Hypothetical Situation. 8 Marines vs 56 Insurgents.

[Scot]

The tactics would vary, but on D-Day(I assume you are referring to Omaha Beach) if they were on the boats, nothing much would differ, except push up that beach and then clear the places. Obviously a AT4 and grenade launchers would help, but still.

[CareBear]

You must understand that the old style of war fighting was very, very crude. They would meet head on in the field, the front row would fire their muskets (very innaccurate. The point was to have tons of people firing in the general direction of the enemy and hope a few of the enemy are hit), they would crouch down and the second row would fire, first row, second row. They didn't use cover at all, if they were coming they would be announcing it with trumpets and drums like a parade. They would be lined up ready to go for a SAW to start mowing them down like a knife through butter.

And if the USMC was mobile, ambushing the British, no question. Small groups would hide along roads, throw a few grenades, the grenades would land at the British feet, the British would be like "wtf? What a strange looking apple." Boom.


Oh, and the British at the time would probably think the USMC were all witches and would run away at first sight.

it is you who must understand that the men in those 'crude' armies had a lot of guts and excellent training,
firstly the muskets are not as innaccurate as you may think,

secondly they are trained to stand and fight, marching up slowly and standing infront of the other army, and to stand there and shoot while being shot at.

thirdly, they have muskets therefore gunpowder, which has been around since the late medieval times. so they would also be trained to face artillery, so they would be used to the explosions of grenades and things

additiaonlly as bob pointed out, its not just 1 massive block of men marching towards the marines. There would be artillery, cavarly etc etc including most likely sharpshooters who would have rifles who would harass the marines and jump from cover to cover etc

so pretty much the marines would be left4dead without the major loss of british life as some of you may think

[Spaz]

I got a felling that a lot of Americans think that the Marines are special forces or something like that. At least that the felling I get from reading on different forums etc.

[blackhatch46]

with 100 marines, you will have around 25 m249s, and 25 M14s, and 25 m203s and with modern defences (Hesco and container bunkers), Marines will win. Each marine must kill 1,120 red coats. A Brit can fire at a rate of 3 shots a minute, A m249 can fire 800 rounds in the same time, plus with marksmen, you can pick off the officers and colours, quickly demoralizing them.

as soon as the brits saw the fire power of the saw and m203 i think their morale would be destroyed and they would surrender. imagine a 1700 era man seeing what a machinegun or grenade launcher can do. they would simply surrender.

[badmojo420]

If the insurgents manage to get up to the walls it would be raining molotovs and AT grenades. But if the marines had some nice towers with machine gun emplacements it might be a good fight. The insurgent snipers would be key to winning that battle.

[PFunk]

as soon as the brits saw the fire power of the saw and m203 i think their morale would be destroyed and they would surrender. imagine a 1700 era man seeing what a machinegun or grenade launcher can do. they would simply surrender.

I think its kind of exaggerated how people think the firepower of a modern company of soldiers would be impressive. Just the soldiers, none of the assets, and its not going to be out do a full army of the day I think. It might scare them a bit cause of the small numbers but I doubt they'd think it was unwinnable since noway 100 Marines would be able to put out enough firepower to be more intimidating than say any of Napolean's armies.

And muskets are accurate. Not M16 accurate but if you line 40 people up and fire then its like a long wide shotgun blast. Rapid firing an M16 isn't accurate either but you manage to kill people that way when the whole squad fires together. Basically the same principle.

[Spaz]

A lot of you are talking about the brits losing the moral. Well think about the moral of the marines, they would have a very low moral when seeing a 1000 or more soldiers coming at them.

[Outlawz7]

they would have a very low moral when seeing a 1000 or more soldiers coming at them.

Unless they were Spartans.

"We shall fight in the shade." ****** gun*

[Cobhris]

I got a felling that a lot of Americans think that the Marines are special forces or something like that. At least that the felling I get from reading on different forums etc.

They're not quite specops, but they're at least a step up from your average soldier.

[Spaz]

They're not quite specops, but they're at least a step up from your average soldier.

I really don't have any idea why they would be I don't know anything about there training etc. So could you please explain to me what is different between them and a average soldier?

[steve_06-07]

So 1+1 mag of standard 30 rounds each for 8 marines equals out to 480 rounds total. If there are 56 insurgents, you would have 8-9 bullets per insurgent. Semi auto would indeed save on ammo, and if the insurgents were crossing an open field, the marines would have more range than the insurgent Ak's, and hopefully better marksmanship skills. However, if the insurgents had pkms and other weaponry, they would win easily.

[gazzthompson]

I really don't have any idea why they would be I don't know anything about there training etc. So could you please explain to me what is different between them and a average soldier?

