How do you explain to the "average American" why we need a Marine Corps?

2016-06-26T09:42:07-04:00

The popular "Yahoo! Answers" site recently posted the the age-old question: "Why do we need a Marine Corps? Why can't it's job be done by the the Army?"
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid= [login to see] 1737AAoShY8 From the footnote of the question the person wanted a "straight" answer.
Putting our own service pride/rivalries aside, is there an answer that can be truly explained to an "average American" who has not served?

Why do we still "need" a marine corp? Why can't its job be done by the army?

I just want a straight answer, no political insults.

Response by Kim Bolen RN CCM ACM made Jun 26 at 2016 9:44 AM

2016-06-26T09:44:34-04:00

It is a different breed of warrior. Sempre Fi

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Jun 26 at 2016 9:53 AM

2016-06-26T09:53:04-04:00

"America doesn't need a Marine Corps, it wants its Marine Corps. "

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Jun 26 at 2016 10:12 AM

2016-06-26T10:12:18-04:00

We went through this after WWII .. Gunny

President Truman issued a directive to modernize the antiquated defense setup. The Marines would be under a single Dept of Defense that would be commanded by the Army ..Gen Vandergrift went ballistic and wrote to Truman that "The Army is back on the job in full force trying to absorb the Navy and the Marines" This became a battle between Gens Vandergrift and Eisenhower. The Marines won this battle but it left scars and there were tensions between the Marines and Army. And it was not until Korea that Truman realized Vandergrift was right about the Marines and he had the backing of Gen MacArthur who was a big supporter of the Marines. And this began the feuding between Truman vs MacArthur.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Jun 26 at 2016 10:14 AM

2016-06-26T10:14:30-04:00

People forget there's a different mission set between the Army and Marine Corps. Problem has been the Marines are given the same missions the Army can and should do, hence taking them away from the stuff they do best. The Army isn't in a position to do the same stuff a MAGTF can do.

Maybe the question should be flipped. How about getting rid of the Army and having a very large Marine Corps? Now I pulled the pin on that one, fire for effect. BTW, Marines would hate this. Somehow "The Proud, The Many" isn't as sexy as "The Few".

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Jun 26 at 2016 10:21 AM

2016-06-26T10:21:40-04:00

We need a group of people in the military that are trained in ways of the air, sea,and land.

Response by SPC James Harsh made Jun 26 at 2016 10:55 AM

2016-06-26T10:55:10-04:00

Because enemies of the US fear Marines first. Isn't there an expeditionary force capable of deploying? Im an Army guy and respect the SF & Rangers although the Marines are tip of the spear not for being exposed on the front lines but being the front line when called on. There's a difference.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 26 at 2016 10:59 AM

2016-06-26T10:59:34-04:00

Every Branch has their specific function, designed and implemented out of an identified need, at some point in time, and agreed upon by people who experienced a shortfall of ours. The Army and Marines ultimately have a different purpose, even if sometimes they have the same mission.
Sometimes we all come together to perform a mission and are doing the exact same job, the lines can become obscured and, actually, that is a good thing. For instance, I saw Navy uniforms in Afghanistan everywhere, but I don't think that there were any ships IN Afghanistan. There were multiple ships deployed to region, at various stages, but MOST civilians have no idea.
Some Navy personnel were integrated into ground roles where there was a need and they had a proficiency (especially Seabees) but alongside and in support of Branches with an actual ground mission. But I don't hear anyone suggesting that we get rid of the Navy because nobody heard about sea battles during OEF/OIF.

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Jun 26 at 2016 11:01 AM

2016-06-26T11:01:39-04:00

Hitting a beach, shipboard security and pulling embassy duty is not something I would want to do. God Bless The Marines for taking up the mission.

Response by Cpl Mark A. Morris made Jun 26 at 2016 11:06 AM

2016-06-26T11:06:34-04:00

I flew a drone up high
To view the future
There was 4 military sections
Air, Sea, Land and SpecialOC
All had the same uniform
All had the same traditions
But, only a few made it past standards
That were never lowered
Due to the Tyranny of evil men

Mark A. Morris BS, RDMS (AB-OB), RVT

Response by SN Greg Wright made Jun 26 at 2016 11:11 AM

2016-06-26T11:11:23-04:00

Marines have skillsets that the Army cannot replicate, and if you did get rid of the Marines, you'd just have to train the Army in those skillsets/missions. Kind of pointless.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Jun 26 at 2016 11:30 AM

