Marines or Army
Haven't seen enough mud slinging around here lately.[:D]
So i am going start up some trouble.[;)]
One Question!
What division of the military shoots better[?]
Marines or Army.
Let the mud slinging begin.[:D]
P.S.
Mods, Please don't POOF this thread.[;)]
So i am going start up some trouble.[;)]
One Question!
What division of the military shoots better[?]
Marines or Army.
Let the mud slinging begin.[:D]
P.S.
Mods, Please don't POOF this thread.[;)]
0
-
ARMY!
Everyone else is only second best![:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]0 -
0 -
who gives a f*** about commies?
could an army rifleman kill a hun from 800 yards?0 -
Well, I was Army. And one of my good friends is an active duty Marine Lt Col. And I can out shoot him any day of the week with a handgun. He can't hit the broad side of a barn with a handgun, we are about even with a rifle. 0 -
everything there is to compare to, the Marines do better. unbiased opinion. a few Marines I talked to commented that they thought being in the Army would be too easy. 0 -
After a quick look through the results of the matches at Camp Perry last year, I seem to see more Army guys at the top of the lists than Marines.
If we are talking about pure killing ability, you just can't beat the Navy. When one of the USN Trident subs hits international waters, it becomes the fourth largest nuclear power in the world! Toss in the torpedos and tomahawks and you just can't beat it! [:D]0 -
In a NRA contest they are about equal if you take the best of the best. In combat conditions an Army soldier out of basic and a Marine out of basic, Hands down the Marine will come out on top each and every time. My two cents. 0 -
Unless things have changed dramatically in either Army or Marine recruit training since I was on active duty, the typical Marine will outshoot the great majority of typical Army recruits when it comes to target shooting. The skills of which would also favor Marines in any other types of combat like shooting as well. The primary reason here is due to the fact that the Corps has been able to place a great deal more emphasis on markmanship instruction, one reason being money, than the Army does. If the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Coast Guard, either one, provided the same type instruction to their recruits as the Marines do, then a great deal of parity would be achieved regarding this issue. As for splitting hairs on which bunch produces the most accomplished target shooters (riflemen), then an in depth analysis would have to be conducted which would, of course, include applicable Camp Perry match results. 0 -
Chuck Norris > Marine Corps & Army combined [:D] 0 -
quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
who gives a f*** about commies?
could an army rifleman kill a hun from 800 yards?
Don't fall for the hype! Regardless of what you have heard on TV, Godless Commies are still the #1 threat to the United States of America.
That's "Godless" Commies.
and as far as Hun's are concerned...
I coined the phrase "Schuetz-N-Schneer".0 -
quote:Originally posted by HandgunHTR52
After a quick look through the results of the matches at Camp Perry last year, I seem to see more Army guys at the top of the lists than Marines.
If we are talking about pure killing ability, you just can't beat the Navy. When one of the USN Trident subs hits international waters, it becomes the fourth largest nuclear power in the world! Toss in the torpedos and tomahawks and you just can't beat it! [:D]
That's just one year. There have been many years when the Army was downright lucky to get more than honorable mention. As I said in my earlier post, if one is going to split hairs as to which service produces the most accomplished marksmen, then an in depth analysis would have to be conducted. This woulld have to include match results at the Army and Marine Corps level in addition to those at Camp Perry. The number of variables regarding this issue would be so great, and basically, so totally unimportant, that it would be a total waste of time, money, and effort. The facts are, any soldier or trooper that the Army or Marines sends to Camp Perry is more than likely a bonifide dinger.
+1 on the Navy note!0 -
quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
who gives a f*** about commies?
could an army rifleman kill a hun from 800 yards?
Can a marine even comprehend the concept of numbers measurement, let alone 800 yards?
[;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by Warpig883
quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
who gives a f*** about commies?
could an army rifleman kill a hun from 800 yards?
Can a marine even comprehend the concept of numbers measurement, let alone 800 yards?
