Should every soldier be required to deploy?

I get the whole "I need a combat patch to feel worthy" argument, but is it really necessary? I think discussions like this one is the reason why some Army leaders have suggested removing the combat patch from Soldiers sleeves - as some have suggested it has created a sense of unworthiness for Soldiers who have never deployed and in some cases, has developed into an inferiority complex. If you joined the Army for the sake of deploying, in order to earn your patch, then you have volunteered for all the wrong reasons in my opinion. Besides, you are starting to see fewer and fewer Soldiers who are sporting a combat patch because many have either separated from the Army, or they have retired. Deployments are at a crawl and unless you belong to a special unit like SF, your chances of deploying are probably zero (at least under the current administration).

Being in the military comes with certain rights and responsibilities concurrent to the job. As discusseed earlier promotions could be based on deployments with any mos.If an individual knowingly enlists in the military they need to realize it's not a democracy. Deploying is part of the job like it or not,

For what? A combat patch? "experience"? There is no shame in sporting a "slick sleeve." Going to war shouldn't be the motivating factor for joining the Army. If it is, you are joining for all the wrong reasons. After serving two deployments to Iraq, I respect all Soldiers, whether they have deployed or not.

I read your post, I understand your positions, but would have to align my answer more with the latter part of what you have written. What I mean is, due to budget restraints, I don't think every soldier should be required to deploy. I'm *very* pro-Defense, but I think that deploying every soldier is too expensive, plain and simple. I have arguments against it, but if I start elaborating I'll get tangled up in words, so really I'd leave it at that. It's dry and boring, but it's about money that I don't feel deploying every soldier would be in Our (the United States') most beneficial interest.

Speaking for myself, my deployments were a high light of my career, I even volunteered to drive on a couple of convoys into Iraq. I trained as a Soldier for many years. I wanted to know if I had what it takes, not that I was looking for medals, I needed to know. That said should every Soldier be put into a combat zone? If there is no reason to put them in harms way, don't.

You or whom ever took a Oath and yes is my awnser

Absolutely not. Why add on this requirement? Essentially we are "deployed" to serve a mission anywhere we go and we know that dangers exist here and abroad. This is not needed as a requirement for a military career. To the most ambitious it may be an element of their diverse skill set that could be a factor in upper level promotions but should not be a requirement.

Only those personnel that are properly trained should go...i.e., those who are retired and CAN BE CALLED UP are no more qualified than a new two week old recruit. The situation dictates what and who should be deployed. That being said, if we have an all out War similar to the first and second and the country needs us, well then, all will go. But as a routine, no.

Hell yes, If you can't deploy who needs you taking up a slot.

Absolutely! As long as their is a war/conflict anywhere the United States is involved with should be mandatory for at least one tour. When I was in the Army, I worked for an E8, who was the biggest chicken shit on earth. Ray Lafavor wore two ribbons on his uniform, A Good Conduct and National Defense. While other enlisted members and myself wore numerous decorations on our uniforms as a result of the Vietnam War, Several experienced severe combat injuries. From time to time we sat around and spoke of our experiences in Nam and how injuries were sustained. The back yellow strip chicken shit totally disliked these conversation; although somewhere is claimed "Isaw the enemy", that was his booster. He was and is a coward and somehow managed to stay out of Vietnam and any other war/conflict. I was a Staff Sergeant and found it very hard to respect him period, and rightfully told him so. He was a hated (using the word loosly) man. In the office hung a picture of General Patton, who he claimed as "My Hero", well if his hero was alive he would have dragged is ass into comabt and whipped him across the forhead with his hand whip. For his transfer out of the command, a farwell party was given, out of 136 people, only 13 had signed up to attend the party until the Command Sergeant ZNajor made it a place of duty for all NCO'. Reluctenly, we attened and left as soon as the Commander presented him and a Army Commendation Medal. Former Senio NCO's were present with MSM's for their service. I had a windbreaker especially made for hi, in the colors of red, blue and yellow. Blue for the oceans he never crossed, Red for the blood he never shed and yellow, the reason why. However, as I was about to present it to him,another Senior NCO grabbed it out of my hands, and I was never able to make the presentation. He was and is a pitiful individual. Had he been sent into combat or at least to the country at war he may have had a different outlook and understanding of what combat is and been proud of his accomplishments and received some respect from his peers instead of being hated and referred to as chicken shit.u