Who is more hardcore Army Rangers or British Royal Marines?

[QUOTE="markop2003"]Marines. Marines include elite commandos on par with Green Berets whilst Rangers are known for making a lot of noise also they have the SBS which is on par with the SAS. Royal Marines come attached to Royal Navy ships, helicopters, logistics ect, Rangers by themselves would be stuck in the US twidling their thumbs.UnknownSniper65

That didn't really make sense the 75th Ranger Regiment is one of the most mobile units the US Army. They've been among the first soldiers parachuted into war zones several times now.

what he's meaning is a the royal marines are tied to their ship and make use of what is there at disposal on that ship and tends to be an aircraft carrier aswell if im not mistaken or at least a fleet group with one, where as most likely the marines need another auxiliary unit to help them with their logistical stuff.

If they get the missions done with zero to minimum casualties among themselves and civilians in the paremeter or as direct participats in a mission, then it doesn't matter who is more "hardcore"Treflis

Well i guess the Spetnaz are reall failures by your standards :lol:

[QUOTE="SamusFreak"]

often wearing a light combat load of 32 Ilbs.

Palantas

This is a lot?

I hope not.

Why the hell are you comparing standard marines to Army Rangers? You don't have to be a super soldier to be a Marine...

F'ing retarded civilians.

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"]

[QUOTE="sonofsmeagle"]

Royal Marines by far,

These guys are pretty much entirely made up of Commandoes and pretty much all of them have received commando training, that plus their experience and reputation should be more than enough to warrant them more hardcore than the Rangers,

Also if you count that the RM are also made up of, The Special Boat Service, the SBS is by far one of the greatest special forces to walk the planet and are on par with the SAS if not better,

Once again the Royal Marines by far,

sonofsmeagle

I think a Rangers/D-force Vs. SAS discussion is more plausible.

Buddy...you're clueless. Royal Marines aren't special in anyway. Anyone can join them. It's just like American Marines. The 230 days you are talking about is basic Marine training and MOS-like training (don't know what you Brits call it). Before you can become an Army Ranger you have to go through basic training and AIT. Then you have to do RASP, which is the selection process (the 61 days you were talking about). Then you have to spend time in a Ranger Batallion. Then finally you attend Ranger School. Yeah...it's more than 230 days buddy. All Royal Marines have to do is basic training/AIT or whatever you guys call it. Basic training is designed for you to pass, RASP isn't.

Try harder next time ignorant civvy.

[QUOTE="Treflis"]If they get the missions done with zero to minimum casualties among themselves and civilians in the paremeter or as direct participats in a mission, then it doesn't matter who is more "hardcore"sonofsmeagle

Well i guess the Spetnaz are reall failures by your standards :lol:

Since it isn't, no I don't consider them failures.

@ SpartanMSU : Is it really nessesary to call people "Retarded F..king Civilians"?

Granted you might be in the military but that don't make you better then anyone else, especially if you act like that.

Try harder next time...

SpartanMSU

This is two military topics in a row in which you've restated one my points. :P

Why the hell are you comparing standard marines to Army Rangers? You don't have to be a super soldier to be a Marine...

F'ing retarded civilians.

SpartanMSU

[QUOTE="sonofsmeagle"][QUOTE="Tetrarch9"] Ya.. Go look up ranger school/training on Youtube and see if you change your mind. The rangers are elite shock troopers. They shouldn't be in a discussion with Royal Marines. While Vise versa if you said USMC is more hardcore then the SAS I'd laugh.

I think a Rangers/D-force Vs. SAS discussion is more plausible.

SpartanMSU

Buddy...you're clueless. Royal Marines aren't special in anyway. Anyone can join them. It's just like American Marines. The 230 days you are talking about is basic Marine training and MOS-like training (don't know what you Brits call it). Before you can become an Army Ranger you have to go through basic training and AIT. Then you have to do RASP, which is the selection process (the 61 days you were talking about). Then you have to spend time in a Ranger Batallion. Then finally you attend Ranger School. Yeah...it's more than 230 days buddy. All Royal Marines have to do is basic training/AIT or whatever you guys call it. Basic training is designed for you to pass, RASP isn't.

