Do soldiers in the military (we’ll just use the American military for now, I think getting into the minutiae of all other militaries would get too complex) generally *want *to deployed to a combat hot zone like Iraq or Afghanistan when they get their 1st-time deployment orders (“Yeah, ***this ***is what I’ve been training for all along”), or do they typically prefer to stay in a safe place and condition for their entire careers?
(Only asking about their 1st time - since it’s totally understandable that someone who has already been in a combat zone once would have no interest in any more of it)
Considering one of the most enduring tropes is of the fresh-faced newcomer eager to get a “crack at the enemy”, the answer would seem to be yes.
On a more analyzed note, the British Army in NE Europe during the '44-45 campaign noted that veteran units and formations were far less likely to take initiative and had notably lower aggressive tendencies, to the actual detriment of operations.
It varies from individual to individual, of course, but, generally, yes. Most of the younger Soldiers were chomping at the bit to get into the action and put all of their training, and all of their cool toys, to use.
A big caveat. I was a Reservist. We had a lot of Soldiers who were a lot older for their rank than would be typical with Active Duty personnel. Many of them had families and established civilian careers. The older Soldiers with families and careers were much more apprehensive about their first deployment.
We still had plenty of younger soldiers in the more typical 18-early 20s age range of junior enlisted and officers, though, and they were mostly excited to deploy and talked about wanting to go where the action was.
Personally, while I was absolutely willing to go into combat if I was called upon to do so, I was not eager to do so. A number of the younger Soldiers in my unit were disappointed when we wound up deployed to a rear area, and the “forward deployment” half the unit was sent on wound up being in (at the time) a stable area of Iraq, and that we spent all of our time inside the wire. I was perfectly happy with that outcome.
On my second deployment, to a rear echelon headquarters in Kuwait, a lot of the younger junior enlisted and officers I served with were frustrated with being “stuck” away from combat. One young buck (a captain, I think) actually contacted his Congressman to complain about not being allowed to deploy to Iraq and take active part in combat. He was actually transferred to a unit in Iraq a few weeks later.
There’s a lot of relevant or at least related information in this RAND study, but nothing that definitely answers the question (at least not that I could see):
Although the title suggests it would focus mostly on post-deployment attitudes, it actually does get into some of the perceptions that people have prior to deployment and things like perceived benefit and “combat motivation.” Unfortunately, a lot of it is qualitative, rather than quantitative, and relies on focus groups and summarizing the conclusions of earlier studies, rather than just hard data. Still, to the extent this is GQ and answers are supposed to be factual in nature rather than “my humble opinion,” that’s the closest I could come up with so far.
From my own personal experience, and the observations of those around me, the excitement about performing one’s trained mission, meeting their goals, and accomplishing the expected mission ***is ***the motivator.
Aside from going to perform what you’re trained to do, and being challenged to do it well in a complex, dangerous environment, there are other perks to being deployed into a combat zone: for the United States Military, all pay earned in a Combat Zone is (or was, last I checked), Income Tax-exempt. This includes retention/re-enlistment bonus pays. It is entirely feasible for a senior-ranking Sergeant in a critical MOS/AFSC, to walk away with a $50k+ re-enlistment bonus tax free.
So, there’s lots of reasons, but from experience, folks like a challenge and want to go get to work.
Generally, most combat arms soldiers do eagerly want to deploy that first time. I extended at my last unit just so that I could go with them on what would be my third deployment. I have 35 months worth of combat tours, and I’d be more than excited to go again.
I tore my ACL during Desert Shield. My unit was part of those in Germany that didn’t get deployed but we were prepped to go in case more numbers were needed. I made sure the doctors were going to let me go if my unit went. Turns out I had to wait until 2008 to go but I wanted to.
I do remember a formation in which the battalion commander asked for volunteers to go to Desert Shield. This was to fill in vacancies in units that were going. Many volunteered and were eager to go. Many did not volunteer and did not want to go. In the end the Army didn’t care about who volunteered and only cared about who was qualified to fill the open positions.
