The Instigator
lannan13
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
Wylted
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Lannan13's 250th Debate Resolved: The United States Marine Corps should continue to exist.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
Wylted
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/19/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,815 times Debate No: 60650
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (14)
Votes (5)

 

lannan13

Pro

This is Lannan13's 250th debate over the existance of the United States Marine Corps.

I'd like to thank Wylted ahead of time for accepting this debate.

Rules
First round is acceptance and definitions.
Round 2 is Contentions, no rebuttles.
Round 3 is Contentions and rebuttles.
Round 4 is rebuttles and conclusions.
No semantics
No Trolling.


Marine Corps- a branch of the U.S. Armed Forces trained for land, sea, and air combat, typically for land combat in conjunction with an amphibious or airborne landing, and whose commandant is responsible to the secretary of the navy. (http://dictionary.reference.com...)

Should- simple past tense of shall. (http://dictionary.reference.com...)

continue- to remain in a place; abide; stay: (http://dictionary.reference.com...)

Exist- to continue to be or live: (http://dictionary.reference.com...)
Wylted

Con

I accept and though I won't troll certain instances of humor that could be interpreted as offensive may be used.

Good luck Lannan.
Debate Round No. 1
lannan13

Pro


“Freedom is not free, but the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share. “


Ned Dolan



Contention 1: From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli


The US Marines are the world's most feared fighting force in the world. (http://www.usmarinesbirthplace.com...) The United States Marines were involved and are involved in the nation's greatest moments. The Marines lead the attack on the Fort that overlooked Mexico City during the Mexican-American War. The Marines have also lead the attack on Tripoli to help end the War against the Babaray States. During the American Expansionalist Period the President deployed the Marines across the globe from Bejing, China to Vera Cruz, Mexico. The Marines were originally created to help the Navy storm ships during the Revolutionary War, but have evolved over time.


During World War 1, the Marines were sent to France and the French troops at Bellea Woods wanted to retreat and the Marine Major Lloyd Williams said, “Retreat? Hell we just got here!” At the Battle the Marines forced the Germans out and fought so ferce that they earned the nickname "Teufelhunden” which is German for Devil Dogs. (http://www.marines.com...)


In World War 2, the Marines swiftly swept through the Pacific in their fight against the Japanese. At the Battle of Iwo Jima the Marines rose the iconic flag over Mountain there.


“The raising of that flag on Suribachi means a Marine Corps for the next five hundred years. “


James Forrestal, Secretary of the Navy; 23 February 1945




In Korea, while most of the UN troops (including the US Army) retreated bellow the 38th Parrallel, the US Marines were trapted in the Chosin Resivoir. Many people saw the Marines movement out of the area as a retreat, but the Marine officer replied, “Retreat, Hell we’re just attacking in a different direction.”


“The safest place in Korea was right behind a platoon of Marines. Lord, how they could fight!”


MGen. Frank E. Lowe, USA; Korea, 26 January 1952


“I have just returned from visiting the Marines at the front, and there is not a finer fighting organization in the world! “


General of the Armies Douglas MacArthur; Korea, 21 September 1950



Contention 2: Army vs. Marine Corps


Many People compare the the two, but there is one major thing that stands out. The Marines are an invasion force while the Army is an occupationial force. Basically after the Marines go in and take the place over the Army then comes in to hold down the fort while the Marines advance in the war. (http://www.wisegeek.org...)



marines vs army

But in all reality though. If you look at Special forces units in other branches like for say the paratroopers in the Air Force. The Marines have the same exact thing except they are the Marine Air Crewmen. The Marines doesn't concider it a special force, because it is a normal MOS (Military Occupationial School). If you look at average intellegence aswell to enter the military you must get a 31 on the ASVAB to get into the Marine Corps, but for the Army you need 21. The score is out of 100 and I got a 72 on my ASVAB just for comparision.


Wylted

Con

FRAMEWORK

This isn't a policy debate. We aren't discussing changing the status quo. It's simply a debate on whether the Marines should exist or not. Do they serve a purpose that necessitates them to exist is how I interpret the resolution. Obviously we aren't debating abolishing the Marines as it's much easier to keep existing bureaucracies than to abolish them even when they serve a purpose that could easily be combined with the purpose of a similar bureaucracy. With all that being said, I interpret the BOP to be split to show that the Marines should continue to exist.

