PDA

View Full Version : Army or Marines



Soljiboy
22nd Aug 2004, 00:51
Are you in the Army or Marines in this game?

ACEofSPADES87
22nd Aug 2004, 01:05
The United States Army.

Soljiboy
22nd Aug 2004, 01:08
Sweet...I hate the marines, I respect them, they fight for our country too, it's just that they are stuck up and they think they are better than every one else. Which most definity is NOT true!

Nirvana128
22nd Aug 2004, 01:39
Hey! The marines are just as good as the army... I personally like the army too, but the marines arnt stuck up...

Soljiboy
22nd Aug 2004, 02:05
Oh yes, most definitly, there marines are just as good, i completely agree, but i dont think they are better, but the marines that i have talked to think that they are the best branch

AgentOrange_section8
22nd Aug 2004, 07:28
every branch thinks that...they always have beef with other branches like navy and airforce they are like "damn airforce guys" and stuff like that...every 1 thinks they are better than any one else...but Marines are known as more "tough guy" image than anyone else. An example this guy named Quinn i met him on this plane ride he show'd me his Rangers tat on his arm and told me all these Nam storys it was cool man hes black too he said that they stumbled on this group of Marines in Nam and they stayed together as a mixed unit thing...and they came upon this hill with a bunker on it and the marines were like "TAKE THAT HILL!" and started running up and guys were getting ripped apart. He was like "marines are stupid tough guys see the Army boys are smart" and he said that they called in a Airstrike on the bunker. So Marines are mostly known for their tough guy image

CKY1709
22nd Aug 2004, 14:37
the U.S. Marines are the most elite fighting force in the world... All great invasions in ww2 and Korea were Led by the U.S.M.C. There is nothing more deadly than a marine and his weapon. Marines arent stupid, they just have balls. In vietnam Marines suffered around 13,000 kia, and they are the smallest force in the military, you got to have respect for them. All great snipers and marksmen were marines scout/snipers.

Marine Corpes for life

Clean
22nd Aug 2004, 15:16
Marines are the First To Fight...Marines ain't stuck up,but if some are they deserve to be...Their the best!

Jsans
22nd Aug 2004, 15:21
[QUOTE]Originally posted by CKY1709
[B]the U.S. Marines are the most elite fighting force in the world... All great invasions in ww2 and Korea were Led by the U.S.M.C. There is nothing more deadly than a marine and his weapon. Marines arent stupid, they just have balls. In vietnam Marines suffered around 13,000 kia, and they are the smallest force in the military, you got to have respect for them. All great snipers and marksmen were marines scout/snipers.

you mean all the great invasions in the pacific theater of ww2 i dont think there where marines in normandy or anzio and if there were it was just a few

also there is a difference between between being stupid and having balls. in the story that guy told with the marines just runing to the bunker thats called stupid not ballsy(i mean no offence i have alot of respect for any one who has fought and died for our country)

CKY1709
22nd Aug 2004, 17:14
Thats not stupid, they were told to charge the bunker so they did. How can you say marines are stupid? You shouldnt say that about anyone serving in the military. Besides thats one story if its even true!

AgentOrange_section8
22nd Aug 2004, 18:24
Look the storys true ok the guy i know got purple hearts the whole deal he got shot 5 times anyways theres no reason to DISS the Marines or any one who fights for the U.S.A because they do one hell of a job my dads in the Airforce i know its not cool as the marines or army or anything but there aint no reason to disrespect the Marines they followed their orders their platoon leader said charge the hill and they did with out question and thats dedication man! Now they dont have to charge any hills so we are very lucky now a days but anyways man Marines are still hardcore so are the Army Airforce and Navy!! dont disrespect they make sure you can sleep at night! or even be on a damn computer!:) anyways im OUT

Soljiboy
22nd Aug 2004, 18:34
How stupid, the marines were only in the pacific CKY, there were no arines in d-day, they were in iwo jima saipan and okinawawa. and there were some army in there to, but only a little platoon of army SF. and the marines arent the most elite fighting force in the world, in my opinion the army rangers are. my cousin is a marine and my brother is a ranger. and my cousin told me that if the army and marines were to go into an all out fight, depending on how long it lasted one branch would win. marines are trained for short strickes were they go in and blow everything up and kill everybody. but he also said that if the firefight dragged on too long they would have to pull out because the marines arent trained for prolonged firefights, and they would have to send the army. so in a long fight, the army is better, but for short srikes, the marines are better. they are trained for different situations. and no the marines dont go first. army special forces, army rangers, and navy seals go first. but they go to recon the area.

ACEofSPADES87
22nd Aug 2004, 20:44
The Marines fought in the Pacific against Japan, i dont belive they were in europe.

CKY1709
22nd Aug 2004, 23:37
yeah... did you see mail call during the d-day period.. they talked about marine beach assualts. and i thought they said some marines were there on d-day

CKY1709
22nd Aug 2004, 23:41
my cousin is a marine as well, and no they were not just trained for short fights. In vietnam the marines were in plenty of long fought fights and won. The army rangers are still a part of the Army which is one fighting force. And when it comes down to it, the marines are better trained and equipped then the army. Thats why im joining the marines ans not the army

ACEofSPADES87
22nd Aug 2004, 23:49
i agree that the marines are more well equipped and better trained than the army. But the Marines definately did not storm the beaches of Normandy, they stormed the beaches of the Guadacanal etc.. but definatly not Normandy.

CKY1709
23rd Aug 2004, 00:02
my grandfather fought in ww2 and he was in the pacific theater. he said that small groups of marines made beach assaults but i guess not on d-day. my bad.

AgentOrange_section8
23rd Aug 2004, 01:59
there WERE marines on D-Day the engineers! they had to clear the tank traps those big metal things!

CKY1709
23rd Aug 2004, 04:07
thank you agent orange... by the way agent orange is a good band

AgentOrange_section8
23rd Aug 2004, 05:00
^^^ yeah man so is camp kill yourself i like their movies the best though they are funni as ****

CKY1709
23rd Aug 2004, 14:32
hell yeah!

ACEofSPADES87
23rd Aug 2004, 16:21
Originally posted by AgentOrange_section8
there WERE marines on D-Day the engineers! they had to clear the tank traps those big metal things!

lol ya sure maybe. That was after we took the bunkers at the top of the beaches.

CKY1709
23rd Aug 2004, 19:35
are you kidding ace? cause the had to clear those things before they could even get most of the troops on to the beach because of the anti tank obstacles even way out in the water... Besides thats still part of the invasion, if they didnt clear those things they wouldnt be able to take over europe without their tanks. So marines aswell as any part of the military played a big role in the invasion

imported_mike_g
24th Aug 2004, 20:54
I was in the Army, but I have great respect for the Marines. I have always found the ones I met to be thoroughly professional and dedicated people. Though it may seem odd to some, they actually have a great reputation for innovative tactics, and adapting to situations. See this article for what they are up to in Iraq: http://slate.msn.com/id/2096027
I also appreciate how the Marines train all personnel, regardless of specialty, as infantry, which accounts for the fact that historically, Marine rear echelon personnel have, when the need arose, dropped whatever they were doing and fought like infantry. A very good, highly motivated, flexible light fighting force. I tip my hat to them.

CKY1709
25th Aug 2004, 02:20
What part of the Army, and when did you serve. Cause im want to join the marines in a year

AgentOrange_section8
25th Aug 2004, 04:02
^^^ im joinin in 2

imported_mike_g
25th Aug 2004, 16:48
What part of the Army, and when did you serve. Cause im want to join the marines in a year

1985-1987 Shortened term due to injury (just a stupid training thing, nothing remotely heroic I'm afraid).

Devil_Dog_0341
25th Aug 2004, 18:33
Ok... I am new to this forum and in reading around about this game I came across this subject. Being that I was in the USMC I think I can put my $0.02 in.

