How many military members actually see combat?

I love how I posted this three years ago and I keep getting comments on it. I’m not even a recruiter anymore or even in the Navy. I appreciate everyone’s answers, point of view and mostly, I appreciate everyone’s service!

My sis was a driver in iraq, she saw small arms fire regularly, and there was the constant risk for ieds. My brother was 11b so he cleared buildings in Baghdad- each got out after 1 tour. I sat 2 tours in a/c making sure people got paid. We got hit with idf regularly (weekly + whenever it was cloudy... got predictable)

The infantry spend quite some time outside the wore, I assure you

HM3 Here. We see combat.

The first thing you need to ascertain is "Exactly why do you want to experience 'combat' ?"

And just what does "combat" mean? For me, having stuff blow up around me was really sufficient -- I never got a chance to cruise the rain forests looking for folks to fire back at and, in truth, I wasn't sorry about that.

On the other hand, a bunch of beyond-the-wire types came back vertical because we kept the stuff running that allowed them to call for fire support and extraction. (And some other stiffs kept the stuff running that actually provided fire support and extraction.)

Too many first-person-shooter video games without second-person-shooting-back-with-live-rounds in my not even slightly humble opinion.

Pretty Safe Assessment! but we will have to see what our Army and Marine Comrades have to say.

PO1 Croser,
I am a retired ISC and saw a lot of combat. As a forward deployed Human Intell guy there are many times collecting intel led to combat situations. Being fired on and returning fire is not rate controlled. In fact, the very examples you used in your question are likely to see combat! By the way, there are many in the US Navy who proudly wear the CAR. There are many more who have died in action. Safe in the rear with the gear - not so. Bases are attacked all the time if you are in country you are a target. Please don't promise the new recruits unicorns and rainbows - the military is still the warfighting arm of the US Government!

I saw a shitload of combat and I was a Personnel Sgt for one deployment (Afghanistan) and a Civil Affairs Sr NCO for three (Iraq twice, HOA).
I didn't go looking for it, although the units I supported often did. Combat came to me, and when it did, I gave the sons of bitches what for.
The Navy has an important job, primarily a strategic one. The service has many benefits compared to the other ones and as a recruiter, I'm sure you know how to identify that lead's interests and preferences. The Navy is great for seeing the world, getting practical technical skills, and so much more. If you want to go door kicking or flushing terrorist out of caves, the Navy isn't for you.

More of us see it than you think. And less of us talk about it.


Oh, and stop lying to applicants. You do a disservice to all of us, and we don't appreciate. Either do your job correctly and well on your own merits, or go tell your command you're a turd and need to go back to your parents.

In the old days of conventional wars where there were front lines and rear areas and such I guess one could say few folks actually ever saw combat. But even in World War 2 there were moments where every swinging individual who could carry a rifle was pushed into the line (the Ardennes immediately comes to mind but there are some others).

Since World War 2 we've been in conflicts where there were no true rear areas - think of Tet where the entire country seemed to blow up in our faces and clerk typists and all sorts of Rear Echelon Individuals picked up their personal rifles and fought. I think it's pretty much the same in the recent and current wars. Mortar rounds and IEDs don't show much discrimination by MOS - there really isn't a "rear area."

Maybe some folks and MOS' are more likely to see combat than others and some places are more likely to be hotter than others - but I wouldn't try to sell anyone a bill of goods that they're going to be safe and sound while others are taking the risks. Even if it was true - my own take is the military doesn't really need folks with that attitude - any branch.