I am sort of sympathetic. One of the most talented people I know went down to the recruiter in late 2004, height of the war in Iraq, and asked about his options. 39, great shape, two Ivy League degrees, three fluent languages, ran a desk of 50 guys on Wall Street and made seven figures consistently ... got told that he couldn’t get a commission but that maybe the National Guard could use him at E3 because of how many guys were being medicaled out after having their bells rung by IEDs on their deployment. In other words: we value your super-intelligence just up about to the point where it exceeds that of people with brain damage. That’s not the best use of human resources at war.
I hate to say it, but to get hired in the Army, you need to be specialized in a skill the Army needs and be able to pass the physical. All of the impressive credentials in the world won’t get someone in if they don’t have a needed skill set.
Your friend had plently of options where his skills could have been put to excellent use.
Why he didn’t pursue them is a question he needs to answer.
Some of the best combat leaders I’ve met are intuitive, natural and possess qualities that schools/education beats out of people.
Sorry, but I disagree. Any one entering the basic branches of the Arm/mil need to go through the whole training enchilada. Just because some guy is a genius in some specialties does not mean the man can tie his boots.
certainly accelerating the process when losses are high ( major war) is necessary, but otherwise, a recipe for both military and social messes.
We need those who want to be all in, not just those who find it “interesting” or even feel a great patriotic duty- but not until.
As a former enlisted guy, I can attest to the frustration had by the enlisted corps even under the rather complex and thorough officer training processes in place now.