I assume you mean Marine Brigades instead of Battalion as by the example you posted. But in fact the Army's Unit of Action more closely resemble a Marine Expeditionary Units(Special Operations Capable)-MEU(SOC)and Marine Expeditionary Brigade-MEB. These are the striking units of the Marine Corps. These are the units the Marine Corps uses to "kick in the door or the roof." They are for short term (30 days of self sustained operation securing the Beach/airfeld etc for follow on forces)These units are based at sea in Amphibious Groups. The Marine Air Ground Task Force-MAGTF is for more sustained combat operations like Iraq, and can greatly vary in size. Each of them contains 3 elements; A Ground Combat Element-GCE, Air Combat Element-ACE and a Combat Service Support Element-CSSE. The compositions of these elements are not really fixed and draw their units form the Marine Divisions, Air Wings and Force Service Support Groups. Will use the smallest of these, the MEU(SOC)and you can compare to the Army's "Unit of Action." This example is typical but not fixed GCE- Consists of a Battalion Landing Team: 1 Marine Infantry Battalion: 1 HQ company 3 Rifle Companies 1 Weapons Company 1 Assault Amphib. Platoon: 13 Amphib Assault Vehicles 1 Light Armored Recon Platoon: 6 LAV Armored Vehicles 1 Artillery Battery: 6 155mm Howitzers 1 Tank Platoon: 4 M-1 tanks 1 Recon Platoon 1 Shore Control Party 1 Engineer Platoon ACE- Air Combat Element: Medium Helicopter Squadron 6-8 CH-53E Super Stallions 12 CH-46 Sea Knights 3 UH-1N Hueys 4-8 AH-1W Cobras 6 AV-8 Harriers CSSE-Combat Service Support Element Communications Platoon Landing Support Platoon Engineer Support Platoon Supply Platoon Motor Transport Platoon Maintenance Platoon Medical Platoon For a Marine Expeditonary Brigade basically just combine two or three MEUs. Other facotrs to consider; A Marine Infantry Battalion is larger and has more trigger pullers than its Army counterpart due in part its 13 man rifle squads and larger weapons platoons and companies. This could be considered mixing apples and oranges given the different missions of a Marine Expeditonary Unit and Army Unit of Action. But my experience with the Marine Corps is that most commanders like having that 3 maneuver unit option.

From the other threads it looks as if the line battalions will have two companies each of mech and armor, and those companies will probably be permanently organized as combined arms companies (I think the army lingo if "team"). Would it make any sense for Marine battalions to be organized this way? The reason I ask this question is that the Cav guys (on the discussion board) all says being organized as combined arms unit is much, much better than being task organized on the eve of war. The reason is simple: the Cav lives and trains how it will fight. How much combined arms training does a BLT have before deploying? What kind of combined arms training does the rest of the regiment have if they are not schedled for MEU deployment? I was a REMF Marine many years ago and was never stationed with combat arms units (I was at a supply depot and MCAS-H), so I don't have a clue. Did you serve in the Corps? If so, what was your MOS? I've read from time to time that the Marines are interested in converting to a British style regimental system. What do think of that?

Think of the Marine Regiments as the administrative holding units for the Battalions. It permits units with a high concentration of one type of MOS, Infantry or Artillery to concentrate training on those individual or small unit skills. Since the Marine Corps started rotating units out of Okinawa a Battalion such as 1/5 may find itself assigned to the 7th Marine Regiment. A Regimental system is certainly feasible except for the high loss of NCOs to DI duty, Recruiting duty and Instructors to Mountain Warfare School. I have read were they are going to give Instructor duty at Infantry Training School the same weight as Drill Instructor Duty. I like the idea but there is yet another drain on top quality NCOs from the FMF. Pluses and minuses I guess. I also oppose a Marine Regimental system because the Marine Corps is the unit for loyalty for the Marine. The Corps first, unit and MOS were all secondary. I have always felt that this was one of the Corps strong points compared to the Army. In the Army your Branch and unit had first call on your loyalty then the Army as a whole. Sometimes it looks like a bunch of warring tribes when they fight for resources pushing their branches agenda over a competing branch. Each Branch has its own insignia and even songs, mottos etc along with each unit. Separate Armies within the Army. A Marine's uniform just has the Eagle Globe and Anchor for unit identification. His soldier counterpart has a uniform that looks like Latin American dictators with its Branch (MOS) Insignia, Unit insignia (battalion), Regimental crest, Division Patch and any awards the unit may have been awarded throughout its history. Not just the ones awarded to the unit while that soldier was assigned to the unit. I will not even get into the multitude of individual badges, devices and awards the Army hands out like lunch. Most of them are chicken sh_t others have merit. Many a Marine who went though Ranger School would like to have been able to wear the tab on his uniform, but an expert driver badge? Give me a break. A Regimental System would be good for the Marine Corps in terms of unit cohesion (Though the Corps rarely deploys or fights as a Regiment so it would seem to me the focus should be at keeping battalions together as long as possible) as long as the focus of loyalty remains the Corps itself. If memory serves, when I was in the Corps as a Grunt, it was about 6 month train up and certification process with all the units together that form a MEU. The individual and most of the small unit training was taken care of at the regiments and Battalions. The MEU train up was to get all the different units: Grunts, artillery, Armor, aviation, support and the Navy training together. Most of the time the train up was more intense than the actual deployment.