Did you know?

[4est_4est_Gump]

I know Liberals only want Marines there when needed; but want to shit on them or discard them in peace time. Yet, cannot comprehend why the Marines, or any other branch of service, is not there after they are removed away.

So you have a specific objective in mind? And you do not think that if you are placed into a strange place with strangers shooting at you that you don't need armour? You don't want someone above you who can see the enemy better than you?

I cannot give you a satisfactory answer. It would lead to more questions from those against the military. Do some research on them, talk to POSITIVE people who have served with them, etc..

No matter how you think of them, or any other military branch, they are indeed needed to protect the rights we have now. It never ceases to amaze me how often FREE Americans want to discard the ones that ensure their freedom.

Bottom line is, they are basically a political tool used to fight your battles for you against a perceived enemy. And when you take them away, they cannot be there for you.

When your ass is in a sling and about to die, that will be the moment where you realize you made a mistake in your decision to support their 'disbandment'. At that point, it will be to late.

Well said, even for a squid!

 

[JohnnySavage]

1. The Marines and the Navy have pre-positioning for rapid deployment down to Wal-Mart like efficiency. We need that.

2. The Army's heavy occupying forces are needed after the Marines make the area safe for them to travel with their air conditioned tents, mess halls and video game centers.

3. The unit at Arlington is the Army's Old Guard, not Marines.


I propose cutting the Army back to its heavy toys and the support apparatus required to make the occupying force comfy. The Marines don't need their own air power as the Navy can handle that. Keep the Air Force's bombers and nuclear force; eliminate it's fighter wings. Buy the Navy a few more carrier battle groups - to have one aircraft carrier at sea, you need three. With two oceans that means you need at least six just for normal operations. If you want to gallivant all over the world you need three more for each adventure - a total of 15 would do.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

1. The Marines and the Navy have pre-positioning for rapid deployment down to Wal-Mart like efficiency. We need that.

2. The Army's heavy occupying forces are needed after the Marines make the area safe for them to travel with their air conditioned tents, mess halls and video game centers.

3. The unit at Arlington is the Army's Old Guard, not Marines.


I propose cutting the Army back to its heavy toys and the support apparatus required to make the occupying force comfy. The Marines don't need their own air power as the Navy can handle that. Keep the Air Force's bombers and nuclear force; eliminate it's fighter wings. Buy the Navy a few more carrier battle groups - to have one aircraft carrier at sea, you need three. With two oceans that means you need at least six just for normal operations. If you want to gallivant all over the world you need three more for each adventure - a total of 15 would do.

If the Navy would stop bombing us...

Their air power is not dedicated to group troop movement... DUH!

 

[JohnnySavage]

If the Navy would stop bombing us...

Their air power is not dedicated to group troop movement... DUH!

Marines should be crawling on their bellies, gun in hand and knife between their teeth. They shouldn't be flying around in the wild blue yonder.

 

[Johnny_Ray_Wilson]

Well said, even for a squid!

Thanks. I hope Kbate does not take it personal though.

 

[Johnny_Ray_Wilson]

If the Navy would stop bombing us...

Their air power is not dedicated to group troop movement... DUH!

If you learned how to use the radios and give out the right coordinates and ETAs, that would not be a problem.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I like the traditional aspects of the Marines. Don't mind my .0001 or whatever of my tax dollar going to support them, with their band and nice dress uniforms walking around times square at fleet week.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

If you learned how to use the radios and give out the right coordinates and ETAs, that would not be a problem.

Marines are like dachshunds...


Anything that will go down a hole after a badger is not all that fucking bright.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I like the traditional aspects of the Marines. Don't mind my .0001 or whatever of my tax dollar going to support them, with their band and nice dress uniforms walking around times square at fleet week.

We do know how to drill and the Blues look great serving cocktail weenies at Democratic White House functions...

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Marines are the only branch brainwashed to obey with out thinking and blindly follow orders... They have their uses.

Fat Slob is trying his best to play with you guys. You really should let him even if he has nothing to add to the subject.

I see Merc turn tail and ran from his own stupidity... Poor guy.

 

[kbate]

I know Liberals only want Marines there when needed; but want to shit on them or discard them in peace time. Yet, cannot comprehend why the Marines, or any other branch of service, is not there after they are removed away.

So you have a specific objective in mind? And you do not think that if you are placed into a strange place with strangers shooting at you that you don't need armour? You don't want someone above you who can see the enemy better than you?

I cannot give you a satisfactory answer. It would lead to more questions from those against the military. Do some research on them, talk to POSITIVE people who have served with them, etc..

No matter how you think of them, or any other military branch, they are indeed needed to protect the rights we have now. It never ceases to amaze me how often FREE Americans want to discard the ones that ensure their freedom.

Bottom line is, they are basically a political tool used to fight your battles for you against a perceived enemy. And when you take them away, they cannot be there for you.

When your ass is in a sling and about to die, that will be the moment where you realize you made a mistake in your decision to support their 'disbandment'. At that point, it will be to late.

Paragraph 1: That says basically nothing.
Paragraph 2: I did not say we do not need armour or air power, I said we do not need Marines.
Paragraph 3: That says basically nothing, I am not arguing to disband our military or to destroy any rights.
Paragraph 4: That in no way argues for the need for a Marine Corps.
Paragraph 5: See paragraph 4.

Prove that we need the Marine Corps as they are constituted today, that their mission cannot be completed by other forces.

What you did was throw out a bunch of "Patriotic Blanket Statements" but failed to address the issue at hand in any manner at all.

Who here honestly thinks that we will never put boots on the ground again, so we don't need an army at all! and if we do, we can just use the SEALs...

The Marines are a Rapidly Deployable Force.

By the time we get there, by design, the Army is still drafting the paperwork to begin moving, which is why we have to take our own support with us. Now the argument can be made that they are being wasted in Afghanistan, but Marines tend to get pissy when left out of a fight...

The Army tends to get pissy when it is deployed too long since it has become a jobs corp for families and pared down to the point where it is mainly a lot of National Guard units being fielded.

And it is not ad hominem to suggest that when it comes to the military you do not know shit from shinola...

If you got rid of the Marines, the army would have to duplicate the Navy's new work in recreating what we already had.

I know we do not need a separate Marine Corp in order to have a rapid deployment force. We also have the Army Rangers, The 101st Airborne and the 82nd Airborne divisions. The marines are far slower than any of these forces to get "boots into the battle".

The Army also has its Special Forces A teams which are generally in the battle before there is a battle.

What are the Marines doing that cannot be cross trained by another unit? Nothing.

Where did I say we won't ever need "boots on the ground again?" Nowhere.

We got rid of the horse cavalry when the army adopted the "Truck". It was revolutionary. WE got rid of the Balloon when the "AirPlane" became popular.

We can get rid of the Marines - and train Army soldiers to do everything they can do.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Marines should be crawling on their bellies, gun in hand and knife between their teeth. They shouldn't be flying around in the wild blue yonder.

Is that your way of turning down our requisitions for catapults to replace the Harriers?

 

[rosco rathbone]

We do know how to drill and the Blues look great serving cocktail weenies at Democratic White House functions...

My ex partner on one of the bridge jobs was a White House guard or whatever they call it under the Clintons. He said they kept trying to shake his hand. I think you're supposed to just pretend they're like furniture.

 

[Johnny_Ray_Wilson]

Marines are like dachshunds...


Anything that will go down a hole after a badger is not all that fucking bright.

Not my fault we all used equipment from the lowest priced bidder. That is why we tended to 'perfect' that equipment on our own once we got it in our hands. (Adapt an overcome ya know)

If you really think about, that badger is the smartest one as it knows when to GTF out of Dodge when the shit hits the fan.

 

[kbate]

1. The Marines and the Navy have pre-positioning for rapid deployment down to Wal-Mart like efficiency. We need that.

2. The Army's heavy occupying forces are needed after the Marines make the area safe for them to travel with their air conditioned tents, mess halls and video game centers.

3. The unit at Arlington is the Army's Old Guard, not Marines.


I propose cutting the Army back to its heavy toys and the support apparatus required to make the occupying force comfy. The Marines don't need their own air power as the Navy can handle that. Keep the Air Force's bombers and nuclear force; eliminate it's fighter wings. Buy the Navy a few more carrier battle groups - to have one aircraft carrier at sea, you need three. With two oceans that means you need at least six just for normal operations. If you want to gallivant all over the world you need three more for each adventure - a total of 15 would do.

Why keep a separate Marine command structure? Why not a "Ground Command", cutting out half the generals from both structures?

