No More Fighting Marines?

longknife

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2012
Messages
42,221
Reaction score
13,121
Points
2,250
Location
Sin City
David Francis, The Fiscal Times, May 6, 2013

In 2010, then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates made waves when he ordered the Pentagon to take a hard look at the Marines to determine what, if any role they would play in the future of warfare.
See more at: Why Afghanistan Might Be the Marines? Last Fight | The Fiscal Times

It is true that they've served their need and just copy what others do? Something to think of. I've always felt there should be one command and force for special operations, combining LRP, SEALS, Special Forces, and the Air Force equivalent. Your comments?
 
David Francis, The Fiscal Times, May 6, 2013

In 2010, then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates made waves when he ordered the Pentagon to take a hard look at the Marines to determine what, if any role they would play in the future of warfare.
See more at: Why Afghanistan Might Be the Marines? Last Fight | The Fiscal Times

It is true that they've served their need and just copy what others do? Something to think of. I've always felt there should be one command and force for special operations, combining LRP, SEALS, Special Forces, and the Air Force equivalent. Your comments?

Services love to compete but their competition has a cost that may not be good for the young people that join to be special.
 
Democrat administrations have been a bigger threat to the Marine Corps than all the enemies they faced on the battlefield. Harry Truman came damned close to abolishing the Marine Corps and if it wasn't for a hero like Marine General "Brute" Krulak he would have done it. MacArthur hated the Marines since WW1 when he was accused of being a timid field commander. When the Marines bailed Pershing's ass out of the WW1 quagmire during the battle of Beleau Wood the Army paid them back by banning the Marine Corps insignia on any WW1 monument in Europe. Marines were used as cannon fodder in the Pacific and MacArthur refused to have a Marine Corps representative on the Missouri during the Japanese surrender. Amazingly MacArthur succeeded in keeping Marines out of the Korean conflict for a while and they ended up saving his ass during the Chosin campaign. Marines refused to go along with (draft dodger) Bill Clinton's order that male and female recruits train together in the same barracks and Clinton's people called the Marines insulting names. It's always democrat administrations that ignore heroism and disrespect Military tradition and Marines are well aware of it.
 
STFU, Whitehall.

(1) Truman cherished the Marines.

(2) MacArthur, a Republican of Republicans that makes Cruz look like a commie by comparison, was thrilled to get the provisional Marine force that helped save the Pusan perimeter.

A combined forces defense department makes sense in this incredible age of developing technology.
 
Democrat administrations have been a bigger threat to the Marine Corps than all the enemies they faced on the battlefield. Harry Truman came damned close to abolishing the Marine Corps and if it wasn't for a hero like Marine General "Brute" Krulak he would have done it. MacArthur hated the Marines since WW1 when he was accused of being a timid field commander. When the Marines bailed Pershing's ass out of the WW1 quagmire during the battle of Beleau Wood the Army paid them back by banning the Marine Corps insignia on any WW1 monument in Europe. Marines were used as cannon fodder in the Pacific and MacArthur refused to have a Marine Corps representative on the Missouri during the Japanese surrender. Amazingly MacArthur succeeded in keeping Marines out of the Korean conflict for a while and they ended up saving his ass during the Chosin campaign. Marines refused to go along with (draft dodger) Bill Clinton's order that male and female recruits train together in the same barracks and Clinton's people called the Marines insulting names. It's always democrat administrations that ignore heroism and disrespect Military tradition and Marines are well aware of it.

The Marine Corps is part of the navy. If the Marine Corps was used like fodder in WWII you might ask the navy about it, and surely the navy had a representative on the Missouri for the signing? FDR was, at one time, an assistant secretary of the navy, and supposedly loved the navy. If the Marine Corps has a gripe, it might be with the navy, not the Democratic party.
 
STFU, Whitehall.

(1) Truman cherished the Marines.

(2) MacArthur, a Republican of Republicans that makes Cruz look like a commie by comparison, was thrilled to get the provisional Marine force that helped save the Pusan perimeter.

