pretty sure tom has cited this as an issue for officers of all grade - i can testify that it's an issue for captains also.

Back in the day, I worked for more than one LTC who I wished many times had declined command.

HUNTER seems to have a pretty good take on what’s happening in todays stressed out over deployed military. I would be most interested in his view. One would have thought that with our weak civilian employment picture that career NCO’s and officers would be inclined to take the pay and benefits that come with deployments rather than throw themselves into a most precarious civil economy?

... for the AVF.

While some are discussing the plight of CPTs, generally the term "Command Declination" refers to Command Select List (CSL) Battalion and Brigade commands.

Personally, I think the best thing that a departing junior officer can do is to get out and use the great new GI Bill to get a high quality graduate degree.

With the GI Bill and the "Yellow Ribbon" program, a departing CPT can get a free MBA at Dartmouth's Tuck School of Business (among other good schools) and a decent, tax-free living allowance.

I'm not quite there, but there is an old saying...for each day that you work past the 20 year mark you are working for half your pay...that is, if you were not working, half your pay-check would still be coming in

I am an active duty, Infantry, Major. I have served 3 deployments since 9/11 and by choice will leave for my 4th next spring. I have some strong opinions on this matter, but just to be clear these do not necessarily reflect those of the US Army or any of it's subordinates units.
Over the past 4 years I have watched multiple Infantry officers, who are the "right" people for the BN and BCT CMDs in deploying units, walk away from the Army. And they are walking away with their heads held high. They have served enough months overseas while neglecting their families that they can say, "no more". We all know that your retirement check looks the same whether you were or were not a BN CDR, the only thing that might change is whether or not you have a family still waiting for you when your time is done.
I have also watched officers being pulled up and given the opportunity for command from the alternates list, who 5-10 years ago would not have been promoted past the rank of CPT.
These topics are not secrets among the Army's ranks, officers know when they are being given a second tier commander for their units, and officers know when they see a great one walk away from it all.
These trends can only be addressed by making some dramatic changes in the systems we use to evaluate and retain individuals in the ranks, and it should start with a long look at quality over quantity and equitable distribution of overseas tours to those who have been hiding out to avoid doing their equal share.

If this is true, it would be interesting to look at the statistics of the ranks that have turned down duty. I cannot imagine a high ranking officer at the CPT level and above doing that since that would be destructive to their career. However, it is not surprising in our modern world right now for this to be happening as family increasingly play an important role in the our lives where family values and time spent with family is becoming more important - naca

IRR SOLDIER, BARBARIC16, TRI-EAGLE57, thanks for the very insightful observations from the inside. I get the feeling that the Army may be losing their seed corn who are the strong officers that feel confident about their competitiveness in the civilian economy. If that situation has been persisting for the past number of years one would have to conclude that some of those left behind who are not so strong and confident are becoming by default the pool of candidates for high rank? Sort of a reverse Darwinism where the strong and adaptable leave and the weak and fretful remain?

It's not just married soldiers who are getting out - its soldiers who want to have families and don't have time for a life b/c of deployments. I was deployed three years out of four from 02-05, and had no life but the next deployment prep and looking after my soldiers (many of whom were facing imploding family lives of their own) when I was CONUS. I got out in 06, am now working on a 2nd Masters and still work in the national security field. Oh, and I got married last December and have a shot at a well rounded (family and love of my job) life. I loved the Army and being a soldier, but it's a lot to ask single folks in their 20s to watch their lives pass them by with nothing but their military service to sustain them, while the civilian world doesn't even know the country is at war.

History continues to repeat itself. Much the same thing happened during the post-Desert Storm 1990's drawdown. The military allowed its employees to self-select who was going to leave, so everyone with any viability in the civilian economy took the money and launched. Out of the 230 or so in my Marine Basic Officer Class from 1984, there were less than 25 lieutenant colonel selectees 18 years later. And that includes aviators, who had money shoveled on them to stay. Dare I say this might account for the quality of strategic thinking at the field grade and upper ranks today? I personally know 4 colonels who retired without even bothering to put in a package for command selection. I also understand that the situation is so bad in the Marine Corps that the Commandant requires all officers declining command to write a personal letter to him, for all the deterrent value that represents...

