I'm curious for you alls views on this. I served with 2/7 in Fallujah (and 3/7 in Ramadi before that), and this hits pretty close to home for me. If you all have read anything I've written here about the military, you'll know I have a pretty strong affinity for General James Mattis, and as in most things I agree strongly with his take here:
quote
We must reject any thinking of our cities as a 'battlespace' that our uniformed military is called upon to 'dominate.'
also
quote
We do not need to militarize our response to protests.
My take here isn't based on support for the protests...while I do support the idea behind them I do not support burning your city down to make that point...but rather on understanding what Marines are. When I was in bootcamp, combat training, and in all the work-ups, trainings, and field exercises I ever did, I was never once trained in de-escalation. I was given extremely brief courses on how to detain a combatant, but not in any way that would respect a US citizens rights. What I was trained on was suppressive fire, to turn and advance on a flanking enemy, to fire on command, to put two shots center mass and one in the head...I was trained to win battles in combat zones, no matter the circumstances, or die trying.
Fun fact: There is no Marine Corps doctrine for retreat or surrender. The only Marine unit that has even been involved in a surrender, the 4th Marines, were surrendered by the Army unit they were attached to, and subsequently stripped of their colors, cut from the Marines Corps like a cancer, and replaced entirely with Marine Raiders (the first Marine Corps Spec Ops) to restore their honor. You send the Marines in to kill your enemies, especially when you want them good and dead right now. That's what the Marine Corps is for, it is our express purpose and one of the things that separates us from any other branch of the military.
Sending those men in to police civilians neither honors the sacrifice it takes to be that force, nor protects the cities or civilians they are being sent to protect. When Bush sent in the Marines to quell the Rodney King riots, we sent 200 rounds down range, at civilians, because some ignorant cop said "cover me." That is how Marines provide cover. My heart goes out to the guys that are out there. The ROEs never make sense when they are against US civilians, their training specifically is very poorly suited to this environment, and this does not honor their legacy as warriors. That last one may mean less to some than it means to Marine veterans, but I personally gave quite a bit to that legacy.
[This message has been edited by NewDustin (edited 06-16-2025).]
Sending those men in to police civilians neither honors the sacrifice it takes to be that force, nor protects the cities or civilians they are being sent to protect.
The Marines were sent in to protect Federal buildings... they aren't in the streets with the protestors... that part seems to get lost in a lot of the news reporting.
The National Guard are the ones that are in the streets working with the police. It was also done intentionally so that any actions done towards the National Guard becomes a Federal crime, and then the DOJ would have authority over the prosecution and conviction of those individuals they arrest. The problem is that the local DAs in California usually give them a slap on the wrist, etc., and then let them go. The DOJ intends to fully prosecute.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: The Marines were sent in to protect Federal buildings... they aren't in the streets with the protestors... that part seems to get lost in a lot of the news reporting.
I understand this, but it is a semantic difference in the role they are playing. What I mentioned above actually happened: Marines sent 200 rounds down range, at civilians, because some ignorant cop said "cover me." I just don't think that force is used properly by securing buildings from civilians during civil unrest, it's who you send in when you want everyone dead. The National Guard is already there, securing those buildings is well within their warrant, and they are trained to do so without all the "Blood makes the grass grow! Kill! Kill! Kill!" that is drilled into Marines from day 1.
Originally posted by NewDustin: When I was in bootcamp, combat training, and in all the work-ups, trainings, and field exercises I ever did, I was never once trained in de-escalation. I was given extremely brief courses on how to detain a combatant, but not in any way that would respect a US citizens rights. What I was trained on was suppressive fire, to turn and advance on a flanking enemy, to fire on command, to put two shots center mass and one in the head...I was trained to win battles in combat zones, no matter the circumstances, or die trying.
While it was long ago, this description is pretty much as I remember. Marines are generally not trained for such duties and if things were to go south at those federal buildings, I would fully expect Marine training to kick in.
But, I also will say that while serving, I and the unit I was assigned to were security for "Special" things at our location. Several times a year there would be anti-Viet Nam Protests just outside our gates and fences. We Marines were the last line of defense for our area and did get some (let's call it) Protest Training. But, what's most important was when these protests did occur the local LEOs and CA HP were between our fence/gates and the protesters. We also had K9s that were brought in just for these events. I can assure you, no protester ever got past our fences and for their sake, that was a good thing. We were authorized to maintain security in our mission. Define that however you wish, no one was going to be allowed to cross that line.
