[Mount Athos]

I have no doubt that reducing to 1 would cripple the effectiveness of the Marines.

[SampleMan]

The Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force all have rifles too?

Yes by all means combine the air power under one service (Let's say the Air Force). Then the USAF will have a sea going wings, sea to shore wings, close attack wings, strategic attack wings. This will all be very confusing, and of course to integrate nicely, these wings will have to be subordinate to the on scene commander. So the sea going wings will be permanently attached to the Navy and be called something like USAF Naval Force. And so on, and so on. Different aircraft will still be required for the specialized missions, but there will be a cost savings on items such as motivational posters.

[Seniram US]

Agreed! During the Korean War, the Fifth Air Force insisted upon and received jurisdiction over the 1st Marine Air Wing, which essentially eliminated the type of close-air support that only Marine pilots attempt, diving below tree-top level to deliver munitions just over the heads of the infantry.

Most calls for air support by the 1st Marine Division during the Korean War, when filtered through Fifth Air Force, either never arrived or arrived, too, late. It became a near-perpetual boondoggle and irrefutably cost the Corps heavily with regard to casualties.

[tet68]

The Marines would NEVER accept it.

[Freedom Dignity n Honor]

Yes we should have more than one airforce.

It's never good to put all our eggs in one basket.

Just like if they put all the medical supplies with one unit and it got wiped out, where would they be?

[2nd Bn, 11th Mar]

BINGO!

Marines kick in the door, operate for 30-60 days and then move to the next door. Combined arms are required...the MAGTF Commander has to have the necessary fire support: organic, artillery, air, naval.

If we rely on one asset, it can be negated by weather, enemy action, countermeasures, or congressional (in)action.

Semper Fi,