Posted on May 6, 2014
Should veteran status be reserved for those who have deployed?
221K
3.94K
1K
430
429
1
This one has come up a lot in conversations with my peers and Soldiers: Should you be allowed to claim veterans status if you have never deployed?
Personally, I'm an ROTC graduate who chose to go straight into the ARNG in 2011, knowing full well that my chances to deploy would be next to none with the changing op tempo. Realistically, had I been actively searching out a deployment the whole time, I still may not have gotten one. I'm sure there are Soldiers out there who served honorably in a reserve component without deploying, despite their best efforts. So, for example, should a Soldier who completed basic training, had a clean service record, excelled in their peer group, but ultimately served 10 years as a reservist with no deployment and less than 180 days on non-ADT active service be prevented from calling themselves a veteran?
I have my own thoughts, but I'm more interesting in hearing your opinions. For clarification, I'm speaking more towards the legal definition of veterans status - even if the laws were changed here, there would still be an immense difference between a legal veteran and a legal veteran with several deployments, combat experience, decades on active duty, or a combination of all three.
Personally, I'm an ROTC graduate who chose to go straight into the ARNG in 2011, knowing full well that my chances to deploy would be next to none with the changing op tempo. Realistically, had I been actively searching out a deployment the whole time, I still may not have gotten one. I'm sure there are Soldiers out there who served honorably in a reserve component without deploying, despite their best efforts. So, for example, should a Soldier who completed basic training, had a clean service record, excelled in their peer group, but ultimately served 10 years as a reservist with no deployment and less than 180 days on non-ADT active service be prevented from calling themselves a veteran?
I have my own thoughts, but I'm more interesting in hearing your opinions. For clarification, I'm speaking more towards the legal definition of veterans status - even if the laws were changed here, there would still be an immense difference between a legal veteran and a legal veteran with several deployments, combat experience, decades on active duty, or a combination of all three.
Reserves
Army National Guard
Deployment
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 678
1
1
0
Ok so my father was a E5 Sgt if you don't know that's a Sargent in the USMC he never diploid he was 4 days out then the war ended. The point is at any moment things can change he singed the doted line to give his life for HIS country there for he has earned the right to be called a veteran.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
From a reservist stand point, I can say the title of veteran is a legal title associated with benefits. I was not awarded veteran status until my first deployment and I had already served 8 years in the USMCR before joining the USAR.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I retired with only 2 deployments but I still believe that anyone how serves/served is a veteran. They raised their right hand and took the oath to deploy if needed, that's my definition. A fire extinguisher is still a safety device even if it isn't used.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
I served on active duty for 9 years, and I did a year in the reserves after. I hated the reserves after active duty. I was a grunt, and I did 4 tours overseas. I saw real action on two of those tours. I am a combat veteran. I'm a teacher now. Today, one of my students said she doesn't recognize her father, a former sailor, as a veteran, because "he didn't do anything." Maybe she's right, but my response was this. Maybe he never did anything, but he volunteered to do things. He signed up and agreed to do things if he needed to. He would have, if he needed to. He still put on the uniform, and he still served.
If you wore the uniform, you're a vet. Sure, some experiences are different, but we all served in some capacity, and we all agreed to go.
If you wore the uniform, you're a vet. Sure, some experiences are different, but we all served in some capacity, and we all agreed to go.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
MT1(SS) if you filled out the check for up to and including your life and completed your duty Honorably you are a veteran. To say because I never saw combat because I did my time between Nam and the Gulf war when I made 9 deterant patrols onboard two diferent boomer subs is ridiculous.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
And what about veterans like me who served active duty combat arms for 6 years and never deployed? Why is this even a question? If you served honorably you are a veteran. It shouldn't matter WHERE you served. Honorable service (in MY opinion) means you were MOS qualified, meaning you made it through Basic and AIT, and served in a unit. I have no idea what regulations say, but if you earned a GCM, I would think you qualify for veteran status, unless you totally screwed up after earning the GCM. Again, no idea what the regs say. If you fulfilled your contract and were discharged honorably, welcome to veteran status.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
A vet is definitely a vet. I served in the Army Security Agency on active duty from 1955 to 1958, was tranferred to inactive status in 1958 after serving over two years in the old Pacific Theater and called up one day in 1963 before being Honorably Discharged. The Cold War may not have had any combat zones but those of us who served in some of the more-or-less clandestine branches of the services are still veterans. We signed on the line, did our jobs in total silence, and served our country!
(1)
(0)
SP5 David Cox
II worked with your successors - a fine, dedicated group. They were all INSCOM by the time I got there, but there were some old ASA vets still around. I was at Field Station Berlin. I disagree that the Cold War did not have any combat zones - I think Korea and Vietnam were both Cold War battles, as well as many smaller fights all around the world - for instance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_D._Nicholson
Arthur D. Nicholson - Wikipedia
Arthur D. Nicholson (7 June 1947 – 24 March 1985) was a United States Army military intelligence officer shot by a Soviet sentry while engaged in intelligence-gathering activities as part of an authorized Military Liaison Mission which operated under reciprocal U.S. - Soviet authority. Military Liaison Missions were ostensibly liaisons between the British, French and U.S. forces and the Group of Soviet Forces in Germany (East Germany), but...
(0)
(0)
SPC David Whitney
If the list would ever be published and it won't, the world would be surprised to know that we have lost similar people every year, including all of the Cold War years, in history.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
If you were in .. you are a vet. Period.
We may want to draw a line as to "Deployed" and "Combat".
But a Vet is a Vet is a Vet.
Thank you for your service.
We may want to draw a line as to "Deployed" and "Combat".
But a Vet is a Vet is a Vet.
Thank you for your service.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
In my opinion if you served honorably and completed your enlistment deployed or not you still are a veteran of course there is always exceptions to every rule.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google