Us army infantry (11b) vs. usmc infantry (0311)

I was wondering if anyone knew how these two services would size up to each other in the realm of the infantryman. Some claim that USMC has better infantry units while others claim that the US Army has far superior infantry units. Please leave spec ops out of this, as they are not regular units. However Cavalry recon units and Marine Light Recon Platoons (not force recon) are fair game

Please give your thoughs and opinions! I know we have some former US Army guys here as well as some former Marines.

Shouldn't this be a poll?

/\-/\-/\-/\-/\

\/-\/-\/-\/-\/

Nah, i'd rather get actual opinions than just clicks. I did that on purpose.

the marines being amphibious troops , i'd say the marines are the best and a large part of the Marine corps participates to first line operations like in somalia

The Marines corp infantry is the best i think since it's one of the main components of the US expeditionary/projection force

That said, a bullet well placed in the head remains lethal , whatever you are an elite unit or an average grunt.

That said, a bullet well placed in the head remains lethal , whatever you are an elite unit or an average grunt.

But can every Army grunt land one between the eyes of target 150 yards away?

Well my USMC buddies may differ in opinion, but in my opinion there is no best.  I've met good infantrymen both in the Army and the Marines.  The Marines have higher standards in physical fitness and rifle marksmanship but Army infantry also do alot of grueling physical fitness training as well as plenty of marksmanship training and I'm sure would have no trouble meeting USMC standards.   There is also the matter of what jobs they do.  As said earlier Marines infantry specialize in amphibious assault.  Army infantry can do this if required, but it's not something that they usually train for.  Likewise Marines do most of the stuff Army infantry do.  Marine philosophy however also more like Army airborne philosophy and that is the mentality that they are the best with no if, and's, or but's about it.   That's why it's a bad idea to for Marines and Army Paratroopers to be in the same bar.  

But many regular Army infantry units also train to be extremely aggressive as well.  

If you look at equipment both Marines and Army infantry have advantages and disadvantages.   Marines with the Marpat uniforms have better camoflage. They also have longer range rifle in the form of the M16A3 (higher velocity then the M4 due to the longer barrel).  However Marines lack a RPG -proof APC while the Army has the Bradley IFV which has proved highly resistant to RPG's in Iraq so far (depending on where it's hit).  

When it comes down to it, it all boils down to how much training they get.   The more training, the more skilled the troops tend to be.  But I have no idea whether Marine on average receive more training then 11B Army infantry.  Most of the training is the same basic infantry tactics and weapons training.   Some infantry units (in both Marines and in the Army) are also Special Ops capable.  

At any rate personally I think it's a silly question and that there is no real unit that is "better".

My old Army Reserve unit had lots of ex Army and Marine infantrymen and they were all good soldiers who knew their stuff and who were highly professional.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

That said, a bullet well placed in the head remains lethal , whatever you are an elite unit or an average grunt.

But can every Army grunt land one between the eyes of target 150 yards away?

Of course training will help to aimyour rifle better.

But in my opinion if a soldier , elite or average grunt is going to be killed by a bullet well placed in the head, it doesnt matter at all if it is a lucky/unlucky bullet or a bullet from an average grunt or an elite unit rifle.

The result of this bullet remains the same, elite unit or average grunt or lucky/unlucky  shot : a bullet in the head.

PS :the whole point behind "the equality in front of a bullet in the head" thing , was that what is right on the theory paper can be wrong in the reality of the field, that is why i think the conclusion of a question like "which is the best army corps" will not have a totally right answer.

If the theory paper was right, elite corps would never suffer any loss , but the reality of the field mostly always put well built plan in the garbage can ;)

Neither....

SOCOM all they way.

Quote[/b] ]The Marines have higher standards in physical fitness

Marine PT is cake, they don't even do sit-ups in the PT test these days.

Neither....

SOCOM all they way.

Quote[/b] ]The Marines have higher standards in physical fitness

Marine PT is cake, they don't even do sit-ups in the PT test these days.

Quote[/b] ]Marines with the Marpat uniforms have better camoflage. They also have longer range rifle in the form of the M16A3 (higher velocity then the M4 due to the longer barrel).

