The Strategic Corporal

[Xenophon]

IMHO...

The Strategic Corporal is not about education level, ability to call a 9 line, or level of responsibility. It's about making dynamic decisions NOW in context of the Commander's Intent without having to wait for authorization.

That's exactly what it's about. However, we need to provide Marines with the information and training to make good decisions within the context of Commander's Intent.

I see your point, Razor, and agree that the Army is moving in the right direction. But I'm pretty much going through one of your BOLC III's right now here at Ft. Sill, and the 135 Army Lieutenants in my company do not support your argument. ROTC training is all well and good, but not all officers get it. I have no doubt that infantry officers do receive good training, but again, that's a minority in the Army. I can tell you that these artillery officers are getting nothing in the leadership and decision making training here. BOLC II is a waste of time, these Lieutenants don't even know how to interact with superior officers, one of them stood up (after being told to stand) and asked the Battalion Commander if artillery BOLC III "sucked" as much as he'd heard. The Marines were absolutely appalled. Their attitudes are horrible. We tried to get the soldiers in our platoon to PT in boots and utes and flak jackets. They literally said, "We dont' want to because it's hot in Oklahoma and that won't help with the PFT." And these are officers who will be in charge of enlisted soldiers' lives.

But you're infantry and maybe the Army, rightfully so, has focused on the development of its infantry officers first. I certainly hope so. It certainly wasn't a cheap stab at the Army, although I don't buy that a 5 week course does the job of transitioning a person into a professional officer. Same goes for ROTC training and infantry training that only a minority of officers receive. You're only as strong as your weakest link.

[Vojnik]

That's exactly what it's about. However, we need to provide Marines with the information and training to make good decisions within the context of Commander's Intent.

I see your point, Razor, and agree that the Army is moving in the right direction. But I'm pretty much going through one of your BOLC III's right now here at Ft. Sill, and the 135 Army Lieutenants in my company do not support your argument. ROTC training is all well and good, but not all officers get it. I have no doubt that infantry officers do receive good training, but again, that's a minority in the Army. I can tell you that these artillery officers are getting nothing in the leadership and decision making training here. BOLC II is a waste of time, these Lieutenants don't even know how to interact with superior officers, one of them stood up (after being told to stand) and asked the Battalion Commander if artillery BOLC III "sucked" as much as he'd heard. The Marines were absolutely appalled. Their attitudes are horrible. We tried to get the soldiers in our platoon to PT in boots and utes and flak jackets. They literally said, "We dont' want to because it's hot in Oklahoma and that won't help with the PFT." And these are officers who will be in charge of enlisted soldiers' lives.

But you're infantry and maybe the Army, rightfully so, has focused on the development of its infantry officers first. I certainly hope so. It certainly wasn't a cheap stab at the Army, although I don't buy that a 5 week course does the job of transitioning a person into a professional officer. Same goes for ROTC training and infantry training that only a minority of officers receive. You're only as strong as your weakest link.

Perhaps the solution is are more comprehensive commissioning and training system for junior Officers? Maybe an equivilent of Sandhurst?