But overall the marines are the first strike, under equipped compared to the army, they have the training to go without eating, they have the agility to hold out. They don't need to have fancy equipment like the Army either. We have old M16A2's and fewer M16A4's (Despite criticism, they are more reliable than you think, but not more reliable than an AK-47) while the army gets new stuff, new everything. Marines? Battle Scarred .50 Cals, M16's, Barrett 50 cal sniper rifles, we don't need "New Equipment" to do the job. But the army boys? They're like to snot nosed brats that need everything that's new. I do think the army can do their job, but I don't like how most of the times, the Marines finish 100 percent of what they need to do, and they also did more than they had to, and then to clear the place of the 5 or so enemies still crying in the corners in their houses, then, go like "Yeah dawg, did all the work, did all the stuff, I did everything man huah!" They didn't do anything, they just took credit for a Marine's work. But I have respect for the Ranger, if anyone can beet the marines, in a certain situation though, the Rangers are going to look like marines except with a different uniform. I have 100 percent respect for the rangers. But I have talked to a Marine who was in Iraq, he said the army boys just took their credit. Some guy even said as an Army member the marines were the ones that made every shot count and how that they "Laid in the grass shooting blank shots" Seriously, from a guy who served for the Army and in his tour in iraq served by Marines, and from a guy who thinks that the army is better cuss they have a little girl Apache, who'd you believe?

But in a large scale operation, where you need to go and start from the beginning and not from a Marines work, I think a marine would need an Army company with them. But out of most situations, the Marines can just kill everything.

reply to post by DareDevil


thank you

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
Army Vs Marines? Marines defiantly, I'll tell you why

After everyone talking, the one thing that stands out about each is that The marines are "Go in, kill everything, don't give a s**T, just go go go!" And the army is like "Come on sarge? Do we have to?" Army is for the long, boring operations that take a while, and need someone to keep a watchful eye. But who came in and wiped out almost all of the resistance? THE MARINES! Who comes in and takes the credit? The army... If you've ever seen the military channel, the marines are ALWAYS the first to go in, ALWAYS, don't question that at all, don't EVER QUESTION IT. The marines are always in the first, they're always killing the first, if they're not, then it's a Navy Seal, Delta Operators, or whatever special forces there are. But overall the marines are the first strike, under equipped compared to the army, they have the training to go without eating, they have the agility to hold out. They don't need to have fancy equipment like the Army either. We have old M16A2's and fewer M16A4's (Despite criticism, they are more reliable than you think, but not more reliable than an AK-47) while the army gets new stuff, new everything. Marines? Battle Scarred .50 Cals, M16's, Barrett 50 cal sniper rifles, we don't need "New Equipment" to do the job. But the army boys? They're like to snot nosed brats that need everything that's new. I do think the army can do their job, but I don't like how most of the times, the Marines finish 100 percent of what they need to do, and they also did more than they had to, and then to clear the place of the 5 or so enemies still crying in the corners in their houses, then, go like "Yeah dawg, did all the work, did all the stuff, I did everything man huah!" They didn't do anything, they just took credit for a Marine's work. But I have respect for the Ranger, if anyone can beet the marines, in a certain situation though, the Rangers are going to look like marines except with a different uniform. I have 100 percent respect for the rangers. But I have talked to a Marine who was in Iraq, he said the army boys just took their credit. Some guy even said as an Army member the marines were the ones that made every shot count and how that they "Laid in the grass shooting blank shots" Seriously, from a guy who served for the Army and in his tour in iraq served by Marines, and from a guy who thinks that the army is better cuss they have a little girl Apache, who'd you believe?

But in a large scale operation, where you need to go and start from the beginning and not from a Marines work, I think a marine would need an Army company with them. But out of most situations, the Marines can just kill everything.

You may want to reread my post directly above yours. I don't even know where to begin with correcting the inaccuracies and misunderstandings that you seem to have about the mission/capabilities of the various services. Here's just a few general observations you may want to consider.

-the Marines aren't always the first ones in. They may be the first major combat unit in, IF the location has a coastline(there'll always be a Special Ops unit in before they arrive though). Their main purpose is to secure ports of entry for follow on forces to come via Sea lift. Of course they also have to be near the coast of the country they're entering, to rapidly respond too.

-when the Marines are the first ones in, it's not because the Army isn't good/lethal enough. It's because their missions are different. The Army doesn't have heavy equipment on ships at all times, near hot spots, so it takes longer for their Mech/Armor forces to get into a theater. That's why Airborne forces capture airfields, so that heavier forces can start arriving on C-5/C-17/C-130s. It's also why the Marines capture ports, so that heavier Army units can arrive to relieve them.

-the Rangers/82nd Airborne/173rd Airborne Bde, all have a 18 hour wheels up response time from notification(so they'd have a quicker reaction time for short notice missions than the USMC). Their task is to capture airfields(for follow on Air lift) or to capture time critical, strategic locations. They too will be proceeded by Special Ops forces.

-Rangers, Special Forces, Delta, 160th SOAR, etc...are all US Army, as are the VAST majority of US Paratroopers.

-Army combat arms units train just as hard as USMC units. They do have different missions generally.

-if the Marines had the budget that the Army does, I doubt you'd find too many that wouldn't prefer new equipement.

-I've worked with the USMC and respect them. There are elements in their culture that I wish the Army had, but that has nothing to do with how effective the respective units are at their mission. Both services are guilty of being boneheaded at times, but both more often than not, are very good at their missions.

I was in the Marines, and I got out a month before 911.
So I been out for a while.
You already know my answer to this question.
Marine Corps...all the way.
Not because I favor it, because I respect it more than anything else.
I was stationed at an Army base in MD for a while for some schooling, and we were constantly getting into fights with them guys in the mess halls over the Army women. Well...they out numbered us cause it was their base..But we did all the ass kicking. OOH RAH!


