[Suhiir]

It's not mobility that I was referring to earlier. It's being so closely tied to those vehicles you can't operate without them.

For instance, the US Army as a whole doesn't use 60 or 81mm mortars, they use vehicle mounted 120's ... no vehicles ... no mortars.
Same for artillery, it's almost all self propelled.
And I won't even get into the amount of ammo the Army uses with their suppression fire doctrine, without their vehicles they'd run out several times faster then Marines do.

Mobility hasn't been much of an issue since the late 1950's. In general USMC infantry is 1/3 LVT/AAVs, 1/3 helos, 1/3 trucks. And the helos in particular give us outstanding mobility. The US Army has one, count them one, Air Cav division, if it's not in the area then significant heloborne operations are not an option.

While the AAV is a poor substitute for a Bradley or even a BMP it's every bit as capable as a M113 or BTR (in fact somewhat more capable). But again the USMC isn't designed/intended for use in Central Europe. During the Cold War we were primarily slated for Norway, Greece, and Italy.

True actual battlefield mobility is reduced, since only a fool rides a truck or helo when being actively shot at. But on the other hand the USMC isn't tied to the road net nearly as much as the Army. Many's the time we've waded thru a swamp or crossed a mountain to attack from directions then Army KNEW no significant attack could come from when doing joint service training with the US Army.

####################

Yeah, amphibious warfare has been obsolete since the invention of the A-Bomb ... funny how many landing have been made since then by various nations worldwide. The Brits should have known retaking the Falklands was impossible ...