Posted on May 28, 2014
Should Army and Marines (or components of) consolidate?
1.36M
6.44K
3.13K
298
286
12
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.
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.
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 1533
I have always thought we should cponsolidate into one known branch of service, however keep thje standards of the individual for the MOS. Marines will ALWAYS be marines no matter what. Army is the most flexible, with the most MOSs expansion.
(0)
(0)
We were all trained for different purposes. But the main purpose of joining was because we love our country and the freedoms of it. We all spill the same color of blood. But we all offered to spill our blood if necessary for our country and our Constitution. Each has different tasks to do in each area and we all do or did them to the best of our ability. And all who wore a uniform for our country should be proud of that and remember we all spill the same color of blood no matter what rank or what area we joined but each one has its purposes that is why they were created that way.
(0)
(0)
Phew...I've thought of this time and time again, and here's the short answer: only if the US Marine Corps completely mirrors the Royal Marines Commando in mission, structure, and training. If all Marines were made to go through the Commando tests (even as opposed to the Crucible) you'd find that we'd bleed the corps dry of Marines who were quite proficient in their job; those Marines, and likely non-combat oriented units could then be pulled into big Army. The Marine Corps would then no longer function as a general purpose force in readiness (something the Corps is organizationally structured and mandated to be), but as an amphibious raid oriented force in readiness. Many of the billets and commands that'd normally be staffed by Marines would then fall under the other services to provide.
This could create a lot of problems in the short and long run in regards to coordination, funding, and retention...not an easy question to give a real answer to.
This could create a lot of problems in the short and long run in regards to coordination, funding, and retention...not an easy question to give a real answer to.
(0)
(0)
No. The Army and the Marines both have a mission as part of the Armed Forces.
(0)
(0)
BLUF: Will not happen for the following reasons: Staying away from the valid arguments of tradition and ethos and I am sure it has been sprinkled through this forum but the Marines has been maintained as a expeditionary force that is part of the nations quick and 24/7power projection arm of our operational and strategic plans. The Army is a campaign arm. It takes over from the bridgeheads or foothold that fights a campaign. Look at the meaning of a land campaign and you will find a use of Marine forces in SUPPORT of the campaign The Marines are not designed or intended for leading campaign because they are expeditionary. Remembering the Marines ideas of The right way the wrong way and the Marine way we all should be reticent. (relax Devils, it was a joke). Lets talk about the Army's inability to meet their requirements. I bet the JSCP is a mess with the current "leadership". Or the Navy shrinking it's fleets in order to give China hegemony in the Pacific Rim. Intentional?
(0)
(0)
WHILE IT SOUNDS LIKE IT MAY MAKE SENSE EXCEPT FOR JSOC I DO NOT THINK YOU FIND MANY MARINES WILLING TO BE ABSORBED BY THE ARMY I JUST DON'T SEE IT
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
PO1 Cliff Heath
YEAH SGT. DIXON I AGREE 2 DIFFERENT CONCEPTS, AND NOTHING AGAINST THE ARMY BUT THE USMC DOES MORE WITH LESS AND LIKE I WAS TRYING TO SAY IS THAT UNDER JSOC YOU HAVE ALL OF OUR ELITE FORCES UNDER THE ONE COMMAND WHICH DOES MAKE SENSE TO ME. BEING UNDER JSOC KEEPS REGULAR COMMANDS FROM SCREWING WITH TIER ONE FORCES. LIKE CMDR. MARCHENKO SAID THAT WHEN HE WAS PUTTING DEVGRU TOGETHER HE HAD A BIGGER BUDGET THAN THE USMC. AND NOW SO MUCH OF THE WAR HAS JSOC TROOPS INVOLVED I IMAGINE IT RUBS SOME HIGHER UPS THE WRONG WAY DOES ANYBODY HAVE AN OPINION ON THIS WOULD LIKE FEEDBACK
(0)
(0)
Read This Next


Troops
Soldiers
DoD