A combined forces defense department makes sense in this incredible age of developing technology.

Maybe you need to look up the word "cherished" again. One of Truman's more famous quotes regarding the USMC after WW2 and after Marines shed so much blood in the Pacific "The Marine Corps is the Navy's police force and as long as I am president that is what they will remain". Ironically the "Navy's police force" bailed the timid bean counter out of the mess he made in Korea.
MacArthur actually thought he had the republican nomination locked up but Korean War Veterans put pressure on the republican party and they nominated Ike. Ever the vindictive petty a-hole, Mac ran on a third party ticket in the election hoping to syphon votes from the Eisenhower platform.
 
MacArthur didn't have much idea about some things...WW2 in PNG, for example.

Kokoka Track - Never Saying Die

On the 29th August the Japanese broke through the Australian lines forcing the Australian Battalions to withdraw towards Alola and then to withdraw to Templeton's Crossing. This was followed by a further withdrawal to the major supply point of Myola.
News of the withdrawals reached Australia and the hierarchy expected the Japanese to soon claim victory. American General Douglas MacArthur announced that:

"the Australians have proven themselves unable to match the enemy in jungle fighting. Aggressive leadership is lacking."


#####

Ah yes, the teen etc volunteers.
Poorly trained, poorly armed...up against the crack Japanese army experienced in jungle fighting.

MacArthur-ilk's "aggressive leadership"...baaah!




Gotta work smarter than that if one wishes to survive;


http://www.convictcreations.com/history/kokoda.htm

Australian general Thomas Blamey fancied himself as a World War II answer to General John Monash. Like Monash, he wanted to push his hand into the enemy throat and keep it there so that it could never gain the ascendancy.
While such aggression proved useful for Monash to break the trench warfare of the Western Front, it was inappropriate for the jungle warfare of Papua New Guinea.
Had those under his command obeyed his orders, then it would have led to the futile infantry charges that Monash considered to be so wasteful. Adapting to the conditions, the Australian soldiers acted like Monash by ignoring inappropriate instructions.
Instead of charging at the enemy in a blitzkrieg approach, they changed the warfare to a running battle of attrition. The Japanese strength was sapped by keeping them on the offensive, lengthening their supply lines, and contaminating any food they captured. It was a strategy that won the Australians the battle. Although the Australians won, the victory came at the cost of Blamey's ego.

To find some self-esteem, on the 9th of November 1942, Blamey addressed the 21st Infantry Brigade on the parade ground and informed them that they had been beaten by inferior forces and that no soldier should be afraid to die. He then said that:

"it's the rabbit who runs who gets shot, not the man holding the gun."

Just as some of Blamey's battle strategies were ill conceived, it was an ill conceived idea to address men who had spent two months in jungle warfare and label them cowards. Not only did it fail to motivate soldiers or inspire respect for commanding officers, it amounted to a huge safety risk for Blamey. Many officers later said that Blamey was lucky to escape with his life.

When Blamey later visited the wounded in hospital, many nibbled lettuce, while wrinkling their nose in mock of him
:)

#####

God love em, they helped save those who were left in Australia from being Japanese laundry slaves, sex slaves, or worse.
 
Last edited:
No more fighting Marines?
Wonderful news!
That means no more can be sent off to die and be maimed for life in stupid wars.

Build more nukes, and non-nuke missiles.
Push-button warfare is the way to go.
'Boots on the ground' is oh so 'yesterday'.
 
STFU, Whitehall.

(1) Truman cherished the Marines.

(2) MacArthur, a Republican of Republicans that makes Cruz look like a commie by comparison, was thrilled to get the provisional Marine force that helped save the Pusan perimeter.

A combined forces defense department makes sense in this incredible age of developing technology.

