Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Infantry Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: US Marines and British Infantry
BRoger    11/5/2004 5:25:59 AM
How does quality of a US Marine compare with that of the standard British Infantry soldier? I ask because I find it interesting that the Black Watch Regiment in Iraq (British infantry) are replacing US Marines in their role near Baghdad.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18   NEXT
violentnuke       2/16/2007 8:14:26 PM
In arrayed battle the Marines have indeed never been defeated, but what do we mean by winning here?
 
Technicaly, if one follow Army principles of  "no excuse", it's the army as a whole, and not the lack of will at home, which got us defeated in Vietnam... and by the same token it includes all the US corps, including the Marines. Winning a battle as a Jar Head is only one component of winning, it is not enough. The jar head then becomes a tool.
 
Some "gay" soldier might talk of winning the hearts and minds in Iraq, ie, not only bringing up production morale and cooperation between Iraqi Armed Force and the US/British army there, and not just the battles, and may end up having a point in fact. This is where we see the difference between the missions and the adaptation of the mission to the appropriate branch or special service.
 
Jar Heads are not there to win hearts and minds, and, no, Major Payne is a stupid movie... it's like asking if a nuclear mine would be a nice way to make the kids quiet at school... of course not.
 
Quote    Reply

BadNews       2/16/2007 9:18:30 PM
h*tp://www.paperlessarchives.com/wwii_marine_hist.html

VOLUME I: PEARL HARBOR TO GUADALCANAL

This volume covers Marine Corps participation through the first precarious year of World War II, when disaster piled on disaster and there seemed no way to check Japanese gains. Advanced bases and garrisons were isolated  and destroyed: Guam, Wake, and the Philippines. The attack on Pearl Harbor seriously crippled the U.S. Pacific Fleet.
 

Should I speak also about Korea war?


 


You should really read that in it's entirety... I did.
1. Guam and wake were small garrisons prior to the Japaneses attack on pearl harbor, smal security units of company size, not expeditionary regiments. In fact prior to WWII there were few full strength Marine Regiments.
 
2. There was a presence on every naval station those were not the front line of the corps  or the navy,
 
3. The Philipines was largely the US Army, abefore anyone says that I am berating the US Army, they were left High and Dry with limited ammunition and essentially sacrificed to stall for time, inspite of that, Under General Wainwright they did stall and fight ferociously before beiung ordered to sut=rrender when no hope of resupply Yes there were Marines there at the garrisons who went down with the rest, but again NOT an Infantry battalion.
 
"Advanced bases and garrisons were isolated  and destroyed" Security forces, not front line infantry units

 
Quote    Reply

neofire1000       2/16/2007 9:31:25 PM
I don't really post on SP now, it's full of arseholes with no knowlede to back up the crap they talk, and all the "we are better than you" shit. For the decent folk I apologise for that statement, you know who you are.
 
I served with the para's for 13 years, 4 years SAS. The US marines are awsome soldiers and I would be glad to have them watch my back anytime. We all do the same job as infantry soldiers and should show a bit of respect for our fellow men. Standard british infantry soldiers go through less training than the paras and marines but they are still very professionl and wether they would be as good as US marines is really a stupid question, having trained along side US troops in wargames I would go to war with them anytime.
 
There are arsehole US and British posters and we have to ignore them.
 
The Black Watch are a very proud Scottish regiment and being Scottish myself I am very proud to see them take on the role which they will commit to with utter professionalism. Can we please refrain from patriotic bullshit in these threads.
 
Anyway this will be one of my VERY FEW posts because I can't really be bothered with some of the crap that ges on in here, so take care folks.
 
Cheers.
 
Quote    Reply

BadNews       2/16/2007 9:35:53 PM

In arrayed battle the Marines have indeed never been defeated, but what do we mean by winning here?

 

Technicaly, if one follow Army principles of  "no excuse", it's the army as a whole, and not the lack of will at home, which got us defeated in Vietnam... and by the same token it includes all the US corps, including the Marines. Winning a battle as a Jar Head is only one component of winning, it is not enough. The jar head then becomes a tool.

 

Some "gay" soldier might talk of winning the hearts and minds in Iraq, ie, not only bringing up production morale and cooperation between Iraqi Armed Force and the US/British army there, and not just the battles, and may end up having a point in fact. This is where we see the difference between the missions and the adaptation of the mission to the appropriate branch or special service.

 

Jar Heads are not there to win hearts and minds, and, no, Major Payne is a stupid movie... it's like asking if a nuclear mine would be a nice way to make the kids quiet at school... of course not.


Hmmm, my comments were never toward the US ARMY, in fact in several postings on other threads on this site i have specifically pointe dout that Army Infantry and Marine Infantry are equally as capable in purely Infantry situations. That said
You mention Vietnam, well point of fact
 
1) The US  Army did not loose any battles in Vietnam either, the NVA did not march into Saigon until almost two Full years after the US Forces withdrew. That is a fact, Oliver Stone aside, US, Austrailian, and South Korean forces performed admirably through out the entire conflict.
 
