Which is better, Army, Marines, or Navy?
-
Kashluk
-
T51b
- Scarf-wearing n00b
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 12:13 am
- Location: land of awnawld, cawlifawnya
When you enlist in the Army, you can get certain options in your contract, such as which MOS you want and where you want to be located. You can also get a guaranteed slot for Airborne School. So if you want to be guaranteed to see alot of deployment, Menno is right; enlist 11-Bravo, and get either Fort Drum, Fort Campbell, Fort Bragg, or Fort Stewart in your contract. Stewart just got back from Iraq though and probably aren't looking to go back for a while (as per quoting my best friend), and Campbell is looking to come home early next year, but the 101st and Marne Express are always getting deployed SOMEWHERE. If the West Coast (and possibly going to war in Korea) is your thing, try to get Fort Lewis, or Schofield Barracks. Or hell, Korea... If your single, that is. I've got alot of friends with 1-9 mech up at Toko-Ri and one of them is married and he HATES Korea.
But I kind of have to disagree with Menno... I was with HHC 1-502d Air Assault Infantry and we were supposed to be a high-speed hooah-hooah unit but when we weren't in the field all we did was, like I said previously, mow lawns and pick up trash out of parking lots or help out at S4. My cousin who is in 1-22 Mech at Fort Hood said all he did was mow lawns too, before he was sent to Baji (small town north of Tikrit), and my best friend, a tanker in 1-64 Armor down at Stewart, guess what, should also have a bolo badge for the riding lawn-mower!
Theres a reason why the Army doesn't have an MOS for Janitor; when the light infantry and other Combat Arms dudes aren't in the field or deployed, they are the janitors... And every "lucky" support personnel (ie medics) with them. The new Army commercials should be like "There are 212 ways to be an Infantryman; Light. Mechanized. Airborne. Floor Buffer. Trash Picker-Upper. Leaf Raker. Lawn-Mower. Weed Eater. Gate Guard. S4 Stock-Boy. Motorpool Rat... Ect. Ect. Ect."
But as for our (the Army) Infantry being better then the Marines, I have to agree again with Menno... The Army has much more specialized schools (Airborne, Air Assault, Pathfinder, Expert Infantry Badge Course, Ranger, ect, ect) that make Army infantrymech much more versatile. Plus the Army has much better toys and support then the Marines. Though you might slack off in the downtime in the Army,when the Army trains it trains hard, and is undoubtably the supreme ground-fighting force in the World.
But yeah Menno, I can't wait to push Airforce punks around again. When I was at Sam Houston we used to see them every Friday at the Malls graduating their BMT and push around the "tough" Airforce guys and then we'd invite the girls to our hotel parties muhwahahahaha!
But I kind of have to disagree with Menno... I was with HHC 1-502d Air Assault Infantry and we were supposed to be a high-speed hooah-hooah unit but when we weren't in the field all we did was, like I said previously, mow lawns and pick up trash out of parking lots or help out at S4. My cousin who is in 1-22 Mech at Fort Hood said all he did was mow lawns too, before he was sent to Baji (small town north of Tikrit), and my best friend, a tanker in 1-64 Armor down at Stewart, guess what, should also have a bolo badge for the riding lawn-mower!
Theres a reason why the Army doesn't have an MOS for Janitor; when the light infantry and other Combat Arms dudes aren't in the field or deployed, they are the janitors... And every "lucky" support personnel (ie medics) with them. The new Army commercials should be like "There are 212 ways to be an Infantryman; Light. Mechanized. Airborne. Floor Buffer. Trash Picker-Upper. Leaf Raker. Lawn-Mower. Weed Eater. Gate Guard. S4 Stock-Boy. Motorpool Rat... Ect. Ect. Ect."
But as for our (the Army) Infantry being better then the Marines, I have to agree again with Menno... The Army has much more specialized schools (Airborne, Air Assault, Pathfinder, Expert Infantry Badge Course, Ranger, ect, ect) that make Army infantrymech much more versatile. Plus the Army has much better toys and support then the Marines. Though you might slack off in the downtime in the Army,when the Army trains it trains hard, and is undoubtably the supreme ground-fighting force in the World.
