M1 Carbine wasn't used in front line battle?

[Sentryduty]

I found various references to the 5 page Ordinance Board requirements in 1940 and another reference to the earlier identification of a light rifle requirement in 1938, however I cannot find an online source of either of those documents to read what the original mandate for light rifle program was.

From the training aspect, I would think it reasonable to assess that the basic training of the day would include the main battle rifle, the M1 Garand, and any other weapons would require additional time, resources, ammunition, and practice to teach the manual of arms. This additional qualification time would seem to perhaps be a waste in non-front line combat or support trades.

I believe this common cooks and clerks terminology is a over-generalization of the "support trades" term, which was probably aimed at those that actually seen the front and had a high likelihood of needing to defend themselves in actual combat, while performing in their support role. Further, I think this over-generalization is being used by modern day detractors of the carbine's capability to paint it as a less-than rifle. Using an inglorious trade such as a cook or a clerk in a derogatory manner (my old paymaster would kill me right now) as way of illustrating the rifle isn't for serious combat and demeaning the role it filled.

This bit of "didn't see combat" is probably some extreme offshoot of the above concept, tabled by an either uneducated or willfully obtuse firearms enthusiast.