Their new BDU's are goofy. Besides, the Army is getting new ones soon as well. The second point is moot, since the usual combat engagement distance is less than 150 meters, making the M4 more than adequate. Also, M16's really suck in urban environments.

Quote[/b] ]Some infantry units (in both Marines and in the Army) are also Special Ops capable.

Sounds like giving everyone the Black beret to make them feel special. Touchy feely horse pukey. If they don't fall under SOCOM, they aren't Spec Ops, the end.

Quote[/b] ]But I have no idea whether Marine on average receive more training then 11B Army infantry.

Precisely, depends purely on who is in command, who the senior NCO's are and how they handle the troops and budget. Both infantrys have equal masses of morons.

*cracks knuckles over keyboard in delicious anticipation*  

Marine PT is cake, they don't even do sit-ups in the PT test these days.

A Marine PFT consists of deadhang pullups, crunches, and a three-mile run.  While it's true we don't do sit-ups anymore (too many Marines were injuring their necks by pulling on the backs of their heads), the number of repetitions went from 80 sit-ups in two minutes to 100 crunches for a perfect score.  It's easy to be hard, it's hard to be smart.

Does the Army still run two miles, or have you guys started using the Air Force's stationary bicycles?  

Their new BDU's are goofy. Besides, the Army is getting new ones soon as well.

Allow me to bid you an early welcome to Club Goofy.  If the Army's cammies are similar to ours you'll soon find they're the best field uniforms you've ever used.

The second point is moot, since the usual combat engagement distance is less than 150 meters, making the M4 more than adequate. Also, M16's really suck in urban environments.

Yeah, but you can't do close-order drill with an M4.  Seriously though, the A2 never caused me problems in MOUT.  In a CQB environment I'd rather have the M4.

Sounds like giving everyone the Black beret to make them feel special.

Sounds like you're unfamiliar with a MEU(SOC)'s capabilities.  No black berets involved.      

If they don't fall under SOCOM, they aren't Spec Ops, the end.

Or is it the beginning?  'Bout time we got some SOCOM $$$.

Semper Fi

Quote[/b] ]Allow me to bid you an early welcome to Club Goofy. If the Army's cammies are similar to ours you'll soon find they're the best field uniforms you've ever used.

I agree.

The CADPAT uniforms we use are similar to the MARPAT ones of the Marines. Though we had them first.

Anyways, what's the point of having a marine force anyways? What can the marines do that the army couldn't, if it was given the task?

Tyler

Quote[/b] ]Sounds like you're unfamiliar with a MEU(SOC)'s capabilities. No black berets involved.

Ahhh SOCOM is aquiring some cannon fodder.

Quote[/b] ]Or is it the beginning? 'Bout time we got some SOCOM $$$.

Another SOCOM unit? Is this really necessary? SF Groups and the SEAL teams are already too large making them operationally cumbersome. Isn't Force Recon enough? Go ask any E-2 USMC puke and he will claim that the entire Corps is a special operations unit. Perhaps in a direct action sense (like Rangers, who these days tend to be bullet shields for Delta), but given the nature of LRRP/LRS, sabotage, FID, CT, and especially UW missions, MEU's do not qualify in my book as spec ops. There is nothing low intensity/ covert about them. Then again, maybe I'm old fashioned in my view of a special forces soldier, someone who goes months with little support deep in hostile territory blending with and training indiginous allied forces.

In that case your definition of Special Operations would fit with my old Army Reserve engineer unit.... well accept for the behind enemy lines part. But they like to stick my old unit in countries like Egypt with a lot of hostile people in order to train indigenous forces. I got a little bit of danger pay when I was there and we luckily missed a terrorist attack on the charter tour that the terrorists thought we were going to be on in the same parking lot where we were a week earlier. Lucky us...but sucked for the German's that became the target of the attack.

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9709/18/egypt.attack1230/

At any rate, I still think it all boils down to training. Plenty of regular infantry units can perform various special operations missions. As an 11b you should know that. Maybe they can't perform all of those missions but that is just a matter of training. But back to Marines....

