Posted on Dec 31, 2018
The vast majority of people who deploy to a combat zone end up in no real danger during their tour -- do you agree or disagree?
12K
143
47
30
30
0
I was debating this topic with an old friend who was in the Navy -- we both deployed at various times in support of OIF. He made the argument that basically, a tiny fraction of people who deployed (Iraq/Afgh) end up in situations that are legitimately dangerous. He wasn't criticizing specific MOS's or people who don't leave the wire -- he was just arguing the point that he didn't think there was any real danger for most people over there. For example, if you are on a huge FOB and never leave, he was asking..."What's the actual danger you are in?" -- and we know there's subjectivity with this. For example, if you are on that huge FOB that's basically the size of a city, and it gets hit one time per year by 1 mortar round, does that really constitute being in danger? The issue also isn't MOS-specific, because there are plenty of combat branch people who get put on battalion/brigade staffs that never left the wire either. So I was curious to ask the RP community what everyone's thoughts on this topic are, and how you would think about that.
Posted in these groups: 
Deployment
Iraq
Afghanistan
Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) - Afghanistan
Deployment Iraq Afghanistan Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) - Afghanistan
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 29
3
3
0
I get what your buddy was saying. I think he was referring to enemy danger, not necessarily the inherent danger that comes with operating in that environment. While the majority of service members deployed to Iraq (I never made it to Afghanistan) were exposed to some level of IDF, I'd concur with your friend that a very small portion were actually in a direct combat situation. I did 3 tours in Iraq, (2xCombat Rolls, 1xStaff) and in that I only saw direct action 5 times, that's over 900 days in a combat environment with only about 10hrs of enemy action. But, my staff deployment was to Basra, and if you ever made it there you get a whole new appreciation for the CRAM's and the protection they provide!
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Danger is retaliative. During my deployments there was never a real threat of enemy fire, but the threat of a mass casualty was always there from fire or flooding. Danger doesn't always come from outside the wire...
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
Not to minimize anything people have faced, but there are always different kinds of danger. On a small boat station or a ship there is danger from the sea. If you have ever been out in a major storm, you'll recognize how very real that was. For instance Typhoon Cobra in WWII decimated Halsey's fleet, sinking three ships, severely damaged 26, and took the lives of over 700 men. How many people died in the line of duty in the cold war? How many aircrews died in routine training missions or search and rescue or other humanitarian missions? At the risk of sounding melodramatic, danger has many faces, and as service men and women, we face most of them at one time or another.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I remember when Clinton dragged us into the Balkans mess, and then tried to get DoD to rule that the pilots staging out of Italy didn't qualify for combat pay, because they weren't bunking under fire.
There are degrees of threat, but any time you're in an area where the locals consider whacking you to be a morally righteous/patriotically dutiful act -- yeah, you're at risk, and should get the pay, recognition, etc for it.
There are degrees of threat, but any time you're in an area where the locals consider whacking you to be a morally righteous/patriotically dutiful act -- yeah, you're at risk, and should get the pay, recognition, etc for it.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I agree, seeing as only one percent of the Army is infantry or combat arms, most of the support elements are on airfields and large FOBs. But isn't that the role? Were taught to stay in our lanes. If your job is to be a bullet sponge then your going out looking for the fight. If your in S6 on a FOB your not going to be seeing action. It's not wrong, support is vital. It's just the way the game is played. I do agree.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I can agree with that.............I can't speak for other branches, but I figure out of all the MOS in the Army, the majority are non combat, inside the wire type of jobs. All depends on the location, they may receive IDF on the camp from time to time or not at all, but that's not the same danger an infantry, engineer, transportation personnel may face outside the wire....... But then again, it all depends on the mission the unit is tasked with. Each deployment is different.........
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I was on Victory base complex in Baghdad we had several mortar attacks while I was there where several US Service Members and Iraqi soldiers were injured. We also had I think about 6 rocket attacks during that time I but no casualties or injuries from those attacks. most every night you would heard automatic weapons fire but that was usually due to soccer tournaments going on and so it was almost always listed celebratory gun fire.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Having spent time on Marez/Diamondback FOBs which were only separated by a 4 lane street of Mosul Iraq. I would say that while yes its true that a large portion of soldiers see little if any time outside the perimeter there was a element of danger on a daily basis for the personnel at the gates who faced IEDs and harrassing small arms fire . In 2006-07 rockets and mortar attacks targeting living areas and fuel points were a weekly and sometimes daily event. FOB Marez was also the site of the DFAC suicide vest in 2004. In all I agree that as far as large FOBs are concerned, the danger is remote for most occupants but, its still present.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
HIGHLY agree... my deployment I was convoy security... an MP's job. National Guard was tasked with the mission because AD MP's were tired of doing it. Most dangerous job in Iraq (so we were told) in 08-09
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Used to be that was the way it was, always more REMFs supporting operations than actual troops on the line, so a lot of troops never may never have even hear a shot fired
Since Vietnam and the rise of guerilla warfare it often depends on where you are deployed and what kind of operations you are involved in. Now days, even rear echelons units/bases can come under attach because our current enemy is not fighting an Army (generically speaking), they are fighting a nation and a way of life they do not agree with and are willing to do whatever it takes to change or destroy them.
Since Vietnam and the rise of guerilla warfare it often depends on where you are deployed and what kind of operations you are involved in. Now days, even rear echelons units/bases can come under attach because our current enemy is not fighting an Army (generically speaking), they are fighting a nation and a way of life they do not agree with and are willing to do whatever it takes to change or destroy them.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google