13
13
0
Without using Google,Wiki, or any other search engine...using only what you know the second you read the question -- Give your opinion why Marines, trained in Amphibious landing, were not used at Normandy on D-Day.
Let's keep this civil, because this is a topic that could easily go awry.
Thoughts?
Opinions?
Facts?
Insider information?
Let's keep this civil, because this is a topic that could easily go awry.
Thoughts?
Opinions?
Facts?
Insider information?
Posted in these groups: 
D-Day
D-Day
Edited 11 y ago
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 131
6
6
0
Marine Corps history. Army has despised the Marines Corps since 1777... Also Marines had a lot of success during WW1, overshadowing the army. Then, WW2 came around and the Army lobbied to keep the Marines out of Europe so to finish in Europe and then go win the war in the Pacific... So reason behind VE day prior to VA day. Just my opinion.
(6)
(0)
LtCol (Join to see)
I take issue with Capt. Ihenacho's statement that the Army despises the Marine Corps. It's true that some individuals in the Army were intensely jealous of the Marines' conduct in WWI. MacArthur, who is absolutely NOT one of my favorite officers, decorated soldier after soldier for their defense of the Phillipines. When asked about the Corps role he responded, "(Expletive deleted) the Marines, they got enough in the last one." Just a casual review of McArthur's conduct, exploits and defiance of authority beginning when he was a second lieutenant leads even the most casual reader wonder how he earned five stars, avoided court martial and dismissal. The Old Soldiers and Old Corps of yesteryear are but a dim memory. Symbiotically, the Marine Corp and the Army make the most potent fighting force in the world. Let's leave our rivalry to the annual football game between West Point and The Naval Academy.
(0)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
Cpl Phil Hsueh, if you look at sheer industrial capability and resources (to include manpower), you will see that Germany was clearly the bigger threat. Japan was never interested in attacking the US mainland because they had no intentions to. They didn't have the resources to do it, nor occupy what ever land they did manage to take, although the door was wide open. Japan was interested in securing industrial resources in SE Asia and being a regional power. Japan's whole war plan was to shock and awe the US with a series of decisive victories then sue for peace with terms favorable to Japan. However, Germany's goal under Hitler was to consolidate Europe under his control, then look towards attacking the US. Had chips fallen a little differently (i.e. blitzkrieg and convoy war knocked Britain out of the war; had Hitler not squandered the bulk of his crack combat forces taking on the Soviets and had he not interfered to the point of actually losing battles for his generals) Germany would have eventually looked at attack the US.
(0)
(0)
Cpl Phil Hsueh
Japan was actually very interested in attacking the mainland US and actually did, though unsuccessfully, with incendiary loaded balloons, I do agree that they had little interest in using the US. As for Germany, from what I've read, Hitler would have preferred Britain and the US not gotten involved in the war and if given the choice would have preferred to leave us & the Brits alone. If I remember correctly he would have liked the both of us join Germany in fighting the Russians. I've never read anything about Hitler, or any of his generals, being interested in using the US, attack maybe but invade no. I know there were plans for a long range, heavy bomber called the America bomber but as far as I know it never left the drawing board. All that said, I do agree wholeheartedly that Hitler was an idiot and interfered in matters beyond his skill and capabilities.
(1)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
Cpl Phil Hsueh, Japan attacked the U.S. in response to our interference in their ongoing imperial expansion.
As to Japan considering mounting a serious attack on the continental United States, you can search far and wide and still find no evidence of it. The Japanese empire was already having a hard time digesting China, and had recent memories of getting thumped hard by the Soviet Union (hence their preoccupation with Soviet neutrality). Even the most militant Japanese imperialists didn't delude themselves into thinking that they could conquer the United States.
As to Japan considering mounting a serious attack on the continental United States, you can search far and wide and still find no evidence of it. The Japanese empire was already having a hard time digesting China, and had recent memories of getting thumped hard by the Soviet Union (hence their preoccupation with Soviet neutrality). Even the most militant Japanese imperialists didn't delude themselves into thinking that they could conquer the United States.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
The US Marine Corps was tasked with the war in the Pacific. My father, a Pfc at the time, was captured on Corrigedor and spent the remainder of the war as a POW.
(6)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
My active duty time was spent with the 1/503rd IN. The unit that took Corrigedor. That was a hell of a time. If your father is still around, tell him I say thank you.
(1)
(0)
5
5
0
Two things, 1) Army was also used extensively in the Pacific. My grandfather fought with one of the most used Divisions, the Sightseein' Sixth in New Guinea and the Philippines. 2) if I'm not mistaken, and I probably am, didn't the Army use Marine Advisors to help plan the Normandy invasion as well as landings elsewhere?
I think both branches did exceptionally well in the theaters and campaigns in which they were used.
I think both branches did exceptionally well in the theaters and campaigns in which they were used.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
All of the Marine Corps was tied up fighting in the Pacific. The Army was fighting on both fronts and were the only ones available for Normandy so they did it.