I've also used the M16A2 in MOUT situations without any problems. While it's not as easy to put on to a target in CQB, it has some advantages over the M4 because of the longer reach with a bayonet and because of it's solid butt-stock that can be used to knock people over or out of the way during a building search. Better for crowd control as well unless your idea of crowd control is bullets to center-mass as we've seen in Iraq.

As for Rangers being "bullet shields" for Delta, I think most Rangers would find that highly insulting. Security for Delta Force is just one of the many joint missions they do with other Special Operations units. Rangers, like Marine infantry, are heavy assault infantry (shock troops) with airborne and long range capability along with training in many other special operations tasks (not to be confused with special forces aka-"Green Berets"). By special operations I mean stuff like small boat insertions, hostage/POW rescue, LLRP, and high-risk assaults. But anyhoo... to me this whole Marine vs. Army thing is silly. I think they both have plenty of equally good units and people regardless of whether they say "Hoooah!" or "Hooorah!"

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

Anyways, what's the point of having a marine force anyways? What can the marines do that the army couldn't, if it was given the task?

"Brute" Krulak (the prior Commandant's dad" said it best:  "The American people don't need a Marine Corps, but they want one."  

The amphibious assault capability is still what many people see as our turf, but to anyone who wasn't paying attention, Baghdad is a considerable distance from saltwater.  The reach will only get deeper when the Osprey and the AAAV come online.

Quote[/b] ]The AAAV will be capable of transporting 18 Marines and a crew of three over water at speeds of 29 miles an hour; the design uses a planing hull propelled by two water jets. On land, AAAV will achieve speeds of 45 miles an hour, with cross-country mobility equal to an M1 Abrams tank.

I can't shake the image of a hydroplaning AMTRAC towing water-skiing jarheads. "Charlie don't surf!"  

Semper Fi

Obviously my opinion is biased as I am an 0311 (24 7) as the cadence goes. What I think it boils down to is our attitude as Marines. Historically, Marines have run into the path of bullets when it seemed that the end was inevitable. Just a couple that come to mind are Belleau woods, Chosin Resavoir, Tarawa, Iwo Jima, and many others. Chosin- 8 chinese divisions encircle just one Marine division and the Marines put up one of the greatest fights of the Korean war. Belleau wood- marines earn our nickname Teufelhunden(devil dogs) by the germans for our tenacity in the fight.

We just feel invincible and can't show the slightest signs of weakness in front of our fellow marines. Hell, we're always competing even with each other. example-(we always talk sh*t to the mortarmen about sleeping in their mortar pits while we're out doin the work)

Quote[/b] ]In that case your definition of Special Operations would fit with my old Army Reserve engineer unit.... well accept for the behind enemy lines part.

Exactly, except that defines the difference between a JCET mission and a UW mission. Operating in a combat area far from friendly lines changes the situation quite a bit. Such as need for a covert auxillary, E&E plan, and basically operational freedom. Once an ODA is deployed it pretty much operates UNODIR. One of the defining differences between SF and conventional units, and even other SOF like Rangers is the level of proficiency of every team member. The lowest ranking guy on an ODA has the knowledge and experience equal to or usually greater than that of an infantry platoon sergeant. ODA's are given an objective, then go into isolation and plan their own ops. This departure fundamentally changes the doctrine of warfare. What I learned in 11B school, and what I have learned from the team guys about patroling are two different worlds. I learn more in a week from a good ODA than I learned in 3 months of infantry training. I firmly believe that most SF soldiers are cut from a different fabric than your average grunt. SF training is gruelling mentally and physically. From start to finish, two years in the making from SFAS to Robin Sage and SERE 80% of those who try to become a green beret fail or quit, in addition to those who dont pass the psych exam or have a high enough GT score to even go to SFAS. or don't have. Additionally, 1 in 4 who apply for DoD security clearance are rejected. Grunts, with the exception higher echelon leaders don't have clearances, and from what I've seen 90% of them couldn't even qualify for one. Which leads me to this question, what the hell qualifies as Special Operations these days?

