<p>Which of the 3 service academies is the safest to be at during these times of war?</p>
<p>navy... without a doubt</p>
<p>If you're making your decision based on that then you are going in for the wrong reasons. Nobody wants to die, but it is a necessary evil. You can die in any branch of the military.</p>
<p>I'm refusing to answer the question out of principle.</p>
<p>I am just peeking in from the navy forum. I must agree that if you are worrying about which service is safer you have no buisness even applying to an academy. ElPadrino, ill back you up on what you just said.</p>
<p>I had a guy ask me at a christmas party if you could transfer if we were in a war to stay out of it; I took it as an insult to the decision so many of us are making to serve our country, regardless of which service.</p>
<p>Bless your pea-pickin' heart spnmyung. I'm sure its an innocent question asked here & you were sincerely looking for an answer but please know that you will be at risk in the military period. Its a dangerous job these guys do but they are well trained to do it. Not sure your question can be answered in a way to give you any peace of mind. If thats what you were looking for...</p>
<p>I feel a hammerin' coming on.... This is "Be Kind to a Newb" day so heh.</p>
<p>P.S. There are 5 (five) US Service Academies. Arrrgggg.</p>
<p>though they are not a majority, dont forget that a considerable percentage of naval academy grads include marines</p>
<p>when i read the OP i thought he was talking about campus safety. I walked into navy land without having to talk to a guard but when I went to west point they had guards checking ID.</p>
<p>Well, 16 percent of the grads from Navy are allowed to go Marines</p>
<p>I think that makes it more dangerous than air force</p>
<p>combat arms aint for everyone. but seriously grow some cajones. but to be honest, you can be "safe" in any of the services.</p>
<p>Well actually, I've been told that depending on the kind of war we wage in the future, the Navy could be just as dangerous as the Army or Marine Corps. I was talking with a friend who had read a book by Abraham Rabinovitch called the "Boats of Cherbourg", an account of Israel's attempt to salvage modern Naval ships, and the role these ships played in the sea battle waged during the 1973 Yom-Kippur War. I have never read the book myself, so I can't comment entirely accurately, but he says that the 1973 war was the last time any 2 "real" navies fought head-on with one another, and that since then the theater of naval operations has remained "peaceful" and quiet. </p>
<p>Despite this trend of peace, he insists that naval battles of the future could be far bloodier than anything we've ever witnessed due to the rise of Information Technology and precision guided bombing. </p>
<p>Think about it, our guided missiles today are over 95% accurate. Our battleships and destroyers are equipped with the same kind of precision weaponry, meaning that if they were to launch their missiles at another ship or target, they would hit most likely hit. Now I don't know how good this kind of tech is for the Chinese Navy (Not saying China's a threat or anything, just saying in a hypothetical situation, a modern navy mostly comparable to ours) or whatever, but even if they were to not have it now I don't see why it would take them anymore than a couple more years or so to achieve the same technology. We are way past the point of fighting with torpedoes and cannons, which moved in a straight line and weren't that accurate. If some other navy were to employ such weapons against us, the massive ships (carriers and battleships) that our Navy has today would pretty much all be sitting ducks. Warfare changes.</p>
<p>Now I'm no expert on the Navy, and I only spoke to my friend about this topic for 30 minutes or so, so I'm not gunna argue that this is "indisputable fact" or whatever. I bring this up as a "something to think about" topic, to "enlighten" the debate, especially seeing that the overwhelming majority of responders have named the Navy as safer than the others. As long as we are engaged in the kind of warfare we see in Iraq and Afghanistan, being in the Navy will not be as "deadly" as that of the others (though a considerable number of Seabees, the Navy's construction corps, have been engaged in combat during construction missions and have been through lifethreatening situations). However, keep in mind that no one knows for sure what'll happen in future wars and conflicts. I'm sure being a truck driver for the Finance Corps used to be a relatively safe job, but seeing how there is no real "front" in the battlefield today, it's now as dangerous as any other.</p>
<p>anyone who talks about sacrificing for their country on r-day is getting tackled.</p>
<p>anyone at west point for that matter demos. Thats retarded, you're not even in the army</p>
<p>You need to understand that all four of the services (five if you count the Coast Guard) have above average risks even in peacetime. Training alone, whether it be jumping out of an airplane, fast roping out of a chopper, flying a jet, operating on the deck of an Aircraft Carrier, or participating in live fire exercises in the Marines or Army, all subject you to a certain amount of risk. Soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen are injured or killed every year just in training accidents alone. This is not meant to scare anyone off, but you must understand that the Military is a risky business and there are no true safe havens among the various services during Peacetime or War.</p>
<p>"you're not even in the army"</p>
<p>That is debateable--put it this way, you're in a different kind of "the army"</p>
<p>As far as danger, we live in times where danger is as nearly as likely to come to you as you are to be shipped off to it. Anyone in uniform is subject to risk.</p>
<p>If people are going to be talking about the training risks of the Army then I think you have to include West Point as the part of the Army it is. I'm not trying to say its as dangerous as an infantry unit in Baghdad, but its not exactly as safe as your cozy home in suburban America.</p>
<p>my reply was for the "anyone who talks about sacrificing for their country on r-day is getting tackled." statement. Nothing to do with the training risks. I'm refering to those guys that pull the "I'm putting my life on the line for my country" routine with the girls or whoever back home.</p>
<p>Hahaha if the girl is dumb enough to buy it then its fine by me...
PS I have a gf so i'm not gonna be the Cdt Cand using that great line.</p>
<p>how about... "I'm sacraficing my social life for my country"</p>
<p>;)</p>
<p>i was spitting game one time and college came up. and i said, "yeah, i like it here at [major university], but I'm going to west point next year." then she walked away. what's worse is when ROTC cadets pull that thizzness.</p>