Search This Blog

Loading...

Friday, October 03, 2003

GUNNY G IN A NUTSHELL! ... --by Dick Gaines


GUNNY G IN A NUTSHELL!
My sites/forums will reflect my attitude on numerous topics Marine; but here, in a nutshell are a few of my feelings on various topics, you will get the idea of what I think, say, and do--might save ya all some time...

My direction is Old Corps--you will not find a whole lotta stuff on my sites regarding the Corps after the early '60s--or even RVN, for that matter.

OLD CORPS VS. THE NEW CORPS!
Most, even most of the oldtimers, will say that the old corps was great, but quickly explain that the new corps is just as good. But, I read an article lately where a Marine general actually said that the Marines of the new Corps are better. But, in general, most will fall back on an old remark by Chesty Puller (often quoted, you know the one I mean) old corps, new corps, there's just one Marine Corps! Paraphrased, words to that effect.

I think, that when General Puller made that remark back in the early '50s it was very true. Since then, however, many things have occurred. America itself is not the same America that many of us older Marines came from; consequently, the Marine Corps of today, of course, draws its manpower (or personpower as it is probably termed today) from today's present American society, therefore, it cannot possibly be the same or equal to that which it was back in pre-WW II days, or even thru the ...maybe, early '60s. Granted today's "Marines" are generally bigger, stronger, better educated (educated that is, meaning a piece of paper/cerification), more intelligent (depends how you define intelligence, maybe; degrees, more years in an institution, etc.) All this, aside from technical developments since the old days. And so, I, personally, think that Old Corps and new cannot be compared.

I liked the old enlisted rank structure prior to 1959--we got along fine back then w/o super-sergeants (pay grades E-8/E-9), and I considered then, and now, the new E-1/E-9 thing to be a humbug--it wasn't Marine Corps--it was a DOD thing the Corps had no choice in it.

I don't OohRah! See my OohRah Origin/History site for more on that.

I do not constantly ooze and drivel this stuff about the Marine Brotherhood--yes, to be sure there is a brotherhood among Marines, and this should be reserved for mostly serious and solemn occasions. Also noted up front on my Introductory Gunny G site.

Uniforms? The new short sleeve shirts and trench coats are fine. But, for the most part, the old service hat (campaign hat) was great for all hands, not just the present prima donnas who are entrusted to wear it today. The old heringbone (HBT) dungarees were fine w/unbloused trousers and boondockers.

And, no, I do not worship the onetime S/Sgt Lee Ermey, whom I consider, for the most part, to be a throwback to the old image of the ignorant pre--WW II sergeant of Hollywood films--I have seen a couple of his films that were pretty good, however, the ridiculous character he has developed for TV, and his carnival-like websites for suckers, are less than acceptable for the thinking Marine!

THE TITLE "GLOBE and ANCHOR"?
Regarding my chosen title for some of my webpages/sites, many have asked why I don't just indicate, eagle, globe and anchor, rather than Globe and Anchor, implying that I have erred. No error, it reads as I intended. Apparently unknown to most Marines of today, there was a time in the Corps when Marines referred to their emblem (emblem not an "ega"--but that's yet another story) as simply the Globe and Anchor, and there are still some old timers and writers around who will still use that term.

There are many writings available, most of them older writings, but some more recent, where you will find this. One of the best examples of this, perhaps, may be--and there are many more--a quote in the recent book by Colonel Jon T. Hoffman, USMCR, Chesty. It reads as follows:

"Colonel Robert D. Heinl, the premier historian of the Old Corps and a former subordinate of Puller, believed that Chesty was one of the greatest raconteurs that ever wore the Globe and Anchor."
(Random House, 2001, Preface, page xi)

This was a common expression even in this old boot's first days in the Corps of the early 1950s. I find the term similar to the term used by the Royal Marines for their emblem, known as the Globe and Laurel.

Matter of fact, I do not recall the emblem being specifically referred to as an eagle, globe and anchor until the late 50s or early 1960s, on TV recruiting promotions, ads, etc.

To be sure, the popular term has now become eagle, globe and anchor, and the majority considers anything they are not used to, to be incorrect. As for this Marine, as always, I'll fall in w/the old salts!

There's more--this should be sufficient right now for my little spiel here. There's more on my sites, if you can bear it--or save yourself the trouble and don't go at all--your choice.

Semper Fidelis
Dick Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
http://www.angelfire.com/ca/dickg/gunny.html



Gunny G's GLOBE and ANCHOR Weblog
by R. W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
Gunny G's...
Marines G&A Sites & Forums!
http://www.angelfire.com/ca/dickg/gunny.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~