Why Marines?

[Ecofarm]

I didn't see either movie. Maybe I saw The Patriot, but I don't remember specifically. You think slander should be protected by freedom of speech? I should be allowed to create a movie entitled "Obama's Presidential Campaign", just invent a bunch of terrible stuff and pretend it is true? Then what is to stop me from creating the film "82nd Airborne in Iraq" and just inventing the whole thing? How about "GinandTonic goes to Thailand"?


Point is, you can't just invent stuff about actual real people. If you do, you need their permission to publish it.

I'm not saying the government has veto right over history; that's ridiculous. I'm saying that people have veto rights over someone inventing stuff about them and publishing it as "based on truth".

 

[say1988]

But for example, Crimson Tide, the US Navy refused any involvement (understandable they don't want to show mutiny on their boat with nukes), so it is a logical conclusion that they didn't give their consent to the use of the name. And the myriad of television shows, movies etc. I doubt most get permission if they don't want anything.

But the vessel in the movie is referred to as a US Navy ship, and even named after a ballistic missile submarine in service at the time.

 

[Ecofarm]

Like I said, I don't know all the details and I'm just figuring it out like you. But I don't think one can just invent stuff about someone and publish it as "based on truth". Was Crimson Tide supposed to be based on truth? Heartbreak Ridge was.

Perhaps the "based on truth" is the catching point.

 

[say1988]

Crimson Tide was 100% fictional.

While it is quite true that you can't just insult a company or person, the government and its institutions are treated differently in many respects, possibly this one.

The people themselves, I believe, would be the main problem for a fictionalized version of events, not the organization as a whole (for the military/government).

I also wonder how a claim to be "based on real events" or "a fictionalized version of real events" or the like would be considered legally.

 

[Steph]

The organization of the French armed irces is a bit different from the OT.

The branches are
- army
- navy
- air force
- gendarmerie

The army includes "troupes de marines". Originnally created in 1622 by Richelieu as "compagnies ordinaires de la mer" (sea companies) they were mostly for fighting on board ships.
They disappeared during the Napoleonic wars (transformed into line regiments), and the "infanterie de marine" were created again in 1831. They were no longer used in ships, but in colonial territories.
In 1900, they were renamed "troupes colonial". And in 1967, renamed again as "infanterie de marine".

We currently have 12 regiments in France
- RIMa (regiment d'infanterie de marine), 5 incuding 1 armored regiment
- RPIMa (regiment parachutiste d'infanterie de marine): 2
- RICM (regiment d'infanterie char de marine) 1 armored regiment
- RAM (regiment d'artillerie de marine) : 3 regiment
- 1 regiment de marche du Tchad

And oversea, 9 additional units.

As I said, all these units are part of the army.

In the navy, we have 1800 fusiliers marins, which are specialized in the protection of the French navy facilities on land.

And we also have 6 "commandos de marine", 500 mens in total, highly trained for special operation. Recently, it was them who freed the hostages from pirates off the Somalian shores (3 operations), with the GIGN, and without.

 

[Bugfatty300]

Like I said, I don't know all the details and I'm just figuring it out like you. But I don't think one can just invent stuff about someone and publish it as "based on truth". Was Crimson Tide supposed to be based on truth? Heartbreak Ridge was.

Perhaps the "based on truth" is the catching point.

Herzog´s Rescue dawn completely transformed the real Gene DeBruin into a cowardly Charles Manson. Ofcourse he is dead so there isn´t much he can do about it but his family was (understandibly) POed about it.

Of course if making a film and presenting it as truth is a crime then Micheal Moore should currently be on death row or tied up in law suits for the rest of his life.

 

[Ecofarm]

If Michael Moore crossed the line with a portrayal of a private individual, he would be sued. He knows better.


You can't be like "Hey, this is the 82nd Abn in 1994!", invent stuff and slander me. Remember, you would be portraying private individuals in an inaccurate and libelous manner.

 

[holy king]

americans think marines are the best soldiers in the world, but i thats not true, a lot of elite forces are better.

 

[Patroklos]

There is no organized group of professional forces on the scale of the USMC that is of higher quality.

Comparing your multiple platton special forces unit with the multiple division USMC is of no use whatsoever.

 

[Patroklos]

There is no organized group of professional forces on the scale of the USMC that is of higher quality.

Comparing your multiple platoon special forces unit with the multiple division USMC is of no use whatsoever.

 

[Aegis]

In 1994, you didn't get to pick as an enlisted man. When did that change? I remember someone correcting me on this before, but I don't remember when it changed or the cirumtances when one gets to pick.

I enlisted in 1997. My brother enlisted in 1986 and he was able to choose his MOS.

When I enlisted, the process was the same for all branches. I took the ASVAB test, found out what fields I qualified for and then chose my MOS. The MOS' were "first-come, first serve" so you were never guaranteed the MOS that you chose but you would still have others to choose from if your first selection fell through.

 

[Lillefix]

There is no organized group of professional forces on the scale of the USMC that is of higher quality.