Marine Corps is more disciplined. We were taught to do two things better than anyone else.....and that was to Kill and Keep Clean.

i just saw that u were in marines, but i like marines and air force what do u think for a girl is better?
thank you

reply to post by Anonymous ATS


Well that all depends on what you want to do in your future? Are you planning on staying in for a career and what kind of career? Or do you plan on getting out and using those skills on the outside world?

Besides the Marines, I respect the Air Force secondly. They are the sky as we are the land. So either or is a good option for you. It just depends on what you want to do with your life?

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
i just saw that u were in marines, but i like marines and air force what do u think for a girl is better?
thank you

There are probably more options in the Air Force, for marketable skills than in the USMC, as it's a much more technology based service.

If you are looking for any time of job training stear clear of the Marines for the most part. Try the Air Force for the tech jobs. The Marine Corps is a place to be if you want the greatest challenge. They get the job done with the bare minimum with no creature comforts. Expect selfless sacrifice with no reward. That being said, the days of being in the Marine infantry were the best days of my life. Not to sound too sexist but I never spoke to and rarely saw a female Marine in four years so I have no idea what one is good for. That is a sample of what you are infor if you are a woman joining the USMC. Better stick to the Air Force if you can not take it.

reply to post by Anonymous ATS

your such a #ing liar...that was all bull# dumbass

Defintely the Marine Corps. First in, last out, like someone else said the Army takes the credit. I would have a Marine back me any time no questions asked, even the Marine out in the civilian work force are always the hardest working group I have ever seen.
I should mention the Army Special Forces are pretty dam crazy too and are like some Marines with different uniforms, after all they need to promote them selfs whos tough.

Lol?

For some reason I don't see anyone stating the Marine Recon,,,,yet you guys are talking about army rangers. Marine recon anyday.

I would also like to add the fact that all the special types within the arms services rather it be the Army special forces or the Marine recon they service men and women from different branches. Say a army special forces wanted to ask to join the seals or rangers, see my point?

[edit on 4-3-2009 by Mr.x211]

reply to post by Mr.x211


Force Recon are some serious guys. I haven't seen anyone that even comes close. They are in a leauge of their own. Ductus exemplo!

If there is one thing I can't stand it is the different branches bashing each other just because they think they are the better ones. We are all branches of the same military, we all do our part, we all do different jobs and have different purposes, no one branch could do it alone, no one branch is "better" than the other, just used for different things.

The Army is there for conventional warfare. They overwelm the enemy with numbers and power, its sort of a swarming technique. They are the main fighting force of any conflict, look at ANY war and you will see this.

The Marines are there to get in and establish initial bases for the Army once they arrive, which isn't that much after the Marines. It is true as said in an earlier post that they are more particularly for securing ports.

The Navy is the force of the sea, they are the ones who transport units, and ensure that the ground forces are able to do their job. They can do anything from blockading resources or reinforcements to transporting troops to just maintaining superior sea power.

The Air Force is there to maintain air superiority. They provide ground support for the Marines and Army. They also transport troops but are particularly for airstrikes.

The Coast Guard is there to maintain our coasts security, stop pirating, etc. While they may not be in actual combat in a war, they are the ones who protect the coastlines.

The National Guard is there to protect the homeland while the other branches are away. While it is true that they are also used for natural disasters their primary purpose is to protect our mainland if it was ever invaded.

We then have the special forces branches including the Army Special Forces who carry out sabotage, assassination, and other blackop missons. The Army Rangers who are generally the FIRST, even before Marines, on the ground. They secure any location of high importance for the main forces to later take control of. The Navy Seals who are there to carry out special operations for the Navy like invading an enemy vessel, or sometimes even operations on land but that isn't their primary purpose, they are specially trained to board ships in the cover of night or even at day. The Air Force and Marines also have a special forces branch each but these are generally not known or talked about and I'm not exactly sure what they do in specific.

Now about the Army vs Marines. Though the Marines boot camp is longer the the Army's basic training, once you facter in AIT for the Army its training is generally longer so that is not an excuse. Though the Marines are generally trained more intensely in combat that the average Army soldier this is because the Army is not all about combat, they have many more missions than that, over 250 to be exact.

Once you start comparing the Marines to the Navy Seals or Army Rangers however, that is a different story. Both the Seals and Rangers training are longer and more grueling. The Rangers go through not 13 weeks of training like the Marines, but over 6 months of training of even more stressful, physically grueling, and combat oriented. The Seals are pretty much the same though I'm not sure as to an exact length of training. Both the Seals and the Rangers have much, much, much higher drop out and rejection rate than the Marines.

Though I'm not saying they are better but I am sick of soldiers, Marines and GI's alike, bashing each other trying to come out on top. Every branch has a different purpose all equally important with none of the other branches being able to carry these tasks out. We are all brothers in arms, we all fight the same enemy. It is a waste of our time and energy to compare each other. It is too childish to be fighting like this when the "game" is WAR! We are experts and proffessionals in our field, we need to act like it! I respect all those who have served equally, this including myself, now stop fighting each other and fight the enemy my brothers.

Seals never stop training.

I was in the Navy and have to give the edge to the Marines. Marines do go through BUDS and as far as I know have the highest graduated percentage vs any other group. Besides they fair much better with the ladies.

[edit on 14-2-2010 by jrod]

Well, I can't really say much on the subject myself, but a good friend of mine (a Marine) was in the middle east and was telling me about how his group (not sure of the terminology) was sent in to take control of a certain area that was over run by the "enemy" and after they seized control, the Army came in to take over the position so they could move on, and the Army lost control after a couple of days so he had to be sent BACK to gain the control again for the Army.