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 ...
He’s retired.
I didn’t know this.
This is interesting. Thanks for that.
Technically he is right. But he is not mentioning the Corps sits on ships right off the coast and are flown in by Osprey’s and helos. So yea, light air cavalry. Pre-deployed to hot spots and ready for anything.
Like the northern coast of France?
O M G...Why are the Marines so insecure?
Trump loves the Marines. They aren’t going anywhere.
I mean, they are not Paratroopers, but they are excellent at what they do.
News flash:
There has always been a strong current of hatred for the USMC in the US Army.
Oh, heck no. The only service that takes order from the president!
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.”
He says that like it’s a bad thing.
Semper Fi.
L
I started my military career in the Marines (served four years active) then joined the Army National guard(served seventeen years with a few deployments) and this DevilDogs assessment is spot on. The only thing I would add is the Army has a ton more money. Before 9/11 the guard had old hand me down equipment. A few years after 9/11 almost every unit had brand new equipment and during the train up to our deployments they handed out new equipment like they were Santa Clause.
When people would ask me what’s the difference between the two I’d always answer like this guy did, but I’d also give this example.
Say the Army and the Marines are given a hill to take. The Marines may have no or little artillery or air support and even if they did have it they might just go take the hill to save that support for another battle. They will take that hill.
The Army on the other hand will fire everything they got at that hill and then take it. They will suffer fewer casualties than the Marines. However, if there comes a time they have to take a hill without support they will suffer much more casualties than a Marin unit.
I agree, and it got worse after OEF/OIF. I saw O4s and O5s with nothing but personal awards and War on Terror Service medals. Yet they would have NAMs and COMs with one or two stars. They are all little politicians jockeying for promotions and assignments inside the Beltway. Worse thing in the world is to get a new CO out of DC who is punching his ticket for a star. They are a$$holes and treat their people like $hit. Even the former warfighters coming out of the Pentagon are generally jerks.
It all boils down to leadership in the end.
Well, in Desert Storm we couldn't do the amphibious operation as we couldn't get the mines cleared IIRC.
I do wonder how many amphibious assaults we would make in the next war.
As an Army veteran I would just like to say, "STFU dumbass"!
My high school history teacher was infantry in Patton’s 3rd Army in WWII. I knew he was a WWII veteran before I got into his class, but I didn’t know what he did. I asked him one day if he had been in the USMC. He said “no, I wasn’t trained for combat.”
Hopefully none since it is likely to be with China. Never get involved in a land war in Asia.......
He reminds me of Dwight D. Eisenhower during WWII who was absolutely against any Marines serving in the ETO. Considering our entry into the WWII ETO was comprised of landings at Casablanca and Oran ( Operation Torch,) followed by landings at Sicily, then Italy, followed by D-Day in Normandy then Southern France, it seems to me that the Army could have used the Marine’s expertise, but then Montgomery was calling the shots while Eisenhower was playing politics. Thank God for Patton!!!!!He was the closest thing to a Marine.
There should only be an Air Force.
When somebody gets out of line, nuke ‘em.
The USMC doesn’t carry nearly as many staff pogues.
An example: Many years back I was working on a reconnaissance system that was used by both The USAF and the USMC. A USAF Two star general came once to inspect our work progress. He brought 35 staff with him in a USAF plane. Three weeks later a USMC Brigadier General showed up, by himself, in a rental car to do the same thing. He flew commercial. Example abound.
Wouldnt that just be so speeecial and conveeeenient for the commie leftist Bolsheviks (AKA Democrat party/ AKA Demcheviks)? I mean how can you possibly do a succesful coup and overturn the constitution with those mean old marines in your way!
Agree with you there. I trained with the 82nd Airborne and they had the same level of discipline and espirit de corps that I saw in the Marines. I assumed the other high speed units in the Army are the same. The difference though is that the entire Marine Corps has that level of espirit de corps and discipline, even the POGS.
I have to ask those Marines in ranger school, did they actually quit or did they wash out? I have a hard time believing Marines would quit a course, especially an army one. Too much pride to do that.
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.