|Speaking as an interested allied observer (IDF infantry officer) it seems to me - admittedly from the outside - that the USMC has a more rigorous training regime for infantry MOSs than the US Army. Let me assure my American friends that I mean this with the utmost respect. We face the same enemies - jihadi Islam. I am thus asking this question in the best of faith.
Every marine recruit does 13 weeks of boot camp, while army recruits do only 9. Marine grunts then go on to do another 7 weeks infantry training at SOI - a total of 20 weeks training - while army OSUT is only 14 weeks long. The Marines also break down infantry squad tasks, alloting a distinct MOS to AT missilmen, machine gunners, assaultmen, mortarmen and riflemen. In the Army the only distinction is between riflemen and mortarmen.
And the same seems to be said for the sniper schools - the Army course is 5 weeks in length while Marine scout-sniper training extends over 10 weeks. Why does Army training seem to be so much less rigorous?
Why is this so? There is much to be said for concentrating training at purpose-built centralised schools rather than in units. At schools the quality-control is much easier to maintain, while there is inevitably substantial variation between the operational and training levels of combat units. And what happens when an army infantryman is assigned to a unit just a couple of weeks away from deployment to a combat zone? Given my personal experience with how militaries work (personnel wonks are the same in any army) I'm sure that has happened in the US Army. Doesn't that shortchange all concerned.. the half-baked grunt and his fellows by creating a weak link in the unit.
So help me please to understand the thinking here, because I don't get it. US Army officers are intelligent and well educated. There must be a rationale for this. But it sure has escaped me.