The Marines are the only service that still shoots from the 500 yard line... with iron sights. From what I understand,
most of them qualify as expert.

not sure what the deal with the pic is- I know the Navy has to follow the same rules as the Marines about cammies off base. Does look like an 8 point.... also looking at the LCPL with nothing on his uniform. Looks to be a staged photo (Though could be just out of boot back before/after the first gulf war)[/quote]

Yup, I'm thinking recruiter and boot who is helping recruiter out after boot-camp.
I've seen Marine Corps recruiters in MARPAT here on the Iowa campus.  I don't know if recruiters have a bit more leniency in rules, my recruiter was never seen in cammies.

More like speed bumps since 1953, since most would be eliminated by artillery concentrations as the war started, not very effective at that either.

Basing father to the south would make much more sense or off the penisula

The services do have schools that multiple branches use. It makes sense to not
duplicate a lot of the schools, especially when a doctrine is written that works.
Different branches in the same US military should be able to work and train
together as far as some schools apply. Basic training is a different matter.

No its about 20 percent qual as expert.  Iron sights are only used accross the board at recruit training and TBS, if you are issued an optic you are expected to shoot with an optic.

The Marines do something once, then put out a press release, and keep talking about how great they are for having done it, for years, and years.

My girl friend is a PAO, as she tells me among the PAO community it is known that the army is is worse enemy when it comes to Public Affairs.  They seem not to understand you either help shape the information that is being told about you or ignore it and the story will still get out without your input.  

As the motto goes in public affairs, doing good things without telling anyone is like wetting yourself in a dark suite.  May make you feel warm for a few minutes, but no one knows.  

using that logic you can say the same thing for all of the branches

If the Avilas ever invented and integrated a Fail Filter, half of these posts in here wouldn't even be visible with it turned on.

true dat

though it would be kinda funny at first.. but then GD would get boring real quick

Agreed.  Fail = Entertainment

That post motivated me.

Semper Fi.

Lok at some of the accounts of WW-II battles.

Pellielau

3 Marine division in bloody epic combat, against a determined enemy, fought off the beaches. ............
US Army 81st Infantry Division, landed 1 day later on the other side of the island, after clearing anouther island in the chain, linked up with Marines, began mop up operations.

How many times have we heard about "Devil Dogs" as the nickname for Marines, from WW-I? How many times have you heard those Marines made up 1/2 of the 2nd US Army Infantry Division?

oh and BTW.. from this Marine ..thanks for your service bro... My father was also 82nd

so screw everybody else who thinks one branch is better than the other

now back to the shenanigans

The MARINES get more chicks, 'Nuff Said.


<––––––––––––––––––USMC 89-93

Uh, no. The Marine Corps has to pay the Army schools for the slots.

by the way, those beanies look real cute!  

I've done both, so here's the real deal.

In a bar fight, I'd want Marines with me. They like to get drunk and punch things.

In combat, I'll take the Army. Better gear, better support, larger numbers, and generally speaking a tad bit more common sense, though that ain't saying much.

In the Marines, you will do things the hard way simply because you're the Marines, we do hard stuff.

In the Army, you'll do things the hard way because your West Point grad LT read a book about Patton once.

Pick your poison.

 You too brother. Cheers to you both.

+1
















P.S. Go Army!

MY US Army BACKROUND:
I was in the US Army Infantry from 1983-87. I did basic,Infantry School, and Airborne School, all the while unit unassigned.
I was hoping for Special Forces or a Ranger unit.
After Airborne school I was sent to the 1st Ranger Battalion at HAAF,GA.
Did RIP-Ranger Indoctrination Program (4 weeks long).
I was there 1 1/2 years of my 4 year enlistment.
Say: "Ranger,Whoo-ah,High-speed-Low-drag",and "Roger that Sir! about 10,000 times. You get the idea.
Was overtly and subliminally encouraged to insult,ridicule, and hate all other branches of our military.

MY EXPERIANCE WITH  USMC:
My Ranger battalion was invited to Paris Island,SC to shoot on the USMC "Known Distance" course, and recieve marksmanship intruction in summer of 1984.
The Marines taught me how to shoot a rifle!
At the end of one week,USMC instructors had me hitting a man sized target at 500m,7 out of 10 times!! I missed USMC "Expert" by 5 points(one shot)!!
The lazy,incompetant US Army rifle range instuctors in 'Basic Rifle Marksmanship" at Ft. Benning(July-Oct,1983) told us that the greatest distance  we could only hope to enguage an enemy target was 300m.That's the max distance we fired there. How mediocre and sad is that?
Rifle's in both cases were "rack grade" M16A1's.

