Shut down Air War College

[Rusty Pipes]

Your comment would be sorta correct for the Navy in some cases, but incorrect about the Army and Marines.

The Army sends all their O-4's to ILE (our version to IDE). They have a 3-4 month school and a year long school in Leavenworth. The Marines are like the USAF...they send their top 20%, mainly to Quantico.

I may be way off on this, like I said it was just word of mouth. The word of mouth came from a Marine and an Army O-6 I worked with who both said that they did go to their version of SDE, but did not go to their IDE (in-Cor instead). The reason it came up was because they were pissed that they had a bunch of AF folks working for them (deployed) and they were all so focused on SOS, ACSC, and/or Masters classes and were giving me the big WTFO? As far as they were concerned, when you were deployed then that was where 100% of your attention should be focused and to the AF guys their actual deployed job seemed to be secondary. I also have a good buddy who is an Army O-4 that is currently a 4 Star's Aide and said he did it in-Cor and is not going in Res... of course he may be the exception.

[ClearedHot]

I may be way off on this, like I said it was just word of mouth.

Way off...USMC sends their tops dudes to ISE/ASG/SDE. It is the Navy that does not value PME for its fast burners. I had a guy (Helo driver), in my SDE class who never commanded, knew he would not command, and applied for retirement eight months after he graduated. The other Navy guy (Surface Officer), pinned O-5 on a few weeks after class started, had never commanded and did not make the cut his first look.

The rationale for taking guys out of the fight and sending them to school for a year is not to take a year off, it is supposed to be to build strategic thinkers who can shape the fight at the next level (did not work in my case, I are too dumb).

[Rusty Pipes]

Way off...USMC sends their tops dudes to ISE/ASG/SDE. It is the Navy that does not value PME for its fast burners. I had a guy (Helo driver), in my SDE class who never commanded, knew he would not command, and applied for retirement eight months after he graduated. The other Navy guy (Surface Officer), pinned O-5 on a few weeks after class started, had never commanded and did not make the cut his first look.

The rationale for taking guys out of the fight and sending them to school for a year is not to take a year off, it is supposed to be to build strategic thinkers who can shape the fight at the next level (did not work in my case, I are too dumb).

I certainly don't want to pass bad info, so I stand corrected! I guess the 10% Truth Rule is universal to all services... even at The MUFF!!!

As far as rationale goes, there is obviously a rationale for all the completely stupid things we do in the Air Force! There is rationale for wearing blues on Monday, wearing reflective belts when you are walking 10 ft to the shitter at the Deid at 3 am, deploying hundreds of people every year to the CAOC when 99% of what is done there could be done CONUS, deploying AF airman to be convoy drivers in the desert when some Cols are assigned personal drivers to work in Kuwait, deploying boom operators and loadmasters as "escorts" to stare at 2 TCNs who take 3 months to build a bus stop that could be done in 3 days, a Wing CC at McGuire who made people wear PT's to the Base gym or while running on Base, or kicking out 15+ yr pilots for being passed over when everyone knows the AF is going to have a big pilot shortage very soon in order to save money... yet forcing these same people to spend millions of AF budget dollars every year to get useless Masters degrees that very few will ever use for anything. That would be fantastic if IDE/SDE built "strategic thinkers", but for the most part it seems to be a big penis rub where everyone is told what fantastic leaders they are and are taught how to rationalize all that is ridiculously stupid!!!

Edited June 28, 2011 by Rusty Pipes

[Rokke]

As far as rationale goes, there is obviously a rationale for all the completely stupid things we do in the Air Force! There is rationale for wearing blues on Monday, wearing reflective belts when you are walking 10 ft to the shitter at the Deid at 3 am, deploying hundreds of people every year to the CAOC when 99% of what is done there could be done CONUS, deploying AF airman to be convoy drivers in the desert when some Army Cols are assigned personal drivers to work in Kuwait or to sit at the Deid and stare at 2 TCNs who take 3 months to build a bus stop, a Wing CC at McGuire who made people wear PT's to the Base gym or while running on Base, or kicking out 15+ yr pilots for being passed over when everyone knows the AF is going to have a big pilot shortage very soon in order to save money... yet forcing these same people to spend millions of AF budget dollars every year to get useless Masters degrees that very few will ever use for anything. That would be fantastic if IDE/SDE built "strategic thinkers", but for the most part it seems to be a big penis rub where everyone is told what fantastic leaders they are and are taught how to rationalize all that is ridiculously stupid!!!

