But he does make a valid point.When you want to compare BMTC,
SISPEC, and OCS, you will eventually come to a point where you have
to compare the end-product of these places in order to weigh up
their merits and demerits.he mentioned the experiences he faced
under different kinds of commanders, be it WOs or officers.It is
true that there are CPTs who serve barely any time yet their rank
determines they have to be Coy 2IC, OC or SO2, SO1.The latter two
are not so much a concern since they are staff appts which do not
have a very direct influence on the men in a generic rifle coy or
any combat coy.For the former three appts, I would rather have an
experienced MWO or 1WO (grade2) to lead the men, provided he has
gone for instructional and educational advancement courses.Reason
being that the main job scope there is combat and soldier
managment, and you need the years of experience and ability to see
the nuances in the men's behavior to anticipate any problems and
move them as a whole force.They have simply more experience at the
ground, as opposed to some junior officers who have not managed
people before and are thrown into a situation where he is the
end-all for the battalion.He does not benefit, neither do the
men.
To be given CPT rank, he should have gone through his PC tour, or
else he should be shifted to staff roles first.SISPEC and OCS do
teach different things, and the ROA to the top is certainly a very
different route.But what the previous guy said, does make for
pondering.Scholars are not blooded well enough, and they are not
military affairs, history or tactics SMEs.Rather, they are groomed
for staff roles and they should not be placed in a situation where
their training is not relevant to their job.The screw-ups have come
too soon too often.We cannot afford it.