The Us Lost on tghe Home front Pure And Simple, piss poor decisions by Elected officials from the get go,
 
I have no idea what you are talking about when you say Japanese General and Marines in a Tactcal Nuclear Environment!
Frankly, All us forces are trained for NBC environmenst as are most western nations forces, and trust me when I say the US Army clearly leads the way in the tactics and technology there, in fact USMC NBC Doctorine comes from the US Army so please elaborate on that one.
 
Quote    Reply

BadNews       2/16/2007 9:41:32 PM









BadNews    Just a little tad more on this   2/16/2007 4:49:51 PM


For those of you who seem to like to dwelve into history, The USMC in it's 231 years has NEVER been defeated on the battlefield, Yes ther where battles with heavy losses, but the Corps has never been defeated in Battle, I know that the Brits, the French Foriegn Legion and even the US Army can not say that.



h*tp://www.paperlessarchives.com/wwii_marine_hist.html

VOLUME I: PEARL HARBOR TO GUADALCANAL

This volume covers Marine Corps participation through the first precarious year of World War II, when disaster piled on disaster and there seemed no way to check Japanese gains. Advanced bases and garrisons were isolated  and destroyed: Guam, Wake, and the Philippines. The attack on Pearl Harbor seriously crippled the U.S. Pacific Fleet.
 

Should I speak also about Korea war?


 



With Regard to Korea, please read below;
 
On 25 June 1950, eight divisions of the North Korean People's Army, equipped with Soviet tanks, mobile artillery, and supporting aircraft, crossed the 38th Parallel and invaded the Republic of Korea. On 27 June, the United Nations Security Council proclaimed the North Korea attack a breach of world peace, and requested member nations to assist the Republic of Korea.

On 30 June, President Harry S Truman ordered a naval blockade of the Korean Coast and authorized the Commander in Chief Far East, General Douglas A. MacArthur, to send U.S. ground troops into Korea. On 2 July, General MacArthur requested that a regimental combat team be deployed to the Far East. The Joint Chiefs approved his request on the following day.

On 7 July, the 1st Provisional Marine Brigade was activated at Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, California. The primary core of the ground element was the 5th Marines, while Marine Aircraft Group 33 constituted the air element of the brigade. Just five days after its activation, the 1st Provisional Marine Brigade, with a strength of 6,500, sailed on 12 July from San Diego, California, enroute to Pusan, Korea.

The first elements of the brigade came ashore at Pusan on 2 August. The next day, the first Marine aviation mission against North Korea was flown from the USS Sicily by gull-winged Corsairs of Marine fighting Squadron 214 (VMF-214) in a raid against north Korean installations. They were subsequently joined by fighter-bomber from Marine Fighting squadron 323 (VMF-323), flying from the USS Badoeng Strait, as the two squadrons harassed enemy positions and installations. Marine ground forces first engaged the enemy on 7 august at Chindong-ni, some miles west of Pusan. In twelve days of hard fighting, the North Koreans were driven back with heavy losses, and the Pusan Perimeter defense was stabilized.

During the grim opening weeks of the Korean War, while American forces fought desperately in defense of the Pusan Perimeter, General MacArthur was already conceiving a bold stroke that would crush the North Korean People's Army. He planned an amphibious assault behind North Korean lines at Inchon, the port for the city of Seoul, and close to both the 38th Parallel and North Korean Army supply lines. The 1st Marine Division would spearhead the assault. The attacking force would have to navigate a narrow channel with swift currents, islands, and coastal defense battery sites. Final approval for the operation, code-named "Chromite," was not given until 8 September.

On 15 September, the 1st Marine Division, under the
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       2/16/2007 9:57:16 PM
The MC strenght is not through its Men , but through its equipment .
Man to man , they 're not better than the RMC , the FFL or else . In fact , they are behind .

The MC is an Army on its own , let 's be clear about this . The USMC is a BATTLEGROUP .
They have Tanks , Artillery , Jets , etc .
As a whole , they can do much more than the RMC or FFL . I wish the Legion had the same hardware to play with .
Once again , it is down to how much $ you spend . (as usual)

On the ground , the MC employs usual US Army drills :
1) Firepower
2) Single envelopment
3) Air cover
Nothing new .

I 've worked many times with the USMC , and SSCOMarine is right when he says that Marines hold their lines like nobody else does . They can assault too .
The problem they have is the lack of "guts" . Here , I know that I am putting my finger on something they hate ...
Sorry SSCOMarine , but instead to assault , they 'll call for CAS . How many times I witness the stuff ...
But it is the right call to make !
Us , FFL , GIA , RPIMA , we do NOT have the same firepower behind us to wait while the enemy is getting pounded by Arty or CAS . We assault .
Some will say , what 's the problem with asking for support ? There is not problem with asking for support , but when you don 't have any ,  I ' ll take any Legionnaire over any Marine to get the "hill" .
I mean , the best French Airforce Commandos (the CPA10) can barely take on the FFL , especialy the REI (Regiment Etranger d 'Infanterie) without leaving plenty of bodies on the ground .
I know :(

Nevermind that , the Legion is now different than in the old days . Sure , they lost few battles and yes , they did get wipped out on few bad days . But nowadays , things are different . The FFL is the most capable assault Force in the French Army , by miles .
They HAVE what they need to do whatever their task is .
If the FFL had the same numbers and assets than the USMC , they would be unbeatable .
Trust me .