SUMMERY:
The USMC will teach you how to shoot a combat rifle,and hit enemy soldiers out to 500m with iron sights.
The US Army 'Basic Rifle Marksmanship" instructors will bring you up to "Boy Scout" level of marksmanship.
I have a LOVE of rifle marksmanship to this day.(SHAMELESS PLUG: DO AN APPLESEED SHOOT!) I owe a debt of grattitude to the USMC for the "GIFT" they gave me for free!

P.S.
Inter-service rivalry= Blah-Blah-Blah.
All 5 branches are good, they just do different stuff.

THIS.



Hello All American brothers.

i'm only going to comment from what i've seen first hand. we were teamed up with anglico in rahalia. damn good men and we got along worked well together. anglico being the marine version of colt (or the other way around, however you want it) there was quite a bit of talking shop and comparing notes about job knowledge.  to make a comparison is difficult because of the close similarities. we all hated Ft. Sill the same.
as far as training, it was surprisingly parallel. when it came time to do some door kicking, it was spooky smooth. we all just fell into our groove and pulled it off like we had been training together for months. i do admit we were less disciplined, but that's largely a colt thing anyway, we are dirtbags.  anglico did have all of the newest highspeed FO gear, and it all worked.  
maybe its the whole FO thing we had in common, but we always got along with them better than others.  hell, we got along with those guys better than the rest of the army.

All The Mutha Effin Way Brother!

One is an average unit that thinks it's Delta force and can do no wrong. Watch out for ND's and poor decision making from the lower enlisted.



The other is an average unit that knows it's average and plans accordingly. Watch out for Officers looking for promotions.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the POTUS can order ANY BRANCH for up to 90 days without an act of congress...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution

According to tthe War Powers Act the president has 90 days after introducing troops into hostilities to obtain congressional approval of that action.  It applies to all branches...

The level of accuracy in this answer will not be well received.

Very nice!

BTT.  The only time I do not support the Marines is Army-Navy week.....and any thread comparing the two.

Sorry, Devil Dogs

Well, here's the best I can do to remain neutral (go Corps ). There was an article posted a few days back about the differing doctrines of the two branches, as evidenced by the chosen rifle. The Army has chosen to mostly field M4, while the Corps ops for M16A4. It's carbine vs. rifle. The two choices actually say a lot about the objectives and outlooks of the branches. Maybe a member can dig up the article for you. The article could give you info on how the branches view warfare and their role in warfare, which could help you choose a branch based on which doctrine sounds appealing to you.

As far as you asking which branch gets newer and cooler shit, it definitely seems to be the Army on that one.

Marines get all the glory. I'm not saying they're overrated, but there are plenty of Army units that are just as good if not better.

Army.

The other branches have to send their troops to the Army for Airborne, the Army for Ranger school etc. etc.

There are far more options for combat MOSs in the Army too. Especially high-speed low-drag type units (Rangers & LRS, SF, etc).

More money for college too. In addition to the G.I. Bill that all of the services get, the Army has it's own College Fund.

Spot-on with the leadership remark, but that's just a funtion of the size of the Army v/s the size of the USMC.

As far as competence at unit level?  This may just be perception, but the USMC seemed to insist on tactics that resulted in more freindly casulaties while accomplishing the same mission with the same results compared to Army units.  But, that wasn't limited to the USMC...I saw the Army's "high speed" units like 101st do some batshit-crazy things (like putting guys into the trunks of 1114's to give them extra dismounts).  On the other hand, they seemed to be smarter "institutionally", such as the Army's bases in sniper range still insisting on saluting, while the USMC-controlled bases never did shit like that.

Wrong...... I was part of 2-3 AV as a crew-chief during the initial push and saw first hand on a daily basis how the Thunder Run was being covered from a logistical POV.

The marines were covering 3rd IDs flank  of the push for Baghdad as we supported both services with airlift capability and logistical support. Each service had it own objectives but in no means were the marines the Main body or main push during that conflict.

In 2003, the 3rd Brigade Combat Team raced across southern Iraq as part of the initial actions of Operation Iraqi Freedom. The 3rd Infantry Division (Mechanized)'s first objectives were in and around Tallil Air Base, and were taken on on 21 March 2003.