2016-06-26T11:30:05-04:00

There was a time that the missions were quite different, now with our asymmetric war with no country loyalty, we need a special breed of warrior. We are gradually morphing into Special Operators that do much of the same thing, regardless of the branch of service. The rest of us do what is necessary to permit these specialized forces do their jobs, and do the yoeman's work and carry the fight to the enemy as we are trained to do. Every branch of the service has specific missions and they do sometimes overlap, but perhaps we should go back to the only wars we have won unequivocally and the make up of the various branches of the military. Long story short, don't fix what is not broken.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 26 at 2016 12:16 PM

2016-06-26T12:16:05-04:00

Remember what the Marine Corps purpose is. At inception, it was an armed group that would repel boarders on naval vessels and board an enemy one to take it by force of arms. Occasionally they'd be a shore party to assist with the taking of fortifications. Later, they took on the amphibious mission, one that is not quite antiquated yet, but hasn't been performed in many years.
Today, they are a fire brigade of sorts, capable of getting to a conflict or disaster area and defeating problems that crop up.
I don't think you change things just to change things. The Corps has a mission. Frankly, I think that they are under resourced and have been for as long as I can remember. If we are going to maintain the corps as a spearhead, we must keep it sharp and at the ready.

Response by Cpl Justin Goolsby made Jun 26 at 2016 12:39 PM

2016-06-26T12:39:44-04:00

No, there isn't an answer that would satisfy the American public. Army is ground troops. Navy is aquatic warfare. Air Force is air combat. Marine Corps is all three. So their first question is always "well we already have the other branches and they're much larger than you, so why do we need the Marines". They don't see us as the strike force that we are.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 26 at 2016 1:00 PM

2016-06-26T13:00:07-04:00

Your standards of pull-ups, sit-ups and 3 mile run would get rid of 1/3 of the Army Reserve and the Army National Guard. I am 53 and I can do 10-15 pulls/70 situps but I need to improve my run because the 2 mile time is about 15 minutes. What is the 3 mile run standard 100% for someone 53 in the USMC?

Response by Capt Walter Miller made Jun 26 at 2016 1:13 PM

2016-06-26T13:13:19-04:00

As General Krulak said, there is a Marine Corps because the people want a Marine Corps.

Walt

Response by SFC Charles Temm made Jun 26 at 2016 1:22 PM

2016-06-26T13:22:39-04:00

We need the Corp b/c amphib ops are still a tool in the DoD toolbox. We also need the Corp as an alternative to the Army; 2 schools of thought can both feed off and correct each other if we have smart people at the helm of DoD (yeah I know how likely that IS!).

All kidding aside b/c I'm green machine until I die, the inter-service competition between the 2 is a great asset few nations have. It may get stupid at times but overall, it's a good thing.

Response by SFC Wayne Theilen made Jun 26 at 2016 2:23 PM

2016-06-26T14:23:19-04:00

Because tradition says so.

Response by 1LT William Clardy made Jun 26 at 2016 2:39 PM

2016-06-26T14:39:37-04:00

The true reason for having a Marine Corps is so they can be kept far, far away from civilized society (and from dating your daughter) -- maybe even someplace where their talents for mayhem and chaos can be useful...

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 26 at 2016 3:59 PM

2016-06-26T15:59:32-04:00

I really like my leatherman, however it's not the knife I want in a knife fight. In a knife fight I want a Ka-bar, not a leatherman.

It's not that Marines couldn't learn to perform the Army mission or that the Army couldn't learn to perform the Marine mission. It's that having services that specialize in certain types of missions, instead of every type of mission makes them better at what they do.

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Jun 26 at 2016 4:28 PM

2016-06-26T16:28:50-04:00

If you take the pride out of it and look objectively, there really isn't anything that only Marines can do. But what they do for the Nation is maintain high standards that the small force allows them to have.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 26 at 2016 4:52 PM

2016-06-26T16:52:37-04:00

GySgt John O'Donnell - Because The Marines have such an Esprit de Corps . . . and such a high state of operational readiness and such regard within their own community and among all other warrior communities . . . that they are capable of undertaking virtually any offensive and/or defensive assignment with minimal advance notice, minimal command oversight, minimal planning, and minimal logistics . . . to attack and destroy any target, hold any ground, secure, protect and recover any asset. They escorted, protected, and saved my colleagues and my own ass far more times than I can count. Plus they wear one of the most iconic, practical, and fashionable dress uniforms among the services. Warmest Regards & Semper Fi Marines!!! Sandy Annala :)

