The "Senior Service"?

Click above for a link to a discussion of a new movie about OIF and the debate on whether it will show the Army or the Marines in a better light (this before the movie has been released!). I have received an edited copy of my previous remarks back from the editors of Proceedings, so they may yet get published, but you've seen them already! Here are my comments on the latest debate at BlackFive...

"Speaking as a civilian, I would suggest you consider the difference in style between the way the Marines and the Army entered Baghdad.

The Marines walked in and then brought up their vehicles to help the Iraqis tear down Saddam's statue.

The army sent its armor on high speed "Thunder Runs" down the highway from the airport to the Green Zone. Two years on, that bit of road is still one of the most dangerous in all Iraq.

So in the light of experience, which proved more effective; walking or driving?

As for the Army being the "Senior Service", back when the Continental Army was truly an 'army of one' (the extraordinary Gen. George Washington) the militiamen of Machias captured H.M.S. Margaretta June 12, 1775 (many days before Bunker Hill) and delivered her crew to the general. They evidently enjoyed it so much they promptly went out and captured another, along with its tender! Knowing a good thing when he saw it, General Washington used his own money to outfit six more privateers, known as Washington's Cruisers and gave them their own distinguishing flag, which can still be bought today! So perhaps the Navy has true claim to being "The Senior Service"!

But who cares today, when we're all part of DOD?"

All of you already know this story and that Gen Washington is my eighth cousin eight times removed. But if some Army types should happen by...

WELCOME ABOARD!