Marines vs. Rangers outcome

dude...if im not mistaken the Deltas are the best. i mean the SAS may be great but the Delta Force is where its at...and i love how eventhough there is a movie based after it and and sorts of other things the gov't still wont formally admit they are responsible for it...thats awesome...haha...but yeah i think the marines are great but id still take the rangers any day of the week...i have immense respect for our military units and what they go through...i personally might be going into the SF and im looking forward to the experience 100% eventhough itll be like 22 freakin months of training...thats crazy...but in any case yeah it doesnt really matter whos the best because theyre all on the same team...does really matter who scores the touchdown between the QB and RB?no the point is that they scored and it was an overall effort but i guess it is fun comparing these sorts of things.......

as i'm coming closer to go back to meps, i'm having second thoughts on joining the marine corps, for i've had to return three times already . violence is never the answer for the world's problems, but i doubt my recruiter would understand...does anyone have any suggestions on how to break this to my recruiter? i've actually been contemplating on becoming a preacher...seriously , or else a writer.

Originally posted by cloud
as i'm coming closer to go back to meps, i'm having second thoughts on joining the marine corps, for i've had to return three times already

. violence is never the answer for the world's problems, but i doubt my recruiter would understand...does anyone have any suggestions on how to break this to my recruiter? i've actually been contemplating on becoming a preacher...seriously

, or else a writer.

Were the Nazis talked out of Europe? Was Japan negotiated out of the Pacific. Slavery was ended in the US by a big ole freedom cake walk right? ONLY VIOLENCE EVER SOLVES ANYTHING!

i think marines are the best trained in the conventonal military but rangers are SF so the rangers are better thats why I might be joining them

[edit on 22-6-2004 by WestPoint23]

The Delta Force were, as discussed in another thread, based upon the SAS. The SBS, a more elite version of the SAS, solely in charge of maritime anti-terrorist responses (and also some land-missions) are better trained than the SAS, and as of yet, there is no competing US unit. A potential competing US unit would be a SEAL that has been trained to Delta Force land standards as well, but still, I believe the emphesis in SEAL water training isnt nearly as great as that of the SBS

Originally posted by Iceman86
I read the posts for US. Army vs U.S. Marines and I am slightly dissappointed by what I see. Being a former Army Ranger, let me clarify some things for you. The US Army Rangers are part of SOCOM (Special Operations Command) which means that we are Special Forces. We don't do full-scale assaults or peace-keeping missions like the Marines or normal army, we usually work with SEALS, Green Berets, or Delta Force to get things done. I firmly believe that a Marine is a bit quicker and sharper than the basic, by-the-book trained US Army infantryman, however, Rangers aren't your basic, by-the-book trained US Army infantryman. We specialize in unconventional warfare and we conduct raids instead of assaults. The system works like this. Marine Recon (very skilled men, on par with Navy SEALs if you ask me) scopes out enemy territory for a couple of days and then sends back an intelligence report. Then the SEALs or a smaller commando unit goes in and secures the perimiter/disrputs enemy/sabotages enemy equipment. From there, the Rangers or the Marines (depending on whether the attack calls for an amphibious assault or air assault) take over and assault the area. Once, they've secured the territory, the normal army comes in and holds it. We as Rangers, however, are always the first ones into combat. Hence our motto, "Rangers lead the way."

Don't make the Corps fall short...we ARE NOW part of SOCOM...we have Marines and Marines RECON and FORCE RECON aswell as Marines in SOCOM....you are comparing an Army Elite with an normal Marine...which the Marine almost compares the same..but if you compare a Marine Recon to an Army Ranger...you best just sit this one out...

My current manger is a former retires Army Special Ops...he can't tell me something that he did in his Special Training that I did in my basic Marine Corps Boot Camp....so don't kid yourself...we have a Great Rep for a reason!

Semper Fi!

Marine Recon i must admit is good but the rangers are better trained than the average marine.

apollyon, i hope you were joking, which i'm certain that you're not. if violence is the only method that solves ANYTHING, then why not let the world's political leaders go toe-to-toe on the canvas instead of sending their followers to their death? besides, imagine the profit that could be reaped if it were on a pay-per-view basis...bush versus saddam, now that would've been something to write home about . either way, who are you to be critical of my choice into the military? as of right now, i'm still going ahead with it, but i still feel that if one uses violence for all of their measly little dilemmas, then we'd all die soon enough.

This is apples and oranges...

Rangers are part of the elite when talking about the army infantry. Trying to compare them with regular marines simply doesn't make sense.
I was part of 1st Force Recon and I would hardly have considered myself as a regular marine grunt. In fact for the most part I got along better with the SEALs we worked with then I did grunts and especially POGs.
Someone mentioned something about marines not being part of SOCOM. I know while I was in there were those in high places in the corps that were pushing for us to move in that direction. But I think the general feeling and reasoning behind not doing so is that marines are if anything cocky first and foremost you can't tell them anything, and they consider themselves heads above the other branches. My understanding is this, the marine corps didn't want to put FR into SOCOM hands because they felt like they would lose some control over FR, whether or not this is the case is irrelavent. So they deceided to keep them out of the loop and run things as they see fit.
Personally I would have welcomed the idea. It would have brought a greater sense of community and better relations amoung the spec ops community.
I am unaware at this point if they have actually made that move and frankly I would be a bit surprised.
As far as working with other groups we mostly worked with SEAL's, CIA Spooks, and occasionally maybe a guy from SF's or Rangers perhaps even AF Combat Controllers.
When it comes down to it every group has a unique and very specific mission, and to try and compare even among the spec ops community is a futile action at best. Besides the philosophy's are completely different. Yeah there may be certain common aspects like getting your jump wings and scuba bubble but it's the mission of each unit that seperates them.

In other words I wouldn't simply say who would win between FR and Rangers. The object of the mission would have to be much more specific. And being that we're trained in different aspects of combat what would be a fair and objective medium in which to judge the results?

[edit on 13-7-2004 by Resintrend]

im looking into joining the marine corps... any tip on training if i wanna be a force recon marine?

Actually, marines do EVERYTHING. They operate land, sea, and air (Not saying that every marine is trained to fly a jet, operate a boat, and on the
frontline as well) but they go wherever America's interests lie. They were also chosen by the State Department out of all others to guard the embassies. Rangers are, like you said, a SOCOM unit that raids, and softens up hard points. Rangers (as well as all other Army units) have
the newest equipment. The marines get trash.
I would say technology wise, the rangers have more training.
Marines train more with their guts.

reply to post by TejanoRey


but the argument is always rangers against normal marines

i dont understand why everyone always wants to compare reg marines to rangers....its two completely different things....training is good and all but all that training goes down the drain when you get shot and its over...everyone talks like some marines will be placed here to fight some rangers over here...it would be a 50/50 imo on who would win it... a scenario and calculating loss of american lives to achieve the goal would be a more realistic comparison...and in this comparison you would find that the two are better and achieving different goals...

different tools for different jobs, everyone should just be happy that our country has the right tool for any job it comes across.