Try harder next time ignorant civvy.

wait what? You can't just sign up for the Royal Marines and simply stroll to basic training

Rangers. Allen from MW2 was a ranger, and he killed over 9000 civillians. That's pretty hardcore while nut speaking Russian.

i've been told that the royal marines are superior on their feet, for example they can speed march 60 kms, with all of their kit and then fight a battle at the end. Whereas the US Rangers are superior at helicopter insertion and room clearance

At a guess the Rangers since they are an elite force as opposed to a generic military branch....also...you underestimate what it takes to become a Ranger.LJS9502_basic

the royal marines aren't a generic branch, they are commando infantry, and have the longest training course in NATO

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]At a guess the Rangers since they are an elite force as opposed to a generic military branch....also...you underestimate what it takes to become a Ranger.gamedude2020

the royal marines aren't a generic branch, they are commando infantry, and have the longest training course in NATO

[QUOTE="gamedude2020"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]At a guess the Rangers since they are an elite force as opposed to a generic military branch....also...you underestimate what it takes to become a Ranger.LJS9502_basic

the royal marines aren't a generic branch, they are commando infantry, and have the longest training course in NATO

wrong. the royal marines have to run 3 miles,1.5 miles as a group, 1.5 miles back in under 10 minutes. The Rangers run 2 miles in under 15 minutes.

They are both totally different cultures of warfare, the US Rangers are focused on rapid insertions and cqc drills, whereas the Royal Marines is focused on pure physical endurance and the ability to survive anything, in any climate. if you look at what the RM did in the Falklands war, you'll see what i mean. if it was the US Rangers, they would have been inserted by helicopter straight into Port Stanley, but because Britain does not have that kind of capability, the RMs landed by sea and to fight their way across the 60 mile island with no air cover

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="gamedude2020"]

the royal marines aren't a generic branch, they are commando infantry, and have the longest training course in NATO

gamedude2020

wrong. the royal marines have to run 3 miles,1.5 miles as a group, 1.5 miles back in under 10 minutes. The Rangers run 2 miles in under 15 minutes.

They are both totally different cultures of warfare, the US Rangers are focused on rapid insertions and cqc drills, whereas the Royal Marines is focused on pure physical endurance and the ability to survive anything, in any climate. if you look at what the RM did in the Falklands war, you'll see what i mean. if it was the US Rangers, they would have been inserted by helicopter straight into Port Stanley, but because Britain does not have that kind of capability, the RMs landed by sea and to fight their way across the 60 mile island with no air cover

No that's not correct. The marines run 1.5 miles solo....and the Rangers have to run in under 13 minutes....not 15.

LJS9502_basic

uve just added in 'solo'. you were wrong, the marines run 3 miles, 1.5 miles in 12.5 minutes, 1.5 in under 10. as for rangers il have to take your word on that, but according to this, it is 15.12

Why the Rangers... . Pick something more L33t like Navy Seals or Green Berets.Fightingfan

They aren't comparable...

Navy Seals, Delta force, Green Berets are all in a league of their own. The army Rangers and British royal marines would be found in between the regular army units and black ops special forces.

No one can really say unless they belonged to one of these groups. Lostboy1224

Even then, they couldn't say because of likely bias.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

No that's not correct. The marines run 1.5 miles solo....and the Rangers have to run in under 13 minutes....not 15.

gamedude2020

uve just added in 'solo'. you were wrong, the marines run 3 miles, 1.5 miles in 12.5 minutes, 1.5 in under 10. as for rangers il have to take your word on that, but according to this, it is 15.12

[QUOTE="SamusFreak"]

often wearing a light combat load of 32 Ilbs.

Palantas

This is a lot?

For basic drills and such, its a decent amount. that's what I meant, they do the majority of Basic wearing at least a light load of 32 Ilbs. The Commando course they do in full combat gear( a lot heavier)

thanks for all the posts you guys. I am going to make a battle simulator of both of the armies and see who wins (3v3)

1. Sniper

2. Close Quarters

3. Vehicle

[QUOTE="gamedude2020"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

No that's not correct. The marines run 1.5 miles solo....and the Rangers have to run in under 13 minutes....not 15.

LJS9502_basic

uve just added in 'solo'. you were wrong, the marines run 3 miles, 1.5 miles in 12.5 minutes, 1.5 in under 10. as for rangers il have to take your word on that, but according to this, it is 15.12

Sorry to interject, but 13mins is not the requisite, merely the ideal it seems (as per the page you've linked).

To be competitive in any of these physical tests, the future Ranger students must not strive for the minimum standards above, but must maximize their personal physical effort and strive for the following recommended scores:

- Pushups- 80-100
- Situps- 80-100
- Chin ups- 15-20
- 2 mile run- under 13:00

thanks for all the posts you guys. I am going to make a battle simulator of both of the armies and see who wins (3v3)

1. Sniper

2. Close Quarters

3. Vehicle

MiloZEgamer34

[QUOTE="MiloZEgamer34"]

thanks for all the posts you guys. I am going to make a battle simulator of both of the armies and see who wins (3v3)

1. Sniper

2. Close Quarters

3. Vehicle

SnipeyMcSnipe

No bias found in this thread

Neither are "hardcore. Hardcore is a music style.