When this debate is over, the voters will see that the Marine Corp is a completely unnecessary part of the American armed forces and isn't really needed at all.

HISTORY

The Marines were formed in 1794. [1] At the time, America didn't really have a standing army, navy or air force. If they did than the Marines most certainly would've never been formed. Now that America has a standing army it is no longer necessary for the Marines to exist and in fact the Marines are being phased out already.

When the government makes military budget cuts or it's always the Marines that are hit first. [2] You see the United States government knows that the Marines aren't needed. It's political suicide to come out and say it, but politicians are saying it with their actions.

INVASION FORCE

My opponent says that the Marines are needed because they act as an invasion force and guard embassies. Let's face the facts anybody in the army could stand next to a foreign dignitary in one of these embassies and guard him and the embassy just as easily. It may make the dignitary feel a little better that a Marine is guarding him (due to the feelings the title brings), but the feeling is shallow. The army is trained to do the same thing, shoot the enemy.

The Marines no longer operate as the primary invasion force for the USA. Now most of the invading and the front lines work is being done by SOCOM, as it was in Operation enduring Freedom[3][4][5]

The Marines are doing the same thing as the Army in Iraq and other locations. They are there in a support capacity. [4][6][7]

CONCLUSION

The Marines serve no purpose and don't do anything that isn't already being done by or which could easily be done by another branch of the military. When you combine the with the fact that the government is already slowly phasing them out you can see that the Marines shouldn't exist. They are pretty useless.

sources
[1] http://www.archives.gov...
[2] http://www.nationalreview.com...
[3] http://www.washingtonpost.com...
[4] http://www.quora.com...
[5] West, Bing; General Ray L. Smith (September 2003). The March Up: Taking Baghdad with the 1st Marine Division. New York: Bantam Books. p. 17. ISBN 0-553-80376-X.
[6] http://ktla.com...
[7] http://www.cbsnews.com...
Debate Round No. 2
lannan13

Pro

Contention 1: History

I'm afraid my opponent is mistaken. The Marine Corps birthdate is November 10th, 1775. The Marines are older than this nation.

"On November 10, 1775, the Continental Congress approved the resolution to establish two battalions of Marines able to fight for independence at sea and on shore. This date marks the official formation of the Continental Marines."

1st Marine Corps Commandant: Major Samuel Nicholas (1775-1783) (http://www.marines.com...)

My opponent makes a straw man argument stating that just because the Marines are hit the hardest under budget cuts does not necissarially mean that the Marines are not needed. The Pentagon has projected and prepared for Sequestration again in 2016 and they have determined that the Marines would be shrunk down to 175,000 active duty (which is above the lowest level that current Marine Commandant General James F. Amos wanted), the Army would lose 450,000 Soldiers, and the Air Force would retire over 80 Air Crafts, and the Navy would halt all purchases on F-35's. (http://www.defenseone.com...) They currently own 194,000 Active duty which means the Marines would only lose 19,000. When you compare the numbers here you can see that the Army is actually hit harder. I'd also like to point out that the Marine Corps Recurit Training is the hardest as if a Marine were to leave the Marine Corps and go to any other branch they would be able to skip over any other military branch's Recruit Training while if you are anything but a Marine, even a 4 star general and wanted to join the Marine Corps you would have to start all over as a Private at Parris Island or San Deigo Training program. (http://en.wikipedia.org...)

“Based on the detailed planning of our working group, and in conjunction with independent analysis, we have determined that with sequestered budgets a force design of 174,000 is right sized to allow the Marine Corps to remain America’s crisis response force,” Amos wrote

Contention 2: Invasion Force

When my opponent brought up that the Marines do is be body guards he is highly incorrect. The Marines have millions of millions of MOS (military Occupation Schools) ranging from CBRN defense specialist to photography and from Drill Instructor to mechanic. (http://en.wikipedia.org...)

Here in this first video it will show you the Marines in Operation Enduring Freedom. https://www.youtube.com... Also, Con is highly incorrect as in the book Semper Fi: The Definitive Illustrated History of the US Marines, it shows the Marines actions all over the Middle East. In Operation Enduring Freedom the US Marines sent in their special forces in 15th and 26th MEU and they also sent in MARSOC (Marine Forces Special Operation Command). (http://www.washingtonpost.com...) and (Priddy, Maj. Wade (2006). "Marine Detachment 1: Opening the door for a Marine force contribution to USSOCom". Marine Corps Gazette (Marine Corps Association) 90 (6): 58–59.)

Contention 3: US Marine Existance challenged before.

Wylted

Con

I don't have much time to post this, but I wanted to touch on 2 things and then in my final round, I'll give my opinion on what's happened in the debate so far.

My argument is essentially that the marines don't do anything other branches of the military don't already do or could very easily do, and my rebuttal was that Socom handles all the aggressive military endeavors such as invasions. Socom handles the special forces in each branch of the military.

I apologize for the brevity, and look forward to my opponents final statement.
Debate Round No. 3
lannan13

Pro

I'm going to go over the only two points that my opponent continually brings up.

First of is SOCOM, aka the Navy SEALs. When you put the math together of comparisons together you can find that the Marines numbers are over 202,000 active duty while the SEALs only have 2,400. The Marines are primarily a invasion force and they do everything that other branches can do, as I brought up and went uncontested in my last round.(http://www.diffen.com...) I also brought up how the Air Force special forces are actually included in the Marine Corps and it is considered a basic job. The Navy SEALs is a basic force that the US would never through the entire unit on the front lines while the Marines is that elite branch. As I brought up earlier and also dropped by my opponent that the Marines are the toughest branch and the hardest. They are the world's most feared fighting force.

I have also given a list of Marine Corps jobs and MOS that the Marines offer and if you look you can also see the only ones that the Marines only do and there are quite a few thousand. (http://en.wikipedia.org...)

In conclusion, one can see that the Marines have provided a great history of fighting and not to mention that that most of my points were not even refuted by my opponent. I have shown that the Marines have and always be part of American defense forces and operation as well as that the Marines are the most feared fighting force in the world!

Semper Fi! Vote Pro!
Wylted

Con

"First of is SOCOM, aka the Navy SEALs. When you put the math together of comparisons together you can find that the Marines numbers are over 202,000 active duty while the SEALs only have 2,400. The Marines are primarily a invasion force and they do everything that other branches can do, as I brought up and went uncontested in my last round."

As my sources pointed out the only units used by the Marines in invasions are ones are the Marines special forces known as Socom. I've also shown that Marines not under Socom have been acting as an occupier force in Iraq. Without the Marines invasions would still occur under Socom. We'd just have to increase the number of special forces a little in the other branches. My opponent's premise that we need the Marines because they're an invasion force falls flat.

"I have also given a list of Marine Corps jobs and MOS that the Marines offer and if you look you can also see the only ones that the Marines only do and there are quite a few thousand."

This is not a good reason to keep the Marines. I haven't argued that the Marines don't do anything. My argument is that they don't do anything not already done or could easily be done by another branch of the military. My opponent brought up a bunch of jobs that every other branch of the military already does. He claims there is 100s of unique ones but fails to mention any.

At one point he said they act as glorified body guards in foreign embassies something which any other branch of the military could easily do. His other premise that they do unique things only they can do is also destroyed and has been since round 2.

". As I brought up earlier and also dropped by my opponent that the Marines are the toughest branch and the hardest. They are the world's most feared fighting force."

This actually was never brought up. There were some quotes by guys pandering to the Marines so they'd get loud cheers from their audience but it was obviously only put there for rhetorical purposes. My opponent never brought up any evidence let alone made the argument that the marines are the toughest branch of the military.

CONCLUSION


I've proven that the Marines aren't needed. They do nothing not already done or can easily be done by another branch of the military. Without more compelling arguments from my opponent it's my opinion that the voters must vote con.

Thanks for reading.
Debate Round No. 4
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
There's about 2 debates I feel bad for winning. This is one of them. Sorry Lannan.
Posted by Ajabi 2 years ago
Ajabi
Will vote on this by sundown, you hear. :P
That was me trying to be Texan.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
I meant navy
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
Just because the arguments apply to other branches don't mean that they don't apply here. You're basically arguing for my opponent when you make votes like that. Not to mention it's not even true. You can't eliminate the marines or air force with those arguments.
Posted by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Analyz. part 3
Lannan concludes the final round by stating how the Navy Seals are nothing compared to the Marines, and builds upon his previous point about how Marines have amazing jobs, much more than the army.
Wylted counters his own point... :"We'd just have to increase the number of special forces a little in the other branches." He says. Well, it would be much easier to keep the marines rather than withdraw the marines, only to hire the forces, right?
Wylted also blatantly says lannan claims there are tons of unique jobs but does not mention any. This is false, as the website directs us to show that indeed, marines do have loads and loads of unique jobs. Furthermore, lannan already listed jobs in the previous rounds, so Wylted's claim is invalid.
Wylted also claims that Lannan gave no proof for why the marines are the toughest. Bull! Lannan gave loads of evidence in round one, which were never refuted!

In conclusion...Lannan wins. It feels like Wylted gave as much effort as he did in my one-gap debate. You're gonna have to try harder, Wylted.
Posted by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Analyzation part 2
Lannan tells us about how Wylted made a straw man because just because you don't support the marines does not mean they aren't needed. He even points out how Wylted's own points harm himself because the soldiers are more withdrawn than the marines, showing the marine's superiority over the military.
Lannan also makes a good point about how the Marines have different jobs that can help, not only just acting as bodyguards.
Wylted does not rebut this due to his limit of time, but he makes a very good point strengthening his previous points about how the military is too similar to the marines, and that the Socom handles the threats, making the marines useless.
Posted by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Let us analyze this. This seems to be a short and easy debate, so I won't need a bazillion parts like the Whiteflame vs Phantom debate. :P
Anyhow ,let' see...lannan makes these points in round two
-Marines are great in war
-Marines do a load of stuff for the US that helps
-Marine is even better than the army
Con interestingly frames the debate differently. He points out these facts:
-The Marine is already being drawn out, showing how useless it is
-The Marines are only a "support capacity"
-Therefore marines are useless
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
@9space, what in the hell are you thinking?

You have a lot to learn.
Posted by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Hmmm....before I read this debate I held 50,000$ for Wylted winning....seeing Lannan's round 2 I can't help but put 20,000$ on the table on his side and removing that amount from Wylted.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
I'll hold off until the last second
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Kc1999 2 years ago
Kc1999
lannan13WyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: As with a shared BoP, the debate went more or less better for Wylted than it did for Lannan. Take the following proposition: "the Marines are braver and the enemy fears them" This is a non-sequitur; the army has been responsible for MANY heroic actions too. Con's counterargument on the usage of the Army makes more sense; after all, they are both fighting force(s). Secondly, a justification for the abolishing of the Marines given by Wylted, albeit not "strong" so to say, presents a convincing point; the Marines were created as a interim army for the states. Since the US now has an army, such useless institutions should be either merged into the Army or abolished wholly. Henceforth, I award ze win to Wylted.
Vote Placed by Swedishperspective 2 years ago
Swedishperspective
lannan13WyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con offered more reliable and respectable sources than PRO and PRO didn't manage to refute the argument that CON presented, namely that the tasks performed by the Marine Corps are more or less interchangeable with the other branches of the military since these tasks are already done by either the regular military or by SOCOM or could very easily be don. Consequently, the Corps more or less function as a backup to the other branches of the military and thus serve no inimitable function that necessitates its existence. Since PRO didn't address that point, I think it is a clear win for CON.
Vote Placed by UchihaMadara 2 years ago
UchihaMadara
lannan13WyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: pro never really addressed con's point that other branches of the military could easily fill in for the navy's functions... this negates any reason for us to believe that the navy should continue to exist. clear con win. not really sure why pro has such a big lead right now... i'm also going to go ahead and award the source points to con because his sources were much more reliable and established ones, whereas pro's sources included some very random sites, wikipedia, and youtube.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
lannan13WyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's main argument was that other branches of the military could do what the marines do. The problem with that is that it can be applied to EVERY branch of the service, negating the notion of separate branches altogether and, while Con could have argued for that if he wanted to, it would have required a lot more argumentation. Trying to focus specifically on the marines, using arguments that can just as easily be applied to any other branch interchangeably, just isn't compelling. Overall an interesting debate, though. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
lannan13WyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: In comments