The troops replacing those in Iraq are going to be less armored, not as many regulars (regular is another term for active duty), and 1 Mar Div and 3rd Marine Air Wing cobined will be replacing a whoe, Army unit which I belive is still quiet bigger than two of our divisons that are replacing the one. Considering the trouble the Army’s had recently, the sending in fewer troops with fewer regulars, it is hard ot imagine how things are going to turn out. On the one hand, 1 Mar Div did over throw Saddam mostly by themselves (remember the early news of the war was primarily about Marines). However, using more reserves when the active Army (there are very few Marines in Iraq right now and you rarely hear of them now) is having a hard enough time as it is, seems a bit strange. Not only that, but peace keeping is something Marines are not the best at. We trained to blow stuff up and kill. Heck, one of the companies in unit (one that I might be going to) almost leveled a small town, after the war. Peace keeping is not our strong point, we have few doctrines on how to do it, and this the first time in history we will be doing it (usually the Army stays in and does that, partly because they have more troops and more money). Not only that but many of those Marines don’t want to return (same sort of reason why most soldiers in Iraq are scoffing at the re-enlistment bonuses the Army is offering) so that could affect things too. Bottomline, sending in fewer troops overall to do as much as more are struggling with. This should be interesting.
I’m sorry if this makes the Army sound like they suck and Marines rule, I tried to keep it as unbias as possible, but that is a bit hard for obvious reasons. If one of our Army guys was here, maybe he could rewrite it to be less bias…or bias the other way:ah-ha!: .
Ehhhh…no. Sorry pal, it doesn’t work like that, and the proof is in the fact that you just contradicted your own statement by referring to her as a former Marine. If you’re always something, you cannot have been said thing formerly. You either are, or you aren’t. You can’t have it both ways.
Originally posted by Rubicante
[b]Ehhhh…no. Sorry pal, it doesn’t work like that, and the proof is in the fact that you just contradicted your own statement by referring to her as a former Marine. If you’re always something, you cannot have been said thing formerly. You either are, or you aren’t. You can’t have it both ways.
Ergo…EX-Marine. [/b]
I don’t make the sayings or terminology, I just use them. Mariens that aren’t in anymore are referred to as “former Marines”, “ex” implies you were but now are not. “Former” does the same thing, but it fits more and is mroe positive. We just use former to describe those that were serving but have finished.
man, I love how in the space of just a few months Infonick went from the least likely person I’d expect to enlist (I’d put Geo and SK over him) to a badass “minister of death praying for war”
Originally posted by Merlin
[b]man, I love how in the space of just a few months Infonick went from the least likely person I’d expect to enlist (I’d put Geo and SK over him) to a badass “minister of death praying for war”
jk mostly [/b]
Fuck yeah! I’m incredibly pissed I’m not over there right now. Yeah, a year before I joined I literally said “I’ll break my leg if I’m ever drafted.” Man, if the guys in infantry weren’t crazy motherfuckers, the field wasn’t closed, and the field promoted faster (many want to be in it that it is packed so promotions are slow and competitive), I’d change to it in a heartbeat. At least with my unit, and being a Marine I still get to do my fair share on infantry stuff when I’m in the field. I think what Joker said in Full Metal Jacket fits me perfectly: “I wanted to be the first kid on my block with a confirmed kill” (or something to that extent). Heck, I’ve already volunteered to go with 1 Mef (the part of 1 Mar Div going to Iraq), but I haven’t received orders yet (which means I probably won’t get them, and there goes the anger again).