Maybe you need to look up the word "cherished" again. One of Truman's more famous quotes regarding the USMC after WW2 and after Marines shed so much blood in the Pacific "The Marine Corps is the Navy's police force and as long as I am president that is what they will remain". Ironically the "Navy's police force" bailed the timid bean counter out of the mess he made in Korea.
MacArthur actually thought he had the republican nomination locked up but Korean War Veterans put pressure on the republican party and they nominated Ike. Ever the vindictive petty a-hole, Mac ran on a third party ticket in the election hoping to syphon votes from the Eisenhower platform.

You need to study history, bub.

You have completely mischaracterized Truman's feelings about the Marines.

Yes, JUST LIKE I SAID, MacArthur was a Republican.

Do you just blab to blab
 
Last edited:
Democrat administrations have been a bigger threat to the Marine Corps than all the enemies they faced on the battlefield. Harry Truman came damned close to abolishing the Marine Corps and if it wasn't for a hero like Marine General "Brute" Krulak he would have done it. MacArthur hated the Marines since WW1 when he was accused of being a timid field commander. When the Marines bailed Pershing's ass out of the WW1 quagmire during the battle of Beleau Wood the Army paid them back by banning the Marine Corps insignia on any WW1 monument in Europe. Marines were used as cannon fodder in the Pacific and MacArthur refused to have a Marine Corps representative on the Missouri during the Japanese surrender. Amazingly MacArthur succeeded in keeping Marines out of the Korean conflict for a while and they ended up saving his ass during the Chosin campaign. Marines refused to go along with (draft dodger) Bill Clinton's order that male and female recruits train together in the same barracks and Clinton's people called the Marines insulting names. It's always democrat administrations that ignore heroism and disrespect Military tradition and Marines are well aware of it.




The Marine Corps is part of the navy. If the Marine Corps was used like fodder in WWII you might ask the navy about it, and surely the navy had a representative on the Missouri for the signing? FDR was, at one time, an assistant secretary of the navy, and supposedly loved the navy. If the Marine Corps has a gripe, it might be with the navy, not the Democratic party.

Indeed. Thanks for cuting through the partisan blather.

Marines are the Navy's responsibility. If the Navy decides they are obsolete, then they will reduce the size of the Marine Corps budget.

But like so many other porky parts of our Military-Industrial Complex:

The Marines are likely to survive not because their core competencies are vital to national security, but


....because they have allies on Capitol Hill who do not want to be responsible for killing a beloved service branch, says AmericanÂ’s Adams



Replace "beloved service branch" with useless Army posts and USAF and Navy bases throughout the USA and rest of the world, and we really get to the heart of the military spending issue. And this doesn't even begin to touch all the Bogus Civilian Defence Contrators that are sucking at the US government tit.

Before someone launches into some red-herring example of NON-military wasteful spending, I'll pre-empt you: PLENTY of it exists too, however, this isn't the freakin' subject of the tread.
 
The Army cannot replace the Marines.

each have different duties and tactics.

The Army is not going to take a needed shoreline and the Marines are not parachuting in.

We should learn from history that cutting certain training always leads to us working to catch up, which cost more lives and money
 
The Army cannot replace the Marines.

each have different duties and tactics.

The Army is not going to take a needed shoreline and the Marines are not parachuting in.

We should learn from history that cutting certain training always leads to us working to catch up, which cost more lives and money

Amen!
 
David Francis, The Fiscal Times, May 6, 2013

In 2010, then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates made waves when he ordered the Pentagon to take a hard look at the Marines to determine what, if any role they would play in the future of warfare.
See more at: Why Afghanistan Might Be the Marines? Last Fight | The Fiscal Times

It is true that they've served their need and just copy what others do? Something to think of. I've always felt there should be one command and force for special operations, combining LRP, SEALS, Special Forces, and the Air Force equivalent. Your comments?

They will serve as they always did, on ship, as the bodyguards of the officer class.
 
The Army cannot replace the Marines.

each have different duties and tactics.

The Army is not going to take a needed shoreline and the Marines are not parachuting in.

We should learn from history that cutting certain training always leads to us working to catch up, which cost more lives and money

Amen!

