RE: The Demise of the Marines?
July 25, 2014 at 1:32 pm
(This post was last modified: July 25, 2014 at 2:07 pm by Anomalocaris.)
(July 25, 2014 at 1:20 pm)Chad32 Wrote: The army is the mainstay of the military, right? I doubt they'd disband that.
Army is suppose to be a heavy land force with staying power and capacity to fight lenghty campaigns with large enemy ground forces. Marine is suppose to be a small assault force mainly to break down the door.
One can be sure that America will continue to stir up hornet nests around the world. We think this is what makes us great. With an army, we are also tempted to stick around for a long time to be stung after we stir up each hornet's nest.
With just a marine corp, at least we are more likely to hightail it out of there soon after the poking.
(July 25, 2014 at 1:23 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: You have more of a Marine Corp than we have an army it total
That's because the self-styled land of the free needs to spend more on defence than the next 20 countries combined in order to pretend to be the home of the brave.
(July 25, 2014 at 1:24 pm)Minimalist Wrote: The American Empire needs soldiers to protect it!
No, American Empire needs soldiers in order to convince itself that it is ego boostingly intimidating.
(July 25, 2014 at 1:17 pm)Bibliofagus Wrote: The US has got like 7 fleets scattered all over the world. Elite forces on each and every one of them greatly increases their range of capabilities. I don't see how this could ever be not useful.
(Edit: Unless fleets themselves become obsolete.)
Actually, the different fleets are just command structures with responsibilities over a region. There are two pools of resources, including ships, planes, and marines. One assigned to the pacific and another atlantic, these resources gets assigned to the different fleets as the need arises.
So 7 fleets doesn't mean 7 times one fleet in ships and marines.
