Posted on May 28, 2014
PO1 Master-at-Arms
1M
5.56K
3K
229
217
12
Should_army_and_marines_consolidate__
Think objectively. Traditions, camaraderie aside. Both are somewhat similarly more combat-oriented than USN or USAF. Answer practically without putting down either one of them.

PS: Yes, some are taunting about USN and USAF consolidation or Air Force return to Army Air Corps. My take on that if it's practical, lessen bureaucracy, and make for a smoother communications pipeline amongst the DoD components, why not? Again, camaraderie and traditions aside for a min.
Posted in these groups: Cf1cbe80 TroopsAmerican-flag-soldiers SoldiersDod_color DoD
Edited >1 y ago
Avatar_feed
Responses: 1390
SSgt Stephanie Luck Landry
737
730
7
NO! I mean no offense to the Army but we earned our eagle globe and anchor and if you asked any Marine that question, it's almost an insult. I have nothing against the army. Each branch serves a purpose but being a Marine is a title we carry with pride. It's sacred to us. There will always be a need for the army and there will always be a need for Marines. I respect other branches but we are "the few, the proud, the Marines". To just put us in with the Army isn't how we trained and not what we signed up for. SEMPER FI
(737)
Comment
(7)
SP5 Jeannie Carle
SP5 Jeannie Carle
9 d
We ALL have pride in our branch. There is nothing in my life that I am more proud of than my service in the US Army.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SP5 Jeannie Carle
SP5 Jeannie Carle
9 d
SPC Donald Moore - Very interesting! I have learned something important today!
(0)
Reply
(0)
SSG Everett Wilson
SSG Everett Wilson
6 d
I agree
(0)
Reply
(0)
SGT Richard Lovell
SGT Richard Lovell
4 d
10 year Army veteran here with many friends that were former Marines (I give them hell about saying it that way) and I agree with you sentiment on this subject. Each service goes through a different "initiation" to enter their respective branches and the honor of graduating is when you receive that branch insignia, etc. I get the emotional side of it as well as the practical side. I suppose the higher ups will do what they will do, but for many, the emotional side will always prevail. I think we were and still are two distinct branches of the armed forces and serve unique rolls that would require major over hauls to integrate. Is the effort and the potential ill will worth it? Probably not at this point in time.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar_small
LTC Paul Labrador
345
343
2
After reading the responses, I'm seeing a lot of the emotional response vs. an objective, analytical response. To some extent, that doesn't surprise me. There is not branch in our military that carries more myth and mystique than the Marine Corps. And Marines themselves are the first to buy into and push the mystique (again, not a big deal. They seemed to have learned early that PR is important. Something the Army as a whole is not as good at). However, to really answer this question we DO need to look at it analytically.

Currently Marines are structured to be medium-weight, combined arms expeditionary force that has been optimized for seaborne deployment. Expeditionary warfare is not unique to the Marines. The Army has it's own expeditionary units (82nd, 101st, Rangers) that can get to the fight faster than the Marines can. The big difference is that the Marines come with more firepower and a more robust sustainment ability (30 days vs 3 days). Also, Marines have interoperability with the Navy that is in their DNA. Their officers are trained from day 1 side-by-side with naval officers so that they are intimately familiar with naval operations. Amphibious warfare is also a stated raison d'etre by the Marines. They have essentially taken that highly specialized role as their own and become the SME's for it.