The marines were not in the ETO but in the Pacific. The invasions in Europe including DDay were by army and the European pattern was an invasion then a long-long series of battles with divisions taking casualties over a long period of time.

The pattern in the Pacific was different, generally an invasion, then a short difficult battle and then preparation for the next invasion.
Many army divisions in Europe spent longer times in combat with many more casualties.
 
The Army cannot replace the Marines.

each have different duties and tactics.

The Army is not going to take a needed shoreline and the Marines are not parachuting in.

We should learn from history that cutting certain training always leads to us working to catch up, which cost more lives and money

:eusa_eh:

The whole premise of the article is that "taking a needed shoreline" is as ridiculous a military tactic as using horse cavalry to outflank an enemy column marching shoulder-to-shoulder armed with muzzel loaders.

There is no such thing as "catching up" with obsolescence.
 
The Army cannot replace the Marines.

each have different duties and tactics.

The Army is not going to take a needed shoreline and the Marines are not parachuting in.

We should learn from history that cutting certain training always leads to us working to catch up, which cost more lives and money

Amen!

The marines were not in the ETO but in the Pacific. The invasions in Europe including DDay were by army and the European pattern was an invasion then a long-long series of battles with divisions taking casualties over a long period of time.

The pattern in the Pacific was different, generally an invasion, then a short difficult battle and then preparation for the next invasion.
Many army divisions in Europe spent longer times in combat with many more casualties.

Red-Herring historical debate in meaningless.

The question is what will the Marine Corps do in the FUTURE?


WW II tactics are obsolete. Island hopping strategy would be ridiculous today.
 
15th post
MacArthur didn't have much idea about some things...WW2 in PNG, for example.

Kokoka Track - Never Saying Die

On the 29th August the Japanese broke through the Australian lines forcing the Australian Battalions to withdraw towards Alola and then to withdraw to Templeton's Crossing. This was followed by a further withdrawal to the major supply point of Myola.
News of the withdrawals reached Australia and the hierarchy expected the Japanese to soon claim victory. American General Douglas MacArthur announced that:

"the Australians have proven themselves unable to match the enemy in jungle fighting. Aggressive leadership is lacking."


#####

Ah yes, the teen etc volunteers.
Poorly trained, poorly armed...up against the crack Japanese army experienced in jungle fighting.

MacArthur-ilk's "aggressive leadership"...baaah!




Gotta work smarter than that if one wishes to survive;


Kokoka Track - Never Saying Die

Australian general Thomas Blamey fancied himself as a World War II answer to General John Monash. Like Monash, he wanted to push his hand into the enemy throat and keep it there so that it could never gain the ascendancy.
While such aggression proved useful for Monash to break the trench warfare of the Western Front, it was inappropriate for the jungle warfare of Papua New Guinea.
Had those under his command obeyed his orders, then it would have led to the futile infantry charges that Monash considered to be so wasteful. Adapting to the conditions, the Australian soldiers acted like Monash by ignoring inappropriate instructions.
Instead of charging at the enemy in a blitzkrieg approach, they changed the warfare to a running battle of attrition. The Japanese strength was sapped by keeping them on the offensive, lengthening their supply lines, and contaminating any food they captured. It was a strategy that won the Australians the battle. Although the Australians won, the victory came at the cost of Blamey's ego.

To find some self-esteem, on the 9th of November 1942, Blamey addressed the 21st Infantry Brigade on the parade ground and informed them that they had been beaten by inferior forces and that no soldier should be afraid to die. He then said that:

"it's the rabbit who runs who gets shot, not the man holding the gun."

Just as some of Blamey's battle strategies were ill conceived, it was an ill conceived idea to address men who had spent two months in jungle warfare and label them cowards. Not only did it fail to motivate soldiers or inspire respect for commanding officers, it amounted to a huge safety risk for Blamey. Many officers later said that Blamey was lucky to escape with his life.

When Blamey later visited the wounded in hospital, many nibbled lettuce, while wrinkling their nose in mock of him
:)

#####

God love em, they helped save those who were left in Australia from being Japanese laundry slaves, sex slaves, or worse.

