If they didnt want to fight in combat situations, why did the soldiers join the US armed forces??

I served for 20 years and retired in '92. One of the things we noticed during the run-up to Desert Storm was the number of people all over Europe, I was assigned to CINCUSNAVEUR support in London, who were screaming "Wait! We didn't know we might have to go to WAR!" That was from people with 8 or 10 years in. All we career types could say was "You're in the military, what did you think we were here for?" If there is a good thing about the Iraqi conflict, which I opposed from the start, it is that our young service men and women have a clear understanding of for what they are signing up. The young people who put their lives on the line for the rest of us are truly the best of our best. I just wish our National Leadership valued them as they deserve.

Yes, you only engage in combat if that's your MOS. I know that if you're already a doctor, lawyer, etc you get to skip Basic, but that's a special circumstance. And Chaplain and Medic doesn't really mean you'll be out of combat or combat zones. You have to talk to a recruiter about jobs that will keep you out of that. And the point is to serve your country, even if you're just the cook. That should be enough. Sure, everybody treats people differently, but that's life. Suck it up and get the hell over it. That should not be what you worry about if you're thinlkink about joining the military.

many people joined the military because the recruiters promised them better career oppertunitys. many of those soldiers werent really ready after 9/11 because they thought it was peace time and nothing could happen. maybe get sent to germany or some other country there there is no war. but that changed everything. so they are over there doing their jobs.

and the army if u do a job lets say as a cook you are trained as a cook first and a rifle man 2nd... in the marines you are trained to fight first and do ur job 2nd.. so i think u mean the marines fight battles and protect people more then the army

After reading a lot of the questions on here, I've noticed that a lot of people have joined or are considering joining just for the monetary and educational benefits. They're not concerned about serving their country. A lot joined when there wasn't a war going on and didn't expect to have to ever fight. Although I still respect them, it's easy to enlist when there isn't a war. I went to a war in '67-'68. There wasn't a lot of job opportunities for a discharged grunt. I am still paying the price for that experience, but that's why it's called "in the service". "Serving your country "seems to be a dying concept. Sad.

The primary focus of military recruiting materials prior to (and still to a great degree today) Iraq was the educational benefits. They joined, as they were encouraged to, for those benefits with the understanding that they were subject to combat under legal and legitimate circumstances and that their enlistment contract would be honored. They didn't get what they agreed to. Simple as that.

I think that there is a world of difference between "wanting to fight" and being "prepared to fight for your country".

I fought for my country during the final year of WW2 and it wasn't a picnic. But I was prepared to fight for freedom and democracy.

No one "wants" to fight, but there are some who are prepared to do it, so you can have the choice what you want to buy from McDonalds.

Try learning the difference.

because they have a detached sense of reality.

they dont have enough sense to realize that they are joining the military. the military kills people. thats our job.

they just eat up what the recruiter is feeding them about not having to go overseas, having a nice safe job and going to school. recruiters at best only emphasize the positive parts of the military and at worse lie about it. but only an idiot is going to join the military honestly thinking they dont have a chance of seeing combat.

AMEN!