@CWO:
I think there is a modern perception that the Navy and Marine Corps won the war in the Pacific largely on their own…This is simply not the case.
US Army had 22 divisions in the Pacific compared to 6 Marine divisions.
You’re absolutely right. Marines were and are used to establish the beachheads so that the superior numbers and equipment the Army could bring to bear wore down the Japanese.
We are the Marine Corps, by definition 2 or more Divisions. I agree that Marines have been made into some Super Human war machines in the popular imagination. Being one, I know the reality. It’s not easy becoming one but popular perception is above and beyond reality. Just look at the games and TV representations. Our promotion dept does a good job promoting our worth because many times in our history, we have come under the gun for disbandment and it was popular support that kept us in existence. Our rep is part real and part self promotion but all necessary for self preservation. My grandfather fought as part of the US Army when the Phillipines were a US territory in WW2. It was the Army that bore the brunt of the Japanese invasion forces. The rivalry between the Marines and Army are simply because of all the services, we are most alike. Friendly but a rivalry none the less.
Semper Fi
You’re absolutely right. Marines were and are used to establish the beachheads so that the superior numbers and equipment the Army could bring to bear wore down the Japanese.
We are the Marine Corps, by definition 2 or more Divisions. I agree that Marines have been made into some Super Human war machines in the popular imagination. Being one, I know the reality. It’s not easy becoming one but popular perception is above and beyond reality. Just look at the games and TV representations. Our promotion dept does a good job promoting our worth because many times in our history, we have come under the gun for disbandment and it was popular support that kept us in existence. Our rep is part real and part self promotion but all necessary for self preservation. My grandfather fought as part of the US Army when the Phillipines were a US territory in WW2. It was the Army that bore the brunt of the Japanese invasion forces. The rivalry between the Marines and Army are simply because of all the services, we are most alike. Friendly but a rivalry none the less.Semper Fi
No worries devil dog. This dog face has nothing but respect for the Corps. Even if I do like to give them sh!t every now and again. I proudly wear a 1st Marine Division combat patch that was awarded to soldiers like myself that were assigned directly to Marine task forces fighting side by side in Fallujah and in Ramadi. We sweated and bled over the same ground. We covered each other and came to each others aid when necessary. I love working with you guys because I know I’m dealing with professionals, even if you guys are self propelled sand bags lol. Semper Fi
PS… it doesn’t matter what we say, the finest human beings out of all us grunts are the medics and corpsman!
The rivalry between the Marines and Army are simply because of all the services, we are most alike. Friendly but a rivalry none the less.
Ultimately, the proof that an interservice rivalry is friendly and constructive can be seen when, in combat, the two rival services both shoot at the same enemy rather than each other. (At least as far as the real bullets are concerned. Non-lethal taunts are exempted from this principle.) A cornerstone principle of free-market economics is that competition between businesses is good for the consumer, so by analogy a bit of healthy interservice rivalry is probably beneficial in a similar way to the nation that these services defend.
It’s also my understanding that the US Army and the USMC have abilities that complement each other, with an overlap zone of common territory: the USMC is better suited to roles in which a small-to-medium sized rapid-reaction force is needed at short notice in odd corners of the world, while the US Army (which has more stuff but is slower to deploy) is on the whole better suited to conducting sustained-duration and/or large-scale operations. At least that’s the impression I have, from my limited perspective as a civilian.
I would say you’re absolutely right CWO. We do complement each other. I see it more as a brotherly relationship…we can beat the hell out of each other all we want, but if anyone else tries to, we’ll go to hell and back to make sure they regret that decision.
I would say you’re absolutely right CWO. We do complement each other. I see it more as a brotherly relationship…we can beat the hell out of each other all we want, but if anyone else tries to, we’ll go to hell and back to make sure they regret that decision.
One could even say (upcoming pun alert) that these two services often complement each other but rarely compliment each other.
@CWO:
I would say you’re absolutely right CWO. We do complement each other. I see it more as a brotherly relationship…we can beat the hell out of each other all we want, but if anyone else tries to, we’ll go to hell and back to make sure they regret that decision.
One could even say (upcoming pun alert) that these two services often complement each other but rarely compliment each other.
:-D Now that’s a pun I can get behind! Just for the ben-e-fit of my Devil Dog breth-r-en, I try to break down the words with more than two syl-lab-les! Otherwise you might invoke a MARINE SMASH!
Otherwise you might invoke a MARINE SMASH!
I’ve never come across that term, which sounds intriguing – could you define it?
At any rate, the topic of inter-service ribbing reminds me of the old joke about a couple who goes to see a marriage counselor. The counselor asks, “What seems to be the problem?” The wife answers, “My husband and I can never agree on anything.” The husband retorts, “That’s not true.”
