What do you think should be requirements for becoming an officer?

I understand where you are coming from but enlisted experience doesn't automatically make you a good officer. If you were a bad NCO becoming a bad Officer isn't any better. Enlisted service is good but shouldn't be a requirement. If you do that you will be robbing from the NCO corps.

Plus the line of thought and decision making is completely different from the two and can be a hindrance.

If the Army did not allow me to sign an 09S contract (guaranteed OCS after BCT) I would have never joined. Just like any other employer, if the military wants to hire the best and brightest, they will have to be a viable option for people who have a stronger background than high school completion.

What I have little tolerance for, SSG(P) (Join to see), is making general statements about having little respect for Soldiers who outrank them. You are not the only one making remarks like this, but I've now seen it three times in two days so I'm pausing here to point out that you (and the others) are not asked by the US Military to invent your own internal set of rules for who you plan to respect and disrespect. I could let it go if your point was that you would lack respect for someone who disrespects you, or who breaks rules they expect others to follow, or some other reflection of poor performance or personal character. But anyone who would say that they would have less respect for someone of good character who does a good job simply because he/she doesn't measure up to some set of invented rules for what makes a good Officer/NCO/spouse/etc reflects pretty negatively on you (and the others making similar remarks).

Things I think should be required to be an officer:
1) Understand that you don't know everything
2) Ability to listen to advice
3) Ability to identify mistakes and inefficiencies, admit them, and learn from them
4) Willingness to lead by doing what he expects the men to do. Not all the time, but enough to let the Soldiers know that he isn't above them
5) Ability to plan, and flexibility to adjust the plan as information becomes available

I don't care what their commissioning source was, if they can do the things above they will be just fine. And I'll follow them anywhere.

A few points. Don't discount ROTC. USMA at Westpoint vs ROTC; it depends on the person. I've had good leaders from both. The Direct commissioning fills needed specialty slots.

I think the major problem I have with your theory, is that you seem to be of the assumption that all Officers are equal. Or rather: a Leutenant is a Leutenant is a Leutenant. Not necessarily true and not merely because of the differring commisioning avenues. In the end I don't find that they NEED to be the same.

As far as enlisted leading to commisioning; Some of the best Captains I've served with were enlisted first, as well as some of the worst. Again its all about individual characteristics, not commissioning source.

If you block direct commissions, good luck getting your docs and scientists. People spend 10+ years in college to earn PhDs and/or MDs. Very few people with an advanced degree (and most likely in their 30s, often with a family) are going to spend years living on E-1 to E-3 pay just so that they can commission.

Requirement number 2 is flawed: eventually we will run out of deployment-qualified candidates due to simple attrition. Or we need to continue to have deployments forever to restock.

And combat deployment, isn't necessarily an indicator of anything. For your respect, SPC (P) Cody Voye, does an Infantry PL that patrols carry more weight then say, a FOB Mayor who manages the daily activities of running a FOB?

A was a Warrior Forge (LDAC-Leader Development and Assessment Course) Instructor for 3 years. I will grant you that the prior service enlisted/NCO cadets on the seemed to be better candidates on the surface, however, I will echo what 1LT Eric Rosa said about bad qualities as an NCO can transfer to being bad qualities as an Officer. Some of the least motivated candidates were the prior service ones who had the "i already know this shit attitude".

GEN (RET) Colin Powell no prior enlisted ROTC graduate.
GEN(RET) Norman Schwarzkopf no prior service West Point.
GEN George Patton no prior service, West Point.
There are far to many factors to say that if you are prior service you will be a better officer or not. The same goes with graduating ROTC vs. the academy. Great officers come from both areas as do dirt bags. I was enlisted before I commissioned and I am glad that I did but it wouldn't be possible to have every cadet go through basic training.

Couple of thoughts here.

1) Officers have to follow orders just the same as Privates (enlisted) do. So, your argument there about knowing how to follow orders isn't really valid. Despite your commissioning source (with the exception of direct commissions), we all learn to follow orders, regardless if it is through West Point, ROTC (there are military schools that offer ROTC that are not West Point) or OCS.

2) Deployed and be a leader deployed. So what happens when the deployments go away? Do we no longer need officers at that point?

3) There are some jobs in the military that require commissions and come "straight off the street"..these are usually professional degreed personnel (lawyers, doctors, ect) that don't necessarily need the same training as line officers do.

What I would offer to consider is that people need to have a desire to be an officer and a solid understanding of what it means to be an officer. 1st) Being an officer is a not a better thing than being enlisted or being a warrant, it is just different. Some of the best NCOs I know have no desire to be an officer because they enjoy being with Soldiers and I respect them for that. 2nd) Being an officer means have less time to actually serve with Soldiers and more time spent behind a desk or in positions that are important to the Army as a whole, but not necessarily where the fun is. There are enlisted that do these same jobs to, just at a reduced number. Had I had someone explain this to me, I probably would have stayed enlisted a little longer than I did, but I wouldn't have traded my experiences as an officer (namely the time I have been able to spend with the great Soldiers of our nation) for anything!

I am sure there are additional areas that can be considered, but where you commission from and having prior enlisted backgrounds, although should be a consideration, should not be the be all, end all reasons for becoming an officer.

I have no problem with the current system.

I have had good officers from ROTC.

I have had bad officers from West Point.

I have had good officers that have never deployed.

One of the worst officers I've ever met had three deployments.

Most individuals I meet, whether officer or not, garner my respect based on their character and not their credentials. That doesn't mean I don't respect their achievements, it just doesn't necessarily mean I respect the man.

Whether someone is a good officer has nothing to do with whether they were LDO, CWO, Academy, ROTC... It doesn't matter. Officers haven't always even been required to have a degree. I've served with great officers from a number of different backgrounds and commissioning programs. Here's what I've noticed in the best of them. They are:
Good planners, with sound decision making skills. Ability to say no to a bad plan.
Sincerely care about those under their command. If an officer is willing to go to bat for his (her) troops, they notice. They also notice integrity.
Ultimately I have a saying, and it may be an oversimplification, but here it is.
It's great to be the sort of leader whose troops would follow you into hell itself. Just so long as they aren't just making sure you get there.