All Armed Forces will need to maintain a "cyber" capability dedicated to use of their service.
I have read a number of good theories and explanations here at the Council, as well as a number of far-fetched propositions, and that by far is the worst I have seen in some time.

BILL, we have enough of a challenge keeping our equipment and TTPs up to date, and now you expect each of the services to maintain a "cyber" warfare capability? Since you did not define the boundaries of that capability, I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that you mean a dedicated element of Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines who do nothing but focus on youtube-centric warfare with opponents who are conducting assymetric attacks against us (pushing their own internet IO, service denial attacks, and generic hacking).

Why does each service need its own force? Please offer some sort of force laydown to convince me that this is a good thing.

It took the Marine Corps a few years to come into the fold of NMCI, and guess what? It works for crap most of the time and actually restrains our productivity to a degree. Staying current with the technology leaps every six months is not a job I would wish on anybody, especially since the program is guaranteed to teeter on the whim of budget constraints every year.