Should veteran status be reserved for those who have deployed?

6 of us that graduated from a small rural high school entered service. 4 of us were sent to Vietnam. One came home in a box, one spent 4 months in the Japan hospital. Then sent home. One was sent to Reed Army hospital in medical field for his entire enlistment. One female did not leave the states either. They’re just as much a veteran than any of us.

I say anyone that served got the Honorable discharge DD214 & or NGB-22 with A Honorable discharge. and still serving as A VETERAN with the UNIT & DIVISION they served with. the only benifits I get for my 6 years active with the ARMY NATIONAL GUARD is VETERAN REG. PLATES on my CARS & VETERAN on my state Drivers LIC. no military ID have to show my DD 214 to get on base for the change of command ceremony's I do as SGT AT ARMS.

Only about 10% of uniformed military of all types serve in combat. Those deployed in combat zones or remote places would NEVER be successful if not for all the support the ~90% provides that is necessary for their survival. There aren't any non-vets or almost-vets or kinda-vets.

I do believe that there should be a distinction between military members who actually spent time in a combat zone and those that never did. I run into too many vets who are wearing "Vietnam Veteran" caps but after talking with them they tell me they served in Germany or elsewhere during the Vietnam Era. I am a wheelchair bound Vietnam veteran who suddenly became disabled in 1999 from my exposure to Agent Orange and Pesticides while serving for 1 1/2 years as a Dog Handler in South Vietnam. I did see some combat and lost two of my dogs in combat. I spent years prior to actually becoming physically ill, suffering from severe PTSD and always fighting to keep things locked up so I could hang onto jobs and pursue my career and education, and keep my marriage a happy one.
This is why I believe there should be different classifications. I feel that we should be given priority in VA services and care. I do not take anything away from those who did serve, but I am not comfortable when I run into the "combat illusionists."
Thank you and God bless all.

yes

Because the question is asked one way in the title and another way in the text, I can’t just say yes or no, so I will say this: anyone who volunteered to serve in the military, completed their indoctrination training, and served honorably is undeniably a veteran, no matter where they were or were not sent (which is a function of when they served, geopolitics at the time, their branch and specialty, how long they served, and a number of other factors that make it often completely beyond their control whether or not they ultimately deploy, where, in what capacity, for how long, etc.). Of course, in many ways, it matters a great deal where and how any individual veteran served, and it’s lame, at best, dishonest at worst, for those who never deployed to act like GI Joe, but anyone who stood up and volunteered to wear the uniform and held true to their oath to support and defend the Constitution absolutely has every right to be called a veteran, regardless of the orders they may or may not have received while in uniform.

We all signed the dotted line and took the risk that at any time we could lose our lives. I served for 13 yrs and while I was never deployed I did have one of the few pease time missions there are in the Army. I was in EOD. Every day we would response as the bomb squad for 2 to 3 states in our area that did not have their own bomb squad. We responded to old ordnance, IEDs, and anything at all they needed help with that might explode. We also got called to work with the Secret Service for anyone who got their protection. So I put my life on the line every day for my countrymen. But I think anyone who wore the uniform took that risk. Any day any of us could have picked up our rifles and gone over seas to fight. We all deserve the right to say we are veterans. There are very few of us in the USA willing to even risk doing that. I think it is bad enough that many have quilt because they didn’t deploy and didn’t have it as bad as those who did but ultimately that is not our fault. It takes and army to keep a deployed army moving!

This is a really weird question. Veteran status is based on whether you have served, not whether you have deployed. If veteran status is based on whether you deployed or not, will it need to be an actual combat deployment, and not just deploying to Kuwait, Germany, etc. for training? And does the length of the deployment matter? Can you really count a 3 or 6-month deployment when I've had the joy of 12 and 15-month deployments? You can really go down the rabbit hole once you start overanalyzing things. So, no. Veteran status shouldn't be connected to any deployments. If you served, then you're a veteran.

No, we all signed the same dotted line, took the same oath and accepted the same risks. Whether we served in combat is pretty much the luck of the draw.

A couple of personal examples. I signed up to the USCG in 1972, pretty much based on my dad's experience in WWII, (a story for another day). A large portion of my recruit company went over, I was held over for "A" school, (ET), because a basically maxed out the sections of the Naval Battery that pertained to ETs. On completing ET"A" school, close to half my class went there, I was sent to class C school as I graduated number 2 in my class. After that I was sent to Alaska and by the time I rotated from there Vietnam was drawing down and not many went over there.

Later on I spent time on small boat stations and a ship, both carrying their own risks. Operating in heavy surf in a small boat. (44' then 47' now), will always carry risks. Approaching and boarding potential drug or other smugglers and bad actors an entirely different set, as does running hundreds of miles into a hurricane strength storm at maximum possible speed because someone is in distress and you're the closest asset able to respond in that weather.

My stepson was an sensor operator on USCG Aircraft, and they often supported us and in some pretty snotty weather. Different risks, but still risks. My point is this deployed or not, we all place our lives on the line, even if we never do anything but train, train, train. Heck a local ROTC lost a member in a training accident here just a couple of weeks ago. Three Army aviators died on a training mission just the other day, and an F-35 pilot had to eject in Alaska just about a week ago.

What exactly do you mean by deployed?