View Full Version : Marines Today vs. Yesteryear
First off I will declare that I do not mean any disrespect for any Marine serving now or in years past.
My question is this...
Is there any difference between a young man in the Marine Corps in the year 2010 and a young man in the Marine Corps during years past?
I just watched the 1st episode of "The Pacific" tonight and I have watched "Band of Brothers" many, many times. I feel like less of a man in comparison to those who served in our Armed Services during our great campaigns.
Again the question... Are our sodiers and Marines today different from their counterparts in years and wars past? Is the structure of the military different today? Do we have a more professional force in arms than we did 60 years ago?
How could we or do we categorize our fighting men and women of today versus the men who fought in Europe and the Pacific during our grandparents time?
Marines today are smarter and better trained than ever before, however thier mettle and esprit de corps is unchanged from generations past. My personal opinion.
dookie1481
03-15-10, 00:23
Marines today are smarter and better trained than ever before, however the thier mettle and esprit de corps is unchanged from generations past. My personal opinion.
I just can't imagine any way that we are as tough as those men were.
What they went through in training alone would likely kill or seriously injure a lot of Marines/soldiers today.
Jay
xrayoneone
03-15-10, 00:33
First off I will declare that I do not mean any disrespect for any Marine serving now or in years past.
My question is this...
Is there any difference between a young man in the Marine Corps in the year 2010 and a young man in the Marine Corps during years past?
I just watched the 1st episode of "The Pacific" tonight and I have watched "Band of Brothers" many, many times. I feel like less of a man in comparison to those who served in our Armed Services during our great campaigns.
Again the question... Are our sodiers and Marines today different from their counterparts in years and wars past? Is the structure of the military different today? Do we have a more professional force in arms than we did 60 years ago?
How could we or do we categorize our fighting men and women of today versus the men who fought in Europe and the Pacific during our grandparents time?
No difference. When I was giving a class to a group of Marines that served at the Chosin Reservoir I asked them that question. To a man they said they saw no difference between themselves at 18 and the Marines they saw then. They knew if "Modern Marines" were put in the same situation they would be up to the task. They would fight you if you tried to say that a Marine today was not of the same caliber. Esprit de Corps man. Gear has changed but the men are the same.
I had a Pacific Marine father, a Vietnam Marine brother and a Iraq Marine cousin. in my view the equipment and training are window dressing. The man who fights and bleeds for his brother Marine, no matter the odds, ferociously is the same today as at Belleau Woods, Guadalcanal, Khe San, and Fallujah.
None of these combat Marines I know were iron men. They were strong and fit but they were flesh and bone, they hurt, bled and feared like anyone else. The difference is they are driven beyond flesh and bone, don't know the word quit and will fight with whatever they have against whatever they face. I hiked one time afterwards with my brother for several days and he had just tennis shoes (yes, we were foolish), he had blisters upon blisters, and his feet bled for four days. Not one word of complaint or pain.
After their wars they lived quietly as family men and you might never know they were Marines. But I have been in a few tight spots with my dad and brother and I'll say this, there is no one I would want more by my side in dire straits than a Marine.
I think they still make Marines like they used to.
Yesteryear in toughness. Newbies in technology.. But the newbies still whip tail.
Marines of the past have set a very high standard, and the Marines of today strive to meet or exceed those expectations. A Marine is a Marine, no matter what Generation. Semper FI
I had a Pacific Marine father, a Vietnam Marine brother and a Iraq Marine cousin. in my view the equipment and training are window dressing. The man who fights and bleeds for his brother Marine, no matter the odds, ferociously is the same today as at Belleau Woods, Guadalcanal, Khe San, and Fallujah.
None of these combat Marines I know were iron men. They were strong and fit but they were flesh and bone, they hurt, bled and feared like anyone else. The difference is they are driven beyond flesh and bone, don't know the word quit and will fight with whatever they have against whatever they face. I hiked one time afterwards with my brother for several days and he had just tennis shoes (yes, we were foolish), he had blisters upon blisters, and his feet bled for four days. Not one word of complaint or pain.
After their wars they lived quietly as family men and you might never know they were Marines. But I have been in a few tight spots with my dad and brother and I'll say this, there is no one I would want more by my side in dire straits than a Marine.
I think they still make Marines like they used to.
Sir, that is an incredible post, I wholeheartily agree with you.
theblackknight
03-15-10, 06:59
People seem to get very romantic, I guess when talking about WW2. There are differences, but war is war is war. If you took men now, had them grow up in the same timeframe, get the same training,and fight the same war, I dont see how we would be different.
I just can't imagine any way that we are as tough as those men were.
Today's Marines are better trained, better conditioned, and better equipped than they have ever been. And they're every bit as mean.
John_Wayne777
03-15-10, 08:47
I just can't imagine any way that we are as tough as those men were.