3rd Brigade followed the 1st Brigade through lanes in the berm that separated Kuwait from Iraq before 2nd Battalion, 69th Armor Regiment; 1st Battalion, 15th Infantry Regiment; and 1st Battalion, 30th Infantry Regiment attacked Objectives Firebird, Clay and Liberty, which consisted of the air base and several key roads and bridges in its immediate area. Moving in behind preparatory fires from 1st Battalion, 10th Field Artillery Regiment, Task Force 2-69th Armor seized the Highway 1 bridge that led to An Nasiriyah to prevent enemy reinforcements. Despite initial resistance, many Iraqis surrendered as Task Forces 1-15th Infantry and 1-30th Infantry fought in and around the airfield.

After securing the objectives, the Brigade allowed the rest of the Division to pass it and move toward As Samawah. It was relieved in place by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force.

Task Force 1-15th Infantry was involved in fighting around As Samawah, but 3rd Brigade's next major action was the containment of Karbala. On 1 April 2003, as the 1st Brigade moved through the Karbala Gap toward Objective Peach, the Euphrates River crossing just south of Baghdad. 3rd Brigade Soldiers surrounded the city, allowing the rest of the Division to pass through the area.

Task Force 1-15th Infantry, attached to the 2nd Brigade during the battle for Objective Saints, took the intersection of Highways 1 and 8 south of Baghdad. Scouts from Task Force 1-15th Infantry led the way through tight roads and potentially dangerous towns between Objectives Peach and Saints.

After 1st Brigade seized Baghdad International Airport, 3rd Brigade conducted a forward passage of lines with 3rd Squadron, 7th Cavalry Regiment (the Division's Cavalry Squadron) on 6 April 2003 and attacked to the northwest of Baghdad, known as Objective Titans. They defended several bridges and kept Iraqi reinforcements from entering the city as 2nd Brigade conducted the Thunder Run on 7 April 2003. The Brigade fought off several Iraqi counterattacks, including an attack on its tactical operations center, over the course of 6-7 April 2003.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/3id-3bde.htm
––––––

ETA: The Thunder Run was set up to deeply penetrate the enemy lines and cause mass chaos(Air, Land and Sea powers included). That by definition is Blitzkrieg.

2 different UNITS, 2 different objectives.

Marines just have a better PR department. Of course the same PR department overlooks the USMC being disbanded for almost 15 years after the Revolutionary War but they do not subtract that from their official age.

It is not the branch of service; it is the individual that is the badass.

Ok, which group have more training in weapons, high-tech gears, and demand more physical fitness to become a Marine or Army, this may help answer some unbiased views...

In all fairness, they have to have that PR department...if they didn't, they would've been disbanded several times by now.

In a strange twist of irony, the USMC wants to be seperated from the Dept of the Navy...but it's that very DN that keeps the USMC alive (because they give the Navy their very own land force, making them the only department with significant land, sea and air capability).  The USMC on it's own would have a VERY hard time justifying a 200k endstrength.

USMC PFT was 3 mile run under 28min. 80 situps under 2 min. 20 pull ups.

Our boot camp was 3 months long and then you had an additional 30day MCT which was basic infantry school.

I was in boot from Nov - Feb. we did not get any breaks during the holidays, we didnt even get a phone call home on Xmas. From what I understand the army let their boots go on some kind of leave during that time.

USMC boot camp is NOT co-ed, they want the marines (male and female) focusing on their tasks at hand, not worried about the chick beside him.

I chose USMC 1) cuz my pops was a Marine 2) cuz its the baddest branch there is.

Walk up to a chick and say your in the army, youll get a "Meh and?"

Walk up to a chick and say your a Marine, youll get a "Oh really, cool"



oh yea, being a Marine on an Airbase is killer, Airforce punks hated us for steeling their wimminz.

Another thing, if you join any other branch of service and then later want to be a Marine, you have to go thru USMC Bootcamp. If you went thru USMC Bootcamp and want to switch, you do not have to go thru any other boot camps, they may send you thru some refresher school if youve been out, but thats about it.

Enlist in the USMC and you'll be in one of the most profound LOVE/HATE relationships in your entire life.  It's an imperfect organization because it's made up of imperfect people.  You'll curse it and hate it, yet believe in it with all your heart when the shit starts to fly.  It's the most frustrating love you'll ever know.

As far as gear goes, I just drew all brand new gear from CIF a couple of months ago.  My M4 has all the high-speed goodies you could hope for.  The USMC is not lacking for the latest in individually issued gear.  In fact, the USMC is constantly looking at replacing the newest items with newer, improved replacements-it makes your head spin.  It's the most profound change I've seen in our "culture" since I went to Boot Camp in 1984.  This isn't the same USMC I came into.

If your heart is in it, you can go on to do great things in either service.  The point is to thoroughly believe in what you're doing and push yourself to be competetive, not what uniform you wear.  Initial training in the USMC is longer than that of the U.S. Army, but I have many, many friends that are SNCOs in the Army that are very good at what they do.  They all tell me TRADOC standards are a joke and that their units train to a much higher level than what you see when you attend their schools.  I believe them.          

The guy on the right is Navy or Marine Corps, he has an 8-point cover.
I can't make out the rank.[/quote]

I don't think so.  The bill on his field cap is too short to be an 8-point cover, and his trousers are tucked into his boots which is something you just won't see in the USMC.  I don't know if the Navy does it or not, but I haven't seen them do it in general when they're "green side".

Also, the wearing of an ear-plug case on the uniform blouse isn't authorized by either service.

Our enemies talk about it for years and years too, which warms my little black fucking heart.

I agree!

In all fairness, the USMC provides me a job as I am a DOD contractor working on an exclusive USMC contract. I have to deal with them on a daily basis and on some days, the Kool-Aide they be drinking is strong.

If they were not officially sanctioned by the govt., they would be a cult.

All I know is that when I was at Bragg last month, the cute female 82nd 1st LT who's house I stayed at said after meeting me, "Oh, you're a Marine?  You just got 10 times hotter" followed by "You're enlisted?  That's even more hot"




No I didn't fuck her.  For combat arms units, I would put the Army Airborne infantry units about on par with regular Marine infantry units.  Some are better, some are worse.  In my experience, they still get some better gear, but the Marine Corps has improved that a lot.  As far as officers go, on average I would rate Marine officers better.  The Marine Corps does have a lot more stupid regulations.  

ETA:  As far as PR goes, yes the Marine Corps is second to none.  And I don't think thats a bad thing at all, even though the overmotivated boots do get annoying.  There are times when the only thing you have left is pride.

Army vs Marines


[/thread]

The principle advantage of Marine infantry versus Army is that you get to have Navy Corpsmen with you.



 

We have Air Force chauffeurs.

MOST deployed unit in the US military.....










*Hint* *hint*..... and they are NOT Marines.

The Marines expect its members to bear more responsibility.  For example, there officer-to-enlisted ratio is lower in the Marines (i.e., fewer officers per Marine) because enlisted Marines are given more responsibility.  Likewise, a billet given to an Army soldier is, in the Corps, likely to be given to a lower-ranking Marine. I understand (and I could be wrong about this) that a staff sergeant in the Army (E-6) is a squad leader.  In the Marine Corps, a staff sergeant (E-6) would act as a platoon sergeant.  A sergeant (E-5) would act as squad leader, while a corporal (E-4) would generally lead a fire team.  In the Marine Corps, a corporal (E-4) is considered an NCO, is authorized to wear the "blood stripe" on his Blue Dress trousers, and is authorized to carry the NCO sword.  In the Army, the NCO ranks don't start until E-5 (or is it E-6?).





Marines are taught leadership principles and are expected to take the initiative to get things done starting in boot camp.  Not sure how it is in the Army, maybe the same.





Disclaimer: My information is somewhat old (15 years), so things may be different today, therefore making me wrong about the above.



ETA:  The Army definitely gets the newer, cooler stuff.  For instance, they get Apaches, the Marines still drive Cobras.  Not a bad airframe, just not as newfangled.



 

Welll according to 2nd ID they are.

This is like the claim that the majority of states put out about having the 48th worst education system in the US.  It is an easy one to make, hard to substatate and really has no intellectual rigor behind it.  I know this claim, started prior to the GWOT, because of Somalia and Kosovo, but how does that compare to say a MEU CE, which did 6 months on, 9 month off indefinitely?

Google is your friend. I found tons of links and information on it.
And guys at drum were doing 15 months on, 12 months off. Not sure if that is true anymore because of things being ramped down in Iraq, but 10th Mountain has been in Afghanistan from the VERY beginning, months and months before any Marine unit was sent there.
ETA: I have a VERY HIGH respect for the Marines, and would be just as willing to have a Marine Infantryman in a foxhole with me as an Army infantryman. They have a very long and proud history in armed conflict and are doing a DAMN FINE job to this day.