[;)]
You might have a fairly good point there [:)] - I'm sure that the Germans that dropped at Belleau Wood, some up to 1200 yards had to be done by Marines with little more than a 3rd grade education, and a little common sense regarding Kentucky windage aided by a liitle long range squirrel hunting savvy.0 -
quote:Originally posted by kimi
quote:Originally posted by Warpig883
quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
who gives a f*** about commies?
could an army rifleman kill a hun from 800 yards?
Can a marine even comprehend the concept of numbers measurement, let alone 800 yards?
[;)]
You might have a fairly good point there [:)] - I'm sure that the Germans that dropped at Belleau Wood, some up to 1200 yards had to be done by Marines with little more than a 3rd grade education, and a little common sense regarding Kentucky windage aided by a liitle long range squirrel hunting savvy.
That called dumb luck[8D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by Warpig883
quote:Originally posted by kimi
quote:Originally posted by Warpig883
quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
who gives a f*** about commies?
could an army rifleman kill a hun from 800 yards?
Can a marine even comprehend the concept of numbers measurement, let alone 800 yards?
[;)]
You might have a fairly good point there [:)] - I'm sure that the Germans that dropped at Belleau Wood, some up to 1200 yards had to be done by Marines with little more than a 3rd grade education, and a little common sense regarding Kentucky windage aided by a liitle long range squirrel hunting savvy.
That called dumb luck[8D]
[:D][:D][:D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by kimi
quote:Originally posted by Warpig883
quote:Originally posted by kimi
quote:Originally posted by Warpig883
quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
who gives a f*** about commies?
could an army rifleman kill a hun from 800 yards?
Can a marine even comprehend the concept of numbers measurement, let alone 800 yards?
[;)]
You might have a fairly good point there [:)] - I'm sure that the Germans that dropped at Belleau Wood, some up to 1200 yards had to be done by Marines with little more than a 3rd grade education, and a little common sense regarding Kentucky windage aided by a liitle long range squirrel hunting savvy.
That called dumb luck[8D]
[:D][:D][:D]
One thing it takes for sure, and that is practice.0 -
quote:Originally posted by mrseatle
quote:Originally posted by kimi
quote:Originally posted by Warpig883
quote:Originally posted by kimi
quote:Originally posted by Warpig883
quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
who gives a f*** about commies?
could an army rifleman kill a hun from 800 yards?
Can a marine even comprehend the concept of numbers measurement, let alone 800 yards?
[;)]
You might have a fairly good point there [:)] - I'm sure that the Germans that dropped at Belleau Wood, some up to 1200 yards had to be done by Marines with little more than a 3rd grade education, and a little common sense regarding Kentucky windage aided by a liitle long range squirrel hunting savvy.
That called dumb luck[8D]
[:D][:D][:D]
One thing it takes for sure, and that is practice.
A young eye is a big plus, too.0 -
From a Soldier, the Father of Soldiers and a Sailor, I believe the Marine Corps churns out superior riflemen. Can't speak to the females, as I don't know.
What I DO know, is that if the individual chooses shooting as a hobby and practices seriously, he will (should) become a great shot, regardless of his Service branch - also regardless of whether he is ever in the Armed Services or Air Force.
D.0 -
This from an Army Vet.
I think that the Marine Corps focuses on marksmanship and rifle training far more than the Army does.
Facts are facts.
That is not to say, of course, that individual exceptions do not exist, or that members of a certain service may not have superior skills over another individual. I am speaking in a general sense and of the training focus.
I fear that your average Marine would somewhat outperform your average Army Troop on the rifle range.0 -
Marines require the LOWEST score on mental aptitude test to pass out of all branches of armed services. That should give you an idea or two. Marines have tought physical training then army, that is also true.
To me, signing up right now is not a smart idea. We are involved in yet another Vietnam. They lowered the requirements and now letting in the people with felonies, mental instabilities and those with Nazi background. Do you really want to be surrounded by such people???