You should have hung out in Fallujah. That would have quickly disabused you of any notion that somehow the younger guys were made of lesser mettle.
What they went through in training alone would likely kill or seriously injure a lot of Marines/soldiers today.
While military training isn't perfect, it's generally a good idea to avoid killing or seriously injuring those you intend to field as troops.
Donbeeler49
03-15-10, 09:46
God bless all of them! they may be different for different reasons but I just can't say for sure. They are a wonderful bunch of young men, regardless if they were my father and uncles of WWII or my nephew of Iraq and Afganistan. I love them all!!
AK44 said it all ! Semper Fi
First off I will declare that I do not mean any disrespect for any Marine serving now or in years past.
My question is this...
Is there any difference between a young man in the Marine Corps in the year 2010 and a young man in the Marine Corps during years past?
I just watched the 1st episode of "The Pacific" tonight and I have watched "Band of Brothers" many, many times. I feel like less of a man in comparison to those who served in our Armed Services during our great campaigns.
Again the question... Are our sodiers and Marines today different from their counterparts in years and wars past? Is the structure of the military different today? Do we have a more professional force in arms than we did 60 years ago?
How could we or do we categorize our fighting men and women of today versus the men who fought in Europe and the Pacific during our grandparents time?
Have you ever served?
rubberneck
03-15-10, 13:41
You should have hung out in Fallujah. That would have quickly disabused you of any notion that somehow the younger guys were made of lesser mettle.
I thought the OP was trying to say that the men entering the Marine Corps back in the 1940's had a much tougher life than the men entering the Marine Corps today. The guys back in 1940 had lived through the great depression and had none of the luxuries that we take for granted in every day life. After going through boot camp and coming out of the other side today's recruits are tough as nails, but there is no way that you can make the case that today's youth has had to endure half as much as hardship as the young men back then.
dookie1481
03-15-10, 14:22
You should have hung out in Fallujah. That would have quickly disabused you of any notion that somehow the younger guys were made of lesser mettle.
While I wasn't there, my old unit was. I know about what they went through. Some of my friends lost their lives there.
I am not saying that they are inferior, simply that I believe that the toughness displayed by former generations is greater than that displayed by ours. Just as effective? Yes. But I don't think we are as tough.
While military training isn't perfect, it's generally a good idea to avoid killing or seriously injuring those you intend to field as troops.
To an extent. But a lot of training today emphasizes safety over the realities of training for combat. SOF units routinely lose warriors to training accidents because they tend to train closer to the edge. Regular units certainly shouldn't train as close to that edge because they don't consist of the same types that SOF units do. They tend to be older, smarter, and more experienced, and know the difference between dangerous and unsafe.
That being said, we could benefit from a little more realism in our training.
One of the best training experiences the Marine Corps has to offer (at least when I was in), CAX, is also one of the most dangerous.
Jay
I think we had more people who had a lot of firearms experience in the military years ago, but now you have marines who were raised on video games, and that completely changes the name of the game. People multi task and handle stress better today. I think our military training reflects that. I read it somewhere years ago, but can't post a link to the info.
dookie1481
03-15-10, 14:28
To expound on my previous post, I would like to point out the firestorm that erupted over the Battle of Mogadishu. Colin Powell said, "The deaths of 18 American soldiers wouldn't have even warranted a press conference in Vietnam."
As a society, our tolerance for loss of life has decreased dramatically. This is, for the most part, a good thing. But we can't have a standing military that is prepared for war without training hard, and training realistically. This unfortunately means that people will get seriously hurt or die in training. Not to say that we should be cavalier about it, but it does happen.
/digression
dookie1481
03-15-10, 14:29
I thought the OP was trying to say that the men entering the Marine Corps back in the 1940's had a much tougher life than the men entering the Marine Corps today. The guys back in 1940 had lived through the great depression and had none of the luxuries that we take for granted in every day life. After going through boot camp and coming out of the other side today's recruits are tough as nails, but there is no way that you can make the case that today's youth has had to endure half as much as hardship as the young men back then.
Thanks for realizing the point. As usual, I fail at adequately turning my thoughts into words. The effects of an ADD-riddled brain.
Jay
The OP's post may as well be a generalization, and not as a question on a comparison of a serviceman today vs one from times past.
At the very bare basics of the question then, everyone from times past would at least in some small way be "tougher" than anyone from today, not necessarily because they were tougher, but that's just how life was for many folks back then.
If you could go back in time and offer today's conveniences, luxuries, and technology to someone and told them they could get things done faster, better, and more efficiently, do you think they'd deny you? Of course not.
If today, you opted to treat a leg injury in combat with a swig of bourbon and a hacksaw, then you're a fool. The guy who had to go it that way back in the day had no choice.