But yeah Menno, I can't wait to push Airforce punks around again. When I was at Sam Houston we used to see them every Friday at the Malls graduating their BMT and push around the "tough" Airforce guys and then we'd invite the girls to our hotel parties muhwahahahaha!
-
Kashluk
Supreme in the sense of the total Army forces (which, at least in numbers IS superior) or single/personal soldier level?
Because what I've heard and read from magazines, they've been, at least recently, calling the Israeli (and sometimes German, though that might just be European propaganda) military the best in the world.
Because what I've heard and read from magazines, they've been, at least recently, calling the Israeli (and sometimes German, though that might just be European propaganda) military the best in the world.
-
avenger69ie
- Strider Elite
- Posts: 977
- Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 6:27 pm
- Location: Dvblinia, Hibernia
- Contact:
-
Kashluk
-
avenger69ie
- Strider Elite
- Posts: 977
- Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 6:27 pm
- Location: Dvblinia, Hibernia
- Contact:
-
Kashluk
-
avenger69ie
- Strider Elite
- Posts: 977
- Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 6:27 pm
- Location: Dvblinia, Hibernia
- Contact:
-
Kashluk
Well now that you mentioned it!
Have you seen the new Milwaukee 5397-6 3/8 in. Pistol Grip Hammer-Drill Kit 5397-6 ? It's a real beauty, lightweight and 3/8 chuck are ideal for the small pilot bits/holes like Tapcons. Mm-mm, such a sweet little baby it tears it's way through anything faster than any of those regular self tap concrete fasteners.
Yup.
Have you seen the new Milwaukee 5397-6 3/8 in. Pistol Grip Hammer-Drill Kit 5397-6 ? It's a real beauty, lightweight and 3/8 chuck are ideal for the small pilot bits/holes like Tapcons. Mm-mm, such a sweet little baby it tears it's way through anything faster than any of those regular self tap concrete fasteners.
Yup.
-
avenger69ie
- Strider Elite
- Posts: 977
- Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 6:27 pm
- Location: Dvblinia, Hibernia
- Contact:
-
avenger69ie
- Strider Elite
- Posts: 977
- Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 6:27 pm
- Location: Dvblinia, Hibernia
- Contact:
-
Kashluk
Haha, everyone I talked to who's been deployed to Korea hates it there. I thank Zeus every morning for not shipping me out over there during my time in the Army, even though we were the Pacific Theater's Ready Army Brigade; they instead sent us to places like Afghanistan and Sinai in Egypt (aside from certain conditions in Afghanistan, the complete opposite of the arctic, go figure). Anyway, if any of you guys are going to enlist for a combat position, and if you're between the ages of 17-22, I say enlist in the Army or Marines. If you get into a good unit, and maybe experience some real combat, it will instill a fair amount of confidence and abilities that you'll carry with you throughout your life. If you're between the ages of 23-30 though, I say enlist in the Air Force. It's alot more lax, easier (at least from what I heard) to move up in rank (which equals more pay), and alot more women around (and because of where the bases are located, alot more pretty ones). Haha, hey, you're in the middle stages of your life, you deserve to relax and kick back.
But T51b said it best, if you're going to go into the Army, try and get into a unit that's going to see alot of action; because those are usually the better trained units. It wasn't ignorant of you to ask Doyle, it was actually a very valid question, and T51b's reply to you was right on the money. Usually they'll allow you to choose where you will be stationed, but if they give you that option it's only guaranteed for about 12 months; after that they can station you where they wish. But they won't always move you though, Haha, because I chose to be stationed up in Alaska and they pretty much forgot about me. Most of the time they'll give you an option to list three bases which you prefer to be stationed at (called a "dream sheet"), and a majority of the time you'll get into one of the three you want to go in; but in the end the Army has final say based on needs and openings. Anyway, if you're young, itching for action, or looking to push yourself physically and mentally and thinking of enlisting, like Tb1b and I said, go for Army or Marines; if you want to relax a bit more, get good pay, and sleep with alot of (good looking) women, and who doesn't?, then go for the AF.