USMC training 13 weeks (United States Marine Corps Recruit Training - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

US army 14 weeks (United States Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

and for comparison only (do NOT turn this into british army training vs US) British army : 14 and 28 weeks depending on age

judging by training length they don't seem normal , but maybe there training is more extensive ?

[CryOfTheWulfen]

I think the marines...seriously 112000 guys, they'd encircle the marines and pound them with cannons, nvg in an ideal situation would be good but how long would the batteries last. Grenades: it only takes a few times before they'd link the 'fruit' and an explosion.
Nowadays the Brits would be annialated, even if we are better trained there are simply too many, its like that last one theres only a certain amount tech and training can do.
Btw for the Brits its 12 weeks phase one(very basic INF and fitness) then like 7-12 weeks phase two depending upon the regiament. I think the usmc must have so many recruits they just pick the naturally talented ones to teach the more extensive stuff to whereas with the small number of British recruits they must be thouroughly tought everything

[IAJTHOMAS]

Grenades: it only takes a few times before they'd link the 'fruit' and an explosion.

If the line companies had payed any attention to the history of the right flank company in their regiment, they wont come as much of a suprise at all, although the lack of a visible burning fuse might stump them for a bit...

[Gaven]

USMC training 13 weeks (United States Marine Corps Recruit Training - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

US army 14 weeks (United States Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

and for comparison only (do NOT turn this into british army training vs US) British army : 14 and 28 weeks depending on age

judging by training length they don't seem normal , but maybe there training is more extensive ?

I don't know too much about the US Army, but I believe the boot camp is 8 weeks, then a few other things added on depending on the specialty.

US Marines train for the normal 13 weeks at boot camp, but if they go into infantry they move into a 59 day infantry school United States Marine Corps School of Infantry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which adds a little over 8 more weeks.

Honestly, I don't think you can judge it by time. I think you'd just have to get somebody to do both of them and explain how it is.

[waldo_ii]

The tactics would vary, but on D-Day(I assume you are referring to Omaha Beach) if they were on the boats, nothing much would differ, except push up that beach and then clear the places. Obviously a AT4 and grenade launchers would help, but still.

I think it would be completely different. First, there would be bombing runs on the solid emplacements a day before the attack, then there would be cruse missiles just before the attack. You can ditch the boats; the Marines would arrive in LAVs. Their 25mms would pound the German emplacements and provide plenty of cover for the Marines as they advance, even after being immobilized.

Tank traps might be a problem, but at least the LAVs could provide a safe ride for the engineers up to the traps.

Then you must account for personal weaponry. 40mm smoke grenades would effectively blind the MG42s.

[PFunk]

I think it would be completely different. First, there would be bombing runs on the solid emplacements a day before the attack, then there would be cruse missiles just before the attack. You can ditch the boats; the Marines would arrive in LAVs. Their 25mms would pound the German emplacements and provide plenty of cover for the Marines as they advance, even after being immobilized.

Tank traps might be a problem, but at least the LAVs could provide a safe ride for the engineers up to the traps.

Then you must account for personal weaponry. 40mm smoke grenades would effectively blind the MG42s.

Kind of optimistic isn't that? IF they had cruse missiles and CObras and so on why wouldn't they just destroy everything, annihilate all the emplacements and then land in Hueys thus forgoing the need for a beach landing at all, and take the places of the paratroopers?

I think the idea is if it were just Marines in the same situation as other soldiers. You add the entire infrastructure of the modern army and you gotta say "why is WW2 still happening?" They'd just JDAM Hitler's bunker and be done with it.

[=]H[=Viper]

"I really don't have any idea why they would be I don't know anything about there training etc. So could you please explain to me what is different between them and a average soldier?"

Marines are a division of the US Navy. The training is extensive and quite varied. They are the first ones in and last ones out. Marksmanship is a major priority ( One Shot, One Kill ) To call them spec ops is a bit of a stretch. They assault from air, sea and land (eagle, globe, anchor) I'd have to say the major difference is the attitude. It's taught from day one that you are the best fighters in the world. If you believe it, you become it. A pretty glorious past, winning some of the toughest battles in history. It's the we can beat anyone, anywhere at anytime attitude that sets them apart. 11 weeks of boot camp, 30 days specialized training in your MOS. Constant training once assigned to your duty station, winter training, desert training, mountain training, beach assaults ect. When the shit hits the fan the Marines are ready.

To stay on topic, the arguments presented here are valid, but silly at the same time. It's like arguing over a team of the past beating a team from the present. You just don't know. Being a Marine I'm sure there were liberties taken with the story. Things always get exaggerated when the story is passed on. Good for moral and recruiting!

[DavidP]

Wow alot of people are forgetting 1 thing. Marines vs Insurgents.