At this point, does it even matter?
Seriously.
We have an Army that is still expanding, and officers are is short supply from 03-05. There are entire YG's that will make 06 based off current extapolations on levels left within those YG's.
As long as the Army has a personnel system that requires any face be placed in a space, and a personnel system that puts the greatest value on "KD" positions, then you will never change the culture within the Army.
And with the lack of officers at the mid-levels ranks - and I agree with Ken, we are grossly overmanned from 04-0-10 - it simply becomes irrelevant whether one is an intellectual, a physcial specimen, or a walking Alice the Goon.
You're still getting promoted to 05 if you don't break the law and pass the APFT and height/weight standards.
"Speak English! said the Eaglet. "I don't know the meaning of half those long words, and what's more, I don't believe you do either!"
The Eaglet from Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland
Hey! I'll be one of those guys who gets promoted because everyone in his Year Group got out! Well, maybe. That's my plan, anyway.
The first thing to go should be the command queue. Of the CPTs that I know that got out between 4-8 years of service, this was the number one complaint. It is also a major complaint for the rest of us. Command is currently based off of "your turn" and not merit/performance. CCC shouldn't be a disqualifier, either. You don't need it to lead Soldiers. We give BN commanders so much responsibility, we can't trust them to look around their formation and choose their company commanders? Especially for deployments.As long as the Army has a personnel system that requires any face be placed in a space, and a personnel system that puts the greatest value on "KD" positions, then you will never change the culture within the Army.
What blows me away is that I've SEEN and HEARD BN commanders acknowledge, privately, that certain captains have no business leading soldiers (this was in Iraq), but they will "let them finish their 12 months" then change them out. I could not believe it. I think good Bn Commanders will and do figure out how to get the best guys leading. I think quality BDE commanders should encourage that.
I'm not saying this because I feel that I was wronged by the command queue. Haven't been in that position yet. I was plagued as a LT with some terrible company and battery commanders; when there were great guys "waiting their turn" on staff. By the time they got in command, the damage had already been done.
Right now, I am in a training BN, after four-plus years in a line BN. I'm thankful to be here, for many reasons...but, I can assure you that my entire BDE is waaaaayyyyyyy overstrength on officers. It's rediculous. I don't know who designed the MTOE, but it's insane. There are officers doing jobs that E6s should be doing.And with the lack of officers at the mid-levels ranks - and I agree with Ken, we are grossly overmanned from 04-0-10 - it simply becomes irrelevant whether one is an intellectual, a physcial specimen, or a walking Alice the Goon.
Insh'allah! I'm counting on it!You're still getting promoted to 05 if you don't break the law and pass the APFT and height/weight standards.
Sir, what the hell are we doing?
On the enlisted side, take a look at this spreadsheet detailing felony waivers by type of offense for enlistment in '06 and '07. Quick summary for '07: AF no felony waivers, Navy 42, USMC 350 - Army 511. The Army is also the only service that granted felony waivers for Indecent acts or liberties with a child, molestation. The overall numbers for this year are even higher.Originally Posted by Ski
In addition, Schmedlap's comment is equally true for the NCO Corps - certain fields are so understrength even at the Senior NCO levels that personnel are not only being promoted beyond their ability and experience, but more than a few minimal achievers and oxygen thieves are in undue positions of influence with inexusable behaviors being overlooked or swept under the table.
Yes, for many outstanding young soldiers, there is an unparalleled opportunity to excel and a good number are performing well beyond expectations - but that positive aspect weighs a precarious balance against the damage that is being done by the proliferation of Joe #### the Ragman being irresponsibly promoted.
The one good point of a non-discriminatory promotion system, is that the creative-thinking weirdos are no longer eliminated because they don't fit the "hi-pro glow" model.
I'm thinking of a particular USAR 0-5 who was threatened with being passed over at O-2 in 1992 when I post this, of course...
Not much to do with "Anti-Intellectualism in the Army"; but since crime stats were mentioned, I thought I'd chime in.
