Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: demon@desire.wright.edu
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Why need US Marines vs US Army?
Message-ID: <1991Jan7.050644.7719@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 7 Jan 91 05:06:44 GMT
References: <1990Dec21.030119.11014@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: University Computing Services, Wright State University
Lines: 28
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: demon@desire.wright.edu

In article <1990Dec21.030119.11014@cbnews.att.com>, stevel@u2.calgary.hp.com (Steve LaCourse) writes:
> 
> 
> From: stevel@u2.calgary.hp.com (Steve LaCourse)
> Being a non-American, I have trouble understanding the need for the US
> Marine Corps. I would be interested in hearing some justification for
> maintaining an elitest organization within the armed forces when the 
> capabilities provided by the Marines can be handled by the
> Army/Navy/AirForce.
> 
	The marines are an assault force.  They do not build, occupy, pacify,
mop-up, etc.  As the marines in WWII used to say "first in, first out" and "the
fighting is over, bring in the army".

	Also, every marine unit is trained for amphibious assault and
unsupplied operation (up to 7 days I believe) where the typical army unit can
operate (my opinion, again) about 48 hours before resupply becomes necessary.

	With two oceans seperating us from our primary enemies, an amphious
assault force is pretty necessary.  The war in the Pacific would have been a
lot more costly without them.

Brett
bkottmann@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil