Marines slowly replacing the Army?

Question

Now, before my question gets totally railroaded and I get bombarded with insults, please consider the question.

If you look at history, the Army has always been a MUCH larger force than the Marines, in fact, several hundreds of times larger. Also, the Marines did not play any major roles in combat until World War 1, but since, have grown tremendously in size and capability, to the point where the Corps is now half the size of the Army. Also, the popular opinion in today's youth is that the Marine Corps is "cooler" and tougher, and everyone wants to be a Marine. Does anyone else think the Army will get replaced in the future?

Answer 1

OH, WELL ITS ALL ABOUT ME AND MY OIL BUDDIES ANYWAYS.

Answer 2

no. although their jobs overlap at times, they still have different purposes and are used for different situations. if you need something invaded overnight, call the marines. if you're thinking long term occupation, bring in the soldiers. the marines are the first to take up arms and fight. then the soldiers come in and work on the things that might take a little more strategic thinking and things that realistically can't be fixed in a quick month or two. the corps has always been smaller and i think it always will be. they have a rep of being much more selective (although that's changed recently). even a few soldiers have told me "the marines go in and invade then the soldiers come in and babysit". not entirely true, but you get the point. (no offense to any soldier out there.)

you want proof that the army won't die? visit a MEPs station near you. walk into the waiting area and then tell all the army deppers to raise their hand. almost 75% of the jam-packed room will respond.

neither of the branches will die. it's absurd to think that the United States Army would be disbanded. as for the Marine Corps, both the navy and the army have tried to disband it, and yet, there it is. strong as ever. the USMC isn't going anywhere either.

and as for the "cool"-ness of the marines: i agree that they have the BEST uniforms out there. gotta love their dress blues. :) the cool and tough part probably comes from (again) how they're usually much more selective over their members and they're known to have a tougher & longer bootcamp than any other branch. also the nickname "devil dog" probably adds to the "tough" perception.

Answer 3

The USMC has been close to extinction several times, and I think it's more likely that will happen at some distant sad time. I hope not, because having the both really leads to more innovative tactics and different capabilities. But the Marines have a long history of outperforming the Army in counterinsurgency operations, and I think the Army will do well to learn from them. I also think the USMC needs to be a bit larger than it is, but the Army needs to be a lot larger. The force ratio between the two is where it is largely because of the misguided reduction in force and over-reliance on Reserves and National Guard.

Answer 4

The Marines have always been on the front lines. Even during the Revolutionary War the Marines fought aboard ships to repel boarders.

The Army was meant to be the occupying force. As for size that started back in the Clinton administration with base closings and cut back in forces. If Hillary gets elected she would like to dissolve all the military. Then who would defend our shores?

As for the Marine Corps being "cooler". Face it no other branch has the Marine Corps Dress Blues and the uniform is recognized all over the world. You guards the White House and embassies. Who flies and guards the Presidents helicopter when it lands on the White House lawn? You don't see Army out there in their Greens.

Answer 5

Never happen my friend. The Corps is still very small. At it's peak in the late 1980's I believe the USMC numbered 196k on active duty and maybe 40k reserves. The Corps is somewhat stricter on it's recruits than the army in terms of education and background. To make the Corps larger than the USA would defeat the point and no Marine wants that. The Corps is not meant to do what the army does anyway.

Answer 6

The Marine Corp is the assault/combat arm of the US Navy. They are seaborne whether by landing craft or helicopter. The Marines primary mission is to 'show the flag' in volatile areas. If a tyrant or dictator thinks that he can flex his localized military muscles at will he will think differently if there are 10,000 US Marines sitting on board Navy carriers and transport ships just a few miles out to sea. The Marines are basically an assault force capable of landing, assaulting, occupying, and defending an area for a limited period of time. They are a tactical force primarily. This means that their focus is the military of a foreign power. The Army is a strategic force requiring much logistics to deploy. But usually when deployed they are in it on a long term basis. The Army is capable of sustaining itself and replacing city govenments. This is considered strategic; their focus is the country itself.

Answer 7

Not a chance in hell. The branches of the military have their own customs and courtesies, histories, and strengths. The Army is needed, and it really needs a return to past glories. The lines that defined each branch has become blurred in recent years, and each branch needs to get back to the basics. The Marines have always been known (WWI and after, at least) for their quick thrust ferocious fighting, and amphibious assaults. They have proven adept at fighting in places like Anbar Province, and this example is kind of what you are referring to. Whatever the Marines put their mind to, they will succeed with great success. That being said, the Army has received a lot of bad publicity in the last few years. They have slightly lowered their standards, too. Their troops are tired, and their families are stressed. Life is hard in the Army now, but I believe that this will be corrected if we can scale back (not completely remove) troops in OIF/OEF and stay out of future conflicts. The Army will rebound and be strong again, and hopefully strong soon.

Answer 8

The M4 carbine, so dubbed via the army is favourite via the contraptions on the floor. The relative length makes it much less confusing to slot in automobiles, the lighter weight makes it straight forward for city operations and room clearing. The accuracy is almost equivalent to that of the M16 and the troops in try against are requesting it. As a "grant pogue" i'm getting to work out extremely some issues like this certainly in action. My complete Brigade, which isn't authorized many M4's, have been given refitted with those rifles earlier our presently ongoing deployment. Why did we get them while they are no longer even our standart authorization? through fact they're greater powerful for our project and we'd have enjoyed them. Will the M16 ever thoroughly area out? unlikely. the cost of completely overhauling the whole military inventory of weapons from M16's, A2's or A4's to M4's would have little tactical benefit and the cost would purely be too great. Will further and extra try against contraptions see M4's as their extensive-unfold rifle. possibly. The squeaky wheel does get the grease. The M16/M4 family individuals of weapons will possibly in basic terms bypass the way of the buffalo while the army unearths a weapon profoundly greater powerful than what they have have been given.

Answer 9

The Army will never get replaced. Who would the jarheads pick on then? The Marines are not even close to half the size of the Army, There are aprx. 75,000 active duty Marines and aprx. 400,00 active duty soilders.

Answer 10

The army is important too, they both have there different jobs. The army is more used for occupation, and the marines are more meant for missions.

Answer 11

It is absurd to even think that most people want to be marines. If this were so, the army would have been extinct decades ago.