Posted on Feb 16, 2016
Why is the Marine Corps much more strict and carry a higher level of professionalism than the great US Army?
125K
1.28K
508
103
103
0
I believe the Army can take some notes if you will from the Marine Corps. I love the US Army but I love the Marines traditions, their pride & honor, how much more close knit that they seem overall. I am not trying the belittle the Army I just wish that our level of overall professionalism matched our sister branch.
Marine Corps
Professionalism
Discipline
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 171
163
163
0
Nice can of worms you opened there Conrad. But you are right in that the Marines as a Service, have created and maintained an aura of invincibility that is carried on by not only the Marines, but by society at large. Truman said that the Marines had the best propaganda machine since Stalin and to some extent he was right. But far more than 'propaganda', the Marines foster an attitude built on history, tradition, pride and leadership. The Corps is only branch of service that tells you up front that you are going to TRY to join their ranks and that they are not going to compromise in order to make you a Marine. Other branches have their elite units that carry that same stature...Seals, Green Beret, etc.. and while the Marines have a pecking order within our ranks as well, the title Marine, regardless of MOS, rank, or unit, carries with it an automatic expectation of leadership, pride and honor. It's an understanding that regardless of job, each Marine is a rifleman. Each Marine is trained as a warrior first, crew chief, admin clerk, cook, infantryman, second. That's why "Marine" is always capitalized...it's at title.. not a job description. That's why Marines are always self aware.. that they represent the Corps 24/7. There are no bigger critics of Marines than other Marines. Finally, there is the esprit de corps... the brotherhood....the fact that anywhere a Marine is, he has a friend in any other Marine, active or not.
(163)
(0)
Cpl Richard Mc Lain
CWO2, You said all the things that we as Marines have held high regards. I also served in the Army, I was young and I put the Army through a few challenges. I still have 3 honorable discharges. 3 YRS in grade Sgt E-5.
(1)
(0)
85
85
0
An analogy if you will...The Marines are the linebackers of the United States military. They have a very specialized mission, take out the guy with the ball. That is a very glorious role which requires us to truly believe in what we are doing. You cannot be a good linebacker if you do not have discipline. Look at the careers of the truly great ones. Very few penalties.
Now, you will never win a Superbowl based on the play of just your linebackers. Those of us who have been around long enough to have shaken off the urge to foster resentment between services realize that we each have our play assignments. One team. One fight.
Now SPC, if you think the Marines carry themselves more professionally, model yourself in that image. It will have a positive influence on most of those around you.
Now, you will never win a Superbowl based on the play of just your linebackers. Those of us who have been around long enough to have shaken off the urge to foster resentment between services realize that we each have our play assignments. One team. One fight.
Now SPC, if you think the Marines carry themselves more professionally, model yourself in that image. It will have a positive influence on most of those around you.
(85)
(0)
Suspended Profile
Sgt Patrick Carron - I agree that we all bicker about who is the best branch of service but it is usually all in good fun and no harm is meant. I would also fight for any service member that is being disrespected. I treat it like a sibling relationship, I can talk sh*t about my siblings, doesn't mean anyone else can.
LCpl Rachel Reynolds
I am a Marine vet and work at the Cincinnati VAMC...I LOVE the Marine Corps but there will never be a vet, from any service that I wouldn't stand beside in a time of need...ever.
(3)
(0)
CSM Charles Hayden
SSG Kevin McCulley Please see the 1600 hours post on Sep 26, 2017 by ‘SSG Dee R’ regarding dereliction of duty!
My favorite battalion commander made a habit of working with Soldiers (and Officers), assigned and available. During his tenure, that ability demonstrated the Mantra he had learned as a Ranger!
My favorite battalion commander made a habit of working with Soldiers (and Officers), assigned and available. During his tenure, that ability demonstrated the Mantra he had learned as a Ranger!
(0)
(0)
SGT Mike Fritz
"Now SPC, if you think the Marines carry themselves more professionally, model yourself in that image. It will have a positive influence on most of those around you." Those are words to live by. Well said, GySgt!
(0)
(0)
81
81
0
"Physician, heal thyself". If you perceive a problem, fix it. Believe me we have similar traditions, pride and honor that the Marine Corps has, but they do a much better job across the board of fostering that sense of belonging than we do. I have always enjoyed working with the Marine Corps. I have also enjoyed working with the Air Force, and Navy. Each of the services has a different culture, and we can see that different Army units have a different culture when compared to other Army units. As a young paratrooper in the 82nd ABN DIV I was told I was the baddest Muldoon walking the planet. I believed it, as did the people around me, and we were an awesome unit not necessarily because we were trained any better (we weren't) but because we had the attitude that put us over the top. If the Army has a shortcoming it is that in some places/units/branches the mentality is that they are "just a maintenance unit" (Jessica Lynch said this after her release from captivity), or "I'm just a PAC clerk". In the Marine Corps EVERYBODY has the shared experience of being a Marine first, and a (insert MOS here) later.
