Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: If the US Marine Corps, and the French Foreign Legion had a battle, which side would win?
Republican    1/1/2006 4:03:01 AM
I think the Corps would win, but both sides are tough as nails.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25   NEXT
Popcorn       3/17/2010 3:21:18 PM
No doubt the Marine Corp has proven itself a tough and first rate fighting force, however a comparison with the engagements and battle history of the French Foreign Legion is equally impressive. I encourage you to check on it, read a little bit about the history of the French Foreign Legion and you might revise your point of view. By the way the use of the initials FFL for the French Foreign Legion (admittedly widespread in the US) is a misnomer. FFL stands for Force Francaise Libre that was the appellation of the French Forces part of De Gaulle Free France. The Maquis and other Resistant inside France became the FFI (Force Française de l'Interieur= French Forces of the Interior).
You have to remember that the size of the two forces is drastically different. The Foreign Legion is trained to operate in small units with a very limited logistic support. They are also extremely versatile in their roles of combatants but also of builders. That is the strategy that we are trying to employ in Afghanistan. War is about real estate and public relation. There is no point fighting to "liberate" a village if once the job is done you pack your bags and go somewhere else living the villagers unprotected and still friendly to your enemies.
Comparing the French Foreign Legion to the Marine Corp is like trying to compare a 20mm Oerlikon with an Uzi Submachine gun. Two differnt weapons two different use. You have to remember as well that in the US our press is covering only the news that are principally focused on direct point of interest to us. The actions of the French Forces or armies of other nations are not very often covered. We all know about the Alamo for example but very few of us are familiar with Camerone (> style="font-style: normal;">) or  Bir Hakeim (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bir_Hakeim

 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       3/17/2010 4:10:23 PM
Battle of Camarón was where the legion won its reputation. I was and am not very impressed by this actually, as nobody tells you the Mexican side. The Mexicans faced a very tough ne' almost impregnable fortified position and were still able to carry it against virtually invulnerable defenders. Brave men-the MEXICANS. If they had not mishandled their cavalry ambush of the French column in the open, Captain Jean Danjou and his command would be a mere footnote in history.   
 
Lack of Mexican professional military leadership made the Legionaires' reputations there. Otherwise the Legionaires would be a bloodstain on the road outside Pueblo. Winfield Scott, same exact problem, had much better troops and did not suffer that kind of disaster. 
 
That will not be a popular opinion for some here, but it is MINE.
 
H. 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Kilo 2-3       3/22/2010 11:21:11 AM
The USMC's combined arms does give it a significant edge in terms of a capabilty basis. The Legion does not have organic artillery, logistics, heavy armor, or aviation assests. The Corps does, and that alone gives the Marines a significant advantage.
 

 
 
Quote    Reply

Beazz       3/27/2010 2:02:32 AM
Popcorn       2/24/2010 3:17:09 PM
Thank you for your post.
However you should consider several factors
The first one is that the length of service of the Combat Legionnaire is much longer than the average Marine.

Don't see where this is that big a deal is it? The USMC are well trained and in long enough. 
  
The effectif of the Foreign Legion is not large enough to allow rotation. Therefore the units and the men within are on the field much longer.

OK, is this a plus or a minus?
 
 

The Legion has a much larger ratio of combattants vs. logistic people.
The Legion is much less dependent on logistic allowing it much greater flexibility.

Don't both those statements simply indicate that the FFL simply does not have a lot of equipment which in itself seems to me to put them at a disadvantage. I think I'd rather have the problem of having to move my hundreds of tanks, trucks, planes, ships, artillery, etc etc etc versus only having to make sure I move my handful of trucks and light weapons. I'm sure this is over simplifying a bit but it looks to me like about all the FFL has as far as weapons is a rifle and maybe some specialized stuff along those lines? No wonder they don't have a logistics problem. Gotta have something to move in order to have a logistics prob right?
 
The typical Legionnaire is highly trained on all the disciplines represented in his unit allowing him to replace many specialist in combat.

Just sounds to me like there ain't a whole lot of those guys nor a lot of things to fight with. Which seems to me to mean they would be in a whole lot of trouble against the USMC.
 