As someone said before, every service branch thinks they are better then the others. That is the way it has been and will always be. It is the mentality of the service to better itself and to create competition between themselves. The Marines behave this way because they have the longest and the hardest boot camp of the branches. Now... every branch has a special operations unit and you can not compare a SF unit to a service branch. The Marine Recon Special Forces Unit is very comperable to the other SF units that other branches have, but better than some.

The Marines are definately not in it for the short quick strikes. As a matter of fact they are the exact opposite, they are there for the long haul. They are first to go and last to leave during a conflict.

I have heard some funny stories too about every branch, some true and some not so true even from my friends. Every branch has stories about the others and it is not uncommon for them to be told to civilians to make their branch look better. I do not take what others say about the different branches very seriously.

CKY1709
25th Aug 2004, 22:59
USMC boot camp is 13 weeks right? Do you have weekends off?

ACEofSPADES87
26th Aug 2004, 00:13
ya it's exactly 13 weeks. Don't think you have the weekends off.

Devil_Dog_0341
26th Aug 2004, 12:35
Actually it depends on when you get there. It can be 15 to 16 weeks, mine was 16 weeks in length. During that time you will have one Sunday off, Vistor's Sunday, which is the Sunday before your graduation. You will have one or two weeks of duty (KP for the recruits, KP for the officers, guard, etc...). Every Sunday morning you have free time which is spent in your baracks doing laundry, writing letters, reading, studing or relaxing. You will be made to attend church, unless you are an aeithist.

Boot camp is divided in to three phases. Each phase last roughly a month in length. There is also a two week transition period from civilian life to military life. These two weeks do not count towards the total time of boot camp, that is why it is longer.

1st Phase is mostly physical training and training classes (history of the USMC, first aid, the different wars and conflicts, and weapons). At the end you will have a PT test which will consist of running 3 miles under a certain time, doing 80 sit-ups in 2 minutes and at least 5 pull-ups (this probably has changed since I was in). You will also do several obstacle courses and then the confidence course. You will also learn about being Pushed. Some drill.

2nd Phases (more PT) is were you actually learn about the weapons hands on, the standard rifle, M-60, M-249 SAW, M-2, Mark-19 and some others. You will learn about Fire Teams and maneuvers, be weary of those 2am wake-up calls to go on a 15 mile hump (hike). You will learn about tear gas first hand in the chamber, go on a 25 mile hump in one day and have lots of fun at the bayonet course. More drill.

3rd Phase, again more PT and getting ready for graduation. You will drill until your feet fall off and have inspections out the butt. You will also have your 5 mile run.

That is about it.

ACEofSPADES87
26th Aug 2004, 15:54
oh cool. Just like in Full Metal Jacket.

CKY1709
26th Aug 2004, 17:06
whats the standard weapon issued to riffleman marines

ACEofSPADES87
26th Aug 2004, 17:08
my guess is the m16a2

CKY1709
26th Aug 2004, 17:12
devil dog, when were you in the marines? And how hard was boot camp, was it more physical or mental strain?

Devil_Dog_0341
26th Aug 2004, 17:18
I think the standard rifle is still the M16A2 or even the M16A3 but I think they are also going over to the M4A1 rifles now.

Devil_Dog_0341
26th Aug 2004, 17:24
Originally posted by CKY1709
devil dog, when were you in the marines? And how hard was boot camp, was it more physical or mental strain?

I was in the USMC in the late 90's. Boot camp was the best darn thing I could ever have done. The physical part of it is nothing and they will prepare you for it. The mental part was the hardest. Asking for permission to speak, permission to use the head (restroom), getting used to some one yelling in your face, no eye contact, and always getting in trouble no matter what you do. I always thought, boy our platoon sucks because we where doing extra-PT all the time, but it was not. They have a reason for eveything.

CKY1709
26th Aug 2004, 17:29
yeah im looking foward to joining in a little more than a year. My cousin joined, and its always been somthing that i wanted to be a part of.

Devil_Dog_0341
26th Aug 2004, 18:51
When you sign up... do not sign up as your MOS being Open. Opens are usually some sort of infantry or where ever they need people at the time.

CKY1709
26th Aug 2004, 23:09
i want to be infantry. My cousin is in demolitions. what part were you in?

CKY1709
26th Aug 2004, 23:11
There is an M16a3?? ive never heard of it

SgtSpecht1234
27th Aug 2004, 00:29
From what i heard, the army and marines yell and put you down and stuff to turn you into killers, because thats all you ar ein the service. A killer. Once your dead your useless to them, ya know, cause you cant kill, and your not helping anyone. They yell to turn you mean, because out on the real battlefield, you gotta be mean, or a killer to shoot, or else your useless to them, thats why they yell at you so much and stuff. Personally, im not going to join the service, because i dont fell like turning into an as*hole or something, or a killer, because thats all you really are, no matter what branch your in, they will teach you how to kill someone.

CKY1709
27th Aug 2004, 02:00
yeah but just because your in the service doesnt mean your an *******. My cousin is in the marines and he is one of the nicest people i know. Its more than just killing, its killing to serve your country and protect the world from evil. Killing in a war is not a sin, unless its like a civilian, its just cause.

SgtSpecht1234
27th Aug 2004, 02:02
But thats all the service does to you, it turns you into a killer, thats why i prefer not joining, i dont feel like killing anyone, and turning into a psycho when im older

CKY1709
27th Aug 2004, 02:05
my dad hasnt turned into a physco, nor my uncle, my cousin, i dont know anyone who has gone "physco" from being in the military.

SgtSpecht1234
27th Aug 2004, 02:08
not military, like wars, with Iraq and stuff, i know a lot of people from veitnam who are crazy now, and thats all the military does, trains people to be killing machines to fight in wars, and have no remorse for the people they killed

CKY1709
27th Aug 2004, 02:15
My dad was a vietnam vet, he still aint a phsyco. Joining the military isnt all about killing, its about personal accomplishments, People say that the U.S.M.C. was the best thing that happend to them

SgtSpecht1234
27th Aug 2004, 02:17
what can come out of good from killing hundreds of people, and saying that the USMC or US Army turned them into great people?

AgentOrange_section8
27th Aug 2004, 03:44
Thats what i hate people say "oh they are heartless killers" and BS like that..son if you had some other grown man pointing a gun at you ready to fire with out second thought you wouldnt shoot him first? you wouldnt blow his brains right out of his skull?? because he sure as hell would do that to you with out hesitation like in Iraq you think them Iraqi's got remourse and "mercy" for our US soldiers? NO they dont they blow them into tiny chunks of meat with RPG's and shoot them in the back from rooftops with AK-47s. Its their job they do it so people like you can be typing on your computer on a game forum they do it so people like you can even play damn games. They bascially sacrafice their lifes for people they dont even know and thats the thanks the soldiers get? "oh they are killers and they are psychos" with out those "killers" and "psychos" we wouldnt be here today. In Nam im sure it was way worse than whats happening now in Iraq but its still the same concept have some respect.

AgentOrange_section8
27th Aug 2004, 03:47
Besides half the time it isnt a Grown man pointing a gun at you its a little kid. You wonder why they go crazy can you imagine at 10 year old kid holding a fully automatic rifle ready to blow your brains out saying "**** america!!" and you have to turn him into a pile of red jelly. Killing kids and Women no one wants to do it but they have to because its survival because those kids and women will sure as **** kill you.

SgtSpecht1234
27th Aug 2004, 03:47
look, i do have respect, but im saying, thats all the Military creates, and most of the wars we were in we didnt need to even be in, and im just saying, all's the military creates is killers

AgentOrange_section8
27th Aug 2004, 03:49
We did need to be in those Wars or Conflicts or whatever the **** people call them now a days because if we wernt we sure as hell would have got taken over and the terrorism problem would be bigger than it is today and if we wernt we wouldnt have as many Allies as we do now. But yeah i agree that this war...i dont know why we went into Iraq...i think Bush just wanted the oil...

SgtSpecht1234
27th Aug 2004, 03:51
we also didnt need to be in Korea or Vietnam, and we should have never started **** with the Soviet Union. America is pushy, and always sticking their noses into other people's business, like when we got involved in the cold war...

Devil_Dog_0341
27th Aug 2004, 11:27
SgtSpecht I have no idea where you get the idea that the military turns you into a killer. I was in it and in the first Gulf War, and yes I have had to defend myself from the enemy, but I function just fine in the civilian world. I have not went "psycho" yet nor do I plan on doing so. The military trains you to defend your country. There is more to the military than just killing.

Now, I do not know the Vietnam Vets that you know, but everyone that I know is not a psycho, and trust me I know more than you ever will.

Every war that we were in, we needed to be in, whether it was Korea or Vietnam to the first Gulf War.

Joining the USMC was the best experience and decision that I ever did. It was not becuase they taught me to shoot a rifle, but because they instilled self confidence, discipline and honor beyond what I already had.

SgtSpecht1234
27th Aug 2004, 16:26
Why did we need to be in Korea? We didnt, we were just there because America stuck its nose in to other peoples business, Same with the Vietnam War, we just stepped in because of stupid politics, we just sent over thousands to die, and america, brace yourself for this one! failed to stop the spread of communism!!! And i get all this from the War Veterans that tell me about what happened, and they say thats all the service really trains people, and you have no idea what you'll turn into years ahead, you could be completely crazy from what the army made you do, and i know your going to say "were not mindlessly killing were defending the country!" Thats what they did in Vietnam, and that was the worst ever war ya know, The Persion Gulf and the war now, isnt even Half as bad as like WWII and Vietnam were. And also the Vets i know, killed A LOT of people, for no good reason at all, they did it because the service and Uncle Sam told them to.

AgentOrange_section8
27th Aug 2004, 16:33
My 10th grade Algebra teacher Mr. Scott Quinn was in Nam and he isnt crazy. Anyways the military doesnt just make "killers" there are diffrent jobs you can become a Cop,a cook, a Aircraft Mechanic, Radio Operators, Communications, Ammo, Cooks, you can become an Officer if you have College and be behind the desk, fighter pilots,transport pilots, Military Police, thats all i know from the Airforce i dont know anything else from any other branch except like infantry and engineers because my dad is in the airforce...oh well im out peace

SgtSpecht1234
27th Aug 2004, 16:37
Im just talking about infantry people, they can get Shellshocked and freak out, basically Section 8 stuff, now im sick of this dumb arugument, im done, its getting old. You guys can celebrate about killing people and being a great soldier and the USMC turned me into a great person even though i killed tons of people, im finished arguing, you just go on with your Convo's.

ACEofSPADES87
27th Aug 2004, 18:19
We went to Nam and Korea because of the Domino effect. I agree that we didn't need to be there. My Uncle Ronald found that out the hard way...

"Staten Island Advance
It's Your Opinion
Date: Post October 4, 1969

Slain GI found war hateful

I just read about the death of a Staten Islander, Ronald Huffman, in Vietnam. I wrote to Ron after his letter appeared in the It's Your Opinion column, because I wanted to get to know the type of person who would write about our borough's flag.

Since that time and for the past three months he and I wrote to each other. Ironic, though it may seem, in his last letter Ron answered a question I asked him: How he felt about the war he was so much a part of. I want you to share in his answer. Maybe it'll make everyone start to think and, most of all, act before more of our servicemen lose their lives in vain. His answer follows:

"I guess I may as well get to answering your question. How do I feel about the war? That's a hard question to answer. Sometimes I think it's right, but most of the time I feel we should get out. The other day a friend of mine (another medic) was killed. Since I've been here two good friends have been killed and too many friends have been hurt. How can I like a war that kills and hurts my friends? One guy I came in contact with became a real close buddy of mine. We went to Recon together and hung around together. One day we walked into an ambush. There were only eight of us. My lieutenant got hit with a white phosphorous grenade. His back went up in flames. Sid, my friend was helping me put out the fire when the dinks opened up again with a machine gun. Sid got hit in the head, right between the eyes. He was only about a foot from me. That's when I decided this war stunk. A lot of people in the States don't realize that we're losing this war. The VC and NVA are experienced jungle fighters, we're not. Another strike against us is the South Vietnamese. They don't care who runs this country. As long as they're left alone to tend their rice paddies and smoke their opium everything is fine. They pay taxes to the VC now, so they aren't worried about that. Well those are my reasons for hating this war. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. I'll do my job as long as I'm here though."

Well, that was Ron's answer. Nine days after he wrote that, Pfc. Ronald Huffman became a part of the casualty list, another number to be added to the death toll in Vietnam. When will it all stop? "

I don't think every war is absolutely necassary. But sometimes things just happen ,just cause they happen. I see war as part of our nature. People been going to war for thousands of years. We just need to do our job whether we agree with war or not, because we're fighting for our safety and hopefully the freedom of all mankind.

But I don't see the war in Iraq as being "a bad war". Yes, maybe we didn't find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but it's better to safe than sorry.

-justin

AgentOrange_section8
27th Aug 2004, 18:54
Yo ace that post was ill man! but you stole my name!! whats wrong with you man you cant take my name like that!

ACEofSPADES87
27th Aug 2004, 19:02
sorry man, it's just that, that name is so great.:rolleyes:

grubman
27th Aug 2004, 20:35
Re WW2 in particular the European theatre.

It always make me smile when I hear/read yanks talking about WW2

I'm not much of a typist so i'll keep this brief.

1 At no time was the US homeland threatened with invasion. Most of the US population was isolationist (cowardly?) until US embargoes forced the Japanese into war.

2 The fact that the US was the only beneficiary of what was essentially a European civil war was due mainly to neat diplomacy (stay out, but SELL the Brits the hardware) and timely intervention once the Germans were beaten militarily by the USSR.

3 The Hollywood version is very entertaining but mainly b------it.
Read some books, find the truth. Example - when the film U571 was shown in the UK, the film was shown with a grovelling caption at the end that the whole work was fiction and that the Enigma machine was captured by crew of HMS Bulldog 3 years before the yanks even entered the war. I can cite many other examples if you care to respond.

4 Military service IS in most cases, a good thing for most young men, it teaches most of them not to be thieving, bull----ting, lazy, pot-smoking wasters who can't get what they want just by pestering mum for long enough.
If you really want to impress, work 20% harder and take an Officers training. Then you'll really find out about doing things that your better nature tells you isn't right.

5 PS2 war is fun. Real war is horrible. I mean HORRIBLE.
More horrible than you can imagine.

I guarantee it.

6 And most importantly - Just because the US came out financially and influentially top-dog out of WW2 (largely due to geography)and what your grand and great grand-daddies did with fresh troops and up-to-date-equipment after the main protagonists had punched each other out does not make your b-lls any bigger than mine or anyone else's - BIG mistake.

7 Man - for man, the most feared soldier in the world is the Gurkha - fact.

Google it.

Responses welcome.

I can do this all day.

Not anti Yank - just pro- truth.

Dave

ACEofSPADES87
27th Aug 2004, 21:15
in response to....
3. Give me more examples plz. pretty intersting.




6. Ok so your saying the only reason why we won WW2 was because we waited till the other more involved nations took each other out before we jumped in?

7. who is Gurkha?

grubman
27th Aug 2004, 22:24
Will respond tomorrow.

Getting kinda late here!

See Ya.

CKY1709
28th Aug 2004, 15:14
To who ever said we didnt stop the spread of communism, that isnt true. IN the Korean war, North Korea Never gained control of the south, So the Korean war did prevent the spread of communism in South Korea. And the U.S. has a right to be "PUSHY," The united states is the most powerfull nation in the world and will step up to anyone. I believe that the both the korean war and vietnam war was necesary. We are just lucky communism didnt spread all throught out asia.

ACEofSPADES87
28th Aug 2004, 16:41
ya but Vietnam is still communist. We could've not went to Vietnam and have milliones of people not die and the end result would still be the same.

SgtSpecht1234
28th Aug 2004, 20:17
yeah it was me who said america is pushy, cause we are, were basically bullies ya know, we push around everyone and try to tell them what to do, and no in korea, we didnt stop it, becasue we never freed the north, but saved the south, and vietnam wasnt necessary, tons of people just died, and we didnt stop the "evil" communist ways. The vietnam war was all politics, it was basically a "safe" war because there were no nuclear devices used... so The Presidents said it was ok to get involved....

CKY1709
28th Aug 2004, 21:50
we werent trying to free the north!!!
i dont know why you thought that. The only reason the UN went in was because the North Invaded the south, but never took over. So we did stop the spread of communism into south Korea.

ACEofSPADES87
28th Aug 2004, 23:20
We did such a great job saving the south, we decided to free the North, but the Chinese started sending troops into North Korea so we pulled out.

SgtSpecht1234
29th Aug 2004, 00:25
Jesus Tap dancing christ...im not even gonan go on, this can last forever....or untill SSN 67 comes out, then im gonna lock myself in my room and not come out unless i need the bathroom, or to eat.......

CKY1709
29th Aug 2004, 02:19
China came into the war because they believed that the UN troops were going to come into china, not to save the north. The vietnam war was not a war with a high death toll considering it lasted almost ten years when the korean ended about the same amount of americans were dead after 3 years. Vietnam was a very bad casualty war all around. But the said part about vietnam was that alot of people died from friendly fire :(

SgtSpecht1234
29th Aug 2004, 02:23
Jesus tap dancing christ...

ACEofSPADES87
29th Aug 2004, 17:29
CKY, you said Vietnam did not have a high death toll, and then you said it did... make up your mind.

How's this for casualties during vietnam...

Laos- over 2 million
Cambodia- over 1 million
U.S.- 58,000
Vietnamese- Alot

SgtSpecht1234
29th Aug 2004, 17:33
The Vietnamese total had over...3 million, including Civilians, NVA, and Viet cong

CKY1709
29th Aug 2004, 17:56
i said a high casualty rate you dumb455, casualties include injuries. I dont know if you knew that.

CKY1709
29th Aug 2004, 17:57
NVA suffered around 660,000 KIA

ACEofSPADES87
29th Aug 2004, 18:05
Originally posted by CKY1709
i said a high casualty rate you dumb455, casualties include injuries. I dont know if you knew that.

stfu. I thought you said deathtoll twice .

SgtSpecht1234
30th Aug 2004, 00:16
actually the NVA sufferd about 1.1 million KIA...

CKY1709
30th Aug 2004, 01:53
actually NVA and VC put together was about 1.1 million. 47,000 americans dies hostile deathes, and about 10,600 died of non- hostile deaths, thats amazing all those non hostile deaths, i know malaryia was pretty bad, and polio as well, but what else accounted for the non- hostile deaths

SgtSpecht1234
30th Aug 2004, 01:57
probably like snake bites, and maybe poisonous plants

CKY1709
30th Aug 2004, 14:19
there were probably quick sand pits and stuff like that. As well as many diseases from the water. As well as animal attacks. But i mean 10,000 is like 1/5 of the deaths. Something big had to be happening

grubman
30th Aug 2004, 17:27
Ace Of spades

Sorry 4 delay responding - hassle with password


in response to....
3. Give me more examples plz. pretty intersting.

OK, Every Hollywood WW2 Prisoner of war movie from "Bridge of the river Kwai" to "Harts War" omits to mention that not a single US Serviceman was credited with a "home run" from captivity during the war.

'The Great Escape' happened in reality on the night of March 24/25th, 1944 and only 1 US born serviceman was involved (serving in the Canadian Airforce).

In 'Memphis Belle'. it is never mentioned that the RAF had been carrying out bombing raids on the European mainland since 1940 (don't forget that the British had been fighting since Sept. 1939)
The USAAF only began active operations against Germany in 1943!

http://www.multied.com/aviation/History3/Daylight.html

During 'The Battle of the Bulge', every serious historian agrees that a major American disaster was averted because the SS armoured column heading for Antwerp quite simply ran out of fuel.



The Gurkha Rifleman from the mountains of Nepal is the only 'Foreign Legion' in the British Army.

Known as 'tree frogs' or 'yellow Germans' to other infantrymen, they are a study in themselves.
Google 'History of the gurkhas' and find out why these dangerous little b'-$&s are so feared.

Will respond on your other question later - the kids need putting in bed!

grubman
30th Aug 2004, 19:13
Ace of Spades

6. Ok so your saying the only reason why we won WW2 was because we waited till the other more involved nations took each other out before we jumped in?

Good question, answer is, yes and no.

In the European theatre, you only have to look at the dates involved.

In August 1943 -

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JAP/is_3_12/ai_110620103

After Kursk , the Germans were beaten militarily, it was only a matter of time before the Russians would work their way westwards all the way to the English Channel if they were of a mind to.

The effect of air-bombing on German industry was negligible - read Albert Speer (Nazi Armaments Minister) "Inside the 3rd Reich" and the main US infantry involvement (actually putting men on the ground) in Europe did not begin until D-Day, - nearly a whole year later.

Look at the German/Russian battle lines in June 1944 - The combined Allied operation on D-Day was only hastening the inevitable defeat of the Nazis by the USSR.

Patton felt this way too.

Whether by accident or design, the US was the only power that emerged from WW2 favourably.

British Empire contribution - Time

US contribution - Resources

Russian contribution - Lives

Who 'won' what?

The Russians won an expanded buffer zone against a hostile West that abhorred Communism. Lost millions of lives. Cities wrecked.

The Americans won the industrialised half of Europe.
Lost - Acceptable war casualties.

The British won the moral right to sit at the top-table at the UN.
Pffft!

Lost - Empire bankrupted, Industry ruined - no Marshall Aid here!, some food items in the UK were rationed for longer than in Germany!
Crushing lend/lease debts to US banks still being paid well into the 1980's!


Accident or superb diplomacy?

Certainly nothing to do with US soldiers being superior or more manly or better endowed in the testicle department.

Militarily, the US Commanders made more than their fair share of
terrible moves - Kasserine Pass - caused by US commanders ignoring British desert tactics advice, pathetic display at Anzio, Gen. M Clark's decision to head for Rome and glory against orders that prolonged the killing of Allied troops in Italy by months in a decision that Churchill (half American)
said that he would have had him shot for!

Roosevelt once made a speech regarding Lend/Lease that I wish I could find a transcript of that went along the lines - If your neighbour's house is on fire, you lend him your hose and if the hose gets destroyed, he has to pay for it.

I would suggest that if my neighbours house was on fire, I WOULD JUMP OVER THE FENCE AND HELP HIM PUT IT OUT!

Wouldn't you?


Far Eastern theatre - a slightly different matter - slightly.

Regards
Grub

SgtSpecht1234
31st Aug 2004, 02:58
See, we Russians saved everyones butts, now i want an apology from everyone who made fun of us or called us "Ruskies" or "commies"....:D

CKY1709
31st Aug 2004, 21:11
Germany would have been defeated with or with out russia. Russia barely had the resources or the man power left to beat germany by themselves. And the U.S. Didnt wait for all the other nations to fight most of the germans off. The U.S. was more involved with Japan than with europe. D-day was very successfull because it made Germany take forces from russia and deploy them to france. So im sorry grubman but the U.S. played a huge role in ww2

grubman
31st Aug 2004, 22:00
Germany would have been defeated with or with out russia.