It has over 2.8 million soldiers in it's army making it the largest in the world, but it's one of the most poorly trained and equipped. It's tanks are extremely outdated, and very slow (and most can't fire while they move; an extreme disadvantage Coalition forces took advantage of during both Gulf Wars against Iraqi forces that used similiar tanks). It's aircraft is from the 60's, and it's Navy is pretty much only suited for coastal patrol. It's jokingly referred to as "the world's largest military museum". The only thing China has going for it is the third largest stockpile of nuclear weapons.
The US military is the best trained overall, because it can perform a wide variety of combat missions in the quickest amount of time, and has the best logistics. It has specialized units for almost every possible mission (from arctic brigades to airborne units, to a variety of special forces, and quickly deployable Marine units), has the best Navy and Air Force in the world, etc. When the time comes to get the job done, every unit usually performs exceptionally. The UK military is also very highly trained, and I personally think they have the best AF pilots in the world (they use outdated Harrier jets for air-to-air combat, where as the jets are designed for ground support). Their military is diversified and has a wide scope of abilities, second to the US. The Royal Marines are also very well trained soldiers to boot, and the UK has a good navy. It's sad that hey don't get the credit they deserve, and that people consider China's military better than the UK's, which couldn't be farther from the truth.
Israel has superior training then both the US and UK in certain distinct areas, since they have to experience those types of combat daily. They're the best of the best in their scope of operations, while limited, are essential to their survival as a nation. However, because the scope of their operations are limited, they don't have the type of training (and resources) to perform large-scale operations. They also rely heavily on reserve forces. But Israel also has perhaps one of the best officer corps in the world, on par with both the US and UK. So Israel has an extremely large military capability relative to its size and economic power, and that presents a problem. Part of the solution to that problem is American subsidies, and we give Israel several billion dollars per year much of which is used to support their military. Without that money, Israel's military capabilites would shrink fast. So Israel has been trying to have it both ways: to have an army large enough to make sure it doesn't get destroyed, while not spending so much on it as to destroy its economy with the required taxation. They've also been making tradeoffs.
Because of that, they can't really perform the wide variety of operations that US and UK forces (and to some extent Russian forces) can. However for the operations they are capable of performing (such as extensive raids), they are some of the best trained in the world. And about Germany having the best trained military, that's bullcrap propaganda, so don't bother with it. They do have a very good land defense force because of a large variety of tanks and a good assortment of soldiers, but a very poor Navy and AF. France has got a good AF, but that's about it for them; they claim to have a good ground force, but does anyone trust France after WWI and II? Anyway, Army VII Corp alone can probably go toe-to-toe with Germany and France.
But T51b said it best, if you're going to go into the Army, try and get into a unit that's going to see alot of action; because those are usually the better trained units. It wasn't ignorant of you to ask Doyle, it was actually a very valid question, and T51b's reply to you was right on the money. Usually they'll allow you to choose where you will be stationed, but if they give you that option it's only guaranteed for about 12 months; after that they can station you where they wish. But they won't always move you though, Haha, because I chose to be stationed up in Alaska and they pretty much forgot about me. Most of the time they'll give you an option to list three bases which you prefer to be stationed at (called a "dream sheet"), and a majority of the time you'll get into one of the three you want to go in; but in the end the Army has final say based on needs and openings. Anyway, if you're young, itching for action, or looking to push yourself physically and mentally and thinking of enlisting, like Tb1b and I said, go for Army or Marines; if you want to relax a bit more, get good pay, and sleep with alot of (good looking) women, and who doesn't?, then go for the AF.