Good rant. I'm sensing a bit of frustration....

[Rusty Pipes]

Good rant. I'm sensing a bit of frustration....

Oh, I gave up on being frustrated years ago. Unfortunately its way too easy to point out stupid crap like this... just don't point it out to your boss or any "senior management" because there is a good chance that it might have been their idea!!!

[Muscle2002]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but I think we need a little reality check here. USAFA is ranked the #5 in the country (behind West Point) for engineering. But read the fine print... it is #5 for schools that only offer an undergraduate degree in engineering. Obviously there is no option to get an advanced degree from any service school, but you're comparing apples to oranges because the stat you are most likely referring to only compares them to other undergrad only programs. I'm not saying that they don't have a good engineering program (they do). However, when you look at the list that compares all of the overall engineering programs at US colleges and universities the list from US News on college rankings go from #1-129...

Yes, because that lists only considers schools w/full-up engineering prgms (ie graduate prgms)

but lets not speed by putting USAFA in the same sentence with MIT, Stanford, or USC... or University of Michigan, Arizona State, University of Florida, University of Texas Austin, University of Maryland, University of Massachusetts (Amherst and Lowell), University of Missouri, etc... all public schools with AFROTC Detachments that ARE in the top 100, just to name a few.

Again, that list only compares schools w/more than undergraduate prgms.

It's logically inconsistent to say "you're comparing apples to oranges" when one says USAFA is a top engineering prgm and then point to "data" that does exactly that.

Not that Rhodes or Marshall scholars are necessarily indicators of the academic acumen of a school, but how many do the likes of ASU, U of F, UTA, Maryland, UMASS and Mizzou have exactly?

[ClearedHot]

That would be fantastic if IDE/SDE built "strategic thinkers", but for the most part it seems to be a big penis rub where everyone is told what fantastic leaders they are and are taught how to rationalize all that is ridiculously stupid!!!

My SDE expedience had nothing to do with reinforcing my leadership style. In fact, they did an anonymous survey of my past supervisors and the members and blended that with a 600 question psychological evaluation to help identify what type of leader I am and how to improve.

We spent a lot of time study economics as an instrument of foreign and domestic policy and had the opportunity to discuss our current situation with Nobel Laureates economists from many competing disciplines such as Keynesian, Classical, Monetarist, and Neoclassical. I even got to stand in uniform on the floor of the NYSE for the opening bell (the traders gave us a standing ovation when we walked in).

We spent the majority of our time studying strategy failures and success and tried to pull lessons from the past, however the most important lesson I learned was that there is no one book that provides a solution, especially to today's situations. Instead, I was taught a methodology to think through strategic problems and hopefully develop potential solutions.

For me the SDE experience was really about access...I was in a very small venue so we met and discussed issues with SECDEF, all of the service chiefs, A Supreme Court Justice, most of the COCOM/CC's, Under Secretaries of Defense, DASD's, think tanks, famous authors (who both praised and attacked the military...including Tom Ricks), former senior officers including Gen Pace, Gen Zinni, ambassadors, The head of JP Morgan, the CEO of Deutsche Bank, industry captains, venture capitalists, and a host of other influential folks.

Not once did I ever hear the words reflective belt, short socks, tall socks, or PT Gear. I did hear every service chief express concern for people. If there is a root cause for all the queep it stems from the fact that we senselessly and needlessly lose so many fine young service men and women every day and leadership overreacts as a result of what they see. I am not defending it, but at this point in my career I think I understand it.

Tom Ricks is a blow hard who truly has not a clue. He loves the ground game and academic freedom prevents me from sharing his view of the Air Force...but I have zero respect for that close-minded idiot. As a lucky person who has done every level of PME in residence, I would most certainly make changes to PME if I had the opportunity, but the core is there, it just needs some tweaking.

Edited June 28, 2011 by ClearedHot

[Muscle2002]

My SDE expedience....

CH, did you do a fellowship for your SDE program?

[OverTQ]

Just left the assignments desk for the Army in FEB. All AC MAJ's go to one of the RES courses. The 10 mo is the standard. 3 mo on a limited bases. The USAR MAJ's (NG included) are the ones who go to the correspondence course. Don't know where you got that info but that is not true.

edited for grammar

Edited June 29, 2011 by OverTQ

[ClearedHot]

CH, did you do a fellowship for your SDE program?

Nope, I went to one of the other War Colleges.