After my first Iraq deployment I got a call from an officer I knew. He was going to be part of a Mobile Training Team going to Afghanistan and wanted to know if I wanted to fill the Combat Engineer NCO slot. I did want to go but I knew it would throw many family situation into turmoil. I told him I would go if they ordered me to but I wouldn’t volunteer. I never got deployed again. (Going back to add that wasn’t cause and effect. I never deployed again because my unit didn’t deploy again until last year which is a couple of years after I retired. I could explain deployment cycles but that’s not the question here)
The answer to the OP is it depends. Despite all dressing the same the military is made up of a wide variety of people with different wants, needs and desires. You will probably find the ones that gravitate to combat arms are more eager to go than someone who signs up to be support but even then you can’t make a blanket statement.
I’m not military, but I know a guy who was a Cold War era tank officer, and I was talking to him, his wife and some other people at a party once, and someone made the comment about being deployed, and why would you want to have that happen? His comment was basically something along the lines of “What’s the point of a warrior who doesn’t want to fight? That’s WHY you do it in the first place.”
That’s why I specifically said combat arms. There is a different mindset. I have a very clear memory of when the air war started in Desert Storm of comforting a crying soldier who couldn’t believe we were at war when she only joined for the college money. I did what I could and kept my opinion of her reaction to myself. We were in no danger of being hit with a scud in Germany. She got booted out of the army a few months later for many
other issues.
I remember for the fist gulf war in 1991 some of the reserve people were shocked they were being sent to possible combat. They even said they signed up just for the extra money. I worked with a marine reserve guy. He was called up to go to Hawaii, in the winter. He was taking the place of people who were sent to Iraq.
Recruit people for the college money; don’t be surprised if they join for the college money. That’s what I have to say about that, and a great many other things in which the military is shocked—shocked, I tell you—to learn that people join or remain in the military for anything other than the satisfaction of serving the nation. Kind of like how the housing allowance gets figured into the “total compensation” when they do a comparison between military and civilian pay, but then when they talk of cuts across the board to the same “it’s not pay, it’s an allowance, and therefore totally not a pay cut, get over it.”
My experience at the end of the Nam era: At age 24 I intended to enlist in US Navy as a sub sonarman. Because events I went Army instead as a radioman in a field artillery unit, definitely combat arms. One company in my battalion had been overrun and destroyed in Nam. Most fellow troops were blooded and in no hurry to return for more but We Are Fucking WARRIORS and ready for it. I’d joined not for excitement or college money but for a career that didn’t pan out because events so I switched to medics and life went a different way.
Why did I join? Because civilian life wasn’t going well. Was I anxious for combat? As a then-married 24-year-old, no. Was I willing to put my ass on the line, to give my life for something bigger than me, the nation? As a patriot, yes. Am I glad I saw no combat? Fuck yes! Worst I had was being chased by bison while guarding the Ft Riley munitions bunkers on Custer Hill. Couldn’t shoot the beasts. Life is so unfair.
A good friend of mine was a new Air Force JAG when that happened. Prior to that, the idea that we would have a giant mobilization was crazy talk. He told me that there were countless people who tried to get out of it by suddenly being conscientious objectors. He had a tough time feeling sorry for those people.
He did feel some sympathy for officers who hated the military but served their commitment and quit but then a few years later got called up again because their specialty was needed.
I read an interview of a fighter pilot who said he was eager to get his first real combat mission. He said something like, “When you spend all that time and effort training to do something you tend to want an opportunity to do it.”
I went to graduate school with a couple of guys who had been Captains in the Army when they got out, and they were both transport/logistics officers. In the Fall of 2002, they were being pestered by the military to come back, but neither of them wanted anything to do with it at that point- I think both were just inside their individual ready reserve committment- I think they were both inside of a year or two.