I didn't want to piss in another thread where this was brought up so...

11b and 0311 are really equivalent jobs.  We have 5 "former or current...whatever" Marines in my ARMY infantry unit and none of them are "Hooah" Ranger types.  They are good Soldiers and everything but do you guys really think that Marine 0311 is the same as Army Rangers?  How so?

People on this board like to point out how easy Army BCT is vs Marine boot camp but every Marine and Soldier I talk to have nearly identical experiences.  The Marine training is longer but the Army's philosophy is to get most training at your first duty station (there are quite a few different types of Army infantry)...

ETA:  Sand Hill may not be Paris Island (I've never been there) but it sure as hell isn't Relaxin Jackson or Fort Leonardwood.

I respect both equally and though I am biased towards the Army my two good friends that are in the corps are infantry SAW gunners the same as myself...I fail to see much of a difference.

Flame away.

Quoted: I didn't want to piss in another thread where this was brought up so... 11b and 0311 are really equivalent jobs.  We have 5 "former or current...whatever" Marines in my ARMY infantry unit and none of them are "Hooah" Ranger types.  They are good Soldiers and everything but do you guys really think that Marine 0311 is the same as Army Rangers?  How so? People on this board like to point out how easy Army BCT is vs Marine boot camp but every Marine and Soldier I talk to have nearly identical experiences.  The Marine training is longer but the Army's philosophy is to get most training at your first duty station (there are quite a few different types of Army infantry)... ETA:  Sand Hill may not be Paris Island (I've never been there) but it sure as hell isn't Relaxin Jackson or Fort Leonardwood. I respect both equally and though I am biased towards the Army my two good friends that are in the corps are infantry SAW gunners the same as myself...I fail to see much of a difference. Flame away.

I went through Ft. LostintheWoods in Aug of '87.  While it wasn't the most difficult thing I have ever done, it wasn't a walk in the park either.  Not sure what your point is.

NO THEY ARE NOT!


Sua Sponte,
prib

Somebody needs validation.

Line infantry is line infantry. I was a Marine and retired a soldier (guard). It's everyone else that makes the Corps special IMHO. Take any random 500 Marines against any random 500 soldiers and throw them into combat. I'd bet on the Marines every time.

A very good freind of mine was a Paratrooper and said the same shit to me as posted by the OP. I asked if he wanted to put up a random sample of troops in a NTC type setting and even a Paratrooper had to admit that he would choose the Marines.

One of my NCOIC's in the Corps was a Sergeant supply pouge got off the bird in the Nam and took over a rifle squad. As a Sergeant of Marines he was expected to lead men. He did and was awarded several medals for the job he did. I would not expect the same from most of the pouge NCO's I met in the guard.

I wouldn't expect such leadership from the supply guys either I was speaking of purely among the infantry.  When I talk to my buddies in the corps their day to day life is nearly identical to mine as was our training.  Most of the weapons we train on are identical aswell.

I know a lot of guys in the guard (none infantry) but based upon the impression they left me the guard is the guard, active is active...you can't really compare the two.  Not knowing the guard unit or Marines you speak of I would have taken the Marines if for no other reason for the sake of them being active duty.

Quoted: Quoted: I didn't want to piss in another thread where this was brought up so... 11b and 0311 are really equivalent jobs.  We have 5 "former or current...whatever" Marines in my ARMY infantry unit and none of them are "Hooah" Ranger types.  They are good Soldiers and everything but do you guys really think that Marine 0311 is the same as Army Rangers?  How so? People on this board like to point out how easy Army BCT is vs Marine boot camp but every Marine and Soldier I talk to have nearly identical experiences.  The Marine training is longer but the Army's philosophy is to get most training at your first duty station (there are quite a few different types of Army infantry)... ETA:  Sand Hill may not be Paris Island (I've never been there) but it sure as hell isn't Relaxin Jackson or Fort Leonardwood. I respect both equally and though I am biased towards the Army my two good friends that are in the corps are infantry SAW gunners the same as myself...I fail to see much of a difference. Flame away. I went through Ft. LostintheWoods in Aug of '87.  While it wasn't the most difficult thing I have ever done, it wasn't a walk in the park either.  Not sure what your point is.

I was referring to the recent GD topics where there were quotes from the commander of Fort Leonardwood's BCT explaining how they were softening up BCT.  I wouldn't expect that my BCT would be nearly as hard as anything the Army had in the 1980s.  I am speaking of the current stuff.

Quoted: I wouldn't expect such leadership from the supply guys either I was speaking of purely among the infantry.  When I talk to my buddies in the corps their day to day life is nearly identical to mine as was our training.  Most of the weapons we train on are identical aswell. I know a lot of guys in the guard (none infantry) but based upon the impression they left me the guard is the guard, active is active...you can't really compare the two.  Not knowing the guard unit or Marines you speak of I would have taken the Marines if for no other reason for the sake of them being active duty.

I have taught basically all forms of armed forces in CQB training at Camp Lejeune. I would rate like this:

Well led Marine infantry
Dutch Marines
Poorly led Marine infantry
82nd Airborne
Pogues Marines or Army
Navy (whatever the security rate is)
The Marines who gaurded the Brig
JROTC kids
The Marine Band (god knows why some of them came to the training)
Jacksonville SWAT



This is just how they came across with ability to learn and listen in the class, follow mission objectives, and how they did at the end of the course.