Plus they had already done their African and Italian amphibious assaults so they had experienced personnel.
Plus they had already done their African and Italian amphibious assaults so they had experienced personnel.
(5)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
I would of half expected the Marines would be used to capture the smaller islands, the Army for the larger islands. Marines for the beach-head assault, and the Army for the big push into Germany. Again, a lot of hindsight goes into this conversation.
(2)
(0)
TSgt (Join to see)
From what I understand of how the Pacific was fought, the Marines would make initial landings and the Army would come in later as reinforcements or via parachute.
The Army in the Pacific focused on building and maintaining air strips for bombers and providing numbers for larger campaign pushes such as New Guinea and the Phillipines, but they did not do amphibious assaults because the Marines were available for that theatre.
The Army in the Pacific focused on building and maintaining air strips for bombers and providing numbers for larger campaign pushes such as New Guinea and the Phillipines, but they did not do amphibious assaults because the Marines were available for that theatre.
(0)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
TSgt (Join to see) You're killing me with that "Corp" you have got to add the "s" on the end.
Gentlemen both, the Pacific campaign did largely use Army units on the larger Islands, particularly in the Philippines. There were a few mid sized islands where the Army and Marine Corps both landed and worked together. Generally the Philippine Campaign was run by the Army under Gen McArthur and the "Island hopping Campaign" to secure Sea Lanes of Communication (SLOCs) and Air-Basing to strike Japan was run by the Navy under Admiral Halsey (meaning Marines did most of the ground combat.)
Gentlemen both, the Pacific campaign did largely use Army units on the larger Islands, particularly in the Philippines. There were a few mid sized islands where the Army and Marine Corps both landed and worked together. Generally the Philippine Campaign was run by the Army under Gen McArthur and the "Island hopping Campaign" to secure Sea Lanes of Communication (SLOCs) and Air-Basing to strike Japan was run by the Navy under Admiral Halsey (meaning Marines did most of the ground combat.)
(3)
(0)
Sgt Jason Tanner
MacArthur initially only used the Marines when the Navy refused to release the assault craft to him. The only way he could get them were to use the Marines because the Navy had already allotted the craft to the Marines and refused to turn them over to the Army and have to wait an unknown amount of time before they could get replacements. It was felt that if the Army got control of these craft they would not be returned to the Navy and that MacArthur would use the example of the Armies use of them to leverage a greater allocation of the limited supply of the craft in the PTO.
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
The reason being that the Marines were to busy in the Pacific, and were hopping from island to island.
(5)
(0)
4
4
0
Well the corps was being used else where. Granted I can't say how it was during those times but from my experience they only call us in now to correct mess ups made by other branches and to do the really messy stuff that others are scared or feel incapable to do no offense meant just from what I seen on my deployments we were always out numbered and in a bind but we were always way more motivated and trained
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
Because the Marines were sent to those smaller hell hole islands because they were better suited to do the landings and spear head the war their. So the Army had to take the landing. The Marines are bad ass but they still didnt have enough to do all the landings.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
The chiefs of staff wanted there to be a fight, not a slaughter.
"It is the only way I can be satisfied, if I use my right...over too quickly." - Indigo Montoya
"It is the only way I can be satisfied, if I use my right...over too quickly." - Indigo Montoya
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
The easy answer was that the Marines were in the Pacific and the Army in Europe. However the true answer is much more political and goes deeper than that. Following WWI, the Army attempted to kill the Marine Corps through Congressional funding. The Marines had to scratch and claw to even get involved in France, and were considered a second rate service by both the Army and Navy. With the Marines consisting of 1 brigade of 1 division of 60 American divisions in France, The Marine Corps emerged from the war as if they had one the war single handedly in the public's eyes. This was largely due to the publicity that the Marine Corps received following actions in Chateau Thiery in which they received accolades for actions they deserved and also for actions truely accomplished by the Army. With this as motivation, a two decade struggle ensued in Congress about whether the Marine Corps should even exist, largely instigated by Eisenhower and other leading Army generals. Once the World War II broke out, the Army had no intentions of allowing the Marines to be involved in Europe and wanted them to be relagated to the Pacific. A war against the japs was seen as less significant as a war against European powers. Prior to Normandy, a small contigent of Marines were brought in as advisors, and during D-Day a small company of 84 Marines were present and were in support of the Rangers at Point Du Hoc. The original reports received from Point Du Hoc was that the rangers were stranded and cut off and initially the Marines were ordered in. This was quickly cancelled by Eisenhower because he knew the political ramifications in headlines that would read "Marines save rangers." Hence, the marines were never actively involved at Normady on D-Day.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
I would say, not only because they serving in the Pacific; The invasion of Europe was going to be a long drawn out Ground battle; The Island hopping in the Pacific was more inline with their tactics and training during that time period.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google