Fact is (and let's stick to facts here) Russia had absorbed everything that the Nazis had to throw at them and were in Poland by June 1944 - By August 1944 they were in East Prussia, - Germany itsself!
Look at a map, do your research!
I spent 3 years of my life doing very little else!

Russia barely had the resources or the man power left to beat germany by themselves.

Nonsense - They already had them beaten!
Russian war production increased year-on-year between 1941 and 1945 - Read Albert Speer. Read Alan Clarke's 'Barbarossa'.

And the U.S. Didnt wait for all the other nations to fight most of the germans off.

In the European theatre, by accident or design, that is EXACTLY what happened.

The U.S. was more involved with Japan than with europe.

Let's stick with Europe for this discussion eh, let's leave the Pacific for another day?

D-day was very successfull because it made Germany take forces from russia and deploy them to france.

After the massive loss of manpower and materiel on the Eastern front and arguably more importantly, having LOST the production battle with the USSR Hitler simply did not have the resources left to fight a war on ONE front let alone two.

Fact - An alarmingly high proportion of German garrison soldiers defending the Atlantic wall were 3rd string units, drafted foreigners, 'weissbrot' battallions (sickly soldiers with stomach complaints and other ailments) and other rag-tag-and-bobtails.

I'm not making this up you know!

So im sorry grubman but the U.S. played a huge role in ww2

Agreed.
Just a different one than in the perception of most Americans (and British for that matter after 60 years of Hollywood revisionist propaganda).

CKY1709
1st Sep 2004, 01:41
russia could barely afford weapons for their entire army. Nor could they produce enough ammo for all of them. Russias army was pretty weakend towards the end of the war. I just studied ww2 for an entire term. Given Russia did occupy the germans making D-Day possible. And The pacific theatre did relate to the Europe Theatre. If the U.S. wasnt involved in a war with japan, they would have been fighting nazis fulll force. So the war with japan does tie into the fact that the U.S. wasnt waiting for the other nations to weaken the enemy. And i do alot of research as well. I'm in A.P. History and thats what im majoring in. I think that its unfair to say that the U.S. Waited for other nations to weaken the enemy then take all the credit. Although im slightly more educated on the vietnam war.

ACEofSPADES87
1st Sep 2004, 01:45
How did we get on the subject of WW2 anyways. I thought we were talking about nam. lol

CKY1709
1st Sep 2004, 01:49
hahah yeah i know.... but what country is grubman from cause he def. aint american. Grubman have you fought in a war, cause you say war is hell?

ACEofSPADES87
1st Sep 2004, 01:53
It says he's from manchester. And he claims he's NOT an anti-yank. Hmmmm. But I do get the points he's making. But unfortunately I'm too lazy to do such research.

SgtSpecht1234
1st Sep 2004, 02:34
Hey we saved you, and you know it! :D just think of Stalingrad, if we lost there, then the world might be living under a nazi flag, thats no lie, cause the fate of the world was in THE RUSSIANS hands at Stalingrad, and yes it took a while for everyone to get weapons, but thats stalins fault, he's the one that started the huge draft, every man over 18 was drafted and shipped to Stalingrad, and we Beat them back, and yes, America did play a major roll, but i dunno if they played as big of one as the Mighty Soviet Union!!! Im not saying the Americans didnt play a crucial role, but the Russians, i think personally, and a little history research had a little bit more involvement, and we did capture Berlin also...(I know Eisonhower let us, but we were also the closest! :D )

Hitman47
1st Sep 2004, 04:36
Originally posted by Clean
Marines are the First To Fight...Marines ain't stuck up,but if some are they deserve to be...Their the best!


ummmm actually Navy SEALs and Army Rangers are the first to fight. the marines clean up after them and then the army. but you can say they are first to fight actually. because they actually fight head on whereas SEALs and Rangers are usually dropped behind enemy lines. and as for the marines being the best. that is definetley NOT TRUE. they are grunts not even 1/2 as trained as a SEAL or a Ranger. thats why they are spec ops and marines arent. in a way (i want this to come out as positive as possible) marines and other regualrs are cannon fodder. but then again. were the US and we have the most elite military program in the world. thats y no one will fight us toe to toe.

grubman
1st Sep 2004, 14:31
CKY - Yes, 13 years British Army. My company were 2nd line attached to Guards Armoured Div. during 'Gulf War 1' taking Iraqi wounded and prisoners.

3 tours Northern Ireland,

1 tour Kosovo as a reservist (By far the worst)

No I never killed anyone to my knowledge and no I was never shot at - the nearest I ever got to being killed was by a Dutch lorry driver who fell asleep at the wheel.

Seeing the aftermath in Kosovo was horrible, seeing 35 year old men throwing half-bricks at 10 year old Catholic schoolgirls trying to walk to school in NI was horrible, searching (and smelling) a destroyed Iraqi Obs. post was horrible.

Ace - What has living in Manchester got to do with being Anti- American? Please don't do that cheap trick that Israel does, that is:- If you question Israeli policy then you must be anti-semitic and therefore a bad person - QED.

I, like you am very patriotic and I, for example, wish that an entire British, Australian etc. Army hadn't been humiliated in Singapore.

But it happened - face it!

Remember, In war, the first casualty is always the truth, and history is always written by the winners!

ACEofSPADES87
1st Sep 2004, 20:52
What the hell are you talking about grubman? I stated that you were from Manchester b/c CKY wanted to know where you were from.

grubman
1st Sep 2004, 21:22
Sorry mate, my mistake, I just re-read the thread.

What is it Churchill said about "two nations DIVIDED by a common language"?

Apologies.

Hitman47
1st Sep 2004, 22:09
ARMY RANGERS ALL THE WAY!!!!!! T minus 2 1/4 years and counting until i begin training. im so crazy i even got a slot reservedin the spec ops training program at fort benning YEAUH. just gotta wait til i get a call back from Sgt. Milano (hope i spelled that right) so he can come to my hosue and we can talk. :-D

ACEofSPADES87
1st Sep 2004, 23:36
Originally posted by grubman
Sorry mate, my mistake, I just re-read the thread.




no problemo.

SgtSpecht1234
1st Sep 2004, 23:38
13 days till shellshock! dont worry guys! it will go by fast!!! As Did summer vacation...

CKY1709
2nd Sep 2004, 02:28
are you kidding??? you cannot compare one branch of the military's spec. ops to an entire branch. The marines have a spec. ops too. And dont think that the Army Rangers are anymore special than any marine. Marines are just as well trained and equipped. Marine boot camps last alot longer than army trainin. I give it to the SEALS cause they are the best spec. op group but im sorry the Army Rangers are no better than the Marine Spec. op. AND its less than 2 years when i join the Marines.... RESPECT to any branch though, i must say anyone with the balls to serve this nation i give thanks to.

SgtSpecht1234
2nd Sep 2004, 02:34
13 more days fellas....

Hitman47
2nd Sep 2004, 02:52
you just want to be a grunt? why nothing higher? after im done living my civilian life to its fullest im going to enlist in the Army for basic training then airborne training then pre ranger training then im off to fort benning for ranger school!!!! im a lucky one and i talked to a recruiter so hes going to reserve a training slot for me. as for you, gj goin for the marines. wed be lsot w/o you guys.

SgtSpecht1234
2nd Sep 2004, 03:02
13 more days...

Meta
3rd Sep 2004, 13:52
Whether or not the game claims they are US Army soldiers or not, they do appear to look more like Marines.

- Fragmentation vest is clearly marine issue (Although U.S. Army soldiers could occationally get their hands on them, not en masse).
- Pouches appear to be those for the M14 not Universal Small Arms Pouches typically used by U.S. Army troop.
- Also, if it's not an attempt at making the pants look dirty, they may be camouflage. For most of the war, and later years at that, the only line units using camouflage were the marines.