Quoted: Somebody needs validation.

I had a choice of which branch to join, I believe I chose correctly.  I'm proud to be a part of the Army.

I just didn't understand why ARFCOM Kommandos dismiss the Army as a bunch of mere soldiers while constantly praising Marines.

IMO they both should be respected equally.  It's not like either branch isn't doing its part in the sandbox.

Quoted: Quoted: I wouldn't expect such leadership from the supply guys either I was speaking of purely among the infantry.  When I talk to my buddies in the corps their day to day life is nearly identical to mine as was our training.  Most of the weapons we train on are identical aswell. I know a lot of guys in the guard (none infantry) but based upon the impression they left me the guard is the guard, active is active...you can't really compare the two.  Not knowing the guard unit or Marines you speak of I would have taken the Marines if for no other reason for the sake of them being active duty. I have taught basically all forms of armed forces in CQB training at Camp Lejeune. I would rate like this: Well led Marine infantry Dutch Marines Poorly led Marine infantry 82nd Airborne Pogues Marines or Army Navy (whatever the security rate is) The Marines who gaurded the Brig JROTC kids The Marine Band (god knows why some of them came to the training) Jacksonville SWAT This is just how they came across with ability to learn and listen in the class, follow mission objectives, and how they did at the end of the course.

fair 'nuff.
Hopefully those were poorly led 82nd Airborne Soldiers...

Quoted: Quoted: I wouldn't expect such leadership from the supply guys either I was speaking of purely among the infantry.  When I talk to my buddies in the corps their day to day life is nearly identical to mine as was our training.  Most of the weapons we train on are identical aswell. I know a lot of guys in the guard (none infantry) but based upon the impression they left me the guard is the guard, active is active...you can't really compare the two.  Not knowing the guard unit or Marines you speak of I would have taken the Marines if for no other reason for the sake of them being active duty. I have taught basically all forms of armed forces in CQB training at Camp Lejeune. I would rate like this: Well led Marine infantry Dutch Marines Poorly led Marine infantry 82nd Airborne Pogues Marines or Army Navy (whatever the security rate is) The Marines who gaurded the Brig JROTC kids The Marine Band (god knows why some of them came to the training) Jacksonville SWAT This is just how they came across with ability to learn and listen in the class, follow mission objectives, and how they did at the end of the course.

High School ROTC over SWAT

I was Cav in the Guard not infantry, but many guys came from the 11B active duty side. I also never did one day in the active Army.

No flame on you or your question. You did see that I thought 0311~=11B.

That said remember that every Marine Inf. Bn. has a Squadron of Jets at their beck and call. Army is Red Leg  heavy vs the Corps though. Just that the Corp's doesn't have to suck Air Force Ass to get close air support.

Would I be afraid to into combat with an infantry company from either service? NO!

Would I be worried going into combat with a bunch of Pouges from the Army pressganged into an Infantry Company? YES!

Would I be worried about the same thing only Marine pouges? NO!

The mindset is different for Marines regardless of MOS. Hell the Corp's even have non 03's in the company. That might account for some of the mindset. Pouges rotate into and out of Infantry Companies in the Corp's.

Quoted: I didn't want to piss in another thread where this was brought up so... 11b and 0311 are really equivalent jobs.  We have 5 "former or current...whatever" Marines in my ARMY infantry unit and none of them are "Hooah" Ranger types.  They are good Soldiers and everything but do you guys really think that Marine 0311 is the same as Army Rangers?  How so? People on this board like to point out how easy Army BCT is vs Marine boot camp but every Marine and Soldier I talk to have nearly identical experiences.  The Marine training is longer but the Army's philosophy is to get most training at your first duty station (there are quite a few different types of Army infantry)... ETA:  Sand Hill may not be Paris Island (I've never been there) but it sure as hell isn't Relaxin Jackson or Fort Leonardwood. I respect both equally and though I am biased towards the Army my two good friends that are in the corps are infantry SAW gunners the same as myself...I fail to see much of a difference. Flame away.

I went to basic with a prior service Marine. A week before graduation i asked him the difference. He told me Parris Island and Benning's training require similar amounts of physically effort. A little more so in Parris Island he claimed. He did admit the mental was tougher at Sand Hill. Although we were part of an experimental training program and quickly had the reputation of "the poor bastards" by everyone else on Sand Hill. We got smoked when everyone else was sleeping. Everyone else was out on pass we were in the mud getting smoked again. When we were doing rifle qual and were supposed to be given some sleep and a more comfortable enviroment our DS's had a boot up our ass. They didn't give a shit about the scores. It did produce some damn squared away soldiers and i still don't get why they gave up un this type of training. We were the first and last company. Perhaps too many washouts.

As far as "Every Marine is Ranger qualified". What most Marines don't understand is the fact that Ranger school is one of the finest leadership courses the Military has to offer. It's really not the physical that makes it so demanding.

