Desperate times: Marines told to 'save every round'

[CJ7]

they were told to save every gallon of gas too ... seriously? sitting on top of one of the largest oil reserves in the world

oh the irony of a prolonged street fight


maybe this is the military's way of saying BRING OUR ASSES HOME!!

and well they should..

[daty/o]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

And I don't think that's the point. Never knew an "ex-Marine" though.

Originally Posted by Gotyour6

Former or Ex?

Hmmmmm, Never in my life have I heard a Marine say that. EVER

Ex as in ex-active-duty. Of course you knew that. You must be non-military; a fellow Marine would never have been so petty. And LL, I never thought that was the point.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by daty/o

Of course you knew that. .... And LL, I never thought that was the point.

Know I didn't.

And I was making no slur against any servicemember, past or present, but all of our military has "waste" and the issue is neither nickles and dimes nor the grunts, that or who is wasteful.

For me, personally, I am disgusted that the current administration has "prioritized" the First Lady's birthday party over ammunition and fuel for our military. That's the point!

As an aside, doing a little mind reading of my own, I suspect that General Amos is not really concerned about a round or gallon here or there, but is satisfying his obligation in the chain of command to present a face of austerity to "his boss" .... in his "official" capacity. I futher suspect that what he says "under his breath" is more pungent and to the point, but he's a good soldier.

[timpage]

Insane.

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Maybe this is a the plan of Obama to disarm us further. We gun owners will get pissed off and set up a collection. We will donate our own ammunition to protect marines and further deplete our own stocks. Yes, smells like an Obama plan.

[timpage]

The Marines are always short-changed when compared to other branches of the service. Poke round and look at the numbers.....the 2010 DOD budget contained a US Army outlay of almost $250 billion, the USAF around $175 billion, the Navy (minus the USMC budget) $150 billion. The Corps got around $30 billion. I realize there are a lot of different reasons for that given the varying missions of the respective services. Still.....

Which tells you a couple of things: 1) The USMC is the best bang for the buck out of all the services; and 2) it's no surprise that command is telling Marines to conserve.

[JD Barleycorn]

It could have something to do with the fact that there are 3 times more army men than Marines or that a lot of Marines get around on Navy ships (so they don't need a lot of C-17s, C-5As, or C-130s). Could be that Marines are more professional and don't need someone to hold their hands like the army. Of course all of this is irrelevant to the topic. Are the Marines short of ammunition? Why? and who made that decision?

[timpage]

Actually, dumbass...I suspect it has more to do with the fact that the Army purchases, uses and is required to maintain a lot more tanks, helicopters and other types of vehicles and equipment that the Marines have lesser numbers of or do not utilize.

Now....the term "Army men"......where did you come up with that? I swear to god, if you served, it was with the fucking boy scouts. Your use of inappropriate and utterly inapplicable terms when it comes to military matters is baffling in light of your claimed service. Army men? Really? "Army men" were plastic, 2 inches tall and something I got for my birthday when I was 10.

As for relevance. Sorry, but less money means less money to buy ammo. I guess a lack of funds to buy ammo is relevant to the inquiry. Now. After you throw up your obligatory "Blame Obama for this" post, please head back to your corner of the classroom.... and don't forget to slip on your duncecap....

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

It could have something to do with the fact that there are 3 times more army men than Marines or that a lot of Marines get around on Navy ships (so they don't need a lot of C-17s, C-5As, or C-130s). Could be that Marines are more professional and don't need someone to hold their hands like the army. Of course all of this is irrelevant to the topic. Are the Marines short of ammunition? Why? and who made that decision?

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Maybe this is a the plan of Obama to disarm us further. We gun owners will get pissed off and set up a collection. We will donate our own ammunition to protect marines and further deplete our own stocks. Yes, smells like an Obama plan.

Maybe this is a government plan!
Maybe jd has fired a gun before!
Maybe jd is a teacher!

Nahhhhhh.

We should start a pool.

When, if ever, will jd get it right?

No one is cutting the ammo supply. They were told to make each shot count. Just an example of preaching to the choir.

Plus our troops are not as stupid as jd. Worst case is both sides would be shooting AKs

Our troops left without ammo?

Only in your private dream world, jd, only in the one place where you have any significance at all.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by timpage

Now....the term "Army men"..........

Does this mean that the "Army women" can't be sent to the "front" because there is not enough ammo for them too?

Now that is a treacherous and sly way of keeping them out of combat ..... reduce the supply to only enough for the "men"!!!! Absolutely brilliant!!!!!