Posted on May 6, 2014
Should veteran status be reserved for those who have deployed?
226K
3.94K
1K
429
428
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 >1 y ago
Responses: 678
5
5
0
NO! YES! (you ask the question differently twice in a row). Only about 7% of all living Americans have served in the military - they absolutely deserve veteran status and any benefit deserved! Due to oddball assignments and locations it was almost 20 yrs before I was able to deploy to a combat zone - I was injured multiple times in TRAINING to deploy - should I be denied veteran status? I don't think so. I've since deployed multiple times but so what?
(5)
(0)
CW4 Russ Hamilton (Ret)
Having read through many of the comments here there seems to be a division between those who "deployed" and those who didn't. First, what does "deployed" mean? An overseas tour? A tour near a combat zone? A tour in a combat zone? Getting mortared? Shot at? Wounded? Killed? MOS? Kosovo didn't count as a combat tour but in 2000 we were investigating "war crimes" and shit that happened after we arrived to keep the peace (LOL). I saw and heard the most godawful things there. Iraq in 2004 was still kind of like the wild west. AFG in 2013 was, well, AFG. Most of us want the opportunity to test our skills but be careful what you wish for. I've seen things I will never unsee. I've seen careers destroyed because someone made a bad decision. Commanders who've gone absolutely bonkers. My deployments changed me permanently and not for the better in my opinion. I digress.
Stateside guys who supported us were invaluable. Period. Deployed near a combat zone? Like the guys who stayed in Kuwait while we were in Irad? Should they count? If it weren't for them we likely wouldn't have gotten in and out effectively, no supply trains, we'd have been hurting. What about those in a combat zone who never left "the wire?" Should they be discounted? Did they not provide a necessary service while still at risk? Everyone contributes regardless of where they are (unless they're in Leavenworth maybe). I've been mortared, rocketed, shot at and IED'd (somehow unscathed but a sniper came within an inch of blowing my brains out). I was in MI - not combat arms but I was outside the wire plenty. We had four man teams plus an interpreter running around Baghdad in two hummers - a driver and a TC with no security element (or crew served weapon). The infantry guys thought we were out of our minds but we had to make do. I saw cooks and admin clerks driving for security convoys day in and day out - quite possibly the most dangerous job in any modern combat zone. So MOS doesn't really matter either. Personally, I hated getting mortared more than anything - I'm talking when they're close, not on the other side of the base or camp and about 15 -20 are dropping all around you. Bottom line: there's a legal definition of a "veteran" - I think we should stick to that. Don't forget: Be careful what you wish for.
Stateside guys who supported us were invaluable. Period. Deployed near a combat zone? Like the guys who stayed in Kuwait while we were in Irad? Should they count? If it weren't for them we likely wouldn't have gotten in and out effectively, no supply trains, we'd have been hurting. What about those in a combat zone who never left "the wire?" Should they be discounted? Did they not provide a necessary service while still at risk? Everyone contributes regardless of where they are (unless they're in Leavenworth maybe). I've been mortared, rocketed, shot at and IED'd (somehow unscathed but a sniper came within an inch of blowing my brains out). I was in MI - not combat arms but I was outside the wire plenty. We had four man teams plus an interpreter running around Baghdad in two hummers - a driver and a TC with no security element (or crew served weapon). The infantry guys thought we were out of our minds but we had to make do. I saw cooks and admin clerks driving for security convoys day in and day out - quite possibly the most dangerous job in any modern combat zone. So MOS doesn't really matter either. Personally, I hated getting mortared more than anything - I'm talking when they're close, not on the other side of the base or camp and about 15 -20 are dropping all around you. Bottom line: there's a legal definition of a "veteran" - I think we should stick to that. Don't forget: Be careful what you wish for.
(2)
(0)
5
5
0
What if you served during peace time or never saw combat- even while deployed? I was in non-combat job (Signal Corps- 25L). The combat guys call us "POG's", like we were insignificant.
I may not have real combat experience, but I served and I did my job. I think "Veteran" is what we all are- those of us who served our bit honorably, with pride. I have nothing but respect and admiration for the Infantry guys and other combat MOS's, but they couldn't do their job without us doing ours. We were all a team with many working parts. I love the Army. Miss it every day. I AM A VETERAN.
I may not have real combat experience, but I served and I did my job. I think "Veteran" is what we all are- those of us who served our bit honorably, with pride. I have nothing but respect and admiration for the Infantry guys and other combat MOS's, but they couldn't do their job without us doing ours. We were all a team with many working parts. I love the Army. Miss it every day. I AM A VETERAN.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
5
5
0
Legally if you spent 180 days on active duty you are a veteran. For me if you served honorably but never made the 180 days I will still call you a veteran and thank you for your service because you raised your hand and took the same oath as I did. Deployments have zero to do with veterans status. Otherwise people will ask was yours a contingency or combat deployment? Not combat? Not a veteran. Or you served in a combat zone but did you engage the enemy? No? Not a veteran. I could go on but you get the point. You served. You know what you did. Hold your head high thank you for your service and carry on.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
There but for the grace of God and the Sec Def's whims go I . . . . . If you wore that uniform with honor you are indeed a Veteran . . . . IMHO.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
I don't know how and why thus is or has been coming up and I don't know the legal definition nor do I care. The simply fact to me is if a person volunteered or in earlier cases was drafted and served they are a veteran
(5)
(0)
SgtMaj Anthony Goss
(Cont) I'm sure there will be the discussion about whether one served honorably or not which is something I can understand. But to try and make a distinction between someone the went to combat and someone that didn't the defining factor is wrong. Most of those that might think that way because too many have been in and all they know is combat. So what are you going to to do about those that served during non combat years? So before someone higher up even starts to get an idea like they usually do, I say squash the question, a veteran is a veteran period.
(1)
(0)
5
5
0
In my 20 years in the Marines, I never deployed to a combat zone. However, I was on recruiting duty, and I swear that 3 years took 15 off my life. I think that might qualify.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
No if you serve, you serve. My opinion is any thing other than dishonorable warrants veteran status. U volunteered! It's no ones fault you never deployed. I'm combat vet and I dont think any less of anyone that ever seen battle
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
I'm in the Army Guard and have done 6 years, just re-up'd and I believe anyone who has served and done their service to our country in any branch of the military is deemed a veteran. Just because you haven't been deployed over seas and been in combat doesn't make you any less of a veteran. A lot of military members who deploy don't even see combat. In the end we all served and would lay down our life if need be for the country we love so in my opinion, you earned veteran status.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
I served 22 years in the guard. In that 22 years I had 13 years of active duty, which included 7 consecutive years of title 10 duty. I was on Desert Fix orders during Desert Shield, my duty station was in Conus. Didn't deploy. I have been to both Germany and Korea on TDY orders. I have not been in a war zone, but don't you dare tell me I'm not a veteran.
(5)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google