Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 08/21/2026 8:09:08 AM PDT by Salman
WASHINGTON — Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is fuming over the Army’s decision to withdraw new academic standards for college students in the ROTC program — including requiring a score of at least 1000 on the SAT — to block “stupid people” from becoming military officers.
The new standards were announced on Aug. 5 in an internal memo issued by then-assistant secretary of the Army for manpower and reserve affairs Jules Hurst and were withdrawn Wednesday.
“The Army must cultivate intelligent and adaptive officers to build a lethal and ready Army prepared to deter, fight, and win our nation’s wars. The strength of our Officer Corps is the strength of our Army,” Hurst wrote, two days before the Senate confirmed him as Pentagon comptroller.
The requirement would have taken effect in January, but was rescinded in an Aug. 12 memo from under secretary of the Army Mike Obadal, who cited a need for “further staffing and analysis.”
Pentagon sources told The Post the pivot demonstrated dysfunction within the Army, whose Secretary Dan Driscoll has clashed with Hegseth over the past year, including on personnel decisions — with the men hardly on speaking terms despite the ongoing Iran war.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
The last thing we need is stupid officers in charge of the lives of others. Like frat brothers.
I mean, can’t he order that to be changed?
As a former Army officer (w/ a 1250 SAT score ;-), I have mixed feelings on this. Fully agree we don’t want stupid officers, but I’m not sure the SAT is the best gauge of such things. We have had plenty of general officers who were Rhodes Scholars and/or had PhDs which were nothing but trouble. I’m sure they had stellar SAT scores.
1000 SAT should not be the only criteria.
But it should be a minimum standard.
I’ve served under stupid officers. They are a danger to all around them.
‘stupid officers’ usually get removed fairly quickly in wartime, one way or another................
I got 1180 on my SAT. Took one class in college for about 2 weeks so my Mom was happy. Quit and pursued a successful 25 years in radio and 23 in Real Estate. My Mom was happy that I was happy. No regerts.
Your point is well taken!
It has been my experience that, sometimes, too much brainpower can be more of a leadership handicap than not enough.
How did lowering the intelligence standard, help with the problem that not all very smart officers are good officers?
The SAT is a measure how much you learned in high school, not your intelligence.
Yeah, I agree that other factors can and should be considered. But take the SAT score down and keep it along with marksmanship, PT, situational awareness, Etc. Look for leadership capability, cooperation and loyalty.
Aside from the SAT how about no soy boys. I hate pansies. You don’t need to be a hero all the time but be a man. Lead from the front is very important.
How about requiring everyone who joins the military to start out as buck Privates? Then fast track those that show promise to be officers with minimum requirements on ASVAB, SAT or ACT scores, meet certain minimum scores in OCS, and other minimums?
No, we don’t need stupid officers in charge of the lives of others, but most frat brothers are pretty smart. They have to be because there are minimum GPAs required to keep the fraternities open. I believe Pi-Kap’s is 3.5. Most of the brothers are also on academic scholarship as well which requires a GPA of 2.9 or better. The reason the ARMY had to drop the SAT requirement is because most young ones who score well on the SAT are not thinking about the military. Casting a wider net is what I call it.
“No regerts”.
Went to the learing center instead of college?
CC
There is a reason that Special Operations are required to have higher than normal intelligence and that the Green Berets used to require higher intelligence scores than candidates for officer.
I can assure you that there are a lot of “stupid officers” who had high SAT scores.
Robert Heinlein would approve ...
The army, and all branches for that matter, should open up opportunities for high performance enlisted troops to get direct commissions right out of the ranks, no charm schools required.
Some of the best leaders I had were mustangs. Many of them never even took the SAT or went to college but they were great leaders both as enlisted and officers. They got there by demonstrated skills, not checkmarks on an application form.
That’s why I said I had mixed feelings. There needs to be a level of demonstrable intelligence. I’m just not sure how much weight the SAT should be given in that calculation, or if a person with an SAT score of 999 who is an outstanding performer in all other areas should be automatically disqualified.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.