ACEofSPADES87
3rd Sep 2004, 16:18
In the cut scene when your riding in the chopper on your way to the 1st mission, the guy in the chopper says "we're the United States Army .. mean mothas!"

ACEofSPADES87
3rd Sep 2004, 16:20
meta

The Flak jacket Was standard issue for the Army as well as the Marines. But the Army had the choice of not wearing them due to dehydration or exaustion. The Marines unfortunatley didn't have that option.

Meta
3rd Sep 2004, 19:59
I understand that. Trust me, moving around in one is not entertaining. ;)

The fragmentation vest being use, however, is of marine issue.

Note in several of the shots on the right shoulder there is a band running down along the edge of the sleeve. This was to prevent a rifle sling from falling off the shoulder when the weapons was carried in that fashion. Also the lack of a collar makes it one of two fragmentation vest varieties. The M52, or the Marine issued version.

Because of the band, it is indeed marine issue. :)

For reference purposes, take a look at various screen shots and observe the vest, then compare: This is a Marine wearing his issued fragmentation armor.

http://www.vietnampix.com/bilder/face2a.jpg

Alternatively, this M67 army issue fragmentation armor (Most commonly seen in movies and television shows.)

http://www.pbase.com/image/16479012.jpg

Finally, this is perhaps the other vest you may beconfusing the marine vest with. The M52 Version.

http://www.thevietnam-database.co.uk/USarmy/M52flak.jpg


Also, if you note several of the screen shots, you will see a large number of pouches on the rear of the belt. These thin pouches are much more likely M14 pouches (standard marine weapon up until issue of the M16) than they are M16 magazine pouches.

:) Remember, video game designers are very talented and the artists are exceptional! But lets be realisitic. It wouldn't be the first time you've seen a flaw in a video game now would it? ;)

SgtSpecht1234
5th Sep 2004, 04:04
you guys should see a picture of my Flak vest...its weird, and is dated 1963...

Hitman47
5th Sep 2004, 04:18
Originally posted by CKY1709
are you kidding??? you cannot compare one branch of the military's spec. ops to an entire branch. The marines have a spec. ops too. And dont think that the Army Rangers are anymore special than any marine. Marines are just as well trained and equipped. Marine boot camps last alot longer than army trainin. I give it to the SEALS cause they are the best spec. op group but im sorry the Army Rangers are no better than the Marine Spec. op. AND its less than 2 years when i join the Marines.... RESPECT to any branch though, i must say anyone with the balls to serve this nation i give thanks to. Marine training isnt half as long as Ranger training because to become an army ranger you must
1. complete basic training
2. complete airborne training and get a reccomendation from a commanding officer
3. qualify for pre-ranger school
4. complete pre ranger school
5. qualify for ranger school.
6. complete the 7 phases of ranger training which is alone im guessinng at least 2 times longer than that of a marine infantryman.
i wouldnt say something so emotionally charged if i didnt know waht i was talking about.

AgentOrange_section8
5th Sep 2004, 04:20
plus you have to take written tests and all that crap

ACEofSPADES87
5th Sep 2004, 18:40
Originally posted by Meta
I understand that. Trust me, moving around in one is not entertaining. ;)

The fragmentation vest being use, however, is of marine issue.

Note in several of the shots on the right shoulder there is a band running down along the edge of the sleeve. This was to prevent a rifle sling from falling off the shoulder when the weapons was carried in that fashion. Also the lack of a collar makes it one of two fragmentation vest varieties. The M52, or the Marine issued version.

Because of the band, it is indeed marine issue. :)

For reference purposes, take a look at various screen shots and observe the vest, then compare: This is a Marine wearing his issued fragmentation armor.

http://www.vietnampix.com/bilder/face2a.jpg

Alternatively, this M67 army issue fragmentation armor (Most commonly seen in movies and television shows.)

http://www.pbase.com/image/16479012.jpg

Finally, this is perhaps the other vest you may beconfusing the marine vest with. The M52 Version.

http://www.thevietnam-database.co.uk/USarmy/M52flak.jpg


Also, if you note several of the screen shots, you will see a large number of pouches on the rear of the belt. These thin pouches are much more likely M14 pouches (standard marine weapon up until issue of the M16) than they are M16 magazine pouches.

:) Remember, video game designers are very talented and the artists are exceptional! But lets be realisitic. It wouldn't be the first time you've seen a flaw in a video game now would it? ;)

I stand corrected. you know your ****. Props given. I'm just saying how can you tell from the screens of the game that it's the standard issue M52 vests or not?

SgtSpecht1234
5th Sep 2004, 20:56
Whats the difference!!?!?!?!? they all wore flak vests!!!! lol

Hobbit
5th Sep 2004, 21:01
I just read throught he entire thread, Very interesting stuff. One question though.

Didn't the US get involved in ww2 fighting japan and germany only AFTER they were declared war by Japan? If that didn't happen, I wonder if they would have "come to the rescue" like they did now. Didn't they want to sit it out?

And what about Band of Brothers, isn't that a true story about US heroics?

grubman
5th Sep 2004, 21:05
Basically correct.

America's hand was forced by the 'unexpected' attack on Pearl and the treaty obligation of Hitler to declare war on the US which allowed unlimited U-boat warfare on US flagged transatlantic shipping.

CKY1709
5th Sep 2004, 22:00
Band of Brothers is about the heroic journey of the 101st airborne during its jump at normandy on d-day.... its a really good series. But WWII was a eurpopean civil war, there was no need for the U.S. to join from its point of view. I believe they would have joined the war anyway.

SgtSpecht1234
6th Sep 2004, 03:41
i dunno, i doubt that, we really had no reason to go, and Hitlers armies were losing pretty badly by 1942/43, so if we didnt enter, The Soviet Union, BRitain, and the other allies probably would have won the war without us

AgentOrange_section8
7th Sep 2004, 07:02
^^^ exactly why would the USA want to sit around and look like cowards? typical thats how we are dude always getting involved into **** we dont even need to be involved in and we wanted to look good kickin hitlers a** all over the place!

SgtSpecht1234
8th Sep 2004, 03:11
Yea, we see a fight going on, we just gotta jump in to look good...look at vietnam, we went, fought for about 11 years, and lost 58,000 people, and the outcome was the same...we just tried to look big 'n tuff...

CKY1709
8th Sep 2004, 19:09
WOW!! does anyone listen.. THE US WASNT FIGHTING HITLER AND THE NAZIS FULL FORCE AT ALL. WE WERE TAKING CARE OF JAPAN.... DONT SAY THAT THE US DID NOTHING IN WWII.. IF THE US WASNT ATTACKED BY THE JAPS WE PROBABLY WOULDNT JOIN THE WAR... BUT THEY DID! THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE CONQUERED GERMANY BUT THEY SURE AS HELL DID JAPAN. THE US NEVER WENT IN WWII TO "LOOK TOUGH." THEY WENT IN BECAUSE OF JAPAN.

Hitman47
8th Sep 2004, 22:14
Originally posted by CKY1709
WOW!! does anyone listen.. THE US WASNT FIGHTING HITLER AND THE NAZIS FULL FORCE AT ALL. WE WERE TAKING CARE OF JAPAN.... DONT SAY THAT THE US DID NOTHING IN WWII.. IF THE US WASNT ATTACKED BY THE JAPS WE PROBABLY WOULDNT JOIN THE WAR... BUT THEY DID! THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE CONQUERED GERMANY BUT THEY SURE AS HELL DID JAPAN. THE US NEVER WENT IN WWII TO "LOOK TOUGH." THEY WENT IN BECAUSE OF JAPAN. so eisenhower and patton were in germany for sight seeing? Carantan was just a pit stop to eat at dennys huh?? what was thing called D-Day? no your right. we didnt fight the nazis at all............:confused: maybe i read your post the wrong way but if u really meant we didnt fight the nazis... your horribly mistaken.