Not the magic feather, but REVERSE-cology.

Rather than permanently losing the A-list stars that decline outright, give those families some breathing room, thru delay option. Offer CONUS assignment choice, a command college or a civilian graduate college. 2-3 years in academia might make even the responsibility and sacrifice of a deploying battalion seem attractive.

Even if the declners stay out, tomorrows FEMA, CaltTrans, or State/AID might hook a few mil-spec crisis managers that know what the military has in its quiver, after the next Haiti, Katrina, or THE BIG ONE in California. I've heard that DOD could use some MBA's, and politics could for sure benefit from participation of command-rated officers.

Thx, all above, for a good discussion. Question: Are the colonels making command assignments at the puzzle palace from the B list? Could BUPERS suffer from poor self image, and be acting out a bit?

to me the key sentence in the original post has not been touched upon:

"Not that it is necessarily our job, but it's not easy to run the world with 10 Army divisions and the Marine Corps."

Lt Cols and such don't make policy, but our policy of Team America affects them greatly and they are voting with their feet. And the policy will not change 'til we can no longer borrow the needed funds to police the world.

My son is a CPT, Ass't BN S-3, and he will be getting out shortly, not because of too many o/s tours, but because of none. He has volunteered to go to both Iraq and AF, and was told no because he was too valuable to his BN. He joined the army to be a soldier, not to be a clerk. He recognizes the importance of the work he is doing,but says he is fed up with an army that sends half its people out on multiple tours, while keeping the other half at home and not utilizing them.

Mr. Ricks, out of curiosity do you have a military background (I don't have the faintest idea where to check on this site)? Speaking as a civilian without firsthand knowledge of military culture beyond my elder brother I was under the assumption that declining a promotion was considered a career killer.

Policing the Afghan half of pashtunistan remains an economy of force mission, by a multiple or two, and the force geometry won't yield to arguments.

Could it be that officers who presumably have done a battalion or brigade staff tour, know the drills, are unhappy about a job that includes writing to NCO's wives and Spc's parents about losses at outposts manned at a level that invited attack, without the option of raining sulphur and steel on the villages of the attackers?

I'm told by one who's been over their that a fighting man needs to fight back, or he just hunkers down until he can go home. Soldiers don't want to hear that looking for mines or being staked out as a target for Katyusha's is balanced by our Predator missions in some other country.

I meant "indiscriminate fire", not 'unrestricted'. Indiscriminate in the usual treaty/legal sense of indirect fire on structures that may have civilian inhabitants, in addition to enemy fighters. As I understand it, our troops can only return fire into inhabited or non-cleared structures when we are being directly attacked from those positions.

JP, going directly at the contradiction inherent in occupation troops suppressing counter-attacks thru 'payback' during an insurgency is more judgemental than what I was driving at. A line commander is supposed to respond quickly in combat without seeing red while doing so. I expect that is the norm for our officers. Exceptions and even crimes are also 'normal', even good wars, as the earlier Patton discussion highlighted.

COIN doctrine, as I understand it, accepts increased short-term casualties, reduced force protection, in pursuit of durable long-term gains. But the casualties are direct on this watch, while the gains are distant and uncertain. Witholding heavy weapon fire support from troops that are engaged must be an unhappy moment in a commanding officer's career. Possibly so onerous that an experienced officer would opt to retire rather than face it?

I'm asking.

Having commanded an infantry battalion in a different army on the Line of Control, albeit not among the '"top quality" ones some moron on this post has referred to, and now stuck in the race, I suggest that you face up to the realities : the "big bad world is out there"!! Its surprising that after more than 2 decades of military service you still are looking at the service through such an idealistic and rosy prism. Senior officer have reached where they are through guts, determination professionalism(most of them) and matching sycophancy and above all ruthlessness : by being winners. You can whine and groan, but if you rally want to do something, get behind those green doors and...MAKE A DIFFERENCE!! Shape the environment you control, set high standards, practice what you preach and LEAD. Remember if you dont do it, somebody with less scruples and less worthy will get the chance to lead. In theses tough times your army especially the infantry faces, if experienced and honourable leaders lose heart and QUIT, well, .........more body bags!!