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Jun 26 at 2016 5:26 PM

2016-06-26T17:26:52-04:00

An old Salty Marine Gunner and a crusty Army CSM were arguing and close to coming to blows at the Pearly Gates ...So St Peter ran over to these two and said "Hey what is all the fuss about/" and the Army CSM said "This Old Jarhead is trying to tell me the Marines are God's favorite branch of the US Military and I told him he was full of BS"...
St Peter said "Ok let me ask God and get back to you and no more fighting with you two here outside of heaven, It is not the right time or place"
The next day St Peter returned and had a letter from God and he read it to these two
Dear Marine CW5 & Army CSM.
Since 1775 & 1776 I have been very impressed with both the US Army and the US Marines and think they have both served their country for 240 years with honor and distinction. Both the US Marines and the US Army are the best of the best military services in the world today.
Sincerely,
God, USMC (Ret)

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Jun 26 at 2016 6:01 PM

2016-06-26T18:01:42-04:00

"How do you explain to the "average American" why we need a Marine Corps?"..
I would just say because America has needed the Marines forever & probably more today because of the threat to our homeland from Islamic Radical Terrorists who needed to be completely destroyed.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jun 26 at 2016 6:14 PM

2016-06-26T18:14:42-04:00

It should be obvious by now that you can't explain anything to the "average American". There is no such animal. Simply trust that there are enough of us who already know the answer and will fight for the Corps.

Response by GySgt John O'Donnell made Jun 26 at 2016 6:47 PM

2016-06-26T18:47:58-04:00

In this great era of "joint ops", it's awesome to see the large majority of our armed service brethren standing with the Marine Corps yesterday, today, and into tomorrow. The thoughtful responses in my mind reinforce World War II Navy Secretary James Forrestal's quote, "The raising of the flag on Iwo Jima, means a Marine Corps for the next 500 years". One Team, One Fight!!!

Response by SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint made Jun 26 at 2016 7:41 PM

2016-06-26T19:41:40-04:00

But competition in business makes success. Competing Armed Forces enhance our security.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 26 at 2016 11:07 PM

2016-06-26T23:07:32-04:00

Well, Jimmy.....

We don't NEED 13 kinds of cherrios, we are just used to having it that way. Each branch its trying to find it's relavalance (and shelf space in aisle 6) in this Global War of Ideology. The have nots want more, the haves don't appreciate what they already have, and those that have never served are in charge. So, you can see why the Army has all the best equipment, the Air Force never leaves the AC, the Navy wants to re-grow its beard, and the Marines...well, the Marines...Point it, this. Because we have Marines the average American doesn't know why we NEED Marines.

Response by SGT Tony Clifford made Jun 27 at 2016 1:11 PM

2016-06-27T13:11:13-04:00

Technically there isn't a mission the USMC does that couldn't or hasn't be done by the army. That being said, the USMC is specifically geared towards it's mission and the army would have to train specialized units to do Marine Corps missions regularly. The USMC is a valuable asset to the United States and really does serve a function.

Response by Capt Walter Miller made Jun 27 at 2016 1:41 PM

2016-06-27T13:41:06-04:00

How about this? "America needs a Marine Corps because all the other services are just conduits of cash from the tax payers to the Defense Industry?"

Walt

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 27 at 2016 2:14 PM

2016-06-27T14:14:07-04:00

We need a Marine Corp because when we finally get into space we'll need someone to go fight the aliens.

Response by SSG Craig LaPine made Jun 27 at 2016 3:24 PM

2016-06-27T15:24:16-04:00

It's an unneeded branch. I'm sorry. It would be easy and probably be more benifical to combined the army and marines. The only reason it hasn't been done is the history. But the history can and will live on. History alone should not prevent us from evolving. The army could absorb the so called roll of amphibious assault if needed. Training the force to do so is nothing. This would be mainly an admistrative action. We aren't and most likely will never be fighting a war like the past. Socom is the spearhead not the marines. The same should be done as far as army units. The 82nd (my first unit) and 173rd should give up their airborne duties. I'm not saying their response time for a global threat. But airborne ops should be left to Rangers and SF. Our military needs a deep rehaul and cuts. But not the way the current POTUS has done or is doing. The wasteful spending in the military is absurd. I have seen it with my own two eyes. This is my own opinion of course

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Jun 27 at 2016 3:27 PM

2016-06-27T15:27:33-04:00

We have a future Marine Fighter Pilot He's 8 years old and his girl friends in the 3rd grade think it is really cool that his old grand pa was a Marine. They all like the Marine Dress Blues.. I probably will not be around if and when he goes to OCS in 13 years but hopefully guarding the streets of heaven, or at one of the Pearly Gates checking IDs ..

Response by Cpl Elijah West made Jun 27 at 2016 6:39 PM

2016-06-27T18:39:22-04:00

We're here because we are a sustainable self-contained expeditionary force in readiness.

