Do you view those without a combat patch differently?

If I'm in danger and need someone to watch my six, I could care less what you are wearing on your right sleeve; You are part of the team...everyone's time eventually comes.

I think the patch is not a sign of superiority but one that denotes the grave nature of frontline combat. This does NOT diminish the roles of others who serve this country. An acrimonious distinction is corrosive and counterproductive.

<p>While the other respondents on this thread are correct in that a patch does not necessarily make any Soldier "better" than any other, there is one truth to this issue.&nbsp; That is, if a leader has not deployed, how does s/he prepare his/her Soldiers for an upcoming deployment?&nbsp; When your Soldier looks to you and asks you what to expect at any or each stage of a deployment, saying "I don't know" (after 13 years of this country being at war) seems to somehow not be the right answer.&nbsp; I would certainly lose just a little bit of confidence in my leader if I were in that situation.<br><br>I deployed twice (full year deployments) in four years.&nbsp; Admittedly, I only went outside the wire once in all that time, but saw, felt, and experienced being mortared and rocketed too many times to count.&nbsp; Does that make me a better or worse leader?&nbsp; I don't know if I would say either way.&nbsp; BUT I can tell a new Soldier what it is like to deploy and assist him/her through every stage of that deployment.</p><p><br></p><p>I get that not everyone is in a MOS/billet that can deploy.&nbsp; However, if one truly WANTED to deploy, there are several methods available to make that happen.&nbsp; The fact that DA had to institute a rule forbidding back-to-back non-deploying assignments (ie., doing recruiting and Drill Sergeant back to back) tells me that too many people were "hiding out" in TRADOC while everyone else left home and family to do the dirty work halfway around the world.&nbsp; So part of that argument is invalid.</p><p><br></p><p>Did I WANT to deploy twice?&nbsp; Yes and no.&nbsp; I wanted to do my part, see what it was all about, and certainly get that "combat patch" on my uniform.&nbsp; I didn't want to leave home and family at all.&nbsp; But, especially after my first deployment, I felt that only deploying once somehow wasn't fair to those who had already deployed several times.&nbsp; So my second deployment was more a dedication to duty sort of mindset for me.&nbsp; I reasoned that by deploying again, someone else could take that year off to be with family and enjoy being stateside.</p><p><br></p><p>So I guess after being at war for 13 years, the real question should be, "how many times have you deployed?"</p><p><br></p>

I know guys who, through no fault of their own, have not had the chance to deploy. I also know, however, people that have manipulated the system (extending over and over again to stay in Korea for example)in order not to deploy. I know a 1SG who did a COT from Korea to Japan in order not to deploy. In that case, you are a scumbag. I dare you to tell me how to train for war. I have been there and you haven't. I have friends who are on their 8th, 9th, or 10th deployment, so I have no sympathy for those who have avoided deploying. I have only been on three deployments myself due to schools and such, and I feel that I haven't done enough! My son JUST graduated AIT and he is already in Kuwait! He was 8 years old when the war started and he has managed to deploy. Why can't you again?

I will say that I do look at people differently when it comes to slick sleeves, I think all of us do that have been in the military for awhile. Over the past decade or more we have been at war, and it is hard to believe that if you have been in the military since 2001 you would have not deployed. Now I will say that I know that there are some soldiers in some MOS's that can not help not being deployed, but those jobs are few. If you have been in a combat support MOS then you should have deployed somewhere over you're career at least once. I will say that I also know soldiers that refuse to wear their combat patch, because they just don't care to wear it.

I don't view them any different. It's a shame the Army culture is so caught up on what you have on your uniform. When will people learn that just because someone wears all that stuff it doesnt make them the best Soldier. Some people's jobs and duty locations allowed them multiple deploymenst and some others didnt.

I appreciate everyone's input on this matter. Personally, I have gained some great insight that will help me grow as a leader and I thank you all for your responses.

Honestly? It depends on the rank. If I see a SSG or above with out a patch I think less of them. If I know that they have been in for over 6years I think this...We have been at war for almost 13 yrs. your lame excuse that. "I kept on trying to volunteer" is dumb and dishonest. Because of you people have had to deploy more than once, some of them have died. All because you are a coward. It is only because people are too polite to call you out on this, that you still live in a world of make believe. Got it some people choose not to wear a patch (I was one for a while) got it this is not aimed at you. Some have an MOS that doesn't deploy.. RECLASS or shut up

Before I retired I had enough to wear a different one every day of the week, and that's not too uncommon now. I usually wore the one that mattered most to me on my Greens. When we went from BDUs to ACUs it didn't matter at much to me who wore what when. When we transfer back to a garrison Army it will be similar to when I joined in 91, combat patches will be the exceptions and not the rule.

If your new to the army then no, but if you been in since the war started then i kinda have to believe you should have gone on atleast one deployment by now. Unless you are on a true non-deployable profile

I do know that lots of soldiers choose not to wear a combat patch for a reason or another. I like to wear mine because I am proud of the things I accomplished during my service. So maybe those that do not wear them are either individuals that didn't earn one because they dodged a bullet or maybe they don't want the attention from others asking them " hey where did you get this one?" or something in that nature.

