I was out with some friends and one of them is a former Marine. I called him a soldier and he took exception to that. He was polite, probably a common mistake, but he made it clear he was not a “soldier.”
I have no doubt the distinction is made but…why? I thought “soldier” is a generic term for people in the military.
I put this in FQ because I think there is a factual answer to it but Mods feel free to move.
AIUI, in the US the Marine Corps is a distinct service from the Army, the Navy and the Air Force. Those who serve in the Marine Corps are neither soldiers nor sailors nor airmen; they are marines.
(In the UK and I think most European countries, the marines are considered part of the Navy. I don’t know when, or why, the US decided to do it differently.)
Army service members are soldiers.
Marine Corps service members are Marines.
Navy service members are sailors.
Air Force service members are airmen.*
There is some [usually] good-natured rivalry between the various branches of the U.S. armed forces. Marines are proud of their branch of service and consider themselves elite, and don’t like to be lumped in with the larger but less-elite Army (in their view, anyway). So they insist on being referred to as Marines and not [mere] soldiers.
*And Space Force service members are apparently referred to as “Guardians,” which sounds pretty lame to me, but not as bad as “spacemen,” I suppose.
Cool…
How should we refer to them as a group? (Even Space Force which I hate even saying…like a 1990’s weak computer game/movie).
Well, the USA kind of does it that way as well. More specifically:
The U.S. Navy is headed by a four-star admiral. The U.S. Marine Corps is headed by a four-star Marine general. But both services are part of the Department of the Navy, which is headed by a civilian Secretary of the Navy (a political appointee).
Military service personnel or service members. Or members of the military.
Nope. Any person serving in the Navy (for example) would bristle at being referred to as a soldier. The job of a typical sailor in the Navy is very different from that a soldier in the Army. (Of course, there are some similarities, too.)
The army, the navy, the air force and the marine corps, together with the space force and the coast guard are collectively the “United States armed forces”, and those who serve in them are, I suppose, referred to as members of the armed forces.
YMMV, but I would understand “military” as referring to the army. “Military” is usually contrasted with “naval”; it doesn’t embrace it.
My mistake, I think, is verbing “soldier” rather than a noun. E.g. “Soldiering on” (which anyone in the military can do…or anyone really)
This is YMMV because “military” is frequently used interchangeably with “armed forces “ , especially historically. I read a lot about WWII and don’t recall that being used that way.
Even wiki says:
Agreed, “armed forces” is probably more accurate than “military,” although it is more wordy.
That’s an older distinction that I would say has pretty much gone by the wayside. But you do see it with the Army’s service academy at West Point, which is the U.S. Military Academy (USMA). Of course, that name goes back to its founding in 1802 when it was the first and only service academy.
In any event, while a Navy sailor would bristle at being referred to as a soldier, they would not bat an eye at being referred to as being in the military (which again, is less wordy than the “armed forces”).
It’s just marketing.
“Soldier” is just a description, like lawyer or electrician. An electrician can’t just call himself a “Bolt-Wrangler” and declare that it makes him somehow different from all other electricians. That would be absurd.
I was told to refer to Marines(they are always Marines, not ex-marines) as “Sir”.
If it’s marketing, it works.
My understanding is you only refer to officers as “sir” (or “Ma’am” for a female officer.) NCOs are referred to by rank. I have no idea what is proper once someone has left the military (since most people will not be able to know a person’s rank I am guessing not much formality, if any, is expected).
Can you clarify what you mean? “Soldier” refers to a member of the Army.
How does that fit into your analogy?
“Soldier” refers to a member of any army. The French have soldiers. The Russians have soldiers. The Chinese have soldiers. The Paraguayans have soldiers. They each call them something else in their own languages, but they’re all “soldiers” in English. I don’t see why the Marines should be given an exception.
This.
And in China, the People’s Liberation Army includes the following:
There’s also the People’s Armed Police who wear uniforms similar to the PLAGF’s but a different color (PAP = dark olive green, PLAGF = pine green). An interesting note is the PAP, along with the Ministry of Public Security, used to include the firefighters throughout the country, until 2018. Before 2018, I’ve seen English language news reports referring to the PAP firefighters as soldiers.
And we still have conversations like “How many soldiers will China need to conquer Taiwan?”
The Marines are like the Yankees refusing be be called “baseball players”, because they’re “Yankees”.
Originally the distinction was minimal. The ancient Mediterraneans put their regular land forces onto galleys and conducted mele combat afloat. The Portuguese, with the first maritime empire, created the first exclusively maritime soldiers.
There was a diplomatic reason to differentiate soldiers and Marines. If you landed your army in some vulnerable, troubled place like China or Samoa or wherever, rival nations would suspect a move on the international game board and respond. Land a few Marines and it could be explained as just a temporary protection of local interests.
Google image search for “Soldiers of the Sea” shows that it was the Marines’ own recruiting slogan until WWII. But after WWII, there was talk of returning the Marines into the small ship-board force they’d previously been and blending the rest into the Army. That jump-started a major PR effort to create an image of the USMC as a very different, elite force. Hollywood stepped in to help, with John Wayne, and thus everyone now believes that only the Marines fought in the Pacific (when actually the Army did over half the fighting).
If the American jarheads disliked being confused with dogfaces, they could at least be glad they weren’t in their counterparts in Germany’s, Russia’s etc. naval infantry brigades, and had to wear sailor uniforms!
Seabees take exception to that. In 23 years, I never set foot on a ship.
“Hey you!”
“Military” means anyone serving in the armed forces.