I'm short on time, but I will just say that Pilgrim's post summed it up pretty well describing his family members in a few words. They were all regular men (boys I guess they were) of their time, but when it came down to it, they were there for their fellow Marines/soldiers and there are the same men (boys again) that do the same on a daily basis now. Also take into account that they were thrown into an extraordinary circumstance, and despite all the romanticism of times past, you can bet that there were those who backed down (just as it is natural to do so) as there are those who do that today.
For Marines specifically, unless they stopped doing so in boot, part of making them the same is teaching the history of the Corps. I was told that we were the only service to do that. It's not physical training, and it's not practical training, but it is somehow an integral part.
The military is much smaller today than it was back then. And we have a larger population from which to pull the best soldiers to maintain high standards.
But back then it seems like most able bodied men signed up out of a sense of duty. Not being fit to serve was a mark of shame for some.
Should there be a large scale conflict in the future that requires the number of men WWII required, I do not think the young people of today would sign up so willingly. For most of them, it's someone else's problem. And if they were drafted, I think there would be a much higher percentage of unfit recruits.
I think men in general were tougher back then due to life experience. But I am confident that the Marines maintain their standards today, they probably just have to weed through more applicants to find the good ones.
theblackknight
03-15-10, 23:00
I thought the OP was trying to say that the men entering the Marine Corps back in the 1940's had a much tougher life than the men entering the Marine Corps today. The guys back in 1940 had lived through the great depression and had none of the luxuries that we take for granted in every day life. After going through boot camp and coming out of the other side today's recruits are tough as nails, but there is no way that you can make the case that today's youth has had to endure half as much as hardship as the young men back then.
Wow! Really? life was harder for Marines in the past?
How about life in general was harder. To say that the previous generation always had it rougher is painfully obvious in any field or topic. Does it mean they were better men? NO because this generation raised in the same time would have done the same job.
People are watching Highly Romanticized Movies about WW2 on history channel VS all-most live footage from Ass-stan on CNN everyday, ofcourse they will look at WW2 as some kind of dignified struggle against the clearly evil power vs the public veiw of this war as"One man's terrorist is another's Freedom Fighter".
Lets not be silly.
Nazi's made lampshades out of Jewskin.
Hahdjis make IED's and hide them in bodies.
Evil is evil,war is war. Our training makes us no better as men, neither did they're lack there of.
rubberneck
03-15-10, 23:16
Wow! Really? life was harder for Marines in the past?
How about life in general was harder. To say that the previous generation always had it rougher is painfully obvious in any field or topic. Does it mean they were better men? NO because this generation raised in the same time would have done the same job.
People are watching Highly Romanticized Movies about WW2 on history channel VS all-most live footage from Ass-stan on CNN everyday, ofcourse they will look at WW2 as some kind of dignified struggle against the clearly evil power vs the public veiw of this war as"One man's terrorist is another's Freedom Fighter".
Lets not be silly.
Nazi's made lampshades out of Jewskin.
Hahdjis make IED's and hide them in bodies.
Evil is evil,war is war. Our training makes us no better as men, neither did they're lack there of.
Wow you got all that out of a simple observation. I am simply astounded by your superior powers of observation. I didn't mention any feelings about the romanticized feelings I had for the Marines of yesteryear and yet somehow you smoked me out. I stand in awe.
Seriously, I make a simple observation about a POINT SOME ELSE MADE and you decide to be a douche. Well played sir.
SGT D USMC
03-16-10, 00:27
I was born during WWII and joined the Corps (pronounced core) in 1961, I was issued an M1 rifle that seemed very light back then. In 1962 I was issued an M-14 brand new right out of the box and carried one in Vietnam during 1966 and 67. I grew up watching WWII movies and in certain ways found some simularities. What shocked me the most was the voice of treasion in our streets while I served. Marines will always rise to the occiasion, will the Americian people?
_________________________________________
he went into younder village and never returned
ArmedSuspect
03-16-10, 08:55
i've always looked up to the Marines that have come before me. not because things were harder for them, things were harder in general back then. i look up to them for their Honor and Courage under fire. i look up to them for the things that they accomplished, often with less support than what was needed. i look up to them because they upheld the standards and traditions of the Marine Corps.
it's no different today, Marines are still Marines. we still fight in dirty, nasty places that mainstream America has never heard of. we still don't have all of the latest high speed gear and equipment, we make due with what we have. we still uphold the traditions and standards of Marines past. life in the Marine Corps is always going to be tough and war is never going to be easy. the more *modern* conveniences that we have the more we're expected to do, IMHO it all evens out. (my pack weighs less so now i can carry more stuff = same weight as before)
it's more fun talking to old Marines, there's something different about the way the old salts talk. my wife (Army vet) don't understand why i like to hang out with the old guys so much and it's tough for me to explain it. call it respect, call it inspiring, call it entertainment, call it what you want, the Old Corps guys have earned the reputation and respect. all i'm doing is trying to not let them down.
