Originally Posted by
West Coast
Not so sure. Your point seemed to be that one could be in the rear and serve effectively, to which I agree. We differ in that the past 10-15 years of US combat operations have had no defined front lines as you call it. There’s no sending daughters oversees with the expectation they will be safe. Safer perhaps than the grunts, but not safe as say a mechanic hundred of miles away from the front lines in a traditional land war.
You have to read my post in the context of the post it was replying to, which was talking about the danger of having poor soldiers in the front line. I was making the point that those who are not up to the physical requirements of "frontline" service still have a contribution to make. This does not mean that they will not be exposed to combat. In the RAF, all personnel are taught to use weapons and basic fighting skills to keep them alive so they can do what they are trained to do. Orginally it was called Ground Defence, then the idea was called Survive to Operate. No idea what the current buzz phrase is but I bet the skills taught are the same - bullet dodging and bullet dispensing and general staying alive.