What's in your DD 214: Is the Senator a "Combat" Veteran?

I did not know that coming under fire was a requirement for being a "combat" veteran. I guess all those pilots who bombed sites in Iraq and Afghanistan and did not come under fire do not get credit for combat sorties. From my understanding as long as you served or conducted operations in the AOR that is declared a combat zone you are then entitled to the combat veteran moniker. Personally you are veteran that served in support of or in combat.

This is a matter of the Liberal media going after a Republican who spanked their candidate.

Brian Williams can say he's a combat veteran... But Joni Ernst can't?!

Stop the world, I want to get off.

She served in an area that had been designated a combat zone. What else would she call herself? She's never inflated her contribution, and in fact has made a point of stating what she did and didn't do?

I think those that would question her service and her qualification as a combat vet don't understand what it means. If I was her - or any SM in the same situation, I'd be insulted.

If she's not a combat vet, then what else needs to happen before she is? Come under fire? How close do the bullets need to come? Does she need to be in firefight? Does she have to take cover?

Serving in a combat zone makes one a combat vet. My 2 cents.

I agree, MAJ (Join to see). She served in a combat zone, and that makes her a "combat veteran" in my book. Anybody who wants the Senator to have been in a firefight to be a combat veteran is off base and out of line. See this article, which is linked from a couple discussion threads on RallyPoint:

http://taskandpurpose.com/dangerous-perception-hurting-veterans-community/

She was in Iraq in '03-'04, she is a combat veteran whether she took fire or returned fire, we were still conducting combat operations and she was present during this time, case closed!

My question is why have we seen a raise in questions here on Rallypoint about who is and who isn't a combat Veteran. Did you serve in support of operations in and around Iraq and/or Afghanistan on or after 9/11? Then yes you are a combat Veteran. The Senator has never made false claims of holding certain awards or being involved in things such as having a helicopter shot down with her in it. Sure, during Vietnam more Soldiers saw direct enemy contact and maybe that is why the Vietnam Veteran mentioned in the articles made his comments. But, just because you aren't walking around with a PH or whatever doesn't mean you aren't a combat Veteran.

The other reason I find this type of thing as bad is because we, as Veterans, shouldn't be looking for more reasons, more rules, more guidelines, to seperate us into sub groups. We already break ourselves down by branch, time frame in which we served, rank, MOS, OEF, OIF, those with multiple deployments, those with only 1 deployment, those with 0 deployments. At the end of the day, we all stood up, took up the pen and wrote a blank check up to the value of our lives.

Yeah I agree with a couple of people here that have stated" you served in a Presidential deemed combat zone" doesn't matter whether bullets flew or not. You where there. You have endured that heat, sand, SPIDERS, snakes, nationals, and the leaving of family. I am not down playing ANYTHING anyone else has suffered. I have friends that have been blown up, shot and have PTSD, and missing limbs. They are Combat veterans. They had the unfortunate reality of living there horrors. I have been deploy 4 time. Once with AC and 3 Guard. Been to Iraq Twice, Afghanistan, and Belgium. Where there firing. Once, Desert storm. Did I receive an injury, no. does that down play the role that I played, no. Was there a chance that I drove up on an IED. Possibly, was there a chance that I could have taken sniper fire, No. Does that down play the fact that one of the many, many mortar rounds that came in COULD have found it's mark, NO.

I went where I was told and done the mission. My units have been lucky. GOD was watching over us. I have been close as 200 m to mortar impacts. There have been convoys that losse several vehicles, and lots of personnel.

The way I see it. The grunts need beans and bullets. Weapons break down and they need parts. Air craft need fuel and parts, and people to fix them. If it was for those people in the rear areas to do these jobs the GRUNT would be screwed. They only would have what they carried and that is it. Leave the fight to go back and rearm and then back to take the same ground that they all ready had. SO there fore you where needed and done your service and made the mission a success!

Joni Ernst is a combat veteran, period, full stop. It’s really rich that a chickenhawk like Andrew Reinbach, writing for a fake-news rag like the Huffington Post, would have the gall to question that. I’d like to see Reinback pull convoy duty or guard duty in Iraq, otherwise he should keep his mouth shut.

I'm fairly liberal, served in a combat arms MOS and still thought the whole conversation was rather silly. She deployed to a war zone and fulfilled the duties asked of her by the Army, full stop. She is a combat veteran.

She served in a combat zone she's a Combat Veteran end of story. If she was claiming more than what she did then it would be a different case. I was on active duty during the first Gulf War but either through plain dumb luck or the grace of God I never made it out of country. She did and went into a combat zone. She honorably earned that claim of being a combat veteran.