Smoothy, the Army is the land component command, hence the avoidance of Marine-style warfare. That would be a duplication of effort. But, if you recall the soldiers that mounted the largest amphibious assault of all time were Army soldiers at Normandy. The Army also did extensive amphibious assaults while island-hopping in WWII in the Japanese theater of operations.
You will note that the Marines did not attempt an amphibious assault during the Gulf War as the waters off the coast had been extensively mined and defenses were heavy. But the mere threat of such an attack drew away defenses along the Saudi border allowing the joint British/Marine/Army invasion to occur over land with awesome speed and success. The Marines have tried to develop the V-22 Osprey as a means of reducing the dependency on landing craft to allow assaults from farther off shore where they are safer from anti-ship missiles.
I will note that the Army has superior CH-47 vs. Navy/Marine CH-46, Apaches vs. Cobras, Blackhawks vs. twin-engine Hueys. For years we had the M1 tank while Marines still used the M-60. The Bradley is superior to the wheeled LAV.
The Marines have a superior hoooah attitude and every Marine is an infantryman. They are scary creatures which further adds to their mystique and effectiveness. Both forces are essential and complementary.
Infuryum, I was going to suggest the prep school, myself but forgot about your age. That is how I got in. My sister's son wanted to got to the Naval Academy but did not get in, and instead enlisted in the Navy for Nuclear Engineering. He finished in the Great Lakes area, went to New York for training and is now training with industry while they finish his nuclear-powered ship.
Maybe you spent too much time trolling here and not enought time studying at Texas A.M.
Do whaever you want and make the best of any decision you make. Night, all.