[Rusty Pipes]

It's logically inconsistent to say "you're comparing apples to oranges" when one says USAFA is a top engineering prgm and then point to "data" that does exactly that.

Not that Rhodes or Marshall scholars are necessarily indicators of the academic acumen of a school, but how many do the likes of ASU, U of F, UTA, Maryland, UMASS and Mizzou have exactly?

Funny you say that... USAFA did have a Marshall Scholar in 2010. Guess who else did? UTA, Maryland, U of F, Mizzou... USAFA's last Rhodes Scholar was 2008... so did grads from UTA, Univ of Oklahoma, Ohio State...

And the "data" I pointed to compared all engineering programs vs. just comparing schools with undergrad programs. I didn't compare USAFA to MIT, Stanford, and USC... he did. I was just pointing out that although it does have a great engineering program, you can't really compare it to even some of the major public Universities in the U.S. that have not only Marshall and Rhodes scholars on their faculty, but Nobel prize winners, etc.

I am not bashing USAFA one bit, it is a fantastic school and has a great engineering program... one that would certainly kick my ass!

[RTB]

Not once did I ever hear the words reflective belt, short socks, tall socks, or PT Gear. I did hear every service chief express concern for people. If there is a root cause for all the queep it stems from the fact that we senselessly and needlessly lose so many fine young service men and women every day and leadership overreacts as a result of what they see. I am not defending it, but at this point in my career I think I understand it.

Unfortunately, from my vantage point there is a serious disconnect between our Service Chief's 'concern for people' and the interpretation/implementation of how to address those concerns by lower level commanders, as expressed continuously throughout this site. Before he retired, I sat in a room and listened to a 4-star AF General tell a group of fighter pilots that if they couldn't juggle deployments, additional duties (now that our CSS and CSA support have been eliminated), career-essential BDE/IDE in correspondence, career-essential upgrades, a career-essential Master's Degree, volunteering downtown to stay competive with the shoes, and maybe a couple hours a week of family time, we simply didn't know how to manage our time well enough. You could have heard a pin drop - it didn't go over very well. Anyone who has been there knows that of all those competing demands, something MUST give. Guys are basically having to choose to either be the best fighter pilot they can be and risk not getting a school slot and BPZ to major, or going for all the squares at the expense of their primary job of flying and employing aircraft. I am just sick and tired of stupid policies killing morale, hurting retention, and making life worse, not better for the people. Maybe I've become too cynical after 18 years but the 25+ CBTs I have to stay current on, the reflective belt I must wear indoors and out, the blues on monday if I'm not on the schedule, and the total misprioritization of a pilot's focus have just left be burned out on the AF.

[Alf]

Guys are basically having to choose to either be the best fighter pilot they can be and risk not getting a school slot and BPZ to major, or going for all the squares at the expense of their primary job of flying and employing aircraft. I am just sick and tired of stupid policies killing morale, hurting retention, and making life worse, not better for the people. Maybe I've become too cynical after 18 years but the 25+ CBTs I have to stay current on, the reflective belt I must wear indoors and out, the blues on monday if I'm not on the schedule, and the total misprioritization of a pilot's focus have just left be burned out on the AF.

Well said...

Why is the AF so obsessed with LOOKING good, rather than actually BEING good? I'd rather having my wingie spending his time practicing his radar mech in the WTT than composing some BS outline for the next worthless paper he's required to write for his Master's degree.

[ThreeHoler]

joe1234, nicely stated.

A lot of the current angst feels like "I deserve something" or "The USAF owes me." The USAF doesn't owe any of us shit. Is it unethical to give people unreasonable career demands? Debatable. Look at the industry of law: new hires bust their asses for years at 80+ billable hours a week just to make partner and have a normal work week. The airlines: fly shitty routes for years to build the seniority to bid for good routes and aircraft. And so on. Every group has barriers to entry and a bunch of shit you have to put up with to "earn" your promotions and higher pay scales. Ours just happens to be PME and other things we've labeled queep. Does that make it right? No.

I guess to put it another way: we'll define the minimum as PME complete and a Master's. I'm sure we've all heard the phrase "if the minimum wasn't good enough, why is it the minimum?" I've said it myself. However, the more I think about it, I come to the conclusion...do you really want people who just do the minimum?

All that said, those of us who don't have our ATP yet...should really consider doing it, even if you're not sure you want to ever go to the airlines. Never close a door you don't have to.