------------------ Rams Learning most of life's lessons the hard way. . You are only young once but, you can be immature indefinitely.
Marines are trained to follow orders. Not just kill kill kill. There superior officer should be the one telling them to kill kill kill. Not some cop who says"cover me". The superior officer gets orders from his superior officer. The 'mission' should be well defined.
Did the Marines in the Rodney King LA riots take a life of a civilian. Not that I know of.
If Marines cannot be trained to protect a building, maybe they should all be removed from our diplomatic buildings overseas. I had no idea that after all of these decades of marine guards at our diplomatic buildings that they were all ticking time bombs just waiting for a local cop to give a bad order and then the slaughter of civilians begins.
Originally posted by cliffw: Marines are trained to follow orders. Not just kill kill kill. There superior officer should be the one telling them to kill kill kill. Not some cop who says"cover me". The superior officer gets orders from his superior officer. The 'mission' should be well defined.
A lot of this is very true, but not exactly how things work. A platoon will generally have an officer, but the squads will be led by a corporal or a sergeant , who is going to be a 20-year old, young Marine themself. While obedience to orders is absolutely instilled in Marines, so is the ability to recognize and respond to needs within a combat zone. If I received a call for cover, then ran off to find my platoon sergeant or OIC to confirm the order, a lot of folks would die for needing cover fire.
The "kill kill kill" thing is actually a very common Marine Corps chant, and is used throughout bootcamp. The ability to engage and kill without hesitation is imperative on the battlefield, and it is hammered into every single Marine -cook, radio operator, and infantryman- from day one. This scene from Full Metal Jacket is absurdly close to what I experienced, and drives the point home: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsUtIWzRkQI
quote
Originally posted by cliffw: Did the Marines in the Rodney King LA riots take a life of a civilian. Not that I know of.
See above about the 200 rounds of "cover me" fire we sent at civilians. I don't think the Marines would purposefully kill civilians, but our training is not based around keeping folks alive.
[This message has been edited by NewDustin (edited 06-16-2025).]
If Marines cannot be trained to protect a building, maybe they should all be removed from our diplomatic buildings overseas. I had no idea that after all of these decades of marine guards at our diplomatic buildings that they were all ticking time bombs just waiting for a local cop to give a bad order and then the slaughter of civilians begins.
Doug over here thinking every Marine duty -and every Marine- is exactly the same
In order to get that duty you have to have at least 2 years of existing exemplary service, be an NCO, be extensively screened both for your conduct and for specific psychological profiles, and THEN attend comprehensive, long-term training on how to act in that role specifically. They are then re-classified into 8156s - literally "Marine Security Guard (MSG)"
It would be an absolute insult to send that force in to guard federal buildings they have nothing to do with.
[This message has been edited by NewDustin (edited 06-16-2025).]
Doug over here thinking every Marine duty -and every Marine- is exactly the same
In order to get that duty you have to have at least 2 years of existing exemplary service, be an NCO, be extensively screened both for your conduct and for specific psychological profiles, and THEN attend comprehensive, long-term training on how to act in that role specifically. They are then re-classified into 8156s - literally "Marine Security Guard (MSG)"
It would be an absolute insult to send that force in to guard federal buildings they have nothing to do with.
You make a hasty generalization on the other extreme saying marines are incapable of performing such duties because of some ingrained attributes of the Marine Corps itself.
Are marines a bunch of meathead that are one bad command away from slaughtering civilians?
You make a hasty generalization on the other extreme saying marines are incapable of performing such duties because of some ingrained attributes of the Marine Corps itself.
Are marines a bunch of meathead that are one bad command away from slaughtering civilians?
I specifically spoke on 2/7 being sent there and based it on my personal experience with that particular Marine unit when I served with them in combat. It's in the friggin' title for goodness' sake. Go back and read it...it's literally right there.
But, I also will say that while serving, I and the unit I was assigned to were security for "Special" things at our location. Several times a year there would be anti-Viet Nam Protests just outside our gates and fences. We Marines were the last line of defense for our area and did get some (let's call it) Protest Training. But, what's most important was when these protests did occur the local LEOs and CA HP were between our fence/gates and the protesters. We also had K9s that were brought in just for these events. I can assure you, no protester ever got past our fences and for their sake, that was a good thing. We were authorized to maintain security in our mission. Define that however you wish, no one was going to be allowed to cross that line.
