What percent of service members see "action"?

[MethuenProgressive]

Probably should say 'combat' v 'action'. Is there any data on this? I'm not getting much help on this via Google.

[Divernan]

1. Used to be 1 out of 10.

But starting in Vietnam, and then especially in Iraq War I, there was an increasing understanding that being in country was to be at risk of being attacked. In the first Iraq war, a group of Army soldiers from the Greensburg, PA area were killed when a missile hit their dining hall. They were assigned to Quartermaster Corps (supplies), not Infantry. I recall this because my daughter (then a 2nd Lt. in Army Reserves) had been in training at Ft. Lee with some of the young women who were killed.

[benddem]

2. 1 in 10 or 11

but in Vietnam, the Gulf and the Iraq war non-combatants frequently see combat. Rocket attacks etc. I think it is much higher in Iraq as many drivers and personnel in the vehicle have been killed by IED's. Best way to check I guess is to see how many CIB's, (combat infantry badges) CMB's (combat medic badges) and other combat badges have been awarded. These are awarded to people who've been involved in combat..but I don't know where or if those figures are available.

[ThomWV]

3. Less than 1 in 10

And I managed to get my dumb ass shot 3 times in Viet Nam.

But ... truth is most guys never pull a triger.

[catnhatnh]

4. Actually-much less than one in ten......

....in the past.In US wars prior to Iraq the 1-10 tooth to tail ratio was accepted,for each combat stud, 9-10 guys guarded rear areas or worked in support roles.But this only applied to guys in "the zone"-add in folks garrisoned in Europe, Asian non-combat bases, and stateside and the ratio was lower....In Iraq we admit to about 150K troops in the zone out of 1.5 mil in the services and obviously many of those are "fobbits".But with the intro of Halliburton "support" and mercenary "security" pesonnel and I am betting almost a 40 % of our troops "rock and roll".About 4 times normal-and it scares me.....