[RTB]

I believe, at the end of the day, we're all going to have to make a conscious decision whether you're going to be a good pilot or a good officer. If you try to be both, you will have absolutely no personal life, and your family will suffer, in addition to your own mental health.

This is the dichotomy that the Air Force has created. Nobody is forcing a gun to your head, saying you have to attend PME or volunteer in town to get OPR strats, or whatever else. We all make that decision indivudually.

Agreed, and that's a sad story. As stated many times on here, the result is a lot of great pilots and leaders departing the fix for greener pastures. It shouldn't be a choice between the two.

A lot of the current angst feels like "I deserve something" or "The USAF owes me." The USAF doesn't owe any of us shit.

Disagree. I don't know anyone claiming that they 'deserve' anything. They just want the words to match the actions.

All that said, those of us who don't have our ATP yet...should really consider doing it, even if you're not sure you want to ever go to the airlines. Never close a door you don't have to.

Definitely.

[tac airlifter]

I'm sure we've all heard the phrase "if the minimum wasn't good enough, why is it the minimum?" I've said it myself. However, the more I think about it, I come to the conclusion...do you really want people who just do the minimum?

I don't want to be rude, however, your post fills me with an overwhelming urge to murder a baby seal, step on a kitten, shake a baby, or untuck my PT shirt in front of a Chief. Instead of induldging those options, I'll simply tell you that I totally disagree. I DO want people working for me who do the absolute minimum amount of queep to get by. Why? Because I want to fly into combat with dudes who are in the vault, know their systems cold, understand capabilities of every platform they'll work with, know CDE, understand the LTA process, have the confidence to assault a target in any weather, and most importantly: are filled with a burning desire to hunt and kill the enemy. Because at the end of the day, battles are won by a handful of dudes with the diligence, persistance and passion to fight despite the myraid of obstacles they face.

Maybe you don't have this kind of job, I don't know what you fly. But I'll tell you point blank there are terrorists alive today because the people persuing them were young captains focused on their masters whose minds weren't in the game the night an opportunity presented itself. 100%. We are smothering our combat forces with bullshit. The majority of guys around me have accepted we'll likely burn out as career Majors or LtCols for the chance to be on the line in the fight. And people like you question their place because they've only done "the minimum?" See why I want to step on a kitten? The AF recently retired a guy who logged the most combat hours of anyone in any service. He retired as a Major after 17+ deployments. That should tell you the system is fucking broken; instead you ask if I really want to fly with someone like him who only did "the minimum." The answer is yes, he was a warrior and I'd fly with him into the worst.

[nsplayr]

Tac,

I don't want to be rude, however, your post fills me with an overwhelming urge rip off my shirt, grow a huge beard, crush some heavy deadlift, or punch a Nazi in the face.

Yes x 1 million. I know several dudes who are fangs-out mish hackers who have continuously stiff-armed the queep and are seeing their careers suffer for it. Likely to be "not continued" in the future.

There is a fine line between principled stand and failing to take necessary self-preservation measures and perhaps they could have given a little more in terms of doing what's needed to stick around, but the sheer amount of BS has crushed the souls of many fine warriors who just want to kill people for a living and don't give a sh*t about a MA in Basket Weaving so they can make O-5. In the CAF and SOF especially, I want dudes who fly because it's the fastest way known to man to go from sitting peacefully in the TOC to finding and violently killing the enemy. That quality is not prized or even considered when it comes to career progression/advancement/awards/etc.

The last time I checked the "paying your dues" part of our job was college/OTS/Zoo/ROTC/UPT/MWS qual/Q1 mission checkride/AC or flight lead upgrade/IP/EP. Once those are accomplished you have made it to the NFL-level of warfare and the focus should be on the mission rather than the career. In the end, no matter what you fly, none of us in the service are hoping the red-eye from Charlotte to Denver or chasing ambulances.

[ThreeHoler]

And that is where you both miss the point. Did I ever say "doing queep above the minimum?"

No.

A dude who is in the vault, who knows his shit, can employ his weapon system, and has done the stated "minimum" of PME and Master's is not doing the minimum.

Here is a thought...at some point your tactical focus has to shift to a broader focus...or we will fail the big picture miserably. The NFL level of war is not in the trenches.

If we do not have dudes concerned enough to get to a point where they can make changes, nothing will change. And even then, some one will likely change it back. We need to make a cultural shift, and that will not happen with the lot of us stiff arming our way to getting kicked out.

[Danny Noonin]

And that is where you both miss the point....