British Royal Marines. Just 'cause their british

[QUOTE="MiloZEgamer34"]

thanks for all the posts you guys. I am going to make a battle simulator of both of the armies and see who wins (3v3)

1. Sniper

2. Close Quarters

3. Vehicle

SnipeyMcSnipe

For basic drills and such, its a decent amount. that's what I meant, they do the majority of Basic wearing at least a light load of 32 Ilbs. The Commando course they do in full combat gear( a lot heavier)

SamusFreak

What's "basic drills?" And what's included in full combat gear?

[QUOTE="SamusFreak"]

For basic drills and such, its a decent amount. that's what I meant, they do the majority of Basic wearing at least a light load of 32 Ilbs. The Commando course they do in full combat gear( a lot heavier)

Palantas

What's "basic drills?" And what's included in full combat gear?

Basic drills that just about any comabt troop go through, some specific things they have to do would be like a "battle simulator swim" and another where they are in the water and have to climb out, up a rope. Full gear depends on the individual, but stuff like Ammo, equipment, supplies, etc. I gave some general info to the TC who was asking for it, If you want to know more, do your own research.

No one is better, dammit! You stupid kids can't wrap that around your heads. I don't think either of them would appreciate some booger eating 16 year old saying one was better than them, when they haven't done anything. These threads piss me off.Seajack

[QUOTE="Seajack"]No one is better, dammit! You stupid kids can't wrap that around your heads. I don't think either of them would appreciate some booger eating 16 year old saying one was better than them, when they haven't done anything. These threads piss me off.sonofsmeagle

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"]

[QUOTE="sonofsmeagle"] Are you really counting the RM out that easy hahahahahhaa You think that because the rangers show their training exercises on youtube and discovery channel and they look hard that they are instantly the best? The training to become a Royal Marine is about 230 days compared to the 61 day ranger course, so if we're counting who is better because of training then i'd say the RM, And not even mentioning the SBS who alone are better than the Rangers,Berets and Delta force,sonofsmeagle

I shouldnt even bother to argue with you, Training would lose its relevance after 90 days? yeh thats why every special forces unit in the world only trains once and doesnt train anymore to become better and advanced in every situation that presents its self,

And it doesnt matter if your a clerk or cook your still by far the best trained clerk or cook there is and if the RM ever lost alot of men you'd have the training to step right into the fray,

and the marines havnt had any serious engagements since WW2? you gotta be kidding me

Korea? Egypt you know the Suez?, Bosnia?, Siera Leon? Congo? The Gulf? Afghanistan? The falklands?

Also the Royal Marines are pretty much the true meaning of Un-officail special forces, they can match the rangers any day, and did you just say that you would compare the SBS (part of the RM) and SAS with rangers? clearly yor patriotism is your only significant arguement :lol:

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"]

[QUOTE="sonofsmeagle"] Are you really counting the RM out that easy hahahahahhaa You think that because the rangers show their training exercises on youtube and discovery channel and they look hard that they are instantly the best? The training to become a Royal Marine is about 230 days compared to the 61 day ranger course, so if we're counting who is better because of training then i'd say the RM, And not even mentioning the SBS who alone are better than the Rangers,Berets and Delta force,sonofsmeagle

I shouldnt even bother to argue with you, Training would lose its relevance after 90 days? yeh thats why every special forces unit in the world only trains once and doesnt train anymore to become better and advanced in every situation that presents its self,

And it doesnt matter if your a clerk or cook your still by far the best trained clerk or cook there is and if the RM ever lost alot of men you'd have the training to step right into the fray,

and the marines havnt had any serious engagements since WW2? you gotta be kidding me

Korea? Egypt you know the Suez?, Bosnia?, Siera Leon? Congo? The Gulf? Afghanistan? The falklands?

Also the Royal Marines are pretty much the true meaning of Un-officail special forces, they can match the rangers any day, and did you just say that you would compare the SBS (part of the RM) and SAS with rangers? clearly yor patriotism is your only significant arguement:lol:

trust me my friend you tend to be patriotic to a fault as well, as do I at times. It seems anything British to you is best, often without examination. We've been posting together long enough on similar posts to know this. Just saying.