This seems appropriate. You're securing the post. It stands that someone literally assaulting a Marine Corps installation would run into an issue with the Marines who have every reason to be there guarding it. It also sounds like they did everything they possibly could to prevent the Marines from having to defend their post.
That feels a lot different than taking Marines and sticking them in front of some building that has nothing to do with them, right in front of an advancing crowd, with failing law enforcement all around them.
I specifically spoke on 2/7 being sent there and based it on my personal experience with that particular Marine unit when I served with them in combat. It's in the friggin' title for goodness' sake. Go back and read it...it's literally right there.
Oh. So it is just your old unit that are the meatheads that are one bad command away from slaughtering civilians. All this talk about how the Marine Corps itself is only trained to kill gave the distinct impression you were talking about all of the Marine Corps. Maybe you should tailor your "fun fact" to just your old unit instead of the whole corps.
Tell us how poor your old unit is at receiving training, adhering to ROE and following orders. How bad is the moral, leadership and discipline for your old unit?
Originally posted by Doug85GT: Oh. So it is just your old unit that are the meatheads that are one bad command away from slaughtering civilians. All this talk about how the Marine Corps itself is only trained to kill gave the distinct impression you were talking about all of the Marine Corps. Maybe you should tailor your "fun fact" to just your old unit instead of the whole corps.
I feel like you are trying to defend Marines right now, and I want to take your words in that spirit. If you feel like what I said was meant to be disparaging then we've had a miscommunication; I hold Marines in the highest regard.
Just to clarify, the entire Marine Corps is trained and purposefully conditioned to kill. Every single Marine is a trained combat riflemen first and whatever-their-other-job-is second. I can only speak for my experience with the few thousand Marines I trained with, but that training is absolutely designed to make you a willing killer. Not a meathead, not a monster, but someone who will kill when they need to without putting a lot of thought into it first. It is also designed to make you confront adversity in a very aggressive manner. Those things are absolutely an asset in combat, but a huge liability when dealing with civil unrest.
That fun fact really is a fun fact. You can google the history of 4th Marines' "China Marines"; it's a fascinating read how the Marine Corps responded. Blackrams already confirmed that my recounting of training mirrors his own. He may be able to help with questions on that as well, though I don't want to offer his assistance for him.
quote
Originally posted by Doug85GT:Tell us how poor your old unit is at receiving training, adhering to ROE and following orders. How bad is the moral, leadership and discipline for your old unit?
My experience with 2/7 was that they were consummate professionals, incredible warriors, and **** at choosing comm officers. Morale was pretty high when we were training for deployment, and mixed when we got back; it's hard losing comrades, but very sweet to return to American soil after having seen some of the worst the world has to offer.
If Marines cannot be trained to protect a building, maybe they should all be removed from our diplomatic buildings overseas. I had no idea that after all of these decades of marine guards at our diplomatic buildings that they were all ticking time bombs just waiting for a local cop to give a bad order and then the slaughter of civilians begins.
Can not be trained is not the same as not having been trained. Marines do follow orders and those orders normally include Rules of Engagement. Every Marine is first trained as a Combat Infantryman, every single one. After that, they will attend additional schooling for other MOSs. While in the Marines, I was trained as a Grunt, MOS: 0311. Aggressive and disciplined as every Marine I've ever met.
I doubt any of those Marines received any (or much) crowd control training. I would fully expect that some would be Military Police but, really don't know.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 06-16-2025).]
Originally posted by NewDustin: Just to clarify, the entire Marine Corps is trained and purposefully conditioned to kill. Every single Marine is a trained combat riflemen first and whatever-their-other-job-is second. I can only speak for my experience with the few thousand Marines I trained with, but that training is absolutely designed to make you a willing killer.
Respectfully, I think we need to use some common sense here. Whatever you might think about Trump... I would doubt seriously he wants to find himself in a situation where you've got a bunch of Marines with M4s and M5s gunning down protestors in the street. I also have to assume that these Marines are not retarded, and despite their training, would not gun down a bunch of protestors in the street, nor would their commanding officers engage in such a way. We've already acknowledged the point of Trump sending these Marines into LA is specifically to protect Federal property... which is usually VERY unguarded; hence why they're needed. This is an entirely different scenario from when the then-Governor asked for Marine support from Bush to directly engage with protestors on the streets with the police officers. I would assume Trump's intent is two-sided...