The Kakoda Track defense was primarily by the Australian 39th Battalion a sort of militia unit. The Australian army was in Africa. After Kakoda the 39th was given a little reward, one company was given leave in Australia. The unit went on leave and not a one returned.
Not many know of the Kakoda Track nor of Buna nor of some of those early army battles to save Australia. It was a MacArthur show and he, as usual, took credit for all good things and the army units were never mentioned. The Marine Corps with its well oiled publicity machine gave credit to marines. MacArthur gave credit to MacArthur.
The Kakoda Track is one of the amazing feats in WWII as is Buna.
 

The marines were not in the ETO but in the Pacific. The invasions in Europe including DDay were by army and the European pattern was an invasion then a long-long series of battles with divisions taking casualties over a long period of time.

The pattern in the Pacific was different, generally an invasion, then a short difficult battle and then preparation for the next invasion.
Many army divisions in Europe spent longer times in combat with many more casualties.

Red-Herring historical debate in meaningless.

The question is what will the Marine Corps do in the FUTURE?


WW II tactics are obsolete. Island hopping strategy would be ridiculous today.

Some of the military runs and depends on its image for survival, the marine corps is one such unit. The tactics the marines used in WWII are still the basic image most Americans have of that branch, but new specialized units keep coming along in competition. The latest new-comer might be the navy seals. I wonder if these specialized units do indeed compete?
 
STFU, Whitehall.

(1) Truman cherished the Marines.

(2) MacArthur, a Republican of Republicans that makes Cruz look like a commie by comparison, was thrilled to get the provisional Marine force that helped save the Pusan perimeter.

A combined forces defense department makes sense in this incredible age of developing technology.

Maybe you need to look up the word "cherished" again. One of Truman's more famous quotes regarding the USMC after WW2 and after Marines shed so much blood in the Pacific "The Marine Corps is the Navy's police force and as long as I am president that is what they will remain". Ironically the "Navy's police force" bailed the timid bean counter out of the mess he made in Korea.
MacArthur actually thought he had the republican nomination locked up but Korean War Veterans put pressure on the republican party and they nominated Ike. Ever the vindictive petty a-hole, Mac ran on a third party ticket in the election hoping to syphon votes from the Eisenhower platform.

You need to study history, bub.

You have completely mischaracterized Truman's feelings about the Marines.

Yes, JUST LIKE I SAID, MacArthur was a Republican.

Do you just blab to blab

Are you basing your opinion on political loyalty? Read a freaking book. As a senator Truman was a vocal proponent of "unification" of the armed services which was code for three uniformed services, the Army, the Navy and the new Air Force. When he became president Truman pushed the unification issue and Marines were locked out of the debate. Marines were not even allowed at JCS meetings. Marshall and Eisenhower (a republican) were completely on board with Truman. JCS paper 1478 called for reducing the Marine Corps to military insignificance. After Marine Commendant Vandegrift testified before a Senate hearing into the issue the story hit the papers and the unification plan was ridiculed. Truman was angry and called the secretary of war and the secretary of the Navy to resurrect the plan but it failed. Truman later hissed "the Marine Corps has a propaganda machine that is almost equal to Stalin's".
 
The Army cannot replace the Marines.

each have different duties and tactics.

The Army is not going to take a needed shoreline and the Marines are not parachuting in.

We should learn from history that cutting certain training always leads to us working to catch up, which cost more lives and money

Amen!

The marines were not in the ETO but in the Pacific. The invasions in Europe including DDay were by army and the European pattern was an invasion then a long-long series of battles with divisions taking casualties over a long period of time.

The pattern in the Pacific was different, generally an invasion, then a short difficult battle and then preparation for the next invasion.
Many army divisions in Europe spent longer times in combat with many more casualties.

The main thing about the Pacific was that they were fighting to gain control of ISLANDS! You know, those things surrounded by water. :eusa_whistle:
 
Back
Top Bottom