​Dilettante "Originally without negative connotation, "devoted amateur," the pejorative sense emerged late 18c. by contrast with professional.​"

So who is a professional?

Someone with "real experience in military theory, no education in military theory". No one can have 'real' expereince in any theory.

Before judging me, you may have considered asking some more questions.

The appraoch taken by the program team, despite having professional military officers and engineers on it was STUPID. [yes, that was an intentional 'scream']

I'm not going to explain to you why it was stupid, but suffice it to say that EVERY professional military officer and engineer NOT connected with thte program I have spoken with since confirmed it was STUPID.

Now the reason I say STUPID, and not just stupid, is because this approach was REALLY STUPID.

This is not just the arrogant me speaking. Apparently the US Congress and the then SecDef thought it was also STUPID.

The USN thought it was so STUPID that it actually adviced the USMC that amphibious assaults were no longer part of its doctrine.

Do you know the problem with that?

Unlike other services, the role of the USMC was enshrined in the Title 10 Code 5063 law in the 1950s after Inchon landings. This law says the USMC "...shall be organized, trained, and equipped to provide fleet marine forces of combined arms, together with supporting air components, for service with the fleet in the seizure or defense of advanced naval bases and for the conduct of such land operations as may be essential to the prosecution of a naval campaign."