The logistics of organizing the other three branches to accomplish the same mission is much more costly and difficult to achieve.

This is the Marine Corps true ethos. To get there, organized, disciplined and the "firstest with the mostest", when the nation needs a rapid response.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 27 at 2016 8:45 PM

2016-06-27T20:45:56-04:00

I've Always believed that the Navy should absorb the Marine Corps back under its wing (Fin)? Then they would be more capable to do the Amphibious mission, they could be called on on hand to aid any Naval Command's mission on ground, and you could have the transition of Marines to positions in the Navy and vice versa, along with limiting certain MOSs to the title of Marines and the title of Marine being earnable through a course (Like the Ranger Regt and School).

Response by Sgt David Hesser made Jun 27 at 2016 9:16 PM

2016-06-27T21:16:12-04:00

A famous Army General once said that there are only two people that understand Marines, other Marines and the Enemy.

Response by Maj Walt Stachowicz made Jun 27 at 2016 10:01 PM

2016-06-27T22:01:08-04:00

I believe that the key word is "innovation". The Corps is small enough to listen to it's junior members, enlisted and officer. They are not held back as much by the dogma of Army regulations. A Marine Officer laid out the entire Pacific campaign back in the 20's (LtCol Pete Ellis). The Marines (and Navy) developed the amphibious assault vehicles and strategy before WWII started. That's what the Army used on D-Day. The Marines developed the use of vertical envelopment by helicopter during Korea, which the Army used successfully in Vietnam. The Marines developed the "Small Wars Manual", which was updated during Iraq and attributed to Army Gen Petraeus but was co-written by USMC Gen Jim Mattis. They continue to provide new insights into asymmetrical warfare, non lethal weapons, as well as cyber warfare, in today's conflicts. Look at your Army digital uniforms and un-shined boots. Where did they copy that from? The Navy service uniform is almost an exact copy of the Marine Corps Service "C". The Army is cumbersome and set in their ways, largely due to the great number of personnel and the stove pipe theories that it perpetuates. Hell, yes, our Country needs a Marine Corps! Who else is going to get our Armed Services looking ahead, and not at the last war?

Response by Georg Mayor made Jun 28 at 2016 10:56 AM

2016-06-28T10:56:14-04:00

Well after the last fifteen years of U.S. and world history, I would argue that this truth is self-evident. Bad shit happens and usually without our leaders going out looking for it..usually I said. If it is not (I haven't been in k-12 education for many years nor have I had to take part in a citizenship course) but then we should look at our educational networks. Let me close by saying, that although one could twist that sentence into a pro-conflict, pro-military industrial complex red, white, and blue machine; that is not the case at all. It's a different world with different needs. We need more Special Forces and Marines; more nimble, technologically cutting edge advanced, and powerfully effective forces that can rush in, take over, and transfer control back to the best possible local governing powers in a smart way.

Response by SSgt Roger W Schultz made Jun 28 at 2016 11:36 AM

2016-06-28T11:36:44-04:00

The Marine Corps provides for a force in readiness that has a global influence while maintaining a high level of flexibility in military unit that would be lost if not for their extremely high standards of physical readiness, training in wide range of military specialities. Since 1775 Marines have stood ready to answer the call. To be the first to enter a conflict and last to leave. The Marine Corps can do this because of its size. Our numbers are small, but we make up for it by keeping our standards high.
I'm a Marine, have been since 1974, I'll die a Marine. To suggest eliminating one Marines is to ignor our history.

Response by SPC Sheila Lewis made Jun 28 at 2016 11:46 AM

2016-06-28T11:46:14-04:00

The Marine Corp is just as relevant today as it was about two-hundred years ago...the problem is this spoiled, undisciplined American society.

Response by MSG Edward Camp made Jun 28 at 2016 1:18 PM

2016-06-28T13:18:22-04:00

Simple, tell them to study history. Today's threat responses are no different from yesteryear's. When it has to be destroyed overnight who do you call.
Semper Fi

Response by PO1 Tharin Young made Jun 28 at 2016 6:56 PM

2016-06-28T18:56:50-04:00

What most people don't realize is that the only military branch that is constitutionally allowed to be a standing force during peacetime is the Department of the Navy for the purpose of defending sea lanes. If we actually reduced our standing forces during peacetime, the Army and Air Force would be required to be reduced to a skeleton crew at the very most.

Since the Navy has it's own air component, and the Marines for the purpose of staging assaults inland from the sea, these components could, if they needed to, do the jobs of the Army and air force until those two branches are able to mobilize.