First rule when you're looking at militaries is to never go by magazines or TV shows; the best source of information is always the guys who actually served. This isn't really pointing the finger at you Kashluk, because most people who aren't familiar with the military will usually take the opinion of a magazine or TV show/report. Secondly, the size of a military is largely insignifacent. Iraq during the first Gulf War had the 3rd or 4th largest military and was decimated in less than a 100 hours, despite having good training, decent technology, and experience (from the Iran-Iraq wars). Thirdly, the militaries that are always involved in war/conflicts frequently will always be the better trained. Nothing substitues real combat; training just attempts to get the right conditioning, tactics, and mindset. So keeping that perspective, the best militaries in the world (with the best training), in order, are the USA, the UK, and then Israel. Canada used to have a solid military, but suffered a great deal of cutbacks during the years after the Cold War (as every NATO-associated military did); except Canada has been neglecting their military more and more as the years have gone by, and there doesn't seem to be any major plans in the pipeline to do anything about it. However, China's military is grossly overrated.Kashluk wrote:Supreme in the sense of the total Army forces (which, at least in numbers IS superior) or single/personal soldier level?
Because what I've heard and read from magazines, they've been, at least recently, calling the Israeli (and sometimes German, though that might just be European propaganda) military the best in the world.
It has over 2.8 million soldiers in it's army making it the largest in the world, but it's one of the most poorly trained and equipped. It's tanks are extremely outdated, and very slow (and most can't fire while they move; an extreme disadvantage Coalition forces took advantage of during both Gulf Wars against Iraqi forces that used similiar tanks). It's aircraft is from the 60's, and it's Navy is pretty much only suited for coastal patrol. It's jokingly referred to as "the world's largest military museum". The only thing China has going for it is the third largest stockpile of nuclear weapons.
The US military is the best trained overall, because it can perform a wide variety of combat missions in the quickest amount of time, and has the best logistics. It has specialized units for almost every possible mission (from arctic brigades to airborne units, to a variety of special forces, and quickly deployable Marine units), has the best Navy and Air Force in the world, etc. When the time comes to get the job done, every unit usually performs exceptionally. The UK military is also very highly trained, and I personally think they have the best AF pilots in the world (they use outdated Harrier jets for air-to-air combat, where as the jets are designed for ground support). Their military is diversified and has a wide scope of abilities, second to the US. The Royal Marines are also very well trained soldiers to boot, and the UK has a good navy. It's sad that hey don't get the credit they deserve, and that people consider China's military better than the UK's, which couldn't be farther from the truth.
Israel has superior training then both the US and UK in certain distinct areas, since they have to experience those types of combat daily. They're the best of the best in their scope of operations, while limited, are essential to their survival as a nation. However, because the scope of their operations are limited, they don't have the type of training (and resources) to perform large-scale operations. They also rely heavily on reserve forces. But Israel also has perhaps one of the best officer corps in the world, on par with both the US and UK. So Israel has an extremely large military capability relative to its size and economic power, and that presents a problem. Part of the solution to that problem is American subsidies, and we give Israel several billion dollars per year much of which is used to support their military. Without that money, Israel's military capabilites would shrink fast. So Israel has been trying to have it both ways: to have an army large enough to make sure it doesn't get destroyed, while not spending so much on it as to destroy its economy with the required taxation. They've also been making tradeoffs.
Because of that, they can't really perform the wide variety of operations that US and UK forces (and to some extent Russian forces) can. However for the operations they are capable of performing (such as extensive raids), they are some of the best trained in the world. And about Germany having the best trained military, that's bullcrap propaganda, so don't bother with it. They do have a very good land defense force because of a large variety of tanks and a good assortment of soldiers, but a very poor Navy and AF. France has got a good AF, but that's about it for them; they claim to have a good ground force, but does anyone trust France after WWI and II? Anyway, Army VII Corp alone can probably go toe-to-toe with Germany and France.
-
andrewdane19
- SDF!
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2003 3:12 am
- Location: Jersey City, New Jersey
-
T51b
- Scarf-wearing n00b
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 12:13 am
- Location: land of awnawld, cawlifawnya
HAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!!!
GIRLS?!!
IN A LIGHT INFANTRY UNIT?!?!!?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!! *GASP* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAH!!!!
*ahem*
Sorry about that.
What I meant to say is:
When you get to Fort Benning, you won't see a female besides the lunch ladies at the D-Fac for about 4 monthes. When you finally get to go visit "beautiful" Columbus, Georgia, and get to stroll down Victory Drive aka VD after all the social diseases that can be contracted there you'll notice that your animal instincts have been heightened and you can actually SMELL the presence of females.