There can't be much doubt about that. According to wiki, USMC with 203 000 active personnel is bigger than most of the world's armies.

 

[bhsup]

Yeah, in fact, I think we should consider disbanding the ARMY and integrating their missions into the USMC. Semper Fi, Mobby!

 

[IglooDame]

Yeah, in fact, I think we should consider disbanding the ARMY and integrating their missions into the USMC. Semper Fi, Mobby!

They're looking for a few good men, not a whole bunch of somewhat mediocre men.


I'm sorry, I just couldn't resist. Take your free USN shot in retaliation if you Army folks would care to.

 

[Cheetah]

Yeah, in fact, I think we should consider disbanding the ARMY and integrating their missions into the USMC. Semper Fi, Mobby!

See, that people even joke about integrating the (rest of the ) Army into the USMC, is part of the reason why I felt like starting this thread.

Anyway, after reading all the posts here, it seems that the conclusion is that the reason that the USMC is it's own branch/department/whatever is really just because of tradition.

Good enough answer for me.

Thanks.

 

[Steph]

There is no organized group of professional forces on the scale of the USMC that is of higher quality.

Comparing your multiple platton special forces unit with the multiple division USMC is of no use whatsoever.

Agreed. They are not comparable.

Are 10 French commando de marine better than 10 average marines? Probably, because they are elite force. Are they better than 10 marines from an elite unit dedicated to similar mission? I don't know, they are probably equivalent.

But there is absolutly no doubt that the USMC as a whole could easily beat the whole 500 French commando without sweating much.

What put the USMC apart is not the quality itself of a marine, as other small groups are as good or better at the individual level, it's the overall quality of the whole large unit.

 

[bhsup]

Not just tradition. Really, just look at what Wiki says.

Doctrinally, Marines focus on being expeditionary and independent, while the Army tends more toward overwhelming force with a large support element.[citation needed] The emphasis on mobility and combined arms makes the Marine Corps a much lighter force than the Army. The Marine Corps maintains a larger percentage of its personnel and assets in the combat arms (infantry, artillery, armor, and close air support) than the Army. However, the Army maintains much larger and diverse armor, artillery, ground transport, and logistics forces, while the Marines have a larger and more diverse aviation arm, which is usually organic to the MAGTF. Marines tend to have better cohesion as an expeditionary unit, as well as being completely amphibious. The Army operates a great many different types of units, while the "Every Marine's a rifleman" creed shows the Marines' focus on standardized infantry units with the other arms in support roles. This commitment to standardized units can be seen in the short-lived experiment of the Marine Raiders, while the 75th Ranger Regiment has continued for the last four decades.

The United States Army now maintains light infantry units capable of rapid worldwide deployment, but those units do not match the combined-arms integration of a MAGTF and lack the logistics that the Navy provides.[9] For this reason, the Marine Corps is often assigned to non-combat missions such as the evacuation of Americans from unstable countries and providing humanitarian relief during natural disasters. In larger conflicts, Marines act as a stopgap, to get into and hold an area until larger units can be mobilized.

Now as far as being used for much more than stop-gaps in Iraq, I personally think that has more to do with the army being gutted than anything else. They didn't have a choice but to permanently utilize Marines in that role.

EDIT: Great post, Steph!

 

[Cheetah]

Yeah, but still...

I don't know, maybe it's just the name that irks me. Other countries have Marines organised differently. Then again they're different forces? What a Marine is varies a bit between countries...

Still seems like the USMC could be organised as divisions or battalions or whatever within the Army anyway, and maybe/probably they would have been if the Marine corps was created today.

I'm still going to explain it as tradition.

It's a good enough answer for the question I wanted to ask, even if that wasn't the question that was understood.

Thanks again for the answers.

 

[Ecofarm]

I enlisted in 1997. My brother enlisted in 1986 and he was able to choose his MOS.

When I enlisted, the process was the same for all branches. I took the ASVAB test, found out what fields I qualified for and then chose my MOS. The MOS' were "first-come, first serve" so you were never guaranteed the MOS that you chose but you would still have others to choose from if your first selection fell through.

In the army, MOS choice (just 1) is guaranteed or contract is void. That's the difference I had confused. In Full Metal Jacket or Bolixi Blues, I forget which, they hand out jobs at the end of boot camp - like christmas - so that had me confused too (perhaps was like that long ago, or just a movie drama addition).

I'm sorry, I just couldn't resist. Take your free USN shot in retaliation if you Army folks would care to.

Meh, squids.

 

[Aegis]

In the army, MOS choice (just 1) is guaranteed or contract is void. That's the difference I had confused. In Full Metal Jacket or Bolixi Blues, I forget which, they hand out jobs at the end of boot camp - like christmas - so that had me confused too (perhaps was like that long ago, or just a movie drama addition).

FMJ took place during Vietnam & Biloxi Blues during WWII. I wouldn't be surprised if they decided your role back then, especially considering they were using the draft and it was during a time of war (real war, not occupational skirmishes like now). Not many would choose Infantry in such an event, so it makes sense to dictate who does what in order to maintain combat troop levels.