ETA: I have ran some MOUT stuff with a prior service Marine and Fallujah veteran as my team leader. He was very happy with our team. He did have a problem with some of the micro management Chain of Command that seems to be happening these days. He didn't deal with that shit in the Marines or so he says.

When I was in BCT we had a former Marine---well, he claimed to be-- I never believed him but when I got really close to calling him on the bullshit others sided with him.  Even there in Infantry OSUT a bunch of guys had the mindset that Marines > Uber Alles which kind of irritated me (why didn't they join the corps?).  What job did the former Marine have?

Of course, you guessed it.  He was a Scout Sniper with plenty of confirmed kills in the sandbox...yet it took him 2 tries to finally get a 26/40 to pass Basic Rifle Marksmanship (23/40 is passing, dunno what his first attempt was).  He blamed it on the M16A4 being a piece of shit.  "In the Corps we threw our A4s away for A2s...etc, etc."  Of course I had seen plenty of pictures of Marines using A4s in Iraq before I joined...also M68s are "piece of shit"...  I hit 33/40 with a clogged gas tube and no scout sniper training

I am delighted to have found out that 0 of nearly 20 18X "SF recruits" in my BCT platoon were selected.  They will all be 11Bs now.  That douche bag was one of them.

Quoted: I was Cav in the Guard not infantry, but many guys came from the 11B active duty side. I also never did one day in the active Army. No flame on you or your question. You did see that I thought 0311~=11B. That said remember that every Marine Inf. Bn. has a Squadron of Jets at their beck and call. Army is Red Leg  heavy vs the Corps though. Just that the Corp's doesn't have to suck Air Force Ass to get close air support. Would I be afraid to into combat with an infantry company from either service? NO! Would I be worried going into combat with a bunch of Pouges from the Army pressganged into an Infantry Company? YES! Would I be worried about the same thing only Marine pouges? NO! The mindset is different for Marines regardless of MOS. Hell the Corp's even have non 03's in the company. That might account for some of the mindset. Pouges rotate into and out of Infantry Companies in the Corp's.

When guys are due to ETS from here we always remind them that they'll be back recalled to active duty serving in the sandbox with a bunch of worthless National Guard pogues that suck at life and all things military if they don't reup...

I think we convinced one guy to reup even though they haven't to my knowledge called up any IRR infantry

Quoted: I am delighted to have found out that 0 of nearly 20 18X "SF recruits" in my BCT platoon were selected.  They will all be 11Bs now.

Don't like SF?

Quoted: Quoted: I am delighted to have found out that 0 of nearly 20 18X "SF recruits" in my BCT platoon were selected.  They will all be 11Bs now.   Don't like SF?

Hell yeah I like SF.  They are some badass guys that are really dedicated to protecting our country...doing much more than I am unfortunetly.

I didn't like the 18X guys in my platoon, that's all.  They held themselves above the 11Bs and often talked a lot of shit like they were already 18 series though most of them were dirt bags.  A few were decent guys that I hoped would succede but they all decided 11B was plenty for them and dropped 18X before they were done with BCT or had plans to drop it after airborne school.

Quoted: High School ROTC over SWAT

They were fat, stupid and jackasses.

We let them plan thier own hit once, thier plan was to burst into every single window/door in the building at once, one gut going in each way. They ended up shooting each other up........

They told us our scenarios were impossible to win, after the Marine pogues going through at the same time won most of them with little losses.

We have 1 almost impossible scenario that few people have won. Everyone always at least gets a team into the first room of the house, they all died outside.

God they sucked. Didnt listen to a word we said.



Highschool kids listened and applied, and so did ok.

have taught basically all forms of armed forces in CQB training at Camp Lejeune. I would rate like this: Well led Marine infantry Dutch Marines Poorly led Marine infantry 82nd Airborne Pogues Marines or Army Navy (whatever the security rate is) The Marines who gaurded the Brig JROTC kids The Marine Band (god knows why some of them came to the training) Jacksonville SWAT

Navy Security Rate is Master-At-Arms.  It used to be a much better rate, but was flooded after the War started and Navy lost many of the Marines that it was used to having and needed more organic force protection ability.  

MA's suffer (in my own personal, and soon to be unpopular opinion) from not having intrinsic unrestricted line officers to whom force protection is their job.  Instead, they usually get retreaded SWOs or aviators on detached duty.  Not a good idea.  Just having warrants and LDOs isn't enough.  

Military Bandmen are often assigned as the security element for Headquarters of whatever unit to which they are assigned.  For example, the Air Wing Band or Regimental Band would be the Wing's or Regt's security element, in addition to being a bandsman.

Like anything, ego is the enemy of effective training.  Listening becomes ability which is trained into skill.

I would take a platoon of Army Infantry against anyone... I was an Infantry Platoon Leader for a year in Iraq and wouldn't trade my Soldiers for anyone else.  Guys would do everything that was required and more, never complained one bit.  Well trained, you bet your ass they were.  Physically fit, that too.  

Rangers Lead the Way!

BTW, Ranger School is not even in the same league as any basic entry level training.  And Ranger Battalions are hands down the best Infantry in the world.  Never served in one, but knew quite a few guys in them.  My Ranger Buddy at Ranger School was 3rd Batt. and a platoon full of guys like him could take on anyone of equivalent force.  Guys don't know how to quit, are aggressive as hell, and are always volunteering to shoulder the heaviest load.

