ED209 wrote:At least their guns would have been salvageable and useful during the upcoming zombie apocalypse. Now you'll have no option other than employing polite but firm language, escalating to the blowing of silver whistles, to fight off the zeds - just like the police do to criminals today.

Weaver wrote:Fucking stop trying to stir trouble with inter-service rivalry bullshit. The simple fact is that all Services have roles to play, and get assigned missions. Marines are good assault troops, trained and equipped for such missions - but that doesn't make them "better" than regular Army Infantry units, only perhaps better at specific Mission-Essential-Task-List jobs. Army Light Infantry units have their own specializations and expertise; Armor and Aviation missions are specialized enough that man-to-man comparisons become quite silly.

Warren Dew wrote:

Weaver wrote:Fucking stop trying to stir trouble with inter-service rivalry bullshit. The simple fact is that all Services have roles to play, and get assigned missions. Marines are good assault troops, trained and equipped for such missions - but that doesn't make them "better" than regular Army Infantry units, only perhaps better at specific Mission-Essential-Task-List jobs. Army Light Infantry units have their own specializations and expertise; Armor and Aviation missions are specialized enough that man-to-man comparisons become quite silly.

I'll accept that it's "mission essential task list" jobs that Marines are better at.

As for the man to man comparisons, I believe you first mentioned them in poast #17 of this thread.

If you hadn't already been making comparisons between numbers of different types of troops, mention of differences in per person effectiveness would have been unnecessary.