As a junior enlisted, I had spent my days turning to NCOs with combat patches. Not that the "slick sleeve" NCOs were any less competent, but the previously deployed took more time, were more patient, and very focused on ensuring their soldiers were well trained for the tasks at hand. Because they knew what we may or may not be facing down the road.

Yes, I respect them for being available.

Few soldiers have a choice in combat participation. The rest served honorably and are due our respect.

Makes me wonder about the Drone Pilot stationed in Arizona, who has killed numerous high value targets. Is a combat patch only if you got sand in your teeth? Granted the guy in Arizona did not get shot at but neither did a great many people who wear the patch. Maybe we should change it to a "I killed the enemy" patch.

That Combat Patch tells me that he/she did their duty under fire. That may not be true but it is an assumption. Without a patch you are an unknown factor.

Depends on how old I think they are and what their rank is. The older and the higher with a slick sleeve, the less forgiving I am. I deployed twice, while others I know (one of which was a BG) actively avoided deployment yet think they deserve my personal respect.

The simple answer is yes. The reason is that they don't have a shared experience. Many try to tell you how something needs to be done in a combat zone but they don't have the patch to show they've been there. Some choose not to where one, and that's fine because it's optional, but their records reflect their deployment. People who deployed with other branches will typically have some type of ribbon or medal that shows a deployment but, obviously, it's only visible in the dress uniform.

Speaking from a perspective in the Army Intelligence community, those with no deployment patches were usually seen as the ones who hadn't done there actual job yet. Being a 35F (or former 96B like me) you don't really get to do your war time job until you deploy. All the exercises in the world will not prepare you fully for doing your job in the real world scenario where real lives on the battlefield depend on your intel. I have nothing against guys with no deployments, but it helps to know that someone beside you has experienced at least some of what I have.

I wanna have a deployment patch. the military is the mucho environment and what Have on your uniform...is what you are

Grate topic

LT,

Although I try to view 'slick sleeves' without bias it is very difficult for me when I spent most of my career in Fort Bragg where the norm in my unit was 12 months deployment/18 months dwell. There are many individuals out there who have valid reasons not to wear a deployment patch (ie. family crisises, medical issues, etc), but my experience is that these individuals were the minority and would end up on the next deployment or out of the military. Young soldiers may not have had the opportunity to deploy, and that is no fault of their own.

My issue, especially in Hawaii, is seeing E-7s, E-8s, E-9s, O-4s and O-5s walking around with no deployment patches when we have been at 'war' for over 12 years. How can leaders who have never been through a deployment truly understand their troops who have? And what have these leaders been doing that has kept them away from combat zones? Everytime I ask anyone in Hawaii if they have deployed, their answer is always I've been to Japan, Korea, Guam, etc. Yeah, I have too, but those aren't combat deployments and saying you've 'deployed' to a combat veteran takes away from the sacrifice's we have made, and the losses we have incurred.

I haven't been through nearly as much as many combat soldiers, but there are no words to describe having to deal with rockets raining down in the middle of the night, seeing blood and knowing it belongs to a friend, wondering who is going to be standing next to you and how many of them are still in one piece when you finally make it back home. Physical injuries are easier for others to understand then the psychological ones. It bothers me that some senior leaders have never deployed, and yet they claim to know how much we've sacrified and what we've been through. I look at these leaders with the burning question in my mind 'why haven't you deployed?' and 'what was so much more important in your life that younger soldiers had to make that sacrifice on your behalf?' Looking at how many young soldiers we have psychologically scarred from these experiences, it makes me angry that an older more experienced leader who should be able to handle these experiences didn't have to make that sacrifice.

I'll be honest, I do view people without a combat patch differently, but mainly when it comes to training. Having a slick sleeve commo guy teach a class on reacting to contact, and tell a group of previously deployed medic that this is what it'll be like if they go downrange is mildly humorous, and kind of annoying, especially when they teach the class wrong.

That said, on a day to day basis, I care far more about competency shown than whether or not they have a deployment patch, and would much rather have someone who hasn't deployed that knows their job rather than someone who has who can't even put on a tourniquet.

I personally try not to jump to conclusions, because as it has been said on here, everyone has a story. It is certainly somewhat jarring to see a senior officer, NCO, or Warrant officer without a combat patch and for many of the same reasons indicated on this thread. Mostly, I look at combat patches, the same way I look at someone's experiences, they are potential commonalities. The same as if I ran into someone who went to my school, is a QM branch, a loggie, or was at the same unit or station I was- similar experiences that allows for a relationship to be built.

When I first joined, after Viet Nam; I was l guy without a combat patch.

Yup

I do not view SMs differently who are without a combat patch. I don't like to judge.

It really only matters when they start talking shit. I had a general once who's one deployment was Kosovo who went on a rant to a room full of field grades who had fought in Iraq and Afghanistan and we are looking at each other like "who the hell is this guy to tell us what is what?". He had no credibility because he lost his temper and started lecturing on things he had no personal experience on to guys who did. If he had not lost his temper and gone on a rant, it probably would not have been an issue. But no combat patch? No slack given by those who had one.