Since WW2 the Foreign Legion has been in arms way pratically on an uniterrupted  fashion, either for mainly French operations: Indochina, Suez, Algeria and Africa , As part of NATO they were in Korea, in Lebanon ( They help provide protection with  the evacuation of the survivors of the Marine Barracks in Beyrouth). They were part of all the operations in Eastern Europe including Bosnia Herzegovina) They took a pretty impressive role in the first Guld War as part of  6th Light Armoured Division Daguet securing the Left Front of the Allied attack and blocking any attempt of counter attack
The 13 DBLE for example In addition to its security responsibilities in Djibouti, the 13 DBLE has participated in military operations that include Operation ORYX and Operation UNOSOM II in Somalia (1992-1993) Operation ISKOUTIR (1993-1995), Operation TURQUOISE in Rwanda (1994), and Operation UNICORN in the
 
Quote    Reply

afrikan_neekeri       4/12/2010 9:19:22 PM
The marine corps would wipe the floor with the foreign legion the same way the armoured branch of armée de terre and the carrier Charles de Gaulle would wipe the floor with the 75th Ranger Regiment. Duh.
 
Quote    Reply

Marche ou Creve    Hear me all!   1/30/2011 6:48:24 AM
I stumbled upon this forum by accident and decided to contribute because there are obviously many people here (and everywhere else) that talk about the French Foreign Legion based on assumptions and not facts. Because France, the media and the Legion itself don't like to publicize its activities it leaves the average person without information sources. I personally served in the Legion for 8 1/2 years (including in the famed 13eme DBLE) and also worked alongside the U.S. Marine Corps, where I still have some friends. So I'm here to tell you the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
 
First and foremost I am perfectly aware that the subject of this tread is merely hypothetical and most likely would never happen because not only France and The U.S. are allies but also if they would declare war on each other they would engage the entirety of their armed forces rather than one single branch. At the most a battle could ensue between a unit of the Legion and a unit of the US Marines and not the whole Corps.
 
So here are the facts:
 
In regards to war experience the Legion has the advantage because, contrary to popular belief, they were involved in almost all past and  present major (and minor) conflicts. I know for sure that at this very moment they are in Afghanistan, Iraq, Ivory coast, Djibouti, doing counter-terrorist missions in the very heart of France and they are fighting the Somali pirates. Actually, the USMC is using "Camp Lemonier", a Legion base in Djibouti. They must also be in at least 3 or 4 other conflicts that I don't know of because I'm not there anymore but places like Sudan, Darfour, Gabon, and Chad, among others seem like plausible targets.
 
So, not only Legionnaires are more seasoned in warfare but they also participate in more varied conflicts whereas the Marines have been fighting in Afghanistan for 9 years.
 
In regards to the number of soldiers the USMC wins.
The Legion is composed of 8500 men and in major conflicts (such as WWII) their numbers can rise to somewhere around 42,000. Even then, the Marine Corps is composed of  202,000 men so there's no contest.
 
In regards to the quality of men the Legion wins.
80% of American soldiers enlist to get college money. 100% of Legionnaires enlist to go to war. Moreover, Legionnaires usually have a shady past, which makes them more belligerent. It is true that the Legion does not accept criminals with namely: Blood crimes, sexual deviants such as pedophiles,  drug smugglers, terrorists, etc. but they do accept 'minor' crimes such as armed robberies, felonies, unpaid debts, "white-collar crimes", burglaries, etc.
Moreover, every single Legionnaire is an infantry man albeit his specialty. It doesn't matter if you are a cook, a nurse or an office clerk. You shoot, practice hand-hand-combat, explosives and are proficient in all fighting matters.
Additionally, there is a motto in the Legion: "You joined to die! We'll send you where you can die!" and that's why the Legion is sent to the most troublesome spots in the world. If an American Marine dies, his family weeps, the media covers the casualty, the public opinion turns grim. Report many casualties and there's a popular uprising such as during the Vietnam war.  If a Legionnaire dies nobody cares. Actually nobody knows about it because he was there 'incognito' in the first place. Lastly, one should never underestimate the power of the fighter that believes his to be a righteous cause.  The U.S. can easily win a conventional war against a regular army but the insurgencies in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, prove that even the most powerful army in the world (the U.S.) can be rendered impotent.
 
In regards to weaponry the Marines win.
It isn't true that the Legion only has rifles. The Legion's weaponry is the most modern one and includes among others anti-aircraft gunnery, anti-tank missiles, 120mm Mortars and a light cavalry regiment. I cannot disclose the full list of weaponry because I swore not to. Suffice to say that ALL the newly issued weapons in France are first tested by the Legion, which is therefore in constant evolution. Nevertheless, it cannot be compared with the colossal amount of weaponry used by the Marines. I don't think I need to enumerate it so let's just mention unmanned drones and aircraft carriers.
 
In regards to logistics it's a tough one:
On one hand, we have the USMC with a huge budget and a massive logistics department dragging behind hamburgers, coca-cola, civilians to clean the latrines, distribute the mail, cook the meals, etc. It is an
 
Quote    Reply

Hoorah       3/14/2012 1:53:40 AM
I too came here by accident, and I registered to respond specifically to this post.  ( I know it's old, I'm sorry)  Looking forward to sticking around however, as this place looks pretty put together.

 

 So, not only Legionnaires are more seasoned in warfare but they also participate in more varied conflicts whereas the Marines have been fighting in Afghanistan for 9 years.

 

Also fallacy; the Marines have experienced every type of battle across every type of terrain...well modern warfare experience is geared more towards the sand; modern combat training is geared towards everything.  The Marine Corps has fought literally everywhere, and has proven time and again that it's unit memory for combat is impressive.  Because of it's dedication to it's history, the Corps NEVER forgets how to fight anywhere; in fact, they just get better because of their flexibility in training.  The Marine has fought every type of engagement the Legion is fighting, and has done over the past 10 years while simultaneously fighting in two wars.

 

In regards to the number of soldiers the USMC wins.
The Legion is composed of 8500 men and in major conflicts (such as WWII) their numbers can rise to somewhere around 42,000. Even then, the Marine Corps is composed of  202,000 men so there's no contest.

No argument here, but the Corps numbers may be a bit off.  Although it does fluctuate.  There is a cap however, on how many marines can be in active service at anyone one time.  It is below 200, 000, however I know they were allowed a little boost when Iraq was declared, and including the 4th division (reserves) it may well be over 200, 000 now.

 

 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Hoorah       3/14/2012 1:55:06 AM

In regards to the quality of men the Legion wins.

80% of American soldiers enlist to get college money. 100% of Legionnaires enlist to go to war. Moreover, Legionnaires usually have a shady past, which makes them more belligerent. It is true that the Legion does not accept criminals with namely: Blood crimes, sexual deviants such as pedophiles,  drug smugglers, terrorists, etc. but they do accept 'minor' crimes such as armed robberies, felonies, unpaid debts, "white-collar crimes", burglaries, etc.

This is also completely misleading; it is also how I KNOW you are lying about ever working with Marines…because no Marine would ever tolerate being labeled as a soldier, and that would be the first thing you learned when working with them. Moreover, well many soldiers, airmen, and sailors join for money and/or benefits; I can assure you that no Marine fits either of those 3 descriptions. We are Marines…and it is bred into you from the moment you meet a recruiter that there is only 1 reason to join the corps…to be a Marine. You will be told straight, that if that is not your reason for joining the Corps, then turn around leave, because you aren’t going to make it. They even have a point during receiving, when you first get to Boot, when they sit every recruit down, and ask the question: Why did you join? If the answer is anything other than “to be a Marine” then you are informed that you should leave. It is you last opportunity to back out of your contract with no repercussions; they’ll even give you directions to the nearest Army or Air Force recruiting station…there is only 1 reason any Marine has ever had for joining the Corps…and that is to be a MARINE.

Moreover, every single Legionnaire is an infantry man albeit his specialty. It doesn't matter if you are a cook, a nurse or an office clerk. You shoot, practice hand-hand-combat, explosives and are proficient in all fighting matters.

 
Every Marine a Rifleman...it's one of, and arguably the most important, tenant of the Marine Corps.  Regardless of MOS, you are a Marine above all, and a rifleman first.  Any other job you have in the Marine Corps is secondary.  First you go to boot, where you learn all the basics; rifles, martial arts, discipline, etc.  It's where you're broken down and rebuilt.  And then you got to School of Infantry/Marine Combat Training, depending on your MOS, where you learn infantry skills.  This includes all your nav skills, furhter familiarization with radio systems, the next phase of martial art (which you keep promoting through during your career...Marine Corps Martial Arts has a belt system) and of course familiarization with more weapon systems.  Chief among these are the M249 SAW light machine gun, the 240 G Medium Machine Gune, the AT4, etc.  From there on out, you will re-qualify, and if needed, re-train every 6 months to year for your Fitness, Rifle, Pistol, Martial Arts, etc, et al.  Combat arms are directly tied to promotions; no qual, no stripes. (For the record, promotion is notoriously difficult in the Corps) Furthermore, failure to be promoted for too long a period of time results in you being processed out of the Marine Corps.  This means your very career as a Marine, hinges on how proficient you are in the combat arms.
 
Quote    Reply

Hoorah       3/14/2012 1:59:07 AM

Additionally, there is a motto in the Legion: "You joined to die! We'll send you where you can die!" and that's why the Legion is sent to the most troublesome spots in the world. If an American Marine dies, his family weeps, the media covers the casualty, the public opinion turns grim. Report many casualties and there's a popular uprising such as during the Vietnam war.  If a Legionnaire dies nobody cares. Actually nobody knows about it because he was there 'incognito' in the first place. Lastly, one should never underestimate the power of the fighter that believes his to be a righteous cause.  The U.S. can easily win a conventional war against a regular army but the insurgencies in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, prove that even the most powerful army in the world (the U.S.) can be rendered

impotent.

There is a saying in the Marine Corps: "You don't win wars by dying for your country...you win wars by making the enemy die for his."  The Marine Corps has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it is better and more efficient at this than any conventional combat force in history.  As far as the "righteous cause argument", it's a moot point.  We are talking about combat effectiveness;  the U.S. Military has NEVER lost a battle.  Let me break this down for you...we WON in Iraq, and we WON in Afghan.  The "loss" in Vietnam was purely political, and EVERY military historian will tell you that.  We never lost a battle in 'nam.  Our total U.S. KIA: 58, 212.  Total Marine KIA: 14, 838.
Total NV and Viet Cong KIA: 1.2 MILLION

We are talking about the combat effectiveness of these two units, not the political effectiveness, and in that, the Marine Corps has proven itself superior to the Legion in every way throughout it's history.  Even including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Marine Corps has gone into battle after battle, and has emerged victorious.  The only two exceptions to this are Wake and Chosin.  At Wake, the Marines actually successfully smashed the Japanese before a comm error forced the commander to surrender; and at the Chosin, the Marines fought off 10 Chinese divisions in -50 degree weather; completely surrounded, they fought their way out, taking their dead, wounded and equipment, and crippling several Chinese Divisions...2 divisions were forced to disband, and the Chinese 1st Division, their best, never saw combat again.

Count those as losses if you want...most historians see them as losses in the same way we view Thermpolae as a loss.  The only "real" loss in the History of the Corps was during the War of 1812 when the British burned D.C.  And still, the Marines gained so much respect from the British Army during that battle, that when the British reached the Marine Barracks and Commandant's house, they ordered they be left alone, out of respect for the Marines.  It's because of this that those buildings are the oldest in D.C.

But please, tell me about how well the Legion acquitted themselves at their legendary battles...try to think of one when they weren't slaughtered.  Go ahead...I'll wait. 

 
In regards to logistics it's a tough one: On one hand, we have the USMC with a huge budget and a massive logistics department dragging behind hamburgers, coca-cola, civilians to clean the latrines, distribute the mail, cook the meals, etc. It is an

No, on one hand we have Marines, with ships (yes, of their own) trucks, helos and cargo planes, all manned by Marines...who eat MRE's in the field, and don't have to worry about latrines and mail until they get back to the rear anyway.  It's no contest...just like with weaponry, U.S. Logistics is so far beyond any other country's capabilities it's laughable...and as the most flexible combined arms force on the planet, the Marine Corps is even better at it than most.  You really compare logistics with a force can put entire Marine Expeditionary Force on the ground anywhere in the world inside of 6 hrs?

 

 

 
Quote    Reply

Hoorah       3/14/2012 2:01:29 AM

In regards to war experience the Legion has the advantage because, contrary to popular belief, they were involved in almost all past and  present major (and minor) conflicts. I know for sure that at this very moment they are in Afghanistan, Iraq, Ivory coast, Djibouti, doing counter-terrorist missions in the very heart of France and they are fighting the Somali pirates. Actually, the USMC is using "Camp Lemonier", a Legion base in Djibouti. They must also be in at least 3 or 4 other conflicts that I don't know of because I'm not there anymore but places like Sudan, Darfour, Gabon, and Chad, among others seem like plausible targets.

This is simply not true.  The Marine Corps has existed, literally, before this country did.  It is not only older than the legion, but has spent it's entire history in a state of forward deployment.  The Marine Corps has averaged 2 MAJOR engagements every year since it's inception in 1775; that's ENGAGEMENTS, not battles.  The idea that any force has more combat experience then the Corps, which has spent 238 years in constant combat is fallacy; especially when that force is more than half a century younger.

 

 

 

 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics