Should Army officers be required to obtain Specialist before being allowed to commission?

I do not believe the need is for experience as an enlisted soldier but the need is for better training of junior officers in humility, and the removal of toxic mid level officers that teach their new juniors to ignore their NCOs. I've seen it happen too many times. At the same time there needs to be ncopd for staff and senior NCOs on how to mentor and train these fresh junior officers. NCOs need to stop telling them to go sit in the corner and color. At the end of the day it's going to be that young lt with his butt on the line.

I think all Officers should attend BCT at a minimum. There they would learn basic drill and ceremony, discipline, and customs and courtesies. ROTC requires their upperclassmen to teach these skills, which often results in a poor end result.

However, I don't think SPC is the magic rank to create an Officer. Possibly the worst 2LT I've ever served with was a mustang with 3 years in service. He never left the SPC mentality. He was first in the chow line and often in bed while his NCOs prepared for the mission ahead. I also served with a 2LT who was a prior E5(P) with a CAB who was pulled off our deployment for his utter incompetence.

Now if you wanted to make the case for more rigorous Officer selection and training I would be all for it. ROTC doesn't even do individual land navigation anymore.

My two cents is this: While it would be nice that all Officers spend time on the enlisted side before they see those Butter Bars......so they know how the other side of that fence lives......there would be less Officers, I think.

I've seen mustangs make great officers, while similarly I've seen mustangs make horrible officers. Likewise with JROTC and DC officers. It's a certain mentality, mustangs who can't get out of the enlisted mindset or ROTC/DC can't get out of the holier than thou officer mindset. It's up to the individual officer to learn from and treat their NCOs with respect and use them as mentors while still maintaining command. I've seen officers allow their PSG to walk all over them and I've seen officers completely ignore than 10-15 years of experience.

Much like the other individuals here I feel making the rank of specialist will not make a difference in the slightest. Having made it to SFC and acting 1SG I can say that the experience definitely helped me become a better leader and more prepared to be an officer (the leadership roles more than anything), but I still listen to to my PSG and allow NCOs to handle NCO business. I would say that time as a PSG would help officers, but that would obviously be a waste of time and resources. Good officers will listen to their NCOs and Soldiers and time as an enlisted individual might not necessarily help an individual learn to listen to their Soldiers. Again much like others have pointed out, there will be good officers and bad officers and no amount of time as enlisted may help that.

I have to agree with this on all fronts. As enlisted, we all recognize immediately the officers who are mustangs. That's because they have an understanding and appreciation for what the low level enlisted does. Officers without prior enlisted experience, well honestly they get a bit too big for their britches sometimes and treat those beneath them like shit unnecessarily. I also think that it helps build comradery and unit cohesion when you can actually trust your higher ups.

This topic comes up fairly often on this site. I was an instructor for a unit that taught Cadets during Warrior Forge. LDAC (Leadership Development Assessment Course)

I have had the chance to work with thousands of Cadets, some were prior service, but most were not. While the prior service folks often had a slight advantage because they already knew some of the basics of the subjects that we were teaching, I did not see any evidence that this prior knowledge necessarily translated to good leadership.

That is what Officer training programs are all about: leadership training. It can be short term, concentrated training such as OCS, or though longer college programs where they get their degree while gaining exposure to the military during weekends and summer training programs. Leadership skills take time and experience to develop, and programs that focus on that are more likely to mold and refine that skill. Just advancing though the junior ranks to Specialist does not always mean that leadership skills are there. Most of those early advancements are automatic anyway.

Another problem with being the rank of Specialist before selection: With college credits, new recruits can enlist at E3 or E4. By your proposal, these soldiers will have minimal army time, most of it TRADOC, before being eligible to compete for Officer Candidate selection. How is this better then 4 years of leadership training woven into their education as done in ROTC?

This question always comes up and the answer is always no.

Exactly what would be the benefit? Sounds like a useless requirement.

No, not at all. I do not see what that would accomplish.