Posted on 08/04/2005 5:53:50 AM PDT by Jarhead1957
i don't know about everyone else, but my frind is in 1st cav in the army, his (whatever grouping platoon, squad, not sure) was only stationed for 6 months there.
There are exceptions. I'm just going by what I know.
3rd Brigade Deploys
2/4/2005 3:01:10 PM
Approximately 2,700 Soldiers with the 3rd Brigade, 1st Armored Division deployed this week to Iraq.
This is the brigade's second deployment in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. The brigade's first rotation was from March 2003 to April 2004.
During this deployment, the 3rd Bde will be attached to the 3rd Infantry Division as they continue the fight against terrorism. The brigade is expected to be deployed for approximately one year.
Currently, almost 4,300 active duty Soldiers from Fort Riley are deployed to Iraq supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom.
You claimed, incorrectly, that no Marines served in Europe. You're wrong, so admit it and stop trying to deflect the verifiable refutation of your false statement. It's very telling of your lack of character and integrity in failing to admit that you are wrong.
A DIFFERENT WAR: Marines in Europe and North Africa
It's not posted in full on the net and you and I both know that you don't possess the initiative to have previously obtained a copy. Running your ignorant mouth takes much less effort.
So reluctant that I, not you, provided the designation of the Army unit that replaced Puller's Regiment. That Regiment had suffered high casualties, the highest in Marine Corps history. There's a night and day difference between that and being relieved for cause for timidly engaging the enemy.
Actually what I said was: Hey tell us about all those great Marine victories in Europe in WWII and in the Civil War Back in post 18. If your reading comprehension is not up to standard, don't blame me. Obviously, I read your link-otherwise how would I have known about the Marine who served as a combat correspondent which I referred to in Post 92-go read it for yourself.
If there was any substance to it you would have quoted it here instead of blustering. As I said, it deals almost exclusively with shipboard detachments, staff duty and training-no great victories noted. Your attempt to bluster your way through it reveals that you suffer from a pride so fragile and prickly that any revelation of the reality of the Army's combat history as compared to the Marine Corps is more than you can bear. Too bad for you.
I suppose you think it a virtue that Rupertus wasted the lives of his men. You have consistently shown that you refuse to acknowledge that the Marines have any faults while taking every opportunity to point out any that you know of on the part of the Army. Don't be shocked that I reply.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.