US Marines and British Infantry

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

BadNews PURPLE HEARTS 2/3/2007 4:32:57 PM

As far as Medals for getting wounded, yes that is true, but I fail to see your problem with that Yimmy... And I also fail to see what medals received have to do at all with capabilities and skill

Quote Reply

GOP 2/3/2007 4:51:08 PM

ORIGINAL Subject: US Marines and British Infantry

And finally, as I have stated in here a week or two ago, in my tenure as a Marine, I had the privilage to work with Soldiers from the UK and some Royal Marines, I respect them beyond what mere words can offer, too bad I didn't get any medals for that, they would have looked awesome on my study wall.

Exactly...I am sure the Royal Marines feel the same way. That is why I hate these discussions, because the people we are discussing (the actual troops in these units) actually highly respect each other.

Quote Reply

dogberry 2/3/2007 7:20:37 PM

How long are the contracts signed by those who enter the American and British Marines? Of those who go in what percentage retire, and is a higher number an advantage?

Wasn't there a long effort to get recognition (a medal?) for service by British forces in Spain during the early 1800s? This would be the background for my dad getting a medal for being in northwest Europe in 1944 (B-17s), me getting a medal for being in South Carolina and Georgia for 90 days in 72-73, and everyone being involve in Grenada receiving a campaign medal. Thankfully not every campaign is the Alamo.

I think SP has some statistics on medals given per KIA.

Kent

Quote Reply

BadNews I Reiterait 2/3/2007 7:32:12 PM

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.

1. The Original post quoted above
2. What does the number of medals per KIA or the number of medals per populace have to do with the original questions, Fact is I had three rows of ribbons in 1991 and that had absolutely no bearing on how I trained or how I trained my Marines in 1992.

3. The quality of a fighting unit rest solely on training. There is absolutely NO WAY to determine that on this forum as Nationalism, pride, Es Spirit De Corps or what ever way you say it always takes precedence on this forum over fact, ( Well not always, but for the most part)

Time this thread just dies (IMHO)

Quote Reply

Padfoot 2/3/2007 8:04:13 PM

These threads are so stupid!

Quote Reply

StudentofConflict 2/14/2007 10:43:23 AM

ahhh, at lot of it comes down to cultural differances, minor though they may be. British troops sometimes find the way that American soldiers/sailors/airmen/marines express themselves a bit over the top (like the US admiral psyching up the sailors with 'we will rock you' by Queen just before the Iraq war). For example my brother, a Lance-Corporal in the REME, had some US mechanics over at Arborfield. He said he found it a bit funny when one of them was saluting an officer and barked out 'Always prepared sir', but he also said they were all decent blokes and did their jobs well enough. I'm sure that sometimes Americans may think that Brits may not be taking things seriously or are that up for it, given the love of understatement, metaphor and irony my countrymen have when talking about serious things. But it all depends on what resonates in your culture. Americans seem to want a revival preacher loudly expressing group feeling, whereas Brits want a bit of Churchillian rhetoric, but that doesn't mean either side are more motivated or enthused than the other, merely that they're motivated by slightly differant things...I think this alsocomes across on strategypage forums....

Quote Reply

SCCOMarine 2/15/2007 7:35:49 PM

As you might know the British have the best trained Army in the world and they have more experience than the US military,the reason the British Army are taking over is the Americans have approached Iraq with the wrong manner so having the Brit's take over is for the best.The standard British soldier is trained a lot better than the US Marines but to be honest i think there should be Royal Marine Commando's there instead because there is no question to who's gonna win in that situation.

Don't get me wrong i think the US Marines are a highly trained bunch who shouldn't be under estimated

I agree the Brits may be the best trained army the world, but the Marine Corps isn't an army? But if your talking force on force the you don't know wht the Fu(k your talking about.

First of all educate yourself on the Corps first, past and present? There's no unit in the world with the combat record that the Corps' has, undefeated...everywhere!

Tactically the only force you have that matches with the Corps is the RMC. What you dumb*asses don't know is that we (the US and NATO) go force on force all the time, in numerous exercises. When we do there's no Euro unit that can stop the Marine Corps'. We do what we want. Any objective assigned we take. Anytime were in defense we're there's no breaking through our lines.

The only unit that gives us any kind of trouble are the RMC, they may breach a line or two, but they never penetrate. And thats b/c they have disclipline to be patient and are tenacious in attack and give good sport. But they never breakthrough our lines.

Quote Reply

GOP 2/15/2007 7:44:07 PM

Don't get me wrong i think the US Marines are a highly trained bunch who shouldn't be under estimated

I agree the Brits may be the best trained army the world, but the Marine Corps isn't an army? But if your talking force on force the you don't know wht the Fu(k your talking about.

First of all educate yourself on the Corps first, past and present? There's no unit in the world with the combat record that the Corps' has, undefeated...everywhere!

Great point SCCO. Now, don't generalize by saying "You dumb*sses"...remember, most of us don't like these comparisons at all, so we are on your side. Please, don't take this wrong, but the defense scenario may not be completely fair. In europe, the defender will have a big advantage in most cases, right (could be wrong)? Also, what kind of numbers does the USMC have as opposed to the RMC? Is airpower allowed?

The RMC are bad-a**ses, and so is the USMC. I don't like comparing units, but I do believe that for the most part that the USMC and RMC are better trained than their army counterparts.

Quote Reply

SCCOMarine Please read for your "edification" 2/15/2007 8:03:09 PM

You ppl on this site don't have an clue of what the MC is or does? You see us in Iraq doing the same thing as an army unit and think that were the same. Iraq is an Armies job (US, Brits whoever) its sustainment, hold and clear after we, the USMC, kick in the door. We’re not the same, not even close, were a Quick Strike and Forced Entry force.

What you dummies dont know is the only reason the USMC is still in Iraq is b/c we were requested to return to take over the most volatile region, Al Anbar. We had left in Sep 03. Our focus is specialized assault, but we can do Everything including convent. missions.

After the end of Major combat in Apr ’03, we were assigned the region around Najaf, Nasirya, and the surrounding areas for 6mths b/c it was supposed to be the most volatile after the war.

We left in Sept b/c we had other commitments, Forced Entry/ Crisis Response Force/Rapid Deployment. When we left the area was in peace. Btw Apr ’03 and Sept ’03, the US Army was losing about 50 soldiers a month KIA we didn’t lose one. After we left the US Army death toll shot up to 80/mth in Nov ’03 the Army lost 87 soldiers and requested the Marines to return.

The Brit Army is a good army, well lead/well trained. But they are no comparison to the US Marine Corps. The Marines run the most complex infantry tactics of any Unit in the world, we can strike anywhere in the world within 300mi of the sea in less than 6hrs, which 80% of the world. It doesn’t matter if its a company sized specialized raid of 100 Marines or an all out assault there’s nobody in the world who can Match us.

Get your facts straight!

Quote Reply

SCCOMarine Please read for your "edification" 2/15/2007 8:13:18 PM

When they do force on force there are large execises like Battle Griffin in Norway, but there are also smaller ones that take place among visiting unit at various bases.

They give scenarios. In Battle Griffin its like full war. Don't get caught up on this "is this unit doing that" or what ever. In BG there are like 8 countries. There are 2 opposing forces of combined units given differnt objectives. Whatever objectives the Marines are given they achieve.

Its very complex to explain. If you ask specific Q's its easier to answer.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 NEXT