5
5
0
My dates of service are 9/2009 to 12/2013. I was a combat medic in the 101st Airborne. I deployed twice to Afghanistan. A year long one
and a 9 month one. When I went to Penn State to begin college in 2014, I joined the school veterans organization and noticed the most
strange thing. It was filled with mostly active duty marine veterans who served the same time as me, but most never did a combat deployment
. Only two or three of them did a short single 6 month afghanistan deployment. Everyone else (and the three marine combat veterans) spent
the majority of their enlistments going around the world on the boat trips, "deploying" to safe places like Guam, embassy guard, etc.... I was shocked because
almost every Army veteran I come across from my time period has done at least a year long combat deployment, though a lot of Army veterans similair to me
have done two. By the numbers, does being a marine make you less likely to deploy to combat than a soldier? I tried researching this
information but found no data. I am asking because a young family member is interested in joining the military, and I was going to suggest
the Marines because from my observations there is a less chance to see combat, and you get to see the world (something you dont really do in the Army,
you just train and deploy to combat). Before I give him or his parents false information, I just wanted to find data on the topic.
and a 9 month one. When I went to Penn State to begin college in 2014, I joined the school veterans organization and noticed the most
strange thing. It was filled with mostly active duty marine veterans who served the same time as me, but most never did a combat deployment
. Only two or three of them did a short single 6 month afghanistan deployment. Everyone else (and the three marine combat veterans) spent
the majority of their enlistments going around the world on the boat trips, "deploying" to safe places like Guam, embassy guard, etc.... I was shocked because
almost every Army veteran I come across from my time period has done at least a year long combat deployment, though a lot of Army veterans similair to me
have done two. By the numbers, does being a marine make you less likely to deploy to combat than a soldier? I tried researching this
information but found no data. I am asking because a young family member is interested in joining the military, and I was going to suggest
the Marines because from my observations there is a less chance to see combat, and you get to see the world (something you dont really do in the Army,
you just train and deploy to combat). Before I give him or his parents false information, I just wanted to find data on the topic.
Posted in these groups: 
Deployment
Deployment
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 17
6
6
0
Couple things.
Size of the force - Active Army is like 450,000 people. Active Corps is...much smaller.
Purpose of force - Marines are for bridging the gap between the Army and Navy, not an occupation force. The Army is the LAND component of the Defense force, so we hold, occupy, and fight primarily on LAND. Any maritime or air ops are in support of LAND ops. Marines fill the gap, and provide extra invasion force. They also have their specialty assignments like the embassies worldwide - that's a Marine only thing - there's many en embassy and consulate and at least 6-7 Marines at each.
So likely the Army deploys more to "combat" because it's bigger and the type of deployments. If it was a war on a country with a major coastline - there'd probably be a much bigger Marine presence.
Size of the force - Active Army is like 450,000 people. Active Corps is...much smaller.
Purpose of force - Marines are for bridging the gap between the Army and Navy, not an occupation force. The Army is the LAND component of the Defense force, so we hold, occupy, and fight primarily on LAND. Any maritime or air ops are in support of LAND ops. Marines fill the gap, and provide extra invasion force. They also have their specialty assignments like the embassies worldwide - that's a Marine only thing - there's many en embassy and consulate and at least 6-7 Marines at each.
So likely the Army deploys more to "combat" because it's bigger and the type of deployments. If it was a war on a country with a major coastline - there'd probably be a much bigger Marine presence.
(6)
(0)
3
3
0
OK, how many of those Army Veterans landed in Afghanistan or Iraq in a Support or Combat Support role and how many served with Combat Units. Since the Navy provides that support for the Marines, a lot smaller footprint. I do know that Marine Combat deployments are shorter than the Army's. As you pointed out, a lot of Marine combat power is tied up in the seven (?) MEU that rotate in and out of floats their entire careers. Having that readily available combat power out there is a decision way over my pay grade, but I don't disagree with it.
One of the other things to look at is that certain Army Units deploy a lot more often than most, the 101st, 82nd, 25th, and 10th Mountain off the top of may head. Probably not going to see 1st Cav in Afghanistan or Iraq these days.
One of the other things to look at is that certain Army Units deploy a lot more often than most, the 101st, 82nd, 25th, and 10th Mountain off the top of may head. Probably not going to see 1st Cav in Afghanistan or Iraq these days.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
It’s all relative and attempting to find a ratio or formula is an impossible task.
I was in 2001-2012 and saw many times that Marines would be on 7 month on 7 month off rotations their whole 4 years. That was all of Camp Lejuene 2003-2008. Dwell time was eventually extended to 12 months but that’s still a short amount of time. Other units would be extended from 6 months to 9 on their deployments. Ground side support Marines would end up doing 15 month deployments due to shortages in their job field.
If someone is picking a branch it should be about the culture of that Military Branch. Wartime and deployment rotations are impossible to predict.
I was in 2001-2012 and saw many times that Marines would be on 7 month on 7 month off rotations their whole 4 years. That was all of Camp Lejuene 2003-2008. Dwell time was eventually extended to 12 months but that’s still a short amount of time. Other units would be extended from 6 months to 9 on their deployments. Ground side support Marines would end up doing 15 month deployments due to shortages in their job field.