Quoted: Line infantry is line infantry. I was a Marine and retired a soldier (guard). It's everyone else that makes the Corps special IMHO. Take any random 500 Marines against any random 500 soldiers and throw them into combat. I'd bet on the Marines every time. A very good freind of mine was a Paratrooper and said the same shit to me as posted by the OP. I asked if he wanted to put up a random sample of troops in a NTC type setting and even a Paratrooper had to admit that he would choose the Marines. One of my NCOIC's in the Corps was a Sergeant supply pouge got off the bird in the Nam and took over a rifle squad. As a Sergeant of Marines he was expected to lead men. He did and was awarded several medals for the job he did. I would not expect the same from most of the pouge NCO's I met in the guard.

i believe the issue is that the army is massive compared to the marine corps.  a lot of support roles that the army fills for themselves are filled by the navy with the marines.

if you included a proportionate number of their navy support personnel in that 500 random marines you would come up with a similar result.

we require massive support roles in the army to maintain ourselves because we are such a large branch.  with a beauracracy this large comes plenty of red tape and extra pork. fact of life.   the army simply cannot put all of its soldiers through the same "every man is a rifleman" spiel because we are simply too big to effectively do so in a reasonable manner.

we also have a rather pogue-ish and large reservist and NG element that might contribute to the thought that the marines are somehow superior to the army.  not true.

 if you wish to compare marine fighting elements with army i would have to say line units are comparable.  im a tanker, and i worked with a bunch of marine tankers in fort knox (they are trained by the army) and we do almost everything the same.  i am attached to an infantry unit now and have a bunch of former marines here as well. they have told me that other than the fact that we dont focus as much on chin ups as the marines, everything is pretty much similar.

Quoted: Quoted: Line infantry is line infantry. I was a Marine and retired a soldier (guard). It's everyone else that makes the Corps special IMHO. Take any random 500 Marines against any random 500 soldiers and throw them into combat. I'd bet on the Marines every time. A very good freind of mine was a Paratrooper and said the same shit to me as posted by the OP. I asked if he wanted to put up a random sample of troops in a NTC type setting and even a Paratrooper had to admit that he would choose the Marines. One of my NCOIC's in the Corps was a Sergeant supply pouge got off the bird in the Nam and took over a rifle squad. As a Sergeant of Marines he was expected to lead men. He did and was awarded several medals for the job he did. I would not expect the same from most of the pouge NCO's I met in the guard. i believe the issue is that the army is massive compared to the marine corps.  a lot of support roles that the army fills for themselves are filled by the navy with the marines. if you included a proportionate number of their navy support personnel in that 500 random marines you would come up with a similar result. we require massive support roles in the army to maintain ourselves because we are such a large branch.  with a beauracracy this large comes plenty of red tape and extra pork. fact of life.   the army simply cannot put all of its soldiers through the same "every man is a rifleman" spiel because we are simply too big to effectively do so in a reasonable manner. we also have a rather pogue-ish and large reservist and NG element that might contribute to the thought that the marines are somehow superior to the army.  not true.  if you wish to compare marine fighting elements with army i would have to say line units are comparable.  im a tanker, and i worked with a bunch of marine tankers in fort knox (they are trained by the army) and we do almost everything the same.  i am attached to an infantry unit now and have a bunch of former marines here as well. they have told me that other than the fact that we dont focus as much on chin ups as the marines, everything is pretty much similar.

I'm trying to think of all the Navy personnel in a USMC unit.
You have the Doc.
You have Chaps and his enlisted aide.
And then you have what?

Quoted: have taught basically all forms of armed forces in CQB training at Camp Lejeune. I would rate like this: Well led Marine infantry Dutch Marines Poorly led Marine infantry 82nd Airborne Pogues Marines or Army Navy (whatever the security rate is) The Marines who gaurded the Brig JROTC kids The Marine Band (god knows why some of them came to the training) Jacksonville SWAT Navy Security Rate is Master-At-Arms.  It used to be a much better rate, but was flooded after the War started and Navy lost many of the Marines that it was used to having and needed more organic force protection ability.   MA's suffer (in my own personal, and soon to be unpopular opinion) from not having intrinsic unrestricted line officers to whom force protection is their job.  Instead, they usually get retreaded SWOs or aviators on detached duty.  Not a good idea.  Just having warrants and LDOs isn't enough.   Military Bandmen are often assigned as the security element for Headquarters of whatever unit to which they are assigned.  For example, the Air Wing Band or Regimental Band would be the Wing's or Regt's security element, in addition to being a bandsman. Like anything, ego is the enemy of effective training.  Listening becomes ability which is trained into skill.

I don't think your opinion is unpopular at all. It's very true in many ways. There are good SWOS that want to go there, but the SWO community isn't giving up those guys.