Carrier groups are too expensive to build more.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

We do not need boots on the ground has been a liberal mantra ever since Bush if not since "the end of the cold war."

The we do not need the Marines meme was alive and well back then too, but they sure come in handy for all the right reasons.

Like that Eastwood movie about Grenada.

Do you think too that we should sub out the Airborne to the Air Force?

Plus, we'll need Marines when we land on the Alien Space ship or the Empire's Death Star...

Shit ain't gonna stay the way it is today, looking through the crystal ball of now, but the Marines will always be dedicated and loyal to dying to save their country.


UHRAH!!!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Not my fault we all used equipment from the lowest priced bidder. That is why we tended to 'perfect' that equipment on our own once we got it in our hands. (Adapt an overcome ya know)

If you really think about, that badger is the smartest one as it knows when to GTF out of Dodge when the shit hits the fan.

Lowest price, lol...


Nobody, but nobody bids the lowest price to Uncle Sam.

He's kinda slow like that...

 

[Busybody]

so what,

some "Jets" were blown up!

we still have enough to BLOW the world up 9 times

Now the US KILLERS wont be bombing WEDDING PARTIES

Obama-2012~~~~~~~~~~

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

My ex partner on one of the bridge jobs was a White House guard or whatever they call it under the Clintons. He said they kept trying to shake his hand. I think you're supposed to just pretend they're like furniture.

Like those Guards outside of Buckingham or the Vatican...

 

[RobDownSouth]

Originally the Marines were tasked as being the nation's naval infantry, stormin' beaches and doing amphibious landings and stuff.

The doctrine of helicopter-borne assault has rendered amphibious warfare largely obsolete.

The Marines then re-invented themselves as the nation's "rapid deployment force", but with a strength of just 200,000, they are too large to handle quick strike missions (Somali pirates and taking out Bin Laden) and too small to invade all but the smallest nations (Grenada). The Navy SEAL teams now handle the "heavy lifting" on the small-mission front, while the Army does virtually all the invasions nowadays.

So what is left for the Marines?

 

[Johnny_Ray_Wilson]

Paragraph 1: That says basically nothing.
Paragraph 2: I did not say we do not need armour or air power, I said we do not need Marines.
Paragraph 3: That says basically nothing, I am not arguing to disband our military or to destroy any rights.
Paragraph 4: That in no way argues for the need for a Marine Corps.
Paragraph 5: See paragraph 4.

Prove that we need the Marine Corps as they are constituted today, that their mission cannot be completed by other forces.

What you did was throw out a bunch of "Patriotic Blanket Statements" but failed to address the issue at hand in any manner at all.




I know we do not need a separate Marine Corp in order to have a rapid deployment force. We also have the Army Rangers, The 101st Airborne and the 82nd Airborne divisions. The marines are far slower than any of these forces to get "boots into the battle".

The Army also has its Special Forces A teams which are generally in the battle before there is a battle.

What are the Marines doing that cannot be cross trained by another unit? Nothing.

Where did I say we won't ever need "boots on the ground again?" Nowhere.

We got rid of the horse cavalry when the army adopted the "Truck". It was revolutionary. WE got rid of the Balloon when the "AirPlane" became popular.

We can get rid of the Marines - and train Army soldiers to do everything they can do.

You are free to post here from the safety of your own home, right? What more do I need to say? You think that shit was without sacrifice? Never mind, you do not get it.

 

[rosco rathbone]

Besides, you never know when you might have to rain musket fire down upon the quarter deck of a Limey frigate, or lead a shore party to storm a harbor battery.

 

[RobDownSouth]

You are free to post here from the safety of your own home, right? What more do I need to say? You think that shit was without sacrifice? Never mind, you do not get it.

The US military has sacrificed quite a bit in the name of "nation building" in the past half century.

Protecting my liberty personally from the foreign hordes? Not so much.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Besides, you never know when you might have to rain musket fire down upon the quarter deck of a Limey frigate, or lead a shore party to storm a harbor battery.

They just don't make wars like they used too. I heard a rumor that the navy ships don't even have fighting tops any more.

It's damned outrageous, if you ask me.

 

[Busybody]

What does a workplace MISHAP have to do with Obama?

Steyn is a RACIST that was put on trial for HATE SPEECH......This "piece" shows he hasnt learned

You are RACIST for posting