Broke down the offenses into catagories that mean something to me. My comments are my opinion, for sure; and I admit bias in certain directions.
Crimes of Violence or Potential Violence
Sorry, but I presume "bad people" here. The criminals here were unable to control their violence in an environment where violence is not tolerated. The prospects of their controlling their violence, in an environment where controlled violence is allowed and is in fact a must be, seems problematic.Aggravated assault, assault with dangerous weapon, maiming (33, 43); Robbery, to include armed (8, 28) - 71 in 2007.
Liars
Sorry, these folks probably all had a "good reason" for what they did - psychological denial, etc. I'd be worried that they'd lie (to save their own asses) in situations where the lies would get people killed.Check, worthless, making or uttering, with intent to defraud or deceive (over $500) (8, 12); Embezzlement (5, 12); Forgery; knowingly uttering or passing forged instrument. (Except for altered identification cards) (8, 27); Illegal/fraudulent use of a credit card, bank card, or automated card (value of $500 or more) (2, 6) - 57 in 2007.
Thieves
Possibly a pass here (see next catagory). IMO: The first two catagories are character flaws (hard to eradicate). Thieves may (repeat: may) act with situational ethics. Multi years ago, interviewed a PFC stationed in Hawaii who had gone home on leave, got drunk and B&E'd an occupied dwelling (no one was home at the time; and he was smashed enough to possibly have just wandered in). His problem: before going into the Army, he B&E'd an unoccupied building. Judge gave him a break then (hung up the charge, so no felony record, if you be a good boy). Clean service record; his company commander said not brightest star in his galaxy, but no UCMJ problems. Probation - nope. Same judge maxed him 5 yrs on a reduced charge (B&E occupied then = 15 yrs). So, situational and maybe the Army can handle thieves.Breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony (18, 15); Burglary (36, 106); Grand larceny -Larceny (value of $500 or more) (26, 56); Grand theft auto (8, 11); Stolen property, knowingly received (value $500 or more) (8, 21) - 209 in 2007.
Druggies
JMM Axiom: B&D > B&E ; trans. booze & drugs lead to breakings & enterings. Clean up the booze and/or drug problem and criminal issues in that and other areas often go away. If the Army wants to be a rehab center, that is up to the Army.Narcotics or habit-forming drugs; wrongful possession or use (marijuana not included) (71, 130) - 130 in 2007.
These four catagories are about 90% of total waivers if I added correctly.
Finally, a brief comment on these:GRAND TOTAL (249, 511) - above are 467/511 - roughly 90%
Have to look at court records. E.g., a guy 18-19 could be convicted for having sex with his 15-16 year old girlfriend (or drunken pickup or whatever underager but age close) - and then fall into one of these crime catagories. It (prosecution under these facts) happens more than you might think. In any event, these sex crimes are a 1% factor.Indecent acts or liberties with a child, molestation (1, 2); Rape, sexual abuse, sexual assault, criminal sexual abuse, incest, or other sex crimes (2, 5).
My question is whether these waiver cases are followed up for statistical purposes to see where waivers should and should not be granted. Somehow, I doubt it (privacy acts, etc.).
Now, where are all the stats for serving officers, who got promoted despite rap sheets ?
JKM
One of my biggest pet peeves is the rotating command line that stretches from the top down.
Everyone has to get their shot. Does not matter if you are a Company Co or a Combatant Commander. After 2 years you are moving on.
Doesn't matter if you are a mouthbreathing dope or a 21st Century combination of Alexander the Great, Gustavus Adolphuis, Sun Tzu and Von Manstein. After 24 months - if you are lucky - it's on to the next job.
Why the 4 bangers don't completely collapse HRC still is a mystery to me. Just another one of a litany of examples where the Army succeeds in spite of the system. Amazing we've been able to keep it together over the last decade and a half with this abortion.
"Speak English! said the Eaglet. "I don't know the meaning of half those long words, and what's more, I don't believe you do either!"
