Posted on May 28, 2014
PO1 Master-at-Arms
1.36M
6.44K
3.13K
298
286
12
Should army and marines consolidate
Think objectively. Traditions, camaraderie aside. Both are somewhat similarly more combat-oriented than USN or USAF. Answer practically without putting down either one of them.

PS: Yes, some are taunting about USN and USAF consolidation or Air Force return to Army Air Corps. My take on that if it's practical, lessen bureaucracy, and make for a smoother communications pipeline amongst the DoD components, why not? Again, camaraderie and traditions aside for a min.
Posted in these groups: Cf1cbe80 TroopsAmerican flag soldiers SoldiersDod color DoD
Edited >1 y ago
Avatar feed
Responses: 1533
Sgt Steven Martin
0
0
0
Hell NO!
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Anthony Rossi
0
0
0
No I joined the army so I could stay on the land. I'm not a big fan of salt water.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 Jack Smith
0
0
0
No marines are part of the Navy. Are biggest land arm. Army don't train is some fundamental training that Maines do. Ones on the ground they work much the same. But how they get their sometime a lot different
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
LCpl Luke Vega
0
0
0
Ahh...HELL NO!!!
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SMSgt Superintendent
0
0
0
I think as we move forward the industrial warfare that the Army and Marines provide will become less of a priority for the defense of the nation. Like or not, Cyber warfare is where we need to be focused. Having said that, whether the Army and Marines consolidate or not may not be the appropriate question. Whichever service leads in Cyber warfare will become the deciding factor in who consolidates with whom. I believe the Air Force may have the edge. So my question is; Are you all ready to consolidate with us???
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 Sami
0
0
0
If this is about saving money then the U.S. Military should have one standard camouflage uniform. As far as the Army and USMC to become one this like asking an apple and orange to become one. Those two branches serve a different role in the fighting force. That is like asking the USAF to merge with the USN the Navy has two roles as the USAF as one (that is to fly)
(0)
Comment
(0)
PO1 Master-at-Arms
PO1 (Join to see)
>1 y
Well we did have one standard woodland/desert camouflage uniform at one time. Then it all changed after 9/11 for better or worse. So much for uniformity amongst US military branches
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MSG Operations Sergeant
0
0
0
I would offer that the Marine Corps has unique mission set and is fully integrated into the Navy for support of their operations. Consolidating them with the Army would rob them of their expeditionary capability. It would also make it extremely difficult for them to train on amphibious operations as the Army doesn't own enough watercraft to train large-scale amphibious assaults. Therefore Marines would have to relly on the Army for administrative and logistical support while being embedded with the Navy for their wartime mission. Therefore the Marines and the Army are akin to oranges and tangerines and couldn't fully integrate effectively.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
LTC William Eisaman
0
0
0
Yes they should combine stronger military would be the end result
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Richard Blue
0
0
0
Edited >1 y ago
From a functional standpoint combining the US Army and US Marine Corps. will work. Instead of mixing units with some Marines and some Soldiers in each unit, it would make sense to have 2 or 3 additional specialized amphibious divisions added to the Army. Doing this would keep the light, fast and amphibious capabilities the Marines provide without changing the training that enables these abilities. Just look at the Army now. We have mountain units, airborne units, cold weather units, air assault units, special operations units, etc. It wouldn’t be a big deal to create a light, fast and amphibious capability within the best army in the world!
(0)
Comment
(0)
Sgt Erle Mutz
Sgt Erle Mutz
10 y
NO - NO POINT!! 
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CMDCM Richard Moon
0
0
0
I reject your premise on just about every level. I'll start with your ending comment - "taunting about USN and USAF consolidation" - they are so dissimilar that in doing so would serve what purpose?

Here's my take - when you centralize, you lose the inherent and necessary differences in each service, be it culture, be it history, mission, equipment and ethos. The mission of the Marines, as is the Navy - btw, they are intermixed and necessary to each other, which is why they comprise the Department of the Navy - is expeditionary. They are there with the gear when you need them.

The Army is not capable of anything remotely similar without massive airlift (a diminishing resource). Airborne units are by definition light infantry, and while they may get into theater quickly, provided it's permissive, they can't bring to the fight what the Marines can on the first day. The Army brings heavy units and sustainability, as does the Navy, but to think or suggest the Army and the Marines have similar missions is ridiculous.
(0)
Comment
(0)
CDR Michael Goldschmidt
CDR Michael Goldschmidt
>1 y
Furthermore, Congress has the authority "to raise Armies and support a Navy". This, with the limit of two years on military appropriations means that the founders intended no standing Army, but a Navy, with embarked Marine Corps, capable of responding to contingencies. A fleet and an FMF is not intended EVER to be an occupying force. It is to keep the sea lanes open, to project power, to show the flag through maritime diplomacy, and to act as transportation when necessary.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close