Here is a thought...at some point your tactical focus has to shift to a broader focus...or we will fail the big picture miserably.

dude here is where YOU miss the point. No one is denying that eventually officers need a broader focus. Key word...eventually. The problem is that the AF is demanding that broad focus out of O-2s and O-3s now. If guys that young all have a broad look then who exactly is supposed to be minding the narrowly focused tactical store? Broad focus is great for O-5+. When our operators are officers we cannot have a service that demands it's young officers be broadly focused or effective operations suffer.

[nsplayr]

dude here is where YOU miss the point. No one is denying that eventually officers need a broader focus. Key word...eventually. The problem is that the AF is demanding that broad focus out of O-2s and O-3s now. If guys that young all have a broad look then who exactly is supposed to be minding the narrowly focused tactical store? Broad focus is great for O-5+. When our operators are officers we cannot have a service that demands it's young officers be broadly focused or effective operations suffer.

Exactly. My last feedback session with my flt/cc involved him telling me, through gritted teeth, to get my MA finished up and to get SOS in correspondence knocked out ASAP. He's a former fighter dude and honestly I could tell what he wanted to tell me was to stay in the vault and concentrate on my upgrade, but he's saying what he has to say to keep his people competitive.

The pendulum has swung way too far in the direction of queep and like it's been said numerous times before, being good, even excellent at your primary duty does not factor in to you being promoted almost at all, which is absolutely insane when our primary duties are as important as they are and our MAs in Basket Weaving and SOS completion certificates are as worthless as we all know they are.

Like Danny said above, I don't exactly need to spend time "grasping the bigger picture" here as a CGO in a flying position during wartime. I like education and would probably pursue masters work even if it wasn't required, but that (and entry-level PME) should not be the focus and they are because you will not get promoted without those boxes checked. There are 6-9 thousand FGOs above me who can get working on the bigger picture and another 6-9 thousand O-6+ who can actually be in a position to affect broader strategy.

Someone needs to give almost their entire focus on cultivating and maintaining tactical excellence and that person should be the crew dog flying the line every day.

Edited July 4, 2011 by nsplayr

[OverTQ]

Question. Would you rather have someone in charge who was the best commander you ever saw or the best pilot you ever saw?

[Danny Noonin]

Question. Would you rather have someone in charge who was the best commander you ever saw or the best pilot you ever saw?

missing the point again. Of course you want the best commander. The question is, how do you get to be a good one? In a flying squadron, it begins by being credible in the jet. Maybe not the best pilot in the world, but definitely credible or folks simply won't follow you. After that, the traits of a great unit commander are mostly intangible....good with people, fair, involved, etc. Exactly zero traits of a good unit commander require a masters degree to obtain.

[tac airlifter]

missing the point again. Of course you want the best commander. The question is, how do you get to be a good one? In a flying squadron, it begins by being credible in the jet. Maybe not the best pilot in the world, but definitely credible or folks simply won't follow you. After that, the traits of a great unit commander are mostly intangible....good with people, fair, involved, etc. Exactly zero traits of a good unit commander require a masters degree to obtain.

Bingo, why is it so hard to grasp the concept we're putting forth? My CC doesn't have to be the best in the squadron, in fact, most likely he won't be as his attention rightfully should be focused elsewhere. But he shouldn't be UNQUALIFIED to fly the aircraft, which has been the case. And I expect that his FEF would show he was at least a decent stick as a younger fellow, otherwise how can he lead experts if he never was one? A good CC, like mine now, should make the guys under him want to be better and not damper their fighting spirit by downplaying its importance.

Additionally, that question is a tangent from the discussion at hand OverTQ, which is about why a line flyer and mid-career CGO needs to shift his focus onto the 'bigger picture.' You present a false dichotomy, the AF is not forced to choose between CC's who are great at being the boss vs great in the aircraft. Do you really think all the box checking we're lamenting makes a good CC? Excellence at queep means only one thing-- that person has spent a lot of time worrying about how to obtain the right move for their own career. This attribute does not turn you into the selfless warrior willing to hang it all on the line to support a soldier in need. I'd be doing a disservice to my guys if I didn't tell them to acknowledge the queep, I don't want my people to be passed over captains. But I encourgae guys to do the same 10 month joke masters program I did, and focus the majority of their effort on the skills that will allow them to save and take lives in combat.

My point is that guys on the line fighting the daily grind of the war need to be focused on that task and judged accordingly. Currently big blue seems more worried about ensuring captains check all the right boxes (not just AAD & PME, but also flt/CC, shop chief, volunteer shit, exercises, etc.... it's really a ton of shit on top of upgrades, TDYs and deployments) than ensuring captains bring their A-game when it's time to crush and destroy.

[ThreeHoler]

Ok, another tack:

How do we, as a service, transition the best damn tactical mofos into the best damn field graders and best damn leaders? To provide a bit of focus to the question: first, how do we do it if we could completely revamp the entire system right now? Second, if we can't make those sweeping changes, how do we do it within our current system?

Facts I will never disagree with: 1) we need the best damn tactical dudes we can train and mentor down in the weeds getting shit done; 2) we need some shit hot dudes in FGO-appropriate roles within our squadrons, wings, and so on; 3) we need shit hot dudes in leadership positions, all the way to the top...dudes that will make the mission happen and provide appropriate care to their people to enhance the mission.

For what it's worth, I think our PME at the SOS and ACSC level is pretty shitty and the most of Master's degrees we do end up wasting money on do not provide any true use to the USAF. The ACSC Master's program has a lot of potential...but right now it's a bunch of circle-jerking dick/clit-sucking bullshit with, in my experience, only 1 of 4 instructors willing to tell students their answers were not up to speed. This is evident in the "with honors" criteria of >3.95 GPA...it is extremely easy to get A's in the courses.

I think we can make it better. The new "operational warfare" focus is a step in the right direction. If you aren't aware of it, the four elective courses are credited for completion of WIC, which cuts your course count down to seven. It gives you credit for three of seven ACSC tests. But it can be better still...we can create something that does provide benefit to the member, the USAF, and allows for DG/other identifiers for "useful" OPR/PRF bullets.

Edited July 4, 2011 by ThreeHoler

[nsplayr]

Threeholer,

All of your last questions are valid and you seem to share the same opinion on PME and DL masters degrees that the rest of us do. The system should evolve from one that promotes based on box checking to one that both incorporates legitimate educational opportunities that are applicable to strategic thinking (and strats based on those), but importantly, also includes more emphasis on primary job excellence. The more I've discussed this overall issue in various settings the more I'm starting to believe the core of the problem is simple: the AF assumes everyone is excellent at their job and thus has to move to "secondary" factors to rack and stack folks. We all know this is false in two ways, A) there is often a wide spread (STS) between the guys who are sh*t how and the dudes who can't fly (or finance or contract or turn a wrench) their way out of a wet paper bag, and B) even if a guy is obviously bad at his job, his OPRs/PRF will often be compiled in a way to minimize that so not to have one of the Commander's guys "left behind."

There's not an easy fix to either of these problems (realizing not everyone is a winner and writing honest assessments), but to me the problems are at least becoming increasingly clear in my eyes. As OverTQ alluded to, no, the CC doesn't need to continually be the best pilot in the squadron and I'd much rather have him be good at Commander business rather than crew dog business, but the idea that a person can rise to the position of Commander without ever having been even decent at crew dog business is a foul on the entire system. I'd argue it is exceedingly rare where a person is a sh*tty pilot but would make an excellent commander of a flying squadron based on other "officership" type qualities, and even then that person would have a credibility problem leading troops in wartime. Being good, even excellent, at your current assigned duties at any level of responsibility should be an absolute requirement to move on to the next higher level, bottom line.

In the ideal system, if you suck at your job you don't get promoted; there's no amount of boxes you should be able to check (PME/MA/volunteer/d*ck sucking/execing/etc.) that should allow you to escape the fact that you can't flourish where you're planted. As your level of responsibility becomes more and more strategic and less and less tactical, your job follows suit so at a certain point if you can't move beyond A+B=C of the tactical world then you will not command or make strategic positions. At that point perhaps relevant, useful PME and Masters-level strategic study are factors that should influence the decision of whether to promote or not.

In today's system it seems to me and to a lot of other that those "strategic thinker/well rounded/MA-educated/officership" considerations are coming up when a dude is a f*cking lieutenant trying to plan ahead for getting on the right "vector" as a young captain so he can get a school slot on his first-look major's board. That's exactly the wrong time for those things to be important; it's the time when that guy should be fully immersed in the tactical mission of his unit, because his primary duties lie at that level. This is amplified even more when you're at war and the Boss is putting pink bodies in iron to go out and kill the enemy, because guess who is likely to be sitting in the seat? What skills do you want that guy to possess at that point in time?