(81)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
csm bennett i agree 110%, in an amed unit that dont wash, old school thinking i agree, but when the amed went to 68w, with and the new trianing many old boots didnt agree, medics dont fight, well care under fire states all weapons used to create superiorty, went thru this training and embraced it, but still had old boots because of the geneva conventions that said no, im old school i served with the marine corps as a corpsman, my fpf was an m-60, i tryied to take this to the csh i served, but they were in the same mind set of conventional vs unconventional, isis dont really care if your a medical unit, your dead
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
MSG (Join to see) - it's the attitude of CA across the board. Once had another O-5 tell me, "we're not soldiers, we're CA!" Had to walk away before I bitch slapped her.
(0)
(0)
CW2 Ernest Krutzsch
I think the responsibility is in leadership. I was in the 1/39th Infantry 8th ID, the 7th ID, Berlin Brigade, 1st ID and the 2nd ID. As an Infantryman we were required to know the units history and traditions. I was USAEUR Soldier of the Year in 1976, I met General Desobry and knew of his time as a POW as I was required to know the history and traditions of the units I served in, and I was curious. The Generals I served under were the Captains during WWII, they WERE history and I was happy to learn it and proud to have lived it. I would go into discipline, but there is not enough room. When I entered the military an Article 15 was an indication that the Commander was in control and was using the tools to discipline his troops. Now it is a tool to harm a soldiers career, and gives the impression that the Commander has lost control. When you work in a risk adverse environment, discipline suffers, when making one mistake can kill a career it kills discipline and morale, again just not enough time here to do it justice!
(1)
(0)
LTC Wayne Brandon
Well said!
My father, a WWII vet (Philippine Islands) used to say: "The Navy gets the chow, the Marines get the glory and the Army does the work" While there is truth to the fact that the Navy certainly eats better than the rest of us, the Marines have most certainly earned their glory (as have all branches) and the Army is called upon to 'carry the bulk of the load' as it were, and that stands to reason for that is the way it is designed, structured and intended. I have always had great respect for the Corps but do not see reason to hold them at any level other than a co-equal in the defense equation.
One way the Navy department is different from other branches, especially the Army, is they don't seem to have the same penchant for changing their uniforms every few years. With a few exceptions related to the use of modern materials and tailoring techniques, the uniforms of the Navy and Marines have remained relatively unchanged for nearly 80 years. The AF operates similarly with the biggest change coming after they became their own service in 1947. Why the army does this shall likely always be a mystery to me.
Not sure where the idea came from that only the Corps trains everyone in infantry skills first. My recollection of basic training (BCT) is one of learning to move, shoot and communicate almost from day one. AIT (Tiger Land, Fort Polk, LA '69) was simply a lot more of the same with better familiarization with the infantry arsenal, land navigation and learning about our enemy and how to defeat him. To say that any solider in a non-infantry MOS is not first a fighter is simply not the case.
My point in all of this is that the Army has suffered from an identity crisis for a very long time and somehow believes that changing uniforms and motto's on a regular basis can help - it doesn't.
This, in no way reflects who and what the Army is; only how it is perceived in contrast to the other services. It is up to Army leadership to change that perception and, IMHO, can begin by dispensing with the 'reinvention' efforts and concentrate on consistency and things that matter most - soldiers, equipment and victory.
My father, a WWII vet (Philippine Islands) used to say: "The Navy gets the chow, the Marines get the glory and the Army does the work" While there is truth to the fact that the Navy certainly eats better than the rest of us, the Marines have most certainly earned their glory (as have all branches) and the Army is called upon to 'carry the bulk of the load' as it were, and that stands to reason for that is the way it is designed, structured and intended. I have always had great respect for the Corps but do not see reason to hold them at any level other than a co-equal in the defense equation.
One way the Navy department is different from other branches, especially the Army, is they don't seem to have the same penchant for changing their uniforms every few years. With a few exceptions related to the use of modern materials and tailoring techniques, the uniforms of the Navy and Marines have remained relatively unchanged for nearly 80 years. The AF operates similarly with the biggest change coming after they became their own service in 1947. Why the army does this shall likely always be a mystery to me.
Not sure where the idea came from that only the Corps trains everyone in infantry skills first. My recollection of basic training (BCT) is one of learning to move, shoot and communicate almost from day one. AIT (Tiger Land, Fort Polk, LA '69) was simply a lot more of the same with better familiarization with the infantry arsenal, land navigation and learning about our enemy and how to defeat him. To say that any solider in a non-infantry MOS is not first a fighter is simply not the case.
My point in all of this is that the Army has suffered from an identity crisis for a very long time and somehow believes that changing uniforms and motto's on a regular basis can help - it doesn't.
This, in no way reflects who and what the Army is; only how it is perceived in contrast to the other services. It is up to Army leadership to change that perception and, IMHO, can begin by dispensing with the 'reinvention' efforts and concentrate on consistency and things that matter most - soldiers, equipment and victory.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google