BTW, Ranger School is not even in the same league as any basic entry level training.  And Ranger Battalions are hands down the best Infantry in the world.  Never served in one, but knew quite a few guys in them.  My Ranger Buddy at Ranger School was 3rd Batt. and a platoon full of guys like him could take on anyone of equivalent force.  Guys don't know how to quit, are aggressive as hell, and are always volunteering to shoulder the heaviest load.

i am down the road from 3rd batt., i went for a 5 mile run on their track down by the airfield for PT this morning.   those guys are nuts....running in freezing weather at 6am with shorts and black t-shirts!  made me feel like a pogue with my army tracksuit on....

Quoted: I'm trying to think of all the Navy personnel in a USMC unit. You have the Doc. You have Chaps and his enlisted aide. And then you have what?

so the navy doesnt manage anything for the marines?  marines load themselves onto ships?  feed themselves?    pilot the ships whereever they go?  

Quoted: Quoted: I'm trying to think of all the Navy personnel in a USMC unit. You have the Doc. You have Chaps and his enlisted aide. And then you have what? so the navy doesnt manage anything for the marines?  marines load themselves onto ships?  feed themselves?    pilot the ships whereever they go?

The Marines do load and unload ships on their own; Navy is just there to make sure their ships don't heel, hog or sag. They feed themselves once ashore. And I suppose we should start including USAF loadmasters and pilots and USCGmen who manage Army ports in the equation?

I don't think your opinion is unpopular at all. It's very true in many ways. There are good SWOS that want to go there, but the SWO community isn't giving up those guys

It's pretty unpopular with Warrants, LDOs and CPOs.  They are very sensitive to the charges that they can't police themselves.  The MA community and the Riverine community are going to have short lives after the Long War is over, mostly because of a lack of upper level sponsership.  All that specialized training will live in the Reserve for about 10 years then dissappear.  See also, Reserve Diving.  Brown water isn't going to be the flavor of the month forever.

Sorry for highjacking your thread, 11Badass.

When I was in the grunts, I got most of my training at the unit level AFTER getting to the unit. There were classes and buildups.

We did boat raids, helo work, amtrac's, all of it. I only went through ITB, no follow on school as the army sends it's rangers too. We trained in it all and we did it all. At the unit level. A few of us were assigned to the the MSPF (martime special purpose force) and the sparrow hawk teams (we were busy doing that in Bosnia). Before we went to Somalia, we trained MOUT, etc...

I think from my past digs in the Marines, we did alot of the same stuff as teh rangers, but we didn't have to go to a school and obtain a badge. Leadership is bred from the time we stood on the yellow footsteps and is the focal point of anything Marine.

Thats my take on it.

Now I must say this, I was in Savannah GA down on River Street in the early 90's. St. Patty's day was going on, we did a 'hit' on the old customs building down ther in the middle of it all, afterward we party'd with some RTB guys and then later on, got our asses handed to us by a WHOLE BUNCH of RTB guys. But we inflicted some damage. We were out numbered 4:1

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm trying to think of all the Navy personnel in a USMC unit. You have the Doc. You have Chaps and his enlisted aide. And then you have what? so the navy doesnt manage anything for the marines?  marines load themselves onto ships?  feed themselves?    pilot the ships whereever they go?   The Marines do load and unload ships on their own; Navy is just there to make sure their ships don't heel, hog or sag. They feed themselves once ashore. And I suppose we should start including USAF loadmasters and pilots and USCGmen who manage Army ports in the equation?

Just admit you need the navy to survive If it wasn't for them you wouldn't have a ship to load and unload. That's the point he was making. Army pogues are the equivilent to your navy buds.

we do the AF like hookers, use them to get where we are going and forget them.  the marines, one the other hand (as noted by their name) LIVE on ships.  their are massive contigents of them floating around constantly, at all times. you cant say that all the navy does for you is show up with the ship.

Quoted: Quoted: I wouldn't expect such leadership from the supply guys either I was speaking of purely among the infantry.  When I talk to my buddies in the corps their day to day life is nearly identical to mine as was our training.  Most of the weapons we train on are identical aswell. I know a lot of guys in the guard (none infantry) but based upon the impression they left me the guard is the guard, active is active...you can't really compare the two.  Not knowing the guard unit or Marines you speak of I would have taken the Marines if for no other reason for the sake of them being active duty. I have taught basically all forms of armed forces in CQB training at Camp Lejeune. I would rate like this: Well led Marine infantry Dutch Marines Poorly led Marine infantry 82nd Airborne Pogues Marines or Army Navy (whatever the security rate is) The Marines who gaurded the Brig JROTC kids The Marine Band (god knows why some of them came to the training) Jacksonville SWAT This is just how they came across with ability to learn and listen in the class, follow mission objectives, and how they did at the end of the course.

as a former leader in 18th ABN, I'm interested to hear what you taught the 82d.....are you saying you ran a range which included a MOUT site?  Did you run a MOUT school/refresher course?  These threads comparing units always go in the wrong direction - the Marines have higher expectations: I believe they meet or exceed these expectations.  My Army buddies aren't as badass as Marines....if they were, they would have joined the Marines!!!!  ha.  The Marines have a "marine" or amphibious role.  The Army has an airborne role....I do compare our Rangers to Marine infantry, except marines  haven't had the leadership training you get in Ranger school....

