We all know GEN Petraeus chaired the last BG board this past summer http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/200...f-us-army-coi/
As one previous post stated, we hope to keep the likes of LTG Caldwell and GEN Petraeus around for the next 5 or 8 years to institute real change and support intellectuals in the Army.
If we looked "behind the curtain" into the Wizard's control room and changed the way we picked BGs, then we may send a message to rest of the Army that is good for muddy boots AND intellectuals, doers and thinkers, men of Action and Contemplative men.
If we were to allow officers to pursue their passions in the career field that they truly excel, we would have the best FAOs, infantrymen, signaleers, and strategists that the Army has ever seen. Then, we would thoroughly screen these COLs for selection to BG, with little or no prerequisites. They would not necessarily need "sponsors" in the board room. Like, "I know McMaster and he is a Cavalryman and an author and I need him for ARCIC." (Although that was a perfect pick and definitely from Petraeus). With a more thorough selection process, those that pursued their passions would rise to the top and they would be evident. With only 400 BGs in the Army and an Army in Persistent Conflict, we will need to shape the future BGs by looking at the selection process differently. Selecting those who are focused on the future Army Requirements, can establish a vision and get things done in the best interests of Soldiers.
Great discussion!
Bookmarks