[QUOTE="SnipeyMcSnipe"][QUOTE="MiloZEgamer34"]

thanks for all the posts you guys. I am going to make a battle simulator of both of the armies and see who wins (3v3)

1. Sniper

2. Close Quarters

3. Vehicle

UnknownSniper65

No bias found in this thread

haha, agreed.....I see he's trained with the U.S. Army Rangers as well to give a fair opinion :roll:

[QUOTE="UnknownSniper65"]

[QUOTE="SnipeyMcSnipe"] I might as well give you the results now: 1. Royal Marines by far (Royal Marines have probably the best snipers in the world) 2. Royal Marines by far ( I have personally trained with Royal Marines in MOUT (Military Operations in Urban Terrain) and the amount of knowledge and technique they have is just insane. 3. Vehicle - Go American budget! AFBrat77

No bias found in this thread

haha, agreed.....I see he's trained with the U.S. Army Rangers as well to give a fair opinion :roll:

While I'll agree with you guys on the second point, I'd give him the first( though not quite as he put it) Standard sniper rifle for the Royal Marines is the AWSM, The Ranger will most likely have a M24 rifle( they could have a better one, but again, standard) It of course depends on the situation and such. I am assuming that in the TCs test, its two fairly equal sharpshooters with the rifles.

Second, can't really measure it unless your gonna use a training vid of an CQC exercise or something from both groups to determine who is "better"

As for the 3rd point, he was right there. The Rangers def get some nicer toys at their disposal.

Why the Rangers... . Pick something more L33t like Navy Seals or Green Berets.Fightingfan

i agree... Navy Seals

but whats up with the voting?? i never heard of any British soldiers kicking ass...

[QUOTE="sonofsmeagle"]

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"] I shouldn't even bother to argue with you. While training does matter. I think it would begin to lose its relevance after 90 days. And I looked under Commando specializations on the RM site. Chef and clerk are two of them. If I went through 230 days of training to be a clerk or cook meals for marines I'd shoot myself. Also when is the last time the RM have had any serious engagements since WWII. And the RM aren't even Special forces. Just troops. While I could see an arguement for the SBS or SAS I can't put the RM on the level of Rangers. USMC yes but not rangers.

AFBrat77

I shouldnt even bother to argue with you, Training would lose its relevance after 90 days? yeh thats why every special forces unit in the world only trains once and doesnt train anymore to become better and advanced in every situation that presents its self,

And it doesnt matter if your a clerk or cook your still by far the best trained clerk or cook there is and if the RM ever lost alot of men you'd have the training to step right into the fray,

and the marines havnt had any serious engagements since WW2? you gotta be kidding me

Korea? Egypt you know the Suez?, Bosnia?, Siera Leon? Congo? The Gulf? Afghanistan? The falklands?

Also the Royal Marines are pretty much the true meaning of Un-officail special forces, they can match the rangers any day, and did you just say that you would compare the SBS (part of the RM) and SAS with rangers? clearly yor patriotism is your only significant arguement:lol:

trust me my friend you tend to be patriotic to a fault as well, as do I at times. It seems anything British to you is best, often without examination. We've been posting together long enough on similar posts to know this. Just saying.

[QUOTE="sonofsmeagle"]

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"] I shouldn't even bother to argue with you. While training does matter. I think it would begin to lose its relevance after 90 days. And I looked under Commando specializations on the RM site. Chef and clerk are two of them. If I went through 230 days of training to be a clerk or cook meals for marines I'd shoot myself. Also when is the last time the RM have had any serious engagements since WWII. And the RM aren't even Special forces. Just troops. While I could see an arguement for the SBS or SAS I can't put the RM on the level of Rangers. USMC yes but not rangers.

AFBrat77

I shouldnt even bother to argue with you, Training would lose its relevance after 90 days? yeh thats why every special forces unit in the world only trains once and doesnt train anymore to become better and advanced in every situation that presents its self,

And it doesnt matter if your a clerk or cook your still by far the best trained clerk or cook there is and if the RM ever lost alot of men you'd have the training to step right into the fray,

and the marines havnt had any serious engagements since WW2? you gotta be kidding me

Korea? Egypt you know the Suez?, Bosnia?, Siera Leon? Congo? The Gulf? Afghanistan? The falklands?

Also the Royal Marines are pretty much the true meaning of Un-officail special forces, they can match the rangers any day, and did you just say that you would compare the SBS (part of the RM) and SAS with rangers? clearly yor patriotism is your only significant arguement:lol:

trust me my friend you tend to be patriotic to a fault as well, as do I at times. It seems anything British to you is best, often without examination. We've been posting together long enough on similar posts to know this. Just saying.