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I wouldn't expect such leadership from the supply guys either I was speaking of purely among the infantry.  When I talk to my buddies in the corps their day to day life is nearly identical to mine as was our training.  Most of the weapons we train on are identical aswell. I know a lot of guys in the guard (none infantry) but based upon the impression they left me the guard is the guard, active is active...you can't really compare the two.  Not knowing the guard unit or Marines you speak of I would have taken the Marines if for no other reason for the sake of them being active duty. I have taught basically all forms of armed forces in CQB training at Camp Lejeune. I would rate like this: Well led Marine infantry Dutch Marines Poorly led Marine infantry 82nd Airborne Pogues Marines or Army Navy (whatever the security rate is) The Marines who gaurded the Brig JROTC kids The Marine Band (god knows why some of them came to the training) Jacksonville SWAT This is just how they came across with ability to learn and listen in the class, follow mission objectives, and how they did at the end of the course. as a former leader in 18th ABN, I'm interested to hear what you taught the 82d.....

If i remember correctly they weren't 11b's if that helps.

I've served with Rangers and I've served with ex-Marines...I'm not taking anything away from the professionalism or the capabilities of the average Marine when I say that wearing the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor does not put them in the same league as the Rangers.  

I went through BCT at WennieWood in 87.  They tortured us.  I know they did illegal and immoral things that no soldier should be put though unless he signed a waiver for such said training.  I do not think the Senior Drill or the 1sg knew what went on.

That said I was an NCO on a multiforce base and quickly gained respect for the Marines.  They had high regard for their NCO's and officers over said Army soldiers.  I never got respect like I got from the Marines.  That respect turns into motivation for the mission.

Go Marines!

Bob DAV

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm trying to think of all the Navy personnel in a USMC unit. You have the Doc. You have Chaps and his enlisted aide. And then you have what? so the navy doesnt manage anything for the marines?  marines load themselves onto ships?  feed themselves?    pilot the ships whereever they go?   The Marines do load and unload ships on their own; Navy is just there to make sure their ships don't heel, hog or sag. They feed themselves once ashore. And I suppose we should start including USAF loadmasters and pilots and USCGmen who manage Army ports in the equation? Just admit you need the navy to survive If it wasn't for them you wouldn't have a ship to load and unload. That's the point he was making. Army pogues are the equivilent to your navy buds.

I guess you don't know.
I'm Navy, not USMC.

The point is this thread is infantry vs infantry. Not support types. However, if you want to include the Navy in the USMC's equation then you need to include NG and USAF in the Army equation.

Quoted: we do the AF like hookers, use them to get where we are going and forget them.  the marines, one the other hand (as noted by their name) LIVE on ships.  their are massive contigents of them floating around constantly, at all times. you cant say that all the navy does for you is show up with the ship.

The Navy does for the USMC just what the USAF does for the Army. Deliver them to the battle zone. The Navy operates the ships and the landing craft. The USMC has their own logistical trail.

BTW, and FYI, I'm Navy not USMC, so I am familiar with the services we do and do not provide. Your experience with the Navy/Marine team consists of what exactly?

If Marine training is equal to Ranger Training why do the Marines send there guys to Ft Benning for Ranger School????

Quoted: as a former leader in 18th ABN, I'm interested to hear what you taught the 82d.....are you saying you ran a range which included a MOUT site?  Did you run a MOUT school/refresher course?  These threads comparing units always go in the wrong direction - the Marines have higher expectations: I believe they meet or exceed these expectations.  My Army buddies aren't as badass as Marines....if they were, they would have joined the Marines!!!!  ha.  The Marines have a "marine" or amphibious role.  The Army has an airborne role....I do compare our Rangers to Marine infantry, except marines  haven't had the leadership training you get in Ranger school....

The course I taught was a 1 week MOUT course, first couple of days are classes and prac app, then last 2 days are applying what you learned clearing buildings with simunitions.

I liked teaching the 82nd, they had good moral and seemed to want to learn, no major discipline problems etc.

As for leadership, it was lacking alot more on small unit levels than I was used to in Marines, and the officer/enlisted were on alot friendlier terms. For small unit leadership I mean that a fireteam leader (I have no idea what you guys call it) would not like to step up and take charge of a situation, which is crucial in MOUT, and would instead look to higher for guidance, causes wayyyy too much delay. The higher up you got in the chain of command, the much better the leadership was, but the small unit leadership wasnt up to par with Marines. You take a fireteam of Marines and someone will hop up and start leading. (except for the brig guys and band )


Most were not infantry, I think 1 or 2 sqauds out of the group were, and they were dispersed around I believe.


Overall they were pretty good to teach, not the best, definitaly not the worst.


Archive of the convoy training they did later that week.
archive.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=450652

Quoted: Quoted: we do the AF like hookers, use them to get where we are going and forget them.  the marines, one the other hand (as noted by their name) LIVE on ships.  their are massive contigents of them floating around constantly, at all times. you cant say that all the navy does for you is show up with the ship. The Navy does for the USMC just what the USAF does for the Army. Deliver them to the battle zone. The Navy operates the ships and the landing craft. The USMC has their own logistical trail. BTW, and FYI, I'm Navy not USMC, so I am familiar with the services we do and do not provide. Your experience with the Navy/Marine team consists of what exactly?

i am army, i dont claim to have much experience with army/navy.  what i do know is that while the AF "delivers us to the battle zone", the marines must have been on their way for the past 200 years, because they RESIDE on ships.  there are contingents of marines afloat at all times, there arent army guys flying all over the place living and sleeping on planes for the heck of it.  you act as if marines only get on a ship when they have picked a destination and get off when they are there.  if you are navy you know thats not the case, as it is with us.

the relationship between navy/marines is WAY more intricate than that of army/AF.  