On the other side of the coin, however, beyond force structure allowing for quicker deployment and the highly specialized amphibious role, everything else the Marines bring to the strategic table is a duplication of Army capability, and not necessarily a more capable duplication. While Marines have better strategic mobility than comparable Army units, they give up firepower and protection to do it. And once they are on the ground, they don't fight much differently than a comparable Army unit. So again, this begs the question, is there much the Marines bring that the Army can't do? The cold, analytic answer is no. The Army is capable of taking over the Marine mission. Now, this would not be without some hiccups. First the, the Army would need to develop a force structure that would allow them to conduct the Marine mission. The closest we have to a "Marine-style" MAGTF is the Strykers, but even that is not a complete 1:1 mirror. We would also have to do some training changes to accomodate the amphibious mission and requirements. Finally, there would need to be more integration with the Navy at the operational level. This will require Army officers to have more and sustained exposure to naval culture and doctrine to create the level of interoperability that the Marines and Navy currently have. In short, consolidaiton is doable, but not without some significant humps to to overcome...and that is not even addressing the emotional reaction that will come about with any plans to dissolve the Corps and roll it under the Army.
(345)
Comment
(2)
SPC Public Affairs Specialist
SPC (Join to see)
9 d
SPC Dawn Appelberg (Johnson) - Special Forces ...OR Green Berets?
(0)
Reply
(0)
SPC Public Affairs Specialist
SPC (Join to see)
8 d
Sgt Aaron McKeever - Sgt., What's the look on people's faces when someone (Who anyway?) says "Send in the Marines or Send in the Army? When & how often is/was this? Also, have " you" seen that look personally? USMC boot camp is twice as long? 10 weeks vs 12 week? Okay...., I will admit the corps pouges are better trained than the Army'sin my opinion.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SSG John Eroh
SSG John Eroh
8 d
LTC Paul Labrador - During my early days (66-86) we were told that it was under consideration to make STRATCOM (Strategic Communications Command) which was the Army's inter-base/long range communications out of the Signal Corps to be combined with the like forces from the Air Force & Navy to become a separate service which would provide the inter-base communications for ALL services with the tactical commo staying with each service. Sounded like a good idea to me. In Korea the Army provided the inter-base communications where I spent time on Osan AB at a microwave station and another place with mostly AF personnel. Worked well there.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SPC Public Affairs Specialist
SPC (Join to see)
8 d
LCpl Michael Cappello - If you know anything about Grenada, you'll clearly see that the General was not informed, but I'm sure the response was along the lines of "General, they were in heavy gunfire when they jumped in, the maps we gave them were tourist maps that are outdated and wrong in many aspects. When they hit ground running they took out plenty of enemy combatants, and many whom were hidden up in the lush forested hills of the island. As they were figuring out how wrong those maps were they also had a few wounded to care for as they navigated on their own and fought off attacks.

At one juncture a road they needed to cross was blocked by construction equipment, huge concrete medians, cars , trucks, cranes, and whatever else laid there to slow them down..... They still returned fire and moved the blockade. Also another platoon heard what was taking place turned back and came to assist them. They were successful and accomplished the mission, it just didn't come in the time frame that D.C. thought it would. General Norman Swarzkopf knew it was not a sporting event where the coach draws a play for a team to execute and score points. They had a few obstacles to overcome., in which they did. So whatever Marines were doing anywhere else had to do with their assigned task and nothing to do with the task the Army was assigned which was to jump in, seize the airfield, defeat any resistance, and rescue the medical students. They even touched on it in a movie you guys seem to love so much. "Heartbreak Ridge." In real life actually it wasn't Marines but Army.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar_small
Cpl Robert Clark
326
322
4
Edited >1 y ago
I always thought Pg 1 of the US Army Survival Manual stated "Call the Marines"
(326)
Comment
(4)
SGT Dan Gray
SGT Dan Gray
4 mo
Marine "my ass rides in navy surplus equipment"
(1)
Reply
(0)
SGT Raymond Franco
SGT Raymond Franco
3 mo
I love and miss the sense of humor! At the end of the day, one Country, one mission! Thank you for your service!!
(1)
Reply
(0)
CSM Arthur La Rue
CSM Arthur La Rue
2 mo
Spoken like a true Corporal!
(0)
Reply
(0)
SPC Donald Moore
SPC Donald Moore
18 d
D120e428
A74adf8c
See the attached photos if you have any desire to embrace reality.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar_small
Cancel
close
Seg?add=7750261&t=2