Memo To Col. Douglas Macgregor:
Click the Pic
Posted on 11/16/2020 1:40:52 PM PST by RomanSoldier19
Retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor, newly-appointed as a senior adviser at the Pentagon, has a track record of making controversial statements. But his most provocative of all might be a proposal to do away with the U.S. Marine Corps.
In a 2012 opinion piece for Time Magazine, Macgregor, a decorated veteran of the Gulf War, argued that the Corps was living on its past glories and was unsuited for combat on today's battlefield, with the possible exception for pushover enemies.
He went further, too, suggesting the acronym "USMC" should really stand for "Under-utilized Superfluous Military Capability."
"Most of today's Marine force consists of airmobile light infantry," Macgregor wrote. "This Marine force is designed for use in the developing world against incapable opponents from Haiti to Fiji, but not much else."
(Excerpt) Read more at military.com ...
This does not bode well for the new SecDef. If he has people like this trailing in his wake, I have no use for him.
It wasn't just the thought that the USMC is superfluous, it is the completely offensive way he has chosen to make his point that highlights who he is.
He reminds me of General Edward Almond from the Korean War.
If you know what I mean.
There's also this: "He has also criticized European countries for being too welcoming to "Muslim invaders."
I'm a-thinkin' this MacGregor guy just likes to say stuff to see what happens.
I wonder if he was one of those people who “almost joined the Marines”... But went Army instead...
The real reason is that the effectiveness of the Marines makes the Army look somewhat shabby by comparison. In years past the Marines remained tough and effective while Army standards collapsed during peace time. The Korean War was a prime example. The Marines were used to stop up holes in the defense while the poorly trained US Army troops were incapable of assembling their Garands so that they could fire them.
That’s always why the Army has tried from time to time to absorb the Marines. Much like the public schools try to “deal with” the private schools by seeking to take them over. It’s too embarrassing.
The Army has been trying to get rid of the Marines for a couple of hundred years. So far, nice try, but no cigar.
Hmmm. Interesting.
Were the “Japs” of WWII incapable opponents??
“ Why is this guy still in the US military?”
************
He not. He’s retired.
The marine corps won’t be disbanded. Too many USMC vets for that to happen.
Memo To Col. Douglas Macgregor:
Click the Pic
That depends... Marines used to be the tool you reached for when you absolutely needed someone sh*t broken.
Let us get back to that and those “redundancy” arguments won’t hold water any more.
.but the reason they exist is for amphibious landings on hostile terrain.
How many amphibious landings have the Marines made in the last 50 years?
Except that the Marines cost far less than comparable Army units.
Sheesh.
5.56mm
“Army”.
ALL you need to know.
No argument. I can think of one on a scale that would justify the mission, although I welcome anyone who can speak to the contrary.
On the flip side, the Army has a whole Airborne division...and we have not done any real airborne operation at battalion or larger since probably Panama.
I know the 82nd jumped into Iraq up in the Mosul area early on, but there is debate on whether they real “needed” to, or just “wanted” to.
Gee a 2012 opinion.
Embassy guards and they are on every surface ship also.
How many of our enemies want them to?
Pretty sure they answer to the Navy. But if that is true, that would be interesting.
On a side note, Special Operations Detachment Delta (aka Delta force) is also a “national asset”
From Quora:
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-the-Marines-and-the-Army
What is the difference between the Marines and the Army?
55 Answers
Patrick Lee Cox, works at U.S. Army
Answered August 14, 2017 · Upvoted by Steven Southam Sr., former Corporal at U.S. Marine Corps (1976-1982)
After having served in the Marines from 2002 to 2006 and then Nebraska National Guard from 2007 to 2012 and having been on two deployments with the Marines and one with the National Guard I have seen first hand only a little bit of what both services are completely like.
The Marines are badass, they hold to a sense of self discipline and commitment to completing the mission that I rarely saw from the army. You will make mistakes and you will be punished for them in the Marine Corps that’s just how it is so learn to embrace the suck.
This is not to say that the Army does not behave in a similar manner but to the degree that Marines do it you would have to at least become an army ranger.
Unfortunately Marines do not facilitate critical thinking skills very well. That’s not to say that Marines aren’t smart I have never met more competent warfighters and per capita you would be hard-pressed to find a better fighting force. But their mindset is more focused on obeying instructions and completing the mission then thinking about how best that mission is accomplished.
If you want to join the Marines and solve problems become an officer. If you don’t want to think too much about what you’re doing while killing bodies and making the grass grow with your enemies blood then join the Marine Corps Infantry. If you’re just looking for a little prestige so that women will finally look at you you can join the Marines and be a POG (People Other than Grunts). You’ll get made fun of by the Infantry but your life won’t suck as bad and you’ll still look good enough in those dress blues to pull some decent ass. Almost inevitably if you join the Marines you will become an insufferable prick and you should know that going into it. The Marines will desensitize you to violence and conflict which makes you incompatible with civilized society and you’re going to have to learn to deal with that also.
As for the Army most of my experience was with the National Guard and the Army units I dealt with while I was deployed with my guard unit. The Army’s a bigger animal so when it comes to units it’s kind of a mixed bag. In the National Guard individuals are smarter and ask more difficult questions of their chain of command which isn’t conducive to getting things done in a combat situation or anywhere for that matter so sometimes that will cause things to stagnate. As far as standing army units I’ve seen some pretty good ones and I’ve seen some really bad ones, the thing that always seems to ruin a unit is lack of discipline. I’ve seen Army units Fall Apart because their leadership didn’t have the heart to punish soldiers acting out of line. I can’t say that as a generality and I know it’s not always true of the army but it does seem that compared to the Marines they do not exercise the same degree of discipline.
Still, with what the Army normally does not as much discipline is exactly required. Most of the army (aside from the Infantry) has it pretty easy from what I’ve seen, especially compared to my time in the Marines. However deployments will be longer. My first two deployments were with the Marines and they were only about seven months a piece. But with the National Guard I did one deployment that lasted a little over a year. One thing that I have seen the Army consistently do better than the Marines is focus on encouraging the individual. In the Marine Corps you succeed and fail on your own Merit and everything is a highly competitive race. The Army tends to be more collaborative in its efforts.
So there you have it, the Marines are a bunch of bloodthirsty crayon eating assholes who will beat the shit out of you for making fun of them because you think crayons don’t have flavor.
And the army is kind of a mixed bag that will most likely just try to get the job done so they can relax.
Which one’s better than the other?
That depends on what you’re trying to get out of it.
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.