Quote[/b] ]I've also used the M16A2 in MOUT situations without any problems. While it's not as easy to put on to a target in CQB, it has some advantages over the M4 because of the longer reach with a bayonet and because of it's solid butt-stock that can be used to knock people over or out of the way during a building search.

I've used both in MOUT and personally find the M-16 ill suited. Knock people out of the way during a building search? If they aren't bleeding out from a double tap, or laying face down as ordered, something's not right. Soldiers that I know that have actually killed people with a bayonet said they quickly found themselves avoiding it, tends to get stuck, and even bend the barrel of the rifle. Most of the team guys carry a bladed weapon of personal choice, tomahawks are popular, and I've even seen a few guys with shortswords strapped to the back of their LBE. Anyways, I prefer the M4 over the M-16 any day.

Quote[/b] ]As for Rangers being "bullet shields" for Delta, I think most Rangers would find that highly insulting.

1. Rangers are assholes, anything you say to them is likely to piss them off. (Personal experience)

2. Rangers that are not assholes, such as ones that are now SF that came out of batallions in the late 90's tend to agree that the 75th is being given lousy tasking of late. Part of this is due to the fact that the people calling the shots in Washinton these days are squemish about words like "casualty" and "assault." Rangers are trained to proverbially rape, pillage, and plunder. Where do you see 'em the these days? Providing perimeter security for the boys over the fence during ops. In all it's a huge case of no likey. Delta no likey the Rangers, Rangers no likely SF, Delta, or leg infantry. The 82nd no likey anyone.

/me takes front seat, with popcorn and soda, and watches both side duke it out.

/me takes front seat, with popcorn and soda, and watches both side duke it out.

Hell Yes :P

Army rocks. We're not suicidal

Anyways, what's the point of having a marine force anyways? What can the marines do that the army couldn't, if it was given the task?

"Brute" Krulak (the prior Commandant's dad" said it best:  "The American people don't need a Marine Corps, but they want one."  

Exactly, there is just something mythic about the Marines. They may not be any better than the Army, who the hell am I to know, I was a squid! But in the average American's mind and in mine since I served with a lot of them, they seem to be just a cut above. It's their mentality, their esprit de corps, the fact that they accomplish the mission without the latest in high tech gadgetry, cushy accomodations or even decent field rations. The idea that they almost always are the first to go in and the last to leave. The fact that Marine Corps bootcamp is a cast iron bitch. It's longer and harder than any other. The Marines are barebones, no frills, highly trained and highly motivated light infantry and seem to take pride and draw strength from that. They are the ultimate "suffering bastards" who always get the job done and accomplish whatever is asked of them. If I was crazy enough to have gone infantry, I'd have been a Marine.

Anyways, what's the point of having a marine force anyways? What can the marines do that the army couldn't, if it was given the task?

"Brute" Krulak (the prior Commandant's dad" said it best:  "The American people don't need a Marine Corps, but they want one."  

Exactly, there is just something mythic about the Marines.  They may not be any better than the Army, who the hell am I to know, I was a squid!   But in the average American's mind and in mine since I served with a lot of them, they seem to be just a cut above.  It's their mentality, their esprit de corps, the fact that they accomplish the mission without the latest in high tech gadgetry, cushy accomodations or even decent field rations.  The idea that they almost always are the first to go in and the last to leave.  The fact that Marine Corps bootcamp is a cast iron bitch.  It's longer and harder than any other.  The Marines are barebones, no frills, highly trained and highly motivated light infantry and seem to take pride and draw strength from that.  They are the ultimate "suffering bastards" who always get the job done and accomplish whatever is asked of them.  If I was crazy enough to have gone infantry, I'd have been a Marine.

Heh, what would you tell an Army paratrooper from the 82nd? I sure as hell don't have the balls to tell him that a regular old Marine grunt is a cut above him :P

Airborne!

Quote[/b] ]Heh, what would you tell an Army paratrooper from the 82nd? I sure as hell don't have the balls to tell him that a regular old Marine grunt is a cut above him :P

Airborne!

My dad was 82nd during the late '60s and early '70s.

While I'm at it here's some more amusing (to me) U.S. WWII propaganda.