Should Army and Marines (or components of) consolidate?

Objectively, maybe. I could see a situation where the Marine Corps is converted to being a "Special Forces" type thing for the Army instead of being the "Ground branch" of the Navy.
However, do you think that:

1. Aren't the Marines MP division effectively the police for the Navy?
2. How's CAP going to work, Navy has rights to fly fixed wing aircraft over land within X miles of shore, while Army is prohibited from having fixed wing aircraft.
3. How would having Large Army Divisions being effectively "permanently" under the command of the Navy work?
4. How would the whole administration thing work? I mean, right now, a lot of the Marines paperwork is pushed by Navy Administrators, how different would it be if the Army suddenly had to push that amount of paperwork? Especially if the Army had to install administrative sub-divisions on Naval bases with significant Marine presence...

And don't the Army and Marines share a significant portion of their ground based weaponry already (the other bit of logistics that needs to be considered for Army/Marine integration) and continuing this pattern be as efficient as before.

The consolidation issue has been raised before. and shot down. The Army has a different mission and make up than the Marines Corps.While the Army is great for moving slowly when they are setting up an occupation force. While Marines move quickly from ship to shore with the verticle envelopement both different tactics each branch having specializedntactics.

The U S Army is the biggest wast of money then any other branch. Why should we have three time more equipment than we use.. The Army has excess equipment stashed all around the world. Look at Iraq Billions of equipment left there so out enemies can now use it against us.

I don't think that either branches could deal with the other. It is too different worlds and the clash would create more damage than it would do good.

Marine Corps is the World's largest special forces. Let's keep 'em.

Just to stir the pot a little I have a couple of questions. Which banner would both services be under? Army or Navy or perhaps a new one?

That's like asking if the air force and navy should be consolidated because both fly combat sorties. That being said it might not be a bad idea to get rid of the Army completely and beef up the Corps.

Read the book titled, "First to Fight" by Victor H. Krulak and you will be shown why the Corps will never be merged with any other service, EVER. If anything, the Corps will outlast any other United States Military Service and, perhaps even the country itself.

Does the Marine Corps do anything the other services can't do?

Short answer: NO.

Oh sure, Marines will tell you that they are tailored toward rapid deployment and conflict resolution or amphibious assault, but the truth is, the Marine Corps exists for only ONE reason: Money.

The Marine Corps solidified its position long ago, when it was created as a Navy Military Police force (entirely seperate from the Navy for the express purpose of being able to police Naval personnel without reporting to any of them, regardless of rank structure), by adapting to new situations faster than the government required and in a less expensive way than any other service. That characteristic is the reason the Corps is still around. There have been, and continue to be, numerous occasions where people try to show that the Marine Corps need not exist because they do nothing which is unique.

The problem is that every time a naysayer spouts off at the mouth about the Corps, they are proven wrong by the Marine Corps budget. No other service can say they can do everything the Corps does at the price the Corps charges for its services.

Simply put: we do it cheaper and more effectively than anybody else. Except the Navy, we love their ships.

Is this a real question?

Nah