Legitimacy of Officers after 2014?

Discussion in 'Join the Army - Regular Officer Recruiting' started by serve_to_lead2011, Dec 2, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I was wondering about how this works out...

    Obviously, there will be new Officers that will come to lead people after 2014 passes and we leave Afghanistan. However, those people will have no combat experience, whilst the men they lead will have probably done a few tours. The SNCOs they command could have done 5+ tours. I'm wondering...is there a "legitimacy" problem with this and how do YOs go about overcoming it? Is it a case that the Officer is very much "on trial" until they themselves have done a tour?

    This is not meant to be a "bone" thread...I am genuinely curious about how this works out. The main the point of the army is go on combat tours...how can you go about leading men if you yourself have not proved yourself at this? I know that obviously the point of Officers is not to be the most experienced, they blatantly aren't, but surely having no combat experience at all doesn't help their authority/ability to lead?
  2. You mean exactly like a young officer leaving Sandhurst and arriving at his first unit now?
    • Like Like x 3
  3. Exactly the same way as the army contracted in size post 1919/21 then 1946/47. With fresh blood to avoid going stale......
  4. There are quite a few YOs around now who haven't done (and probably won't do) an Op tour in Afghanistan. There are also quite a few more senior officers who haven't done Afghan or Iraq.

    Being a decent commander isn't all about combt experience (though it does sometimes help). I doubt very much the soldiers will have an issue with a troopy who hasn't done an op tour. Unless he/she is a knob; in which case they could have all the op exeperience in the world, their soldiers will still think they're a knob!

    Why do you ask anyway?
    • Like Like x 1
    • Like Like x 6
  5. So how did it work in the 50s when young officers were probably leading men who'd gone through several campaigns in WW2? It'll probably be the same in 5 or 6 years time. The newbies listening to the boring war stories from the old sweats. The "When I was in ...." tales and so on.
    • Like Like x 2
  6. OK then Flash, what's the alternative? Stop recruiting new officers and simply make the ones who have managed to fit in a tour in Afghanistan stay in until they die of old age?

    Is it really? Have you read the National Security Strategy or SDSR - do you even know what they are?

    Have you seen this diagram?


    Well, once again true to form for you, it is one. Remind me again when did you pass AOSB? Oh that's right you haven't yet have you? I'm sure that your forthright, well considered and researched opinions will stand you in good stead during the group discussion exercises.
    • Like Like x 1

  7. If you turn up as a young officer to your first unit and are a professionally competent, hardworking guy/girl who digs out blind for your soldiers, you'll do fine. The army can't ask any more of you than that.
  8. Brotherton Lad

    Brotherton Lad LE Reviewer

    The Army has had illegitimate officers serving in it for centuries. Some have been excellent, many did well and a few were just bastards.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Is "legitimacy" the same as legitimacy? Perhaps the use of inverted commas mean that you are a bit cleverer than the rest of us. I don't think that there is a legitimacy issue. Or a credibility one, for that matter, for the reasons given by previous posters. If you are going to be an officer, don't worry about it. If you are an officer without tour experience, don't worry about it. If you are neither, why are you asking?
  10. Combat ops in Afghanistan finish end 2014, not ops full stop. There will still be an overwatch requirement and no doubt some sort of training/mentor component.

    Also heard recently from someone fairly senior, that he didn't expect a pull out of Afghanistan to mean an end of UK Ops - there would doubtless be other pots on the boil, in need of liited intervention.

    So, officers deciding to rock up post 2014 wouldn't necessarily be inexperienced crow bags for long - they could go out on other tours, more interesting than HERRICK.

    BUT, as pointed out, this is a cycle - when I joined, there wasn't much going on, Iraq Pt1 had happened, Afghan was limited, Iraq Pt2 happened and then trickled on. It was possible to not serve in one of those areas until around 2005/6 I reckon, when the churn through HERRICK meant it would be unusual not to.

    Returning to contingency, an unlucky officer might not go anywhere, but then if they stick around, 2020 will be upon us and the politicians will be itching to use us, in our shiny new structure, fit for purpose etc.

    Also, don't forget that the blokes will not all be hardened combat veterans, many will have moved up/on/out.
  11. There must have been a fair few ruperts who joined in 46/7 and had soldiers under them who had two world wars under their belts, plus a bit of empire policing. They seemed to manage.

    We've all got to start somewhere; I can imagine some officers with several tours still being bellthronks, and others fresh from Sandhurst being damn good at their job. Most junior ranks can tell the difference.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. "The main point of the army is to go on combat tours"...f*** me, I've come across some daft statements but that one takes the biscuit! (In the original post)