1 - To scare protesters into thinking they actually will get gunned down by Marines 2 - To actually just defend Federal property
I'll apologize if I turn out to be wrong... but I think this is nothing but a show of force to deter people from getting crazy, and ensure rioters don't destroy Federal buildings like they have state and city-owned buildings.
Respectfully, I think we need to use some common sense here. Whatever you might think about Trump... I would doubt seriously he wants to find himself in a situation where you've got a bunch of Marines with M4s and M5s gunning down protestors in the street. I also have to assume that these Marines are not retarded, and despite their training, would not gun down a bunch of protestors in the street, nor would their commanding officers engage in such a way. We've already acknowledged the point of Trump sending these Marines into LA is specifically to protect Federal property... which is usually VERY unguarded; hence why they're needed. This is an entirely different scenario from when the then-Governor asked for Marine support from Bush to directly engage with protestors on the streets with the police officers. I would assume Trump's intent is two-sided...
1 - To scare protesters into thinking they actually will get gunned down by Marines 2 - To actually just defend Federal property
I'll apologize if I turn out to be wrong... but I think this is nothing but a show of force to deter people from getting crazy, and ensure rioters don't destroy Federal buildings like they have state and city-owned buildings.
I agree with this. I actually think #1 is the most likely reason (or else why not use the National Guard?), but I think it's asking for someone to be put into a position they are not ready for, and will not work out well for anyone.
Can not be trained is not the same as not having been trained. Marines do follow orders and those orders normally include Rules of Engagement. Every Marine is first trained as a Combat Infantryman, every single one. After that, they will attend additional schooling for other MOSs. While in the Marines, I was trained as a Grunt, MOS: 0311. Aggressive and disciplined as every Marine I've ever met.
I doubt any of those Marines received any (or much) crowd control training. I would fully expect that some would be Military Police but, really don't know.
Rams
I have a different assumption. The marines were not called until the riots had been happening for several days. I'll bet that at the start of the riots the unit was told they might be used. They were called up after the national guard. At least in my experience, when my units were on call for a possible deployment, we did everything we could to prepare. This included shots, dental, equipment preparedness, vehicles etc. It also included any possible training that might be needed.
I don't think the commander just went through the barracks one day, rounded everyone up and said they were going to LA. I'll bet they had at least a day or several days preparing for it including training. I don't think they were just handed a riot shield and told, "you stand here."
I was not a marine. Maybe the marines do things differently.
This seems appropriate. You're securing the post. It stands that someone literally assaulting a Marine Corps installation would run into an issue with the Marines who have every reason to be there guarding it. It also sounds like they did everything they possibly could to prevent the Marines from having to defend their post.
That feels a lot different than taking Marines and sticking them in front of some building that has nothing to do with them, right in front of an advancing crowd, with failing law enforcement all around them.
I have a different assumption. The marines were not called until the riots had been happening for several days. I'll bet that at the start of the riots the unit was told they might be used. They were called up after the national guard. At least in my experience, when my units were on call for a possible deployment, we did everything we could to prepare. This included shots, dental, equipment preparedness, vehicles etc. It also included any possible training that might be needed.
I don't think the commander just went through the barracks one day, rounded everyone up and said they were going to LA. I'll bet they had at least a day or several days preparing for it including training. I don't think they were just handed a riot shield and told, "you stand here."
I was not a marine. Maybe the marines do things differently.
I wasn't there and have not seen any reports on how this went down. But, it would not surprise me if orders came down and a battalion plus didn't get told to be prepared to go to LA the next morning.
All I'm really saying is, the Marines are an offensive tool for the President, they are not designed for defensive actions. Of course, every military unit goes on defense periodically but........................ Crowd control would not be one of their strong points. If, rioters were to attack the building the Marines are guarding, they better be prepared, well prepared. Those Marines will defend that building and themselves. Just as I would expect any military unit should.
I have other service related skills learned while in the US Army, while not knocking any service, Marines are who you call when you really need help. Chesty Puller is still my hero.