Response by Sgt Frank Rinchich made Jun 28 at 2016 7:32 PM

2016-06-28T19:32:29-04:00

You don't need to explain , the Marine Corps has explained it for 240 years. Just get yourself a book on Marine Corps battle facts. . why don't we get rid of all the popular smaller cars and everyone forced to buy a BMW, Why because the smaller car can go places the bigger car can't , the smaller can run for longer periods of time on less fuel. the smaller car can move in and out before the big car can turn around, the small car is built for rough terrain , the big car for luxury. now that I put it in a child's way of thinking, maybe adults will catch on Why we need a Marine Corps. over the years people were saying bigger is better, now they know that's not true, bigger is not better, its how you use it that counts. and from my time in the Corps to now we used it with precision.
But the way things are going, drafting women for combat. which we know will get the shit kicked out of them in a hand to hand ,so we lower the standards. soon they will be lowered enough even politicians can join.
And don't get me wrong about woman. there are many jobs in the military that they can do and men can't. combat is not one of them. lets have a hand to hand game 100 people 50 women 50 men. I pick all the men you can have the women who do you think wins? I know , off track but you want to compare that's what I did.

Response by SSgt Obom Bowen made Jun 28 at 2016 11:30 PM

2016-06-28T23:30:06-04:00

Awesome post.

Response by LCpl William Perry made Jun 29 at 2016 7:34 AM

2016-06-29T07:34:22-04:00

In short the differences are the Marines are a small spearhead group that creates a landing area (footprint) for the larger Army to work with. We then fight side by side with our brothers to ensure victory. Another mission is Marine Barracks, Embassy Duty, White House Duty, Guarding Nuclear assets...ETC. As for the Air Wing this is air support from LCAC to VTOL as the Marine pilots need to be able to take off and land air craft at sea, which the Air Force is not trained to do. We are the Few The Proud, The Marines that is first to fight and last to leave and would not have it any other way. When time comes time, take the muzzles and the leashes off as it is Devil Dog Time......RAH!

Response by SPC Christopher Perrien made Jun 29 at 2016 10:28 AM

2016-06-29T10:28:07-04:00

Because the Navy wants its own army. The USMC should be exactly what it says. A Corps (and a small one). Yes a specialized unit s required to conduct amphibious(ship to shore/shoreline) ops and the small "banana wars", but the large amphib ops of the past are a thing of the past as should be large land deployments.

Anti-ship missiles make an amphib fleet too big of a target. I can see maybe a USMC of 3 regiments i.e.3 Landing-teams(i.e.3 divisions) , past that no. As to the Marines being employed in total land battles no. Afghanistan is no place for the Corps. The cost of having a double land combat organization is too much. Might as well have a Wehrmacht and an SS. But the Navy wants its own army with all the bells and whistles and even with its own second air force). simple as that.

Response by Sgt Loren Petty made Jun 29 at 2016 9:15 PM

2016-06-29T21:15:22-04:00

We need a Marine Corps because we have always had a Marine Corps. Esprit de Corps is something real that is inspired by more than two centuries of outstanding service to the nation by Marines at places like Bellau Wood, Tarawa, the Chosin reservoir, Khe Sahn, and Fallujah. Marines always have, and always will, answer the call of their nation with a fighting spirit known as Esprit de Corps and a ferocity that is unmatched by any other infantry. Why would we want Army units to assume the mission of the Marine Corps when Marines perform the mission perfectly now?

Response by MSG David P. made Jul 1 at 2016 9:52 AM

2016-07-01T09:52:53-04:00

Question from feather merchant civilian: Why do we need a Marine Corps?

Answer: Because people like you don't join a service, someone has to do the dirty jobs and the Marines volunteered. Why Marines specifically? Because they are the specialists at going ashore in foreign lands when ordered to protect and defend. They have the training, equipment and Esprit necessary to enforce U.S. foreign policy in places no sane person would go.

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made Jul 9 at 2016 11:39 AM

2016-07-09T11:39:33-04:00

Because they scare the Hell out of our enemies.

Response by Cpl Steve Sweeney made Jul 25 at 2016 3:27 PM

2016-07-25T15:27:02-04:00

I think each branch brings to the party a different type of skill that combined form a force that's impossible to beat. As for why the US needs a Marine Corps. Simply put "NO ONE " can do an amphibious assault like we do. And the attitude that Marines have, is unique and unwavering.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 26 at 2016 6:54 PM

2016-07-26T18:54:37-04:00

because if we didn't have a Marine Corps, there would be no one to plagiarize Joint Regulations from. Does the average american understand joint regs or plagiarize?