imfdb.org  

Go Back   imfdb.org > The Forum > Off Topic

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #14  
Old 07-15-2012, 06:36 PM
Yournamehere Yournamehere is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 912
Default

I personally don't care what they're called. If anything I call those in the service what they are (as in "I know a guy who was a pilot in the Marines" or "I know a guy who was an Armorer in the Army") or I refer to them by branch then rank. If speaking about them generally, I'll probably end up calling Army guys soldiers and Marines will be referred to as Marines, but that's inconsequential. From that natural response and for the sake of arguing for or against Excalibur's point, I'm asking if there is some solid distinction to be made other than what I consider blowhard and silly branch rivalry or semantics, for my own personal knowledge or for the sake of agreeing or disagreeing with Excalibur's argument. That's just the logical way of figuring out where to stand as opposed to agreeing with the status quo just because "it is what it is".

Quote:
Originally Posted by commando552 View Post
If you want to REALLY dumb it down, soldiers are land based infantry, and marines are naval infantry. Historically this is where the distinction comes from.
And this is reasonably articulated evidence for the argument in favor of the separation of terms. So given this is true and perhaps elaborated upon, I'd say yeah, you shouldn't call Marines soldiers.

Last edited by Yournamehere; 07-15-2012 at 06:38 PM.
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.