I, for once, would stay the heck away from the military for now, if I was forced to go, I would join with the Navy or Airforce. It is safer there, and people who server there tend to be more educated. Also, remember that USMC does have some hazing problems, while USAF is rather free of them, and the Army has much less of a problem with that. Do not join now. Wait until the debacle called IRAQ is over.
If you do want to join up, sign up with the army, and score high enough on aptutude test to be placed in a high tech MOS, far away from harm.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Tigerclaw_x
Marines require the LOWEST score on mental aptitude test to pass out of all branches of armed services. Uh-that would be the Air ForceThat should give you an idea or two. Marines have tought physical training then army, that is also true.
To me, signing up right now is not a smart idea. Like you have a ton of themWe are involved in yet another Vietnam. They lowered the requirements and now letting in the people with felonies, mental instabilities and those with Nazi background. Do you really want to be surrounded by such people???Where, prey tell, did you hear such drivel-I'd love to see a link
I, for once, would stay the heck away from the military for now, if I was forced to go, I would join with the Navy or Airforce. It is safer there, and people who server there tend to be more educated. Also, remember that USMC does have some hazing problems, while USAF is rather free of them, and the Army has much less of a problem with that. I don't think for second you'd have to worry about the hazing (and all branches have it) because that means you achieved something of substance. This is obviously still a goal you've yet to achieveDo not join now. Wait until the debacle called IRAQ is over.
If you do want to join up, sign up with the army, and score high enough on aptutude test to be placed in a high tech MOS, far away from harm.You sound like Kerry
That said. The Marines emphasize marksmanship higher than any other branch.0 -
Patriots do not run away from the possibility of injury or death in the Service of their Country.
It seems oxymoronical to me to include "safety" as a component of Military Service.
Hooorah.
D.
Note: is "oxymoronical" a word?? If not, should it be??0 -
quote:Originally posted by Tigerclaw_x
Marines require the LOWEST score on mental aptitude test to pass out of all branches of armed services. That should give you an idea or two. Marines have tought physical training then army, that is also true.
To me, signing up right now is not a smart idea. We are involved in yet another Vietnam. They lowered the requirements and now letting in the people with felonies, mental instabilities and those with Nazi background. Do you really want to be surrounded by such people???
I, for once, would stay the heck away from the military for now, if I was forced to go, I would join with the Navy or Airforce. It is safer there, and people who server there tend to be more educated. Also, remember that USMC does have some hazing problems, while USAF is rather free of them, and the Army has much less of a problem with that. Do not join now. Wait until the debacle called IRAQ is over.
If you do want to join up, sign up with the army, and score high enough on aptutude test to be placed in a high tech MOS, far away from harm.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
The thing I like most about this forum is how much better I feel about myself after browsing it for a few minutes.....0 -
I have to side with my old buddy Hack on this one.
www.sftt.org
DEFENDING AMERICA
David H. Hackworth
August 2, 1994
"YOU'RE IN THE MARVY NOW"
Last year in Somalia (Oct. 3), in a 15-hour battle, at least 12 U.S. soldiers died and 70 were wounded because tanks were not on hand to reinforce a raid that, with a burst of enemy gunfire, turned from brilliant success to bitter disaster -- even though U.S. Army commander, Maj. Gen. Thomas Montgomery, had asked for Army tanks two months before.
On ships four sailing days away sat dozens of USMC tanks, but Army thinking went: Marines should not, gallop to the rescue of Army troops. After the defeat and at great expense, Army tanks were finally flown in, while the Marine tanks still guard the decks and wait for another emergency such as Oct. 3.
Stupidity, reckless commanders and inter-service rivalry caused the death and wounds of those gallant young men as much as Somali gunfire. The aviation commander should have known that the "birds" were too vulnerable to operate over a city at low altitudes against a well-armed opponent. Had tanks been the relief element rather than thin-skinned trucks, our casualties would have been limited to a few Rangers banged up in the initial assault, and the troops would have gotten in fast, done the job and gotten out before the mission deteriorated into a nightmare.