Quoted: I've served with Rangers and I've served with ex-Marines...I'm not taking anything away from the professionalism or the capabilities of the average Marine when I say that wearing the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor does not put them in the same league as the Rangers.

On another note, we had a guy who was an ex-ranger go through SOI with me and he was a complete shitball. In some cases its really the person and not the branch at all.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: we do the AF like hookers, use them to get where we are going and forget them.  the marines, one the other hand (as noted by their name) LIVE on ships.  their are massive contigents of them floating around constantly, at all times. you cant say that all the navy does for you is show up with the ship. The Navy does for the USMC just what the USAF does for the Army. Deliver them to the battle zone. The Navy operates the ships and the landing craft. The USMC has their own logistical trail. BTW, and FYI, I'm Navy not USMC, so I am familiar with the services we do and do not provide. Your experience with the Navy/Marine team consists of what exactly? i am army, i dont claim to have much experience with army/navy.  what i do know is that while the AF "delivers us to the battle zone", the marines must have been on their way for the past 200 years, because they RESIDE on ships.  there are contingents of marines afloat at all times, there arent army guys flying all over the place living and sleeping on planes for the heck of it.  you act as if marines only get on a ship when they have picked a destination and get off when they are there.  if you are navy you know thats not the case, as it is with us. the relationship between navy/marines is WAY more intricate than that of army/AF.

That is because Marines operate FROM ships. And yes we do feed them while they are onboard. However, that is not the point. The Marines don't fight the ships, the Navy does. The Marines go ashore to fight. Once they leave, the ship is a wharehouse. Sometimes it isn't even that. They Marines have to take logistical capabilities WITH them when they go. There is no going back to the ship to eat or sleep. Just as there is no going back to the aircraft, flying back to the US to get some chow.


The difference between the Army/USAF and the Navy/USMC is we are out there everyday ready to respond to a contingency. The Army has units ready to deploy as well, but ships take longer to get on location than an aircraft does. So we have to take Marines onboard and sail in the vicinity of likely trouble spots.

It doesn't change the fact the ships, like the aircraft, are just a mode of transportation.

You'd think a person with no experience in such matter would defer to the person who does.

ETA: A ship's crew resides on a ship. The ship's crew takes on Marines for the period of a deployment. The Marines do not reside on a ship as they are not ship's company. A ship does not have a designated Marine unit that is always onboard.

Quoted: [A ship's crew resides on a ship. The ship's crew takes on Marines for the period of a deployment. The Marines do not reside on a ship as they are not ship's company. A ship does not have a designated Marine unit that is always onboard.

One time I rode around on two AEGIS cruisers for a month the Port Royal and Phillipine Sea. They made us sleep up in the radar room behind the big panels, think I have cancer from it?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Line infantry is line infantry. I was a Marine and retired a soldier (guard). It's everyone else that makes the Corps special IMHO. Take any random 500 Marines against any random 500 soldiers and throw them into combat. I'd bet on the Marines every time. A very good freind of mine was a Paratrooper and said the same shit to me as posted by the OP. I asked if he wanted to put up a random sample of troops in a NTC type setting and even a Paratrooper had to admit that he would choose the Marines. One of my NCOIC's in the Corps was a Sergeant supply pouge got off the bird in the Nam and took over a rifle squad. As a Sergeant of Marines he was expected to lead men. He did and was awarded several medals for the job he did. I would not expect the same from most of the pouge NCO's I met in the guard. i believe the issue is that the army is massive compared to the marine corps.  a lot of support roles that the army fills for themselves are filled by the navy with the marines. if you included a proportionate number of their navy support personnel in that 500 random marines you would come up with a similar result. we require massive support roles in the army to maintain ourselves because we are such a large branch.  with a beauracracy this large comes plenty of red tape and extra pork. fact of life.   the army simply cannot put all of its soldiers through the same "every man is a rifleman" spiel because we are simply too big to effectively do so in a reasonable manner. we also have a rather pogue-ish and large reservist and NG element that might contribute to the thought that the marines are somehow superior to the army.  not true.  if you wish to compare marine fighting elements with army i would have to say line units are comparable.  im a tanker, and i worked with a bunch of marine tankers in fort knox (they are trained by the army) and we do almost everything the same.  i am attached to an infantry unit now and have a bunch of former marines here as well. they have told me that other than the fact that we dont focus as much on chin ups as the marines, everything is pretty much similar. I'm trying to think of all the Navy personnel in a USMC unit. You have the Doc. You have Chaps and his enlisted aide. And then you have what?

Dentists?

Quoted: Quoted: I'm trying to think of all the Navy personnel in a USMC unit. You have the Doc. You have Chaps and his enlisted aide. And then you have what? so the navy doesnt manage anything for the marines?  marines load themselves onto ships?  feed themselves?    pilot the ships whereever they go?