Let me humbly suggest that it is an imperfect world, with imperfect institutions, organizations and, yes, leaders. Let me also recommend that instead of careers and command assignments, military professionals should focus on missions, tasks and soldiers. None of this applies to certain journalists and historians who, of course, are alway perfect in judging those doing or having done real work.

I am surprised to hear that enough LTCs are turning down BN CMD for someone to create a forum about it. I've not even seen a hint of such character from our field grades down here in 3ID. I have unfortunately seen a number of officers staying in to receive their "future entitlements," as well as superb officers leave the ranks. My intent is to stay to at least receive a BN CMD and go from there. There is an interesting forum being hosted by GEN Peter Chiarelli via the Strategic Studies Institute (SSI) at the Army War College that is attempting to address talent management in the Army. There have been a lot of ideas thrown at the problem of retaining quality officers and "cutting sling load" on those who fail to perform. However, many of the ideas seem that they will be hard to effectively implement. Worst of all I believe that the army is simply too small to carry out what our government is going to expect of it in the future. A product of the "do more with less" syndrome the world currently finds itself in. Does this mentality of doing more with less also apply doing "more with less" capable officers?

Your comment about Vietnam struck as interesting to me.

"It won't just be like the post-Vietnam era, with indiscipline in the ranks and disgusted NCOs punching out early."

The Army is minting substandard NCOs, not fully developing NCOs, and between the vacuum from retiring senior NCOs and the epidemic of "MOS-T" retention, is pushing these incomplete NCOs into higher positions.

The army is on the eve of implimenting the new promotion points system, which on face value seems improved due to axing the "gimme" points from the commander's recommendation and the board. Further inspection just shows that the army is going all in on it's "Hell if your proficient at your job, as long as you can shoot and run your an NCO" attitude, which one can argue is how we got into this mess with all the contractors. "Leadership" (I.E., Land-Nav, Opords and Counciling Statements) is important no doubt in the NCO corps, but when you have revisions in WLC that's damning even that, it begins to wonder if the Army is building NCOs or just training them for the test (Iraq, Afghanistan, insert next Low Intensity Conflict). The real kicker is the Army has changed WLC to be more exam based in the leadership catagories, but still refuses to impliment MOS proficiency exams to ensure these soldiers are not only capable of becoming NCOs, but also able to handle the increase of Skill level. This in conjunction of the MOS Transfer retention incentive, has led to a epidemic of soldiers switching MOS's at higher NCO ranks, only to show when the time is right, that they cannot perform their duties.

What good is an E6 who's FA-turned-MI when he cannot operate at a 35F10 level, let alone 20 or 30 level? It's a worthless soldier. How can he mentor his junior soldiers on Leadership alone and throw his E3's and E4's to the wolves because he himself didn't really complete his new AIT on merit and aptitude, he was given the go because he's an MOS-T and he'll "pick it up".

This is what your seeing across the army in critical skill MOS's. Intel, Signal, Aviation, heck even Finance and Medical as well! This is why an influx of contractors are needed. You have these Combat Arms NCOs who've went to Iraq 3 times as Armor or Infantry and making rank quick, and coming to other branches being waved through AIT without retaining any new MOS skills, sitting around being a half NCO without a clue as to what their job duties are.

Now project this on Signal, Intel, Medical, and Aviation soldiers (who quite a few already possess college education). From their prospective; they see that the army doesn't value job performance at all, they'll probably never make their E7 because these E5s and E6s keep coming into their MOS and taking all those slots, and if they become proficient at their job they can just get out in 3-5 years, go to a contractor, come back to Iraq or Afghanistan or wherever doing the same job for three times the pay.

Your only hitting one side of the coin when you talk about capable officers leaving the military. You also have very apt, capable junior enlisted who have no reason to stay in past their initial enlistment because whereas they take their job seriously, they are led by NCOs who have not one clue about their job, they just wanted out of the infantry and that fifth deployment for an "easy" job.

A huge issue within the E-1 to E-4 ranks that is causing soldiers to get out--"screamers". I got out of the Army and re-enlisted in the Air Force and I'm glad I did. The Army is such lower class...the need to scream at people to show their manhood is absurd.