I think everyone does.

Actually, my grandfather, great grandfather, etc, etc, right up until the time my family first came to the US were Navymen. My dad broke the mold by joining the Marines (and only then because it was still part of the Navy). There he learned an intense dislike for the Navy-proper. :P
I gotta say objectively though, I have not heard good things about the Navy (discipline-wise, etc).
Unfortunately though, the M855, while fragmenting fairly reliably within 200 yards when fired from M16s and M249s with 20" barrels, but from what I have read, rounds fired from the M4 stop fragmenting reliably past 50M or less because of the lost velocity due to the shorter barrel.
Here is an interesting article on the problem created by the M4's shorter barrel.
The truth is GC, the M855 already had issues with its fragmentation reliability (esp when thick clothing was concerned), but the M4 only makes that much worse.
I am personally with the Marines here; I would much rather have the M16, because you have a much better chance of actually killing your opponent with it. My friend told me (and I am not sure if it is true) that the Marines want to get their M4 barrels replaced with 16.5 inch ones.
When the Military decides to replace an obsolete assault rifle, why on God's green earth would they pick another DI *#&@box with an even shorter barrel!
I just ripped this off wiki. Look at how bad the reliability of that weapon is compared to the competition. Can you really blame the Marines for being reluctant to switch to it?
The Marines may not be good tankers or good policemen, but they are good Riflemen, and that is the core of the Corps.
Bookmarks