Cheers .



 
Quote    Reply

BadNews       2/16/2007 10:20:44 PM

The MC strenght is not through its Men , but through its equipment .

Man to man , they 're not better than the RMC , the FFL or else . In fact , they are behind .



The MC is an Army on its own , let 's be clear about this . The USMC is a BATTLEGROUP .

They have Tanks , Artillery , Jets , etc .

As a whole , they can do much more than the RMC or FFL . I wish the Legion had the same hardware to play with .

Once again , it is down to how much $ you spend . (as usual)



On the ground , the MC employs usual US Army drills :

1) Firepower

2) Single envelopment

3) Air cover

Nothing new .



I 've worked many times with the USMC , and SSCOMarine is right when he
says that Marines hold their lines like nobody else does . They can
assault too .

The problem they have is the lack of "guts" . Here , I know that I am putting my finger on something they hate ...

Sorry SSCOMarine , but instead to assault , they 'll call for CAS . How many times I witness the stuff ...

But it is the right call to make !

Us , FFL , GIA , RPIMA , we do NOT have the same firepower behind us to
wait while the enemy is getting pounded by Arty or CAS . We assault .

Some will say , what 's the problem with asking for support ? There is
not problem with asking for support , but when you don 't have any
,  I ' ll take any Legionnaire over any Marine to get the "hill" .

I mean , the best French Airforce Commandos (the CPA10) can barely take on the FFL , especialy the REI (Regiment Etranger d 'Infanterie) without leaving plenty of bodies on the ground .

I know :(



Nevermind that , the Legion is now different than in the old days .
Sure , they lost few battles and yes , they did get wipped out on few
bad days . But nowadays , things are different . The FFL is the most
capable assault Force in the French Army , by miles .

They HAVE what they need to do whatever their task is .

If the FFL had the same numbers and assets than the USMC , they would be unbeatable .

Trust me .



Cheers .







You know, one thing that always frost me,
"The problem they have is the lack of "guts" . Here , I know that I am putting my finger on something they hate ...Sorry SSCOMarine , but instead to assault , they 'll call for CAS . How many times I witness the stuff ...
But it is the right call to make !"
 
The bottom line is this, war and battle is NOT some romantic venture, nor are they about playing fair or seeing who has more hair on their chest. It is about crushing your opponant and removing his ability and/or will to fight, period. Yes Us forces use CAS and a lot of it, and yes that is where a large portion of our military spending goes. And that is because we are playing to win!
 
There is nothing noble about death, what is noble is that young men and women risk death for thier countries, so with that in mind the more CAS the better, the more Arty the better, that in essence is what a solid fighting force must do,
That is why these topics do nopthing more than piss me off, it's about winning, and using every resource available to acheive that end is the smart thing to do. And the fact that the USMC has the assets simple means we are among one of the most powerful fighting entities on earth.
 
Your assesment about guts is very much debatable as well, no US MArine, nor No US SOldier that I have ever had the pleasure to serve with has ever lacked for guts. We do what must be done, whther with bomb or bayonet, it is about winning that is all.
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       2/16/2007 10:37:36 PM
""Yes Us forces use CAS and a lot of it, and yes that is where a large portion of our military spending goes. And that is because we are playing to win!""

I agree 100% with you :)
I wish we could do the same on the same (huge) scale .
Luckily , we have other means who work too ;)

Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       2/16/2007 10:44:39 PM
""Your assesment about guts is very much debatable as well, no US MArine, nor No US SOldier that I have ever had the pleasure to serve with has ever lacked for guts. We do what must be done, whther with bomb or bayonet, it is about winning that is all.""

Don 't get me wrong . I have a lot of respect for the Marines , or for any other GOOD Grunts .
I salute them as Brothers in Arms . TA TA TAAAA !
But they don 't have legionnaires 's guts .
I know .

Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

BadNews       2/16/2007 10:50:52 PM

""Your assesment about guts
is very much debatable as well, no US MArine, nor No US SOldier that I
have ever had the pleasure to serve with has ever lacked for guts. We
do what must be done, whther with bomb or bayonet, it is about winning
that is all.""



Don 't get me wrong . I have a lot of respect for the Marines , or for any other GOOD Grunts .

I salute them as Brothers in Arms . TA TA TAAAA !

But they don 't have legionnaires 's guts .

I know .



Cheers .



LOL I will concede that point to you, Legionare's definately have their own brand of Guts, to that there is no debate :)
 
And please everyone, I in no way want to imply or infere that any of the western forces British, french, german etc are anything but highly skilled professionals, I have at numerous times trained or excercised with many of your outfits, quality all, Especialy my drinking buddies from OZ
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy