Question:
American deployment of forces during world war two?
Dominic
2014-01-22 13:07:32 UTC
Ok during world war two the United States had two basic fronts One in Europe and the other in Pacific. My question is why did we only divert the marines to the Pacific and not split them like we did with the Army. I understand the Marines are a lot smaller than the Army and cant take the beating like the Army can. Nor do they have the resources to fight for a sustained period. I know this cause I am a soldier and I have worked with Marines before. But this is what I wonder why not split them? I believe there were 6 marine divisions during the war witch is nothing compared to the Armys sum 100 during the war. Now I heard that the island campaign suited them better because they got to do their bread and butter witch was beach taking but their were at least 4 or 5 of those in the European theater witch the Army conducted. The other thing ive heard is that during the European campaign that divisions were out at the front for 30-60 days and that the Marines could not meet this demand but at Iwo Jima and Okinawa the Marines fought for just as long as that requirement. Please help and thanks.

Also the Marines were not at Normandy that would be Soldiers and Coast Guardsmen
Seven answers:
Walter B
2014-01-22 16:30:48 UTC
1) There were Marines fighting in the European Theatre, and not just aboard naval ships. There was a small detachment based in Britain who did fight in Europe.

2) There were FOUR theatres of operations and NOT two. There was the (a) Europe theatre under Eisenhower, (b) The Pacific under Admiral Nimitz, (c) The Southwest Pacific under MacArthur and (d) the China-Burma-India theatre under the British command with General (Vinegar) Joe Stillwell as the US commander of US Army troops and who also commanded Chinese troops.

3) American Army troops fought in the SW Pacific command in Papua New Guinea and the Solomions and at Guadacanal. Army fought in China and Burma and Army troops fought in the Pacific theatre.
lana_sands
2014-01-22 21:46:13 UTC
Marines were at Normandy.



Shipboard detachments of Marines served throughout the landings in North Africa, the Mediterranean and the Normandy invasion as gun crews aboard battleships and cruisers. A 200-man detachment was normally carried aboard a battleship, and 80 Marines served aboard cruisers to man the secondary batteries of 5-inch guns providing fire for the landing forces.



During the June 6, 1944, Normandy invasion, Marines, renowned as expert riflemen, played a vital role reminiscent of the days of the sailing Navy when sharpshooters were sent to the fighting tops. Stationed high in the superstructures of the invasion fleet, Marine riflemen exploded floating mines in the path of the ships moving across the English Channel to the beaches of Normandy.



On Aug. 29, 1944, during the invasion of southern France, Marines from the crusiers USS Augusta and the cruiser USS Philadelphia went ashore in Marseilles harbor to accept the surrender of more than 700 Germans who had fortified island garrisons.
?
2014-01-22 21:15:54 UTC
The Pacific was a naval war. The Marines are attached to the Navy. Make sense the two would stay together.
Stand-up philosopher. It's good to be the King
2014-01-24 02:37:10 UTC
On Aug. 29, 1944, during the invasion of southern France, Marines from the battleship USS Augusta and the cruiser USS Philadelphia went ashore in Marseilles harbor to accept the surrender of more than 700 Germans who had fortified island garrisons.



[Researched by Alexander Molnar Jr., USMC/USA (Ret.) ]



This is the only time they set foot on EMEA hostile ground.
jeligula
2014-01-22 21:17:24 UTC
Sorry, Dominic, but you understand absolutely nothing and there is nothing I can do to edify you. Being in the Army and having worked with Marines does not give you any insight into their readiness or their ability to forward deploy for sustained periods of time. Yes, the Army is larger. No, Marines were not present at Normandy.
?
2014-01-22 21:09:52 UTC
Simple - the Marines specialize in amphibious assault. The Pacific was an island-hopping campaign, therefore...



It's a no-brainer.
?
2014-01-22 23:19:07 UTC
Too much going on at too many places, and limited to where it was needed the most.. They train to get the other's in and out, without out that means, it's stalled. When it's stalled, it goes no where. That and the surprise fact of Japan joining forces with Hitler, deemed something major had to be done, ASAP. It was. Now, that that is all said and done. They know people that don't want to be controlled by one with all the wealth and power, making them slaves, won't be tolerated, and allowed. So, it stands.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...