Get rid of the military academies?
O.K., not gone. Redesigned.
The dinosaur mentality that has lasted since the military's birth needs to be extinguished.
I'm not suggesting we eliminate officer training or get rid of military leadership. I'm suggesting we change how people become officers in the first place.
Here's the idea.
Two Years of Enlisted Service Before Commissioning
You graduate high school and decide you want to serve on active duty.
Instead of going directly into a military academy, you enlist and complete a minimum of two years — 24 months — of military service before becoming eligible to apply for an academy or pursue a commission.
It doesn't matter what branch you're serving in or which branch you want to join as an officer. Under my proposal, everyone starts with enlisted experience.
What does this accomplish?
It gives every future commissioned officer experience at the bottom before placing them in charge of the people working there.
My best commissioned leaders were prior enlisted.
The ring knockers were almost always assholes.
That's my experience. Other people may have had different experiences, but it's one of the reasons I've questioned the current commissioning system for years.
Redesign Military Academy Admissions
You would still have to earn acceptance into the military academy of your choice.
But instead of evaluating applicants primarily through their academic background and other pre-service qualifications, the academies would also have actual military performance to examine.
Applicants could submit enlisted performance reports, military training records, recommendations, and any additional education credits earned during their service.
Think about that.
Instead of trying to predict whether a high school graduate might make a good military leader, we'd have two years of actual military performance to consider.
It would also create a different atmosphere inside the academies because everyone arriving would already understand basic military life.
They'd know how to wipe their asses, military style, before freshman year even started.
And yes, they'd still get a ball-busting experience. Prior military service doesn't mean the academy or officer training suddenly becomes easy.
What About ROTC and College Graduates?
Same rules apply.
If you graduate from college and want to become a commissioned officer, you'd complete two years of enlisted service before applying for a commission.
You'd be an enlisted service member with a college degree, gaining military experience before moving into an officer's position.
That would fundamentally change the existing ROTC and commissioning pathways. I'm proposing a replacement for those direct-entry routes, not describing how they currently operate.
A college diploma can demonstrate academic achievement. It doesn't automatically prove that someone knows how to lead military personnel.
Give More Enlisted Personnel a Chance to Lead
Here's another benefit.
People who leave high school without the opportunity, money, connections, or knowledge needed to pursue a military academy could still find themselves competing for a commission later.
They could discover leadership abilities they didn't even know they had.
Imagine someone who enlists without ever considering becoming an officer, performs exceptionally well, earns the respect of fellow service members, and realizes there's an opportunity to do more.
Now that person has a path based partly on demonstrated military performance.
Let the true leaders who never knew they could lead get the chance to kick ass.
Leadership Requires More Than Rank
What this system could help accomplish is breaking down the stupid class system that so many people think is essential to military discipline and structure.
Discipline problems aren't automatically the result of enlisted personnel failing to understand their place.
Sometimes the problem is piss-poor management.
Leadership courses across the military teach valuable skills. But knowing what leadership is supposed to look like and actually practicing it are two different things.
Laziness and complacency can destroy effective leadership just as easily in the military as in civilian life.
Go figure.
Being placed in charge doesn't mean you can lead.
Let's fix this.
Standards Should Still Matter
My proposal isn't about eliminating standards or handing commissions to everyone who completes two years of enlisted service.
Service members would still have to qualify for the programs they want to enter.
Academic requirements, physical standards, character, performance, and leadership potential should all matter.
And people who don't qualify should have opportunities to improve themselves where possible.
Didn't finish high school? Get your diploma or GED. Need more education? Get additional accredited college credits or a degree.
Improve yourself and reapply when you're qualified.
You're welcome, dumb ass. Get on the bus.
Military Tradition and the Old Guard
I know the old guard would fight this.
Any attempt to change the commissioning system would upset people who believe the traditional separation between officers and enlisted personnel must remain exactly as it is.
And if those dickhead officers can take away the Black Beret of the Rangers, then perhaps it's time to question what else they're willing to change in the name of tradition or uniformity.
I don't like Rangers. Never have. But I didn't think they deserved to have their distinctive black berets taken away.
Tradition seems to be sacred until somebody with enough authority decides otherwise.
The Problems With My Proposal
Are there holes and pitfalls in this idea that I'm not seeing?
Absolutely.
Military academies would have to be redesigned. ROTC and other commissioning programs would have to change. The services would need to rethink career timelines, funding, educational requirements, and how prospective officers are selected.
There would also be questions about how much enlisted experience is enough and how to evaluate that experience fairly.
Two years of service won't magically turn every candidate into a great leader.
But the existence of challenges doesn't mean the present system shouldn't be questioned.
Experienced senior enlisted personnel already demonstrate substantial technical knowledge, leadership ability, and professional judgment. The military should make better use of that experience rather than treating traditional commissioning pathways as untouchable.
The Next Step: Restructuring Military Leadership
The commissioning process is only part of the issue.
The other part is how the military divides responsibility and authority between officers and enlisted personnel after those leaders are selected.
That's the subject of my follow-up article: Enlisted vs. Officer: Does the Military Need a New Rank Structure?
I still believe that military leadership should be based on demonstrated ability, experience, accountability, and the needs of the mission rather than prestige and tradition alone.
Being placed in charge doesn't mean you can lead. Let's fix this.
Opinion and commentary. Originally published October 2013. Updated October 2026.