Hitman47
8th Sep 2004, 22:17
Originally posted by SgtSpecht1234
Yea, we see a fight going on, we just gotta jump in to look good...look at vietnam, we went, fought for about 11 years, and lost 58,000 people, and the outcome was the same...we just tried to look big 'n tuff... no thats not why we joined. we were attacked by japan and most of the world was under either hitlers or hirohitos control. and we were next on japans list. we werent going to sit there and let japan take us over. its obvious you were absent on the day we learned about WWII in social studies.

SgtSpecht1234
8th Sep 2004, 22:37
well i know that, but i mean, we would have jumped into WWII anyways, most likely to look big, but yeah Japan attacked us and we were dragged into it

CKY1709
9th Sep 2004, 00:56
OK you did read my post wrong cause i said they didnt fight the nazis full force.. i men that the us wasnt fully involved with europe because of japan

ArTsKiLLaRy
9th Sep 2004, 01:18
Hmmmm Marines were the ones on the frontlines, they weren't the ones back in Saigon shooting up into their veins...Marines were scattered from Da-Nang all the way up too Hue...Besides they were the ones that were in that stand-off at Khe Sahn....

CKY1709
9th Sep 2004, 01:38
Amen Thank you.... USMC FOR LIFE!

Hitman47
9th Sep 2004, 04:59
Originally posted by CKY1709
OK you did read my post wrong cause i said they didnt fight the nazis full force.. i men that the us wasnt fully involved with europe because of japan gotcha :)

Hitman47
9th Sep 2004, 05:05
there is nothing super special about a marine grunt. they get the job done and get it done well. but there are better soldiers than marines, ie SEALs, Army Rangers, Delta Force, Green Berets, basically any team under SOCOM is better than marines. hell you might think theyre first to fight,(they are in a lot of cases) but a lot of the time its the SEALs and other forces under SOCOM who are the first on the scene taking out keypoints and basically softening them (Charlie in this case) up for the marines then followed up by the army to establish base camp and a perimeter. dont get me wrong, marines are damn good warriors im just saying that theyre not the best.

CKY1709
9th Sep 2004, 10:47
You cannot compare a special force unit of a military branch to an entire branch... What about Marine Special ops? they are just as good as rangers. The marines have a variety of special forces (I.E. Amphibious)

Ducky
9th Sep 2004, 17:11
What the hell are you guys on? The only real marines are the Royal Marine Commando's of Her Magesties Armed Forces. They have the longest basic infantry training course in the world and they are much older than their yank counterparts. They would, could and have beatten U.S Marines in marksmanship, physical and mental compitions. There were no U.S marines on the Normandy beach's on D-Day, only U.S Navy beach parties. They were the one's who cleared the beach obsticles on the U.S beach's. If the yanks used the same tactics as the British did in Malaya "Hearts and Minds" and didn't have the typical "We're better than you and you know it!" attitude then there would have been far less dead.
By the way the Austrailians and New Zealanders pulled off better operations in Vietnam and suffered far less causulties during their stindt ('65-'72). I wounder why that was?
Anyway the S. A. S are far, far better than any of the U.S "Special Forces".

ArTsKiLLaRy
9th Sep 2004, 17:25
Yeah, I must admit the Austrailians did a hell of a job working with the Corps...But if you've seen the history channel they had a special about the Marine Corps Marksman...Hell them guys knew how to shoot very well with any rifle...

CKY1709
9th Sep 2004, 19:31
haha british marines are better? haha jeese h/o...... ok thanks i had to laugh at not only your studpid minded post but your name as well... DUCKY?.... You must be kidding me about British marines being better. I love retarted people who post here..... U.S.M.C. is far more advanced, equiped and trained... there might not have been any marine fighters on the beaches of normandy but were there any british soldiers in JAPAN? no there were not... And only the U.S.M.C. could have accomplished that as well as they did. NAVY ****ING SEALS would make S.A.S **** thier pants. I just dont understand why you would say that.....Maybe if you knew a thing about Vietnam or two then we can debate on vietnam.... but for now shut the hell up and go have some tea and trumpets...

Ducky
9th Sep 2004, 20:51
Originally posted by CKY1709
haha british marines are better? haha jeese h/o...... ok thanks i had to laugh at not only your studpid minded post but your name as well... DUCKY?.... You must be kidding me about British marines being better. I love retarted people who post here..... U.S.M.C. is far more advanced, equiped and trained... there might not have been any marine fighters on the beaches of normandy but were there any british soldiers in JAPAN? no there were not... And only the U.S.M.C. could have accomplished that as well as they did. NAVY ****ING SEALS would make S.A.S **** thier pants. I just dont understand why you would say that.....Maybe if you knew a thing about Vietnam or two then we can debate on vietnam.... but for now shut the hell up and go have some tea and trumpets...

Well, if it wasn't for deserter's from the Royal Marines in the early 18th centuary then there would be no U.S.M.C! The British army in the far east was fighting the jap's for longer than your precious corps. And after all the Allies only set foot on Japan its-self because the japs surrendered beforehand. Hell if it wasn't for us you would be bloody spanish! Don't worry we've had our own "Vietnam". It was in 1899 against the Boars, decendents of Dutch settler's to South Africa. Did you know that the U.S.M.C is actually larger than the British Army. And don't call me a retard, any one who believes that because thave got all the best kit doesn't mean they are the "BEST" must be! What i have seen of the Navy Seals is that they are probably the worst Special Forces units that have ever existed. I have to say i might have been a bit too sceptical of the U.S.M.C. Why don' tyou go and shut the hell up and go and defend and worship youre flawed constitution!

CKY1709
9th Sep 2004, 21:06
HAhA the NAVY SEALS are the worst Spec Ops ever... now i know for a fact you are retarted... USMC is the smallest part of the U.S. Military but yet it is bigger than britains army?

Clumsyorchid
9th Sep 2004, 21:15
but for now shut the hell up and go have some tea and trumpets...

No need for rudeness, we can all discuss this stuff without resorting to petty namecalling.

CKY1709
9th Sep 2004, 21:17
sorry Clumsy.... its just Ducky is being stupid.......haha NAVY SEALS worst spec ops that ever existed..... wow

Clumsyorchid
9th Sep 2004, 21:20
its just Ducky is being stupid

Your reading comprehension could use some work.

Be respectful, everyone has an opinion, and often times, it'll be different from your own.

CKY1709
9th Sep 2004, 21:24
Originally posted by Clumsyorchid
Your reading comprehension could use some work.

Be respectful, everyone has an opinion, and often times, it'll be different from your own.
well now you are insulting me....???... well im sorry i forgot since your a moderator you dont make typing mistakes... Well only 5 more days.....

p.s. i dont like clumsy anymore

Hitman47
9th Sep 2004, 22:36
Originally posted by CKY1709
You cannot compare a special force unit of a military branch to an entire branch... What about Marine Special ops? they are just as good as rangers. The marines have a variety of special forces (I.E. Amphibious) they have 2. Maritime Special Purpose Forces and Force Recon. yea and i havent heard of a spec ops team called amphibious. if you mean amphibious missions, all spec ops teams are trained for amphibious missions.

Hitman47
9th Sep 2004, 22:42
Originally posted by Ducky
Well, if it wasn't for deserter's from the Royal Marines in the early 18th centuary then there would be no U.S.M.C! The British army in the far east was fighting the jap's for longer than your precious corps. And after all the Allies only set foot on Japan its-self because the japs surrendered beforehand. Hell if it wasn't for us you would be bloody spanish! Don't worry we've had our own "Vietnam". It was in 1899 against the Boars, decendents of Dutch settler's to South Africa. Did you know that the U.S.M.C is actually larger than the British Army. And don't call me a retard, any one who believes that because thave got all the best kit doesn't mean they are the "BEST" must be! What i have seen of the Navy Seals is that they are probably the worst Special Forces units that have ever existed. I have to say i might have been a bit too sceptical of the U.S.M.C. Why don' tyou go and shut the hell up and go and defend and worship youre flawed constitution! your pretty stupid to think SEALs are the worst. maybe you were watching footage of the SAS not SEALs. and how you got hold of these tapes is beyond me. maybe james bond down from MI6 got it for ya. yea anywho SEALs are the best. end of story.