A film made of the fight by Army choppers proves tanks would have saved the day, but it has been classified as part of an Army cover-up campaign. Top generals, fearing public outrage and protecting those responsible, now insist tanks wouldn't have made a difference.
Don't tell that crap to the men who were on the ground for hours at the mean end of a terrible pummeling. And don't lay that Pentagon damage control jazz on me. I interviewed those fighters and spent two weeks doing an analysis of the battle. Hopefully, Sen. Nunn's truth squad will square the record. More hearings are scheduled.
We cannot bring back those who died or whose lives were destroyed by U.S. Army incompetence in this badly thought out raid, but the problem of inter-service rivalry can be corrected by an order: merge the Army and Marine Corps.
This idea is sure to upset a lot of Marines. Some may say I'm an ex- doggie and I'm picking on the Corps. Not so. I don't care if we disband the Army and keep the Marines. Matter of fact, we'd get a lot bigger bang for the buck; the Corps doesn't have the blubber the Army bulges with.
But the Marines have lost their mission. Desert Storm proved amphibious warfare is as dead as a horse cavalry attack. The Corps hasn't made a live-fire amphibious assault since Korea. Throughout the last three years of that war, eight years of Vietnam and four days of Desert Storm, Marines fought with exactly the same mission as U.S. Army infantry.
America cannot afford two large ground outfits doing the same gig. When the Army horse cavalry and battleship Navy became obsolete, the brass screamed all the way to the tar pits, but the dinosaurs went. America doesn't need two ground armies, just as McDonald's doesn't need two stores on every lot. Two sets of everything, including missions and roles, waste billions of taxpayers' dollars.
The new force could be called MARVY. The hard-core could wear their service uniforms until they retire. Army and Marine troops could retain all their proud separate customs. But by year 2030, the traditional mind-set will have disappeared, and all MARVY troops will be wearing the same suit and following the same drills, only now they'll be motivated by merged past glories such as Normandy and Iwo Jima, Pork Chop Hill and Khe Sanh.
Think of the savings. There would be one of each: training and material command, finance, administration, intelligence, supply, maintenance, legal, school system, aviation, research and development and just one set of generals with only one group of dog-robber aides to worry about their bosses' social schedules. The savings would probably run to the tune of around $20 billion a year.
It's time, after 200 years, for these two proud outfits to get in lockstep and fight from the same foxholes. Wouldn't it be MARVYLOUS?0 -
quote:Originally posted by Doug Wilson
From a Soldier, the Father of Soldiers and a Sailor, I believe the Marine Corps churns out superior riflemen. Can't speak to the females, as I don't know.
What I DO know, is that if the individual chooses shooting as a hobby and practices seriously, he will (should) become a great shot, regardless of his Service branch - also regardless of whether he is ever in the Armed Services or Air Force.
D.
Very true about the civilian comment.0 -
I have thought this way for quiete some time.
It is interesting to read of the massive efforts and expenditures the Marine Corps has made/spent, since the latter part of WWII to maintain their seperate status.
I agree with the guy.
D.0 -
A load of crap if I ever heard one. Hackworth is a bone head to start with, and anyone heeding his advice is equally ignorant.
The Marines are an expeditionary force. Their job is to take real estate. Then move on to other real estate. They do a great job at what they are designed do.
The Army is an occupational/blocking force. Their job is to keep real estate in American hands. Forever if need be. They do a great job at what they are designed to do.
Neither does the other job particularly well. Hammer and anvil.0 -
Apparently you must have missed the part in class about Airborne, Rangers, Delta Force, and Special Forces.
By the way, did you pay attention to the makeup of the Allied Expeditionary Force in WWI?? Say again "Expeditionary".
I am not trying to say that the FUNcTION that the Marines have traditionally performed should go away, or that the Proud Heritage should be ignored, only that it makes a lot more sense to roll up the functions into a MARV force.
D.0 -
This is the one and only case I'm bias and I don't care about facts.
ARMY KICKS ASS!!!!
[:D][:D][:D][:D][:p][:p]0 -
"one and only", huh??
D.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
54 comments