Posted on May 28, 2014
PO1 Master-at-Arms
991K
5.49K
2.96K
200
187
13
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: 1369
SSgt Stephanie Luck Landry
724
718
6
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
(724)
Comment
(6)
Sgt John de Nugent
Sgt John de Nugent
27 d
I was both Marines and Army National Guard (infantry), rapidly promoted in both, and I really know both cultures. The Army sure proved on D-Day, once and for all, that they can do amphibious too, and cooperate with the Navy as well, but the competition between the two branches is good. The Marines are as proficient as they are partly out of rivalry with the Army, and the Army is always trying to show those stuck-up Devil Dogs they are their equal. The rivalry, within proper limits, is a very good thing!
(4)
Reply
(0)
MSG Tim Bertrand
MSG Tim Bertrand
23 d
SSgt Landry I fully respect your view on this subject. I am a retired Army MSG and totally feel the same way about the US Army pride and mission. Each entity has specific missions and capabilities and function autonomously quite well separately.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SGT Ben Barr
SGT Ben Barr
18 d
Don't you have to ask the Navy before speaking?
(1)
Reply
(0)
SSG Craig Newton
SSG Craig Newton
15 d
I’m Army and I say no. Besides, the Marines are already consolidated with the Navy. Just saying.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar_small
LTC Paul Labrador
333
331
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.
(333)
Comment
(2)
PFC John Roscoe
PFC John Roscoe
2 mo
Capt Jeff S. - more than the Marines executing wounded prisoners in the mosque? Give it a rest, with tens of thousands of troops and hundreds of units in each branch, there are always will be some incompetence, bad attitudes and poor performance. Having said that, as a range medic at Schofield, we had Marines come to qualify on our ranges, and attend our recon school. Their Warrior culture is more intense and effective than the Army's, in general- meaning the branch as a whole. The Marines seem a lot more willing to accept spartan conditions. They weren't trying to show-off or anything, it's just how they lived and trained and what they accepted as normal. Marine chow sucks.
(1)
Reply
(0)
PFC Flor Gomez
PFC Flor Gomez
1 mo
PFC John Roscoe@Cpt Schwager - why Army troops need to go on diets, lmao (with the exception of a few go getters like myself trained for Marines but ended up Army) LOL
(0)
Reply
(0)
SGT Dan Gray
SGT Dan Gray
1 mo
PFC Flor Gomez - Sorry PFC but you need to respect your superiors. I have seen some very rolly polly Marines that look like beached whales, just as some of then other branches do. If you were to walk through the Pentagon, you would see some officers that are obviously unable to pass a tape test of any sort, let alone pass a PT test and yes they wear dress blues just like others wear dress greens and navy whites. Your statement clearly shows utter disrespect for superiors officers both NCO and other. You keep this attitude and I can assure you that this rank will be the highest you ever get as one of these superiors you are degrading is going to hear you and then you will be looking at an Article 15 separation charge for violations of the UCMJ. Maybe its time you start to keep your opinions like this to yourself?
(1)
Reply
(0)
CW4 UH-60 Pilot
CW4 (Join to see)
1 mo
Nailed it!
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar_small
Cpl Robert Clark
323
319
4
Edited 4 y ago
I always thought Pg 1 of the US Army Survival Manual stated "Call the Marines"
(323)
Comment
(4)
PFC John Roscoe
PFC John Roscoe
2 mo
it is 2100 hours, for you civilians that 9 pm, for you marines, The big hand is on the 12 and the little one on the 9........Uncle Sam's Misguided Children, lovers of the frontal assault and other casualty-intensive tactics to show their bravery...... But the Mo' fo's were pretty freakin' awesome at Wei
(1)
Reply
(0)
SGT Dan Gray
SGT Dan Gray
1 mo
Marine "my ass rides in navy surplus equipment"
(1)
Reply
(0)
SGT Raymond Franco
SGT Raymond Franco
1 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
3 d
Spoken like a true Corporal!
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar_small
Cancel
close
Seg?add=7750261&t=2