Hobbit
9th Sep 2004, 22:42
Originally posted by CKY1709
well now you are insulting me....???... well im sorry i forgot since your a moderator you dont make typing mistakes... Well only 5 more days.....

p.s. i dont like clumsy anymore

Why are you always calling everybody names. Always cursing around? You think you are really something don't you? You think you know everything and are really tough don't you?

And why shouldn't he insult you? You insult everybody else. What comes around goes around.

Clumsyorchid
9th Sep 2004, 22:49
Just to clarify, it was not an insult. You blatantly disregarded my previous post.

Hitman47
10th Sep 2004, 01:59
Originally posted by Ducky
Well, if it wasn't for deserter's from the Royal Marines in the early 18th centuary then there would be no U.S.M.C! The British army in the far east was fighting the jap's for longer than your precious corps. And after all the Allies only set foot on Japan its-self because the japs surrendered beforehand. Hell if it wasn't for us you would be bloody spanish! Don't worry we've had our own "Vietnam". It was in 1899 against the Boars, decendents of Dutch settler's to South Africa. Did you know that the U.S.M.C is actually larger than the British Army. And don't call me a retard, any one who believes that because thave got all the best kit doesn't mean they are the "BEST" must be! What i have seen of the Navy Seals is that they are probably the worst Special Forces units that have ever existed. I have to say i might have been a bit too sceptical of the U.S.M.C. Why don' tyou go and shut the hell up and go and defend and worship youre flawed constitution! sorry to burst your bubble ol chap, but the US military is bigger, more advanced, trained better, and well... just better than the british militarily.

CKY1709
10th Sep 2004, 02:21
good point hitman and i didnt blatanly disregaurd what you said Clumsy... its not like im the only who curses or calls people names.... and hobbit i dont make fun of everyone... just you cause i dont like you.... you came into the forum with an anti yank attitude... so i was defending my country from all you whinin european *****es who want to be american..... Why cant we all just get along....

Clumsyorchid
10th Sep 2004, 02:22
This is not up for discussion. I won't give another warning.

CKY1709
10th Sep 2004, 02:25
whats not up for discussion..... the fact that im the only one being warned when there are tons of other post 10X worse than mine?? im just curious i dont intend to be a wise *** right now

Edit: No swearing, 1337 or otherwise.

Hitman47
10th Sep 2004, 03:32
Originally posted by Clumsyorchid
This is not up for discussion. I won't give another warning. :-X

AgentOrange_section8
10th Sep 2004, 06:37
:D i'd never thought i'd see the day...where this forum turned into a Gamespot forum..full of arguments,name calling, banishments, topic close downs....*sigh*...this used to be a friendly place where we would put in ideas,tell each other things about the game,post up new videos, ask mods and that sort of stuff...now...its flame zone..lol oh well dudes

Hobbit
10th Sep 2004, 08:40
Originally posted by CKY1709
good point hitman and i didnt blatanly disregaurd what you said Clumsy... its not like im the only who curses or calls people names.... and hobbit i dont make fun of everyone... just you cause i dont like you.... you came into the forum with an anti yank attitude... so i was defending my country from all you whinin european *****es who want to be american..... Why cant we all just get along....

Well I am sorry if you thought I have an anti yank attitude. I don't have an anti yank attitude. I was just not saying it was the best nation with the best people that never made mistakes, like you. I still like the US, but I don't think that the country is perfect. Its political views for instance are far from perfect.

CKY1709
10th Sep 2004, 10:25
Originally posted by Hobbit
Well I am sorry if you thought I have an anti yank attitude. I don't have an anti yank attitude. I was just not saying it was the best nation with the best people that never made mistakes, like you. I still like the US, but I don't think that the country is perfect. Its political views for instance are far from perfect.
i know i never make mistakes, im perfect.

Ducky
10th Sep 2004, 12:25
Look, I apoligise for my remarks but don't think because the U.S Armed forces are so huge that they can do every thing. Even the smallest forces can be the best. The S.A.S. were formed in 1940-41 and are one of the most respected units in the world. In Afganistan a platoon of U.S soldiers were pinned down by a small group of Afgan fighters. An S.A.S. patrol out flanked the Afgan's and wiped them out. So what do u think of that.

Hitman47
10th Sep 2004, 19:33
youre right. were allies in the real world.... so lets be allies in the forum. US and BRITAIN = BEST FRIENDS FOREVER!!

grubman
10th Sep 2004, 20:52
Ducky - Rattled a few cages there mate!

Hitman - Agreed

Everyone else - GO AND SERVE! - There is a recruitment centre near YOU! or STFU

or at least

Get out from in front of your computers and read Gen. Colin Powell's book (amazon, 14.95) particularly the section on Vietnam where he ADMITS albeit through gritted teeth, that US forces in Vietnam were, er, CRAP! (all the gear. but no idea!) - I would suggest that
(just as an aside) you Google on 'operation success navy seals' then try 'operation success sas' then try 'mass surrender italy us rangers'.

READ SOMETHING then get back to me.

Hitman47
10th Sep 2004, 22:44
yes. ive noticed theres a few people here who try to debate about wars and branches of the military and weapons used by them when fact is they really dont know anything besides what they played in games or saw in the movies. i would also highly reccomend researching about this material. its very interesting and its always good to know about your country.


Grubman- have you read "Rouge Warrior" by Richard Marckino?

grubman
11th Sep 2004, 07:30
I never did Hitman, but I just read a review and it's on my list now!

PS love the typo! Isnt 'rouge' ladies make-up?!

Thanx

AgentOrange_section8
11th Sep 2004, 07:34
oh yeah for vietnam check out "Steel My Soldiers Hearts" by Col David H. Hackworth


that book rocks!

grubman
11th Sep 2004, 07:47
I was never much of a student until I read 'Barbarossa' by Alan Clarke about the German campaign is USSR.

I ended up receiving a degree based on that one book!

This got me a Short-Service commission in the Army and I ended up staying in for 13 years!

One book!

Hitman47
11th Sep 2004, 16:47
Originally posted by grubman
I never did Hitman, but I just read a review and it's on my list now!

PS love the typo! Isnt 'rouge' ladies make-up?!

Thanx AHAHAHAHA :p i just noticed that!!!! AHAHAHAHAHAH. :p

SgtSpecht1234
11th Sep 2004, 16:48
Im reading the Book Stalingrad By Antony Beevor, its actually really good to, puts the war in perspectives from the USSR's side and The Nazi's side

SgtSpecht1234
11th Sep 2004, 16:50
Im reading the Book Stalingrad By Antony Beevor, its actually really good to, puts the war in perspectives from the USSR's side and The Nazi's side

Hitman47
11th Sep 2004, 16:57
Originally posted by grubman
I never did Hitman, but I just read a review and it's on my list now!

PS love the typo! Isnt 'rouge' ladies make-up?!

Thanx yea i just noticed that ahahahahahah:p

d-2-502-101abn
19th Sep 2004, 20:28
I reposted my comments elsewhere, rather than have two versions, this link (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=45361) will take you to the updated content (correction of typos and the addition of clarifications).

Those who have a desire to deepen their understanding about things military -- including some enlistment advice and military history -- can follow the link above; as for others, they can skip my long dissertation's impact on the flow and context of this post :) ...

Take point troop and don't get yourself waxed to the max. Geronimo. -- d2

Hitman47
20th Sep 2004, 01:42
too long to read but im almost positive that you made a good point.

SgtSpecht1234
20th Sep 2004, 01:48
took the words right outta my mouth...