Semper Fi
stoneburner
03-16-10, 09:11
If Hollywood was as interested in making flattering movies about today's fighting men as they it is in making flattering movies about the soldiers who fought in WWII, I doubt these sort of questions would ever get asked.
Instead, now, you can win an Oscar for making movies about reckless shitheads who endanger and even shoot their own teammates.
You are comparing reality to a Hollywood production? :confused:
The conscripts back in the 40s were a bunch of kids who were drafted. They were just as scared and unsure as anyone today. They may have come from rougher backgrounds on average, but they were no where near as well trained and educated as the modern professional Marine or Soldier. In the end, you are comparing a Hollywood representation of people 60 years ago, to a somewhat misinformed perception of today.
John_Wayne777
03-16-10, 12:18
I am not saying that they are inferior, simply that I believe that the toughness displayed by former generations is greater than that displayed by ours. Just as effective? Yes. But I don't think we are as tough.
To accurately gauge that you'd need a war on the scale of WWII...which isn't in the cards at the moment. When a relatively small band of morons flew planes into buildings recruiter's offices were filled with people looking to go find the bastards who planned it and to kill them. They've been busy doing that for the last several years.
I don't really know how much more evidence of grit you need. When the call went out plenty of people answered it and did their jobs well...and they weren't being forced to do it by drafts, either.
To an extent. But a lot of training today emphasizes safety over the realities of training for combat. SOF units routinely lose warriors to training accidents because they tend to train closer to the edge. Regular units certainly shouldn't train as close to that edge because they don't consist of the same types that SOF units do. They tend to be older, smarter, and more experienced, and know the difference between dangerous and unsafe.
That being said, we could benefit from a little more realism in our training.
Yes, training can become so encumbered by safety that it loses some practical value..but remember this:
In WWII training wasn't dangerous because it was super-awesome combat preparation. It was dangerous because they didn't know a lot of stuff that we know now. The guys on the front line bitched about the lack of realism in training in WWII too. Training wasn't lethal because it was awesome. Those two seem to be too easily confused.
WWII was a meat grinder that got a lot of people killed who wouldn't have been killed had the WWII military had the knowledge, technologies, and capabilities that our modern forces have. One of the reasons for increased concern about safety in the modern military is because the individual fighting man isn't seen as a sacrificial number anymore. Yes, that can be taken too far, but in general it's a good thing that getting an entire company of Marines wiped out in a brave but ultimately pointless maneuver isn't seen as laudable these days.
Even though "regular" military units may not train like the SF/SOF guys do, the "regular" units seem to be doing a pretty darn good job of turning living bad guys into worm food.
JW, great post. I think we said the same thing in different ways.
SeriousStudent
03-16-10, 20:41
I'm third-generation Marine infantry. I have always considered it an honor to have veterans of WWII, Korea, and Vietnam as my friends. And it's also a gift to sit with a young "03" and listen to them today.
Most of the Marines fighting today are young enough to be my children. I am constantly humbled when I read of their valor. I am filled with pride when given the opportunity to listen to them.
The Corps is in excellent hands. These fine young men and women make the Eagle, Globe and Anchor glean even brighter. They do not tarnish it.
Fallujah is a battle streamer that belongs on our colors, no less than Belleau Wood, Okinawa or Khe Sanh.
To the OP: Worry not.
You are comparing reality to a Hollywood production? :confused:
The conscripts back in the 40s were a bunch of kids who were drafted. They were just as scared and unsure as anyone today. They may have come from rougher backgrounds on average, but they were no where near as well trained and educated as the modern professional Marine or Soldier. In the end, you are comparing a Hollywood representation of people 60 years ago, to a somewhat misinformed perception of today.
I don't think he was comparing reality to a Hollywood production, he was pointing out that most Americans don't see a difference between the two.
I'm a former 0311, and I recall that we were taught a lot of history in boot camp, things like Bois de Belleau, Tarawa, and Chosin, in a way that made them examples of accomplishments we should strive to emulate. That said, we always considered the Old Corps to be tougher, even if it was you finishing SOI one class before another guy; that made you salty. (:
I'm third-generation Marine infantry. I have always considered it an honor to have veterans of WWII, Korea, and Vietnam as my friends. And it's also a gift to sit with a young "03" and listen to them today.
Most of the Marines fighting today are young enough to be my children. I am constantly humbled when I read of their valor. I am filled with pride when given the opportunity to listen to them.
The Corps is in excellent hands. These fine young men and women make the Eagle, Globe and Anchor glean even brighter. They do not tarnish it.
Fallujah is a battle streamer that belongs on our colors, no less than Belleau Wood, Okinawa or Khe Sanh.
To the OP: Worry not.
Eloquently said. Thanks for being one of the few who have stood in the breach for the many.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.