We can agree to disagree. Everyone sees things differently. I think I got the OML part from misunderstanding when you mentioned OML in your post and thought you were comparing the ROTC OML, where the more boxes you check the "better" you look, to that of the big Army's system.
It's just the way it is with some courses. Leadership courses such as Ranger, Sapper, etc. can have an effect since the skills learned there can be directly applied to ones job. AB and AA is not like that, they are teaching more technical aspects and not leadership skills. Yes, it will forever be on someone's record that they graduated from AA or AB and they'll always have those skills, but those skills don't translate into their actual job unless they're in a unit doing those operations, and the chances of them really doing some of the things they learn in AA as an officer are low. Similarly, when officers in these units are being evaluated and rated, they all have those badges because they're required to be in the unit. Outside of those units, it's really just uniform flair because they aren't using those skills in their job so it isn't going to influence anyone one way or the other. I'm not sure what other skills you're thinking they are learning there, but they aren't really giving someone a leg up anymore. These badges are also everywhere now and in many people's eyes have lost value compared to other schools (CDQC for example). Years ago they were viewed more favorably. Maybe that's where our views split. The two examples you gave (AB and AA) are different from many other courses or schools that go on someone's resume and could distinguish them. For example, following BOLC I went to a follow on course that, upon graduation, awarded me and additional skill identifier (adds onto my 'MOS'). That will forever be on my record and my AOC (MOS for officers) and is a required skill for certain positions within my branch. Something like that, and there are many examples of this type of course but just don't have (or need) skill badges, could have an effect on promotions because they open doors to certain positions, or add skills that benefit someone in their job, that could be more beneficial for progression. Do I know if my ASI does that? No, because I've never asked someone about it and haven't been in long enough to really see. Additionally, as long as you're decent and don't get in trouble, you're not really competing for promotions until you're a captain. By then, there are many other things that affect your selection over an AA or AB badge.
I only say CULP is a better bet because you will have a better chance to use the skills regardless of your branch when you commission. Yes, CULP is not some super experience that transforms cadets, but it does provide some foreign exposure. And it's better for them to have that first exposure prior to taking charge of a platoon and taking them overseas for a training exercise. Even if it's something minuscule. If a cadet was 100% destined to go to the 82nd and I was his/her instructor, given the cadet had the opportunity to attend either CULP or AB, I would send them to AB no question. Same for if a cadet was going to the 101st and air assault. But, the system doesn't work like that. Cultural understanding has been a hot point throughout our involvement in the ME, so somewhere along the line they decided officers needed more of it and CULP was developed to provide a tiny bit of that to cadets.