If someone is picking a branch it should be about the culture of that Military Branch. Wartime and deployment rotations are impossible to predict.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
There's Sunny Dave running down the U.S.M.C. again. I see you everywhere with the same disrespectful crap. You have a real inferiority complex dude.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Apples and Oranges- there were more army folks in the Pacific in WWII than USMC. Some Army units deployed 7-9 times, many USMC3-4.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
That we have been engaged in combat operations for 20years (or thereabouts), should give you pause. I served from Aug of 81 'til Aug of 84. There were no active combat operations, anywhere. It was understood, back then, that Marines would be used as invasion forces with the Army being brought in after, to maintain the fight. To answer your question, maybe that thinking still applies.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
SGT Suraj Dave I don’t think you can find data that will back up your hypothesis. Taking the small group that happens to not have combat deployment during your timeframe is as much a coincidence as statistics go. I’d just go with what you know about your service. It really depends on what your young friend may want to do. I know the Army being the largest service has better opportunity for faster promotions in the enlisted ranks. Coast Guard and Marines being the smallest have to outlast their peers awaiting their departure in order to get chances for “open” positions.
(2)
(0)
SGT Suraj Dave
Im willing to accept the data even if it doesn't fit my hypothesis, problem is I cant find the data. My goal is to be truthful, not exactly to prove one point or another. Thanks for your response.
(1)
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
SGT Suraj Dave I agree with some of what LTC John Mohor says. You go cross eyed trying to find data that doesn't exist. Anecdotally I would say that OIF and OND were done in 2010. Afghanistan was a coalition fight. The Marines had a whole Regional Command (South East). They had a MAGTF because it was a day that ends in y, but the ground component was a MEU if I remember my time in ISAF HQ in 2011. In that same time the US surge was a joint effort, but when fighting a ground war in a land locked country, it was an Army heavy deal. The 2009-2014 time frame was probably leaner for deployments for the Marine Corps. The Marine Corps role in Iraq was much bigger, essentially MEF centric MAGTF. The MEU mission was always mostly afloat and came off a menu of like 10 different missions ranging from NEO to Amphibious Assault. There were I believe 2-3 BPTadditional areas they trained O/O that enabled them to be a MEU SOC, or Special Operations Capable. After 2011, the Army largely focused on Afghanistan, then kicked out DIY SFABs (limited advise and assist) until SFaBs came on line. The OIR mission was mostly a BCT and SOF with enablers with one foot in Kuwait and one in Iraq/Syria.
The Marines went back to theater security cooperation and deterrence, with a smaller throughput in Afghanistan. My glib analysis. Before someone puts their virtual foot on my neck, this was not all inclusive, hence the term anecdotal. Generally, this is what happened.
As far as advising family, you know the deal. You write a blank check. You may see nothing more dangerous than Fayetteville on a Friday night or the Commissary on payday, then by the fickle finger of fate, you may deploy five or six times To a combat theater to be named later. No way of telling.
I think it is far better to match the recruit up with the right branch. Fit is one thing I learned in my civilian life. Not matter how cool the company or flashy the brochure, the more you don't fit, the worse it will be for everyone until you quit, or they fire you. And the worse it will be for the next guy you and onboard when word gets out.
The Marines went back to theater security cooperation and deterrence, with a smaller throughput in Afghanistan. My glib analysis. Before someone puts their virtual foot on my neck, this was not all inclusive, hence the term anecdotal. Generally, this is what happened.
As far as advising family, you know the deal. You write a blank check. You may see nothing more dangerous than Fayetteville on a Friday night or the Commissary on payday, then by the fickle finger of fate, you may deploy five or six times To a combat theater to be named later. No way of telling.
I think it is far better to match the recruit up with the right branch. Fit is one thing I learned in my civilian life. Not matter how cool the company or flashy the brochure, the more you don't fit, the worse it will be for everyone until you quit, or they fire you. And the worse it will be for the next guy you and onboard when word gets out.
(1)
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
SGT Suraj Dave you are trying to do an honorable thing. Just stick to what you know. You know deployments are a crap shoot. Straight up. You might hit none ro you might hit 5 or 6.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I was Air Force and deployed 5 times in my first six years and the. Got stationed in AK and didn’t deploy anymore. I think a lot has to do with specialty and location, at least in the Air Force.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
This guy is just a Facebook troll with a inferiority complex. He goes by Sunny Dave or Sunny Dee. He pops up on Different Vet pages with this same mess each time. I'm not sure what his deal is but every time it's the same post trying to make a point that he thinks Marines don't fight and die in war. He's a disrespectful prick and nothing more.
(1)
(0)
SGT Suraj Dave
I apologize deeply for hurting your feelings. Im sure there is someone who you can complain to if you dig deep enough. Im here confirming data which I suspected. My disposition seems to be correct from the responses. I have never said marines don't fight and die in war. What I have said it they are less likely to go to begin with in our era of GWOT, as is echoed in the comments below. From our previous exchanges, I am not the disrespectful one. You are the one who curses and threatens me. Last time you and I conversed you implied you would resort to violence against me if I ever visited Louisiana. I haven't done any such thing to you. I have not threatened or cursed at you. Please give everyone the facts and not just your single sided stories. In those discussions which you are hurt about, it is all in good fun. At the end of the day, all of us signed a blank check and could go anywhere at anytime if we are commanded. No one has threatened violence or attempted to curse me out over this except you. It leads me to believe you may have an inferiority complex, but I don't know you well so I cant make that judgment.
Good luck
Good luck
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Guys he's not really interested in a answer to his question. He was known as Sunny Dave before. He pops up on Different Vet pages from time to time. He's always got the same theme which is to try to prove his opinion that The U.S.M.C gets all the glory while the Army does all the work. He's got a serious inferiority complex going on. He's stuff usually crosses the line from just good natured interservice rivalry into the disrespectful range.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google