After that, you'll see females, but they won't be in your unit. Most of them will either be working at Battalion (S1-4) or sticking you with needles at the TMC.
That is of course, if your in a combat-arms line unit ie the infantry. If you're a POG (personel other then grunt), you'll work with females all the time, and you'll be able to interact with the local females though most of them hate Army dudes except for the barracks-slut who pretty much lives in the bachelor's enlisted quarters (sort of like dorms or apartments depending on where you are stationed) and screws everybody.
(EDIT: Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you asked if you were stationed with alot of girls... Anyways, I really didn't have much luck with the ladies at Ft Campbell, but when I got to Ft Sam Houston in San Antonio I was rolling in the Airforce and Mike-6 (Army nurse) students! I'm enlisting Airforce for the sole purpose of getting to live back in San Antonio!)
GIRLS?!!
IN A LIGHT INFANTRY UNIT?!?!!?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!! *GASP* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAH!!!!
*ahem*
Sorry about that.
What I meant to say is:
When you get to Fort Benning, you won't see a female besides the lunch ladies at the D-Fac for about 4 monthes. When you finally get to go visit "beautiful" Columbus, Georgia, and get to stroll down Victory Drive aka VD after all the social diseases that can be contracted there you'll notice that your animal instincts have been heightened and you can actually SMELL the presence of females.
After that, you'll see females, but they won't be in your unit. Most of them will either be working at Battalion (S1-4) or sticking you with needles at the TMC.
That is of course, if your in a combat-arms line unit ie the infantry. If you're a POG (personel other then grunt), you'll work with females all the time, and you'll be able to interact with the local females though most of them hate Army dudes except for the barracks-slut who pretty much lives in the bachelor's enlisted quarters (sort of like dorms or apartments depending on where you are stationed) and screws everybody.
(EDIT: Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you asked if you were stationed with alot of girls... Anyways, I really didn't have much luck with the ladies at Ft Campbell, but when I got to Ft Sam Houston in San Antonio I was rolling in the Airforce and Mike-6 (Army nurse) students! I'm enlisting Airforce for the sole purpose of getting to live back in San Antonio!)
Sadly, T5 is right Andrew. As you can imagine, there weren't too many gorgeous girls where I was stationed either, being up in the Arctic and all. Though surprisingly there were some beautiful civilian women. I think it's really insecure guys who marry a beautiful woman, and drag her up to the arctic so she isn't around alot of guys (since she'd be in the middle of nowhere). Anyway, enough rambling. If you enlist in the Army solely to get women, I suggest wearing your BDU's frequently when you go home on Leave. I first met my beautiful girlfiend when I came home on my first day of Leave last year, wearing my BDU's. For some reason, most women love a guy in BDU's (at least moreso than the dress uniform); from what she told me it's because it portrays "authority" and "toughness". It's weird how this works, but you're actually more sucessful picking up women in areas that don't have your branch of service. Like if you're in the southeast, there's plenty of Army bases there, and most women are accustomed of being around Army personnel in some capacity, so I guess to them it's nothing new or special. But transplant that same soldier to the southwest instead of the southeast, and he's suddenly in demand (I met my girlfriend in Vegas). They got tons of Air Force bases down there, and virtually no legit Army bases. So I guess to a woman its like they think you're a real "soldier" (hence a real "man") instead of those lax guys in the AF.
Anyway, here's the breakdown of which branch in certain areas are most successful with women. Again, it's really based upon the individual, but I'm talking in general terms here. Keep in mind this is just an opinion based upon my observations, and I'm sure other guys who served might say differently.
Northeast: Navy
Midwest: Air Force/Marines
Southeast: Army/Marines
Southwest: Army
Northwest: Navy
Anyway, here's the breakdown of which branch in certain areas are most successful with women. Again, it's really based upon the individual, but I'm talking in general terms here. Keep in mind this is just an opinion based upon my observations, and I'm sure other guys who served might say differently.
Northeast: Navy
Midwest: Air Force/Marines
Southeast: Army/Marines
Southwest: Army
Northwest: Navy