Just like Army C5a's and C17's.......Oh wait they are Air Force.

Quoted: I just didn't understand why ARFCOM Kommandos dismiss the Army as a bunch of mere soldiers while constantly praising Marines.

History would seem to be against you, sir.

Kasserine Pass would be a good example. Korea would be yet another example in general terms, retreating from the Chinese would be a specific one where they abandoned their wounded & stood by as the Chinese shot the wounded...............      

While the US Army certainly has many deserved accolades (D-Day, Battle of the Bulge, Bataan Death March, etc.), the measuring stick would seem to be which ones have their dicks caught in the wringer & shit their bed the most, IMO.

Could be as well the Army has more fuck-ups because it's bigger than the Corps? Could be a lot of things, I'll allow the smart ones to debate that one.............    

Quoted: If Marine training is equal to Ranger Training why do the Marines send there guys to Ft Benning for Ranger School????

Everyone needs a break now & then..........................    

Seriously, it's for the jump school. USMC doesn't run its own jump school, unless that's changed...............

Also, keep in mind that the old refrain about 1 Marine = 1 Ranger is normally attributed to mean 1 Marine Grunt, not one Marine REMF, IMO.............      

I spent almost three years in Vietnam and observed both line Army and Marines in action.  I could hardly tell the difference in competency in the field.  

The Army combat arms and Marines all come from the same pool of motivated young American men.  The Marines have a better basic training program but by the time an Army 11B is deployed in combat he is well disciplined, very well trained and usually very well led.  The elite Army units are very well motivated and competent.

I agree with an earlier poster that the Rangers are probably the best infantry in the world.  

I think we all get hung up on the term "best".

For instance I think the 3rd US Army Infantry Division can lay the claim to being the "best" infantry division in the world after their excellent advance against Baghdad.

We can have all this inter service rivalry we want but we will never know for sure who is the best because we will never go up against one another.  We are all on the same team.  Some of us are quarterbacks and others are linemen.  We all work together to win.

Thanks for all of the input guys.  I just want to point out that Rangers are part of SOCOM as in they are the premier "elite" light infantry force.  They train to deploy from parachute, helicopter (air assault/airborne) and just all around light infantry roles.  They have an amazing budget for the size of unit that it is...I don't see the Marines getting that kind of training except for small specialized units like force recon and whatever their new socom unit is called...

IMO Marine light infantry would be better compaired to 101st, 82nd, 10th Mountain, 25th ID (light portion), and the like units...NOT the 1 Regiment worth of "the best of the best 11Bs."

Now I'm off to do what infantry does best...pick up the slack for the pogues.  Some general somewhere decided that it would be best for half the 11Bs in Korea to run pogueish evacuation drills because the pogues are too pogue to do it correctly...at least I get to leave this shithole of a camp for the next few days.


Some of my buddies and I have decided that our plane on the way to Korea may have crashed and we all may have died...we could be in hell right now.  We just don't know it.  The only way to be sure that I am still alive is when March roles around and my plane leaves this Peninsula.

That's motivation.

Hooah

ETA:  If there is a hell, everyone there wears an IBA.  Always

No ARFCOM for week...

I go back a bit farther than most of you. I did my BCT in 1967 in Ft. Jackson SC. Most of our training cadre was good, my Platoon Sgt in particular was great. He was the Army bayonet poster boy - we were surprised to see one of the training films depicting him in action. He was as tough as he was fair. He had his first combat experience in Korea. Name was Tomlin - damn fine soldier. Anyway, they were pretty concerned that all of us could fight and operate in small unit combat, so we were trained that way. The training was very physical, sometimes with 5-6 mile marches from distant ranges.

There was a lot of emphasis on bayonet, especially bayonet, and H2H.  Live fire was also emphasized, in particular squad and platoon sized assault and defense. We were not trained for combat in Vietnam, specifically, but for general terrain, taking hill positions and repelling counter attacks from numerically superior forces.

My later training took me into the intel services. I was at a few multi-serivce facilities. In one, I had the honor of getting to know a Dutchman that was in the Army Special Forces, an E-7. He had been with the Dutch Marines and moved to the US, joined the Army and fast-tracked to SF. There were a number of SF guys, mostly e-6 & E-7 on rotation from 'Nam. If I had not already been pre-assigned to an elite unit, I would have done my damnedest to get into SF. Great guys, don't impress with guts & glory, just downright smart, unassuming and highly competent soldiers.

I have come to the conclusion that it is not always the specific service or organization within the service that makes the difference, but the way a unit is run and the way its people bond. Sure, one branch of service may have a more solid history and tradition, but it is often the unit that makes the difference.

Finally - back then, the draft was the big supplier of troops. I was one of the few enlistees in my BCT unit - in my final destination unit, we were all highly vetted volunteers. The Marines did not use the draft, except in the later stages of 'Nam. I never met a draftee Marine. The Marines had more spirit because they wanted to be Marines. The Army BCT mix was more like someone used big shovel and scooped a section off of some street - a cross section of Americana, minus all the well-to-do guys that were fast-tracked through officer programs.

F