The Eaglet from Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland
If my CGSC class is any indicator Tom, the pleasant smiles are becoming fewer and fewer.
"Speak English! said the Eaglet. "I don't know the meaning of half those long words, and what's more, I don't believe you do either!"
The Eaglet from Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland
It makes a mockery of any general leaving a legacy or making an impression in all but the most fleeting of ways - he won't be able to stick around long enough to make real changes, and his successor will likely undo everything he attempted, if only to make a name for himself. And of course the SES' will wait him out. My joy at Gen. Mattis taking over JFCOM was damped by this realization.
Farther down the line - why doesn't the Army stop insisting that officers must be great staff officers and great commanders alike? It comes to pass that there are those who excel at the former and suck at the later (and vice versa) - why not just identify who's who, and keep people where they're best suited?
EDIT: I realized I parroted what some others have said in the thread already in my second paragraph - that's what happens when you read the thread backwards and post before reading the whole thing...
Last edited by Stevely; 11-20-2008 at 01:55 AM.
He cloaked himself in a veil of impenetrable terminology.
Having been one of the evil coterie in a former lifetime, I can sympathize with you on that. Of the eight senior sillly-villians in my last headquarters, two of us were reasonably mission oriented if crooked and were willing to cheat, lie and steal to get things done -- not only willing to we did, got a lot done and didn't go to jail (amazing ourselves and many onlookers...).
And the supremely evil "we can't afford it" and "we have to protect the boss" types...
It was my observation that most other hindquarters were the same, there were always a few good civilians and senior Staff officers in there somewhere. Just find the good guys and use them to flank the dense, the dogmatic, the regulatory scrunches, the hidebound, the play it safe and the not on my watch types...This of course is the heretical part. Keep it up, you're doing great! I'm witchoo!Farther down the line - why doesn't the Army stop insisting that officers must be great staff officers and great commanders alike? It comes to pass that there are those who excel at the former and suck at the later (and vice versa) - why not just identify who's who, and keep people where they're best suited?And your edit snuck in; this is what happens when you type as slow as I doEDIT: I realized I parroted what some others have said in the thread already in my second paragraph - that's what happens when you read the thread backwards and post before reading the whole thing...
And the Army now goes down to 37 months from commissioning to Captain.
Gotta keep the conveyor belt moving. Fill those space with faces.
"Speak English! said the Eaglet. "I don't know the meaning of half those long words, and what's more, I don't believe you do either!"
The Eaglet from Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland
Had a Company Commander in 1969 who was a CPT with 29 months of service, none of it outside CONUS. In WW II, my old man went from Ensign to LtCdr in about 33 months.
The bad news is that during the Korean war, there were guys who went from Pvt to SFC in a year.
This too will pass...
Generalissimo White (that does have a nice ring about it, I have to say)
I don't care so much about it passing as I do the present. The contraction has to stop somewhere - we are pushing inexperience upwards, which leaves us with a disaster waiting to happen, especially on the individual level.
It's not officer attrition is wicked high.
"Speak English! said the Eaglet. "I don't know the meaning of half those long words, and what's more, I don't believe you do either!"
The Eaglet from Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland
Yeah, I just found out that my BZ board for MAJ is now in January. Wow.
Not that I've got a snowball's chance (nor should I), but seriously.
I haven't been a CPT THAT long. I'm not even 30.
It's pretty crazy now; 3 years to CPT, 8-9 years to MAJ. Unbelievable.
Sir, what the hell are we doing?
Frankly, I'm impressed that the Army has maintained as much discipline in the system as it has. As John T and Ken can attest, we went through some periods when that was not the case. During VN, TOS to CPT was 2 years. Benning was churning out OCS grads to beat the band. There was a program whereby company commanders could frock E-3s and above to buck sergeant - "acting jack", and there was an "instant NCO" program at the Infantry School (and perhaps other places) - shake & bake.
Additionally, years of combat have an impact on the maturity level and real world experience of the officers involved.
No things have definitely been worse.
Bookmarks