Looking back on my comment, I have to clarify some points & I have to stand from my Perspective. Yes it is good to have knowledge of military, & political issues and have a professional discourse. Having cfr'd, I still have the the outlook of an NCO. This may come from the ucw background, or from my training. I do not pretend to understand global politics. I understand mission politics. Professional discourse is a loaded statement. In my position, I have seen too many officers having their next career move as priority 1 over their people. Making sure my people were properly equipped mentally, physically, & with the gear required for the job has always been my priority. Yes I have a good knowledge of tactics through out history. The electronics degree does not present tactical advantage, where as knowing intimately the 7.62x39 AK47 does. Knowing how to interpret a topo map gives me possible hides. Knowing how , when & what to deploy is crucial.
Over the years I have seen a few Infantry officers rise to the top after having failed to pass basic field quals. I spent a long time doing bdf's, and the critiques on them. I probably made more than my share of enemies over the bdf reports simply because certain officers did not like the fact that a Sgt and later Lt could penetrate their defensive positions. Instead of taking a "professional attitude" & learning, the position was that I had not followed the ex format (cheated). Maybe my attitude is wrong as you, the younger generation have seen more combat than I have. I do not profess to have all the prerequisite knowledge but if a target presents at 500m, & I have a 7.62x51-147 gr fmj, that round is gonna drop approx 1.2 m & I will have my people positioned for that. (Sorry, grey moment, forgot the stats for SS109- 556x45) If I do an ambush or ATC, you can rest assured that my people will be in the best & safest spot. I will ensure that mission objectives will be reached. By the same token there is good officers out there. It has & always will be a juggling act to advance a good officer on merit alone. The same can be applied to NCO's. The per's & por's have not addressed this problem adequetely. The old boys network still factors into the equation.
Am I popular in the Officer's Mess? Probably as much as a case of the plague. Will people follow me into harm's way? From what I have heard, 99% will (scary thoughts for old men.) My own opinion of me as an officer? Let's not go there. Will I put my can on the line for my people? See dotted line on neck.
Did I get my commision on merit? My guess not. Do I know Parade drill? As good as any DI.
Bottom line is the selection process is like swiss cheese. It was probably built that way to allow enough people to qualify. The problem being is there is no effective way to deal with the screw ups or other variables such as personality traits unless they hit critical mass. In combat there are ways, but not socially acceptable. The other half of the coin is simply that the military is not a place for people to climb the social order. The ratios of NCO's & Officers have to be brought back into line for the size of the military. I don't know if any body else remembers this old stat, but 135 Leopards & 140 Generals.
We are sporting more Generals/capita than the whole US or Russian Army (cold war).
Who ever said there's no life like it, wasn't lieing. In spite of systemic problems, my hat is off to all the young NCM's & Officers. They collectively shine on the world stage with professional attitude & dedication, second to none! & this is the end of my rant on the subject, for better or worse.
