The rationale for this study is based on growing evidence demonstrating that VRET is an efficacious treatment for PTSD and holds the potential to improve access to care for Soldiers who would otherwise avoid treatment. Although PE is considered one of the most effective cognitive-behavioral therapies (CBT) for treatments for PTSD, there are reasons why it may not be the most viable option for many Soldiers. First, prolonged exposure requires a level of emotional engagement during exposure to the trauma that many patients are unable to obtain. Second, stigma and concerns about how Soldiers will be perceived by peers and leadership has a dramatic impact on whether a Soldier will seek care. VRET may address these concerns and may also improve treatment outcomes and access to care by augmenting the patient's re-living of the trauma with a sensory-rich environment and moderating stigma perceptions by offering non-traditional treatment that is a preferable option for many Soldiers who are reluctant to seek out traditional talk therapies. Despite its promise as a viable treatment option, few studies have examined VRET for combat-related PTSD and there are no published studies that have compared VRET to PE in the treatment of combat-related PTSD. Positive results may provide new treatment options for all Soldiers, but should prove to be an especially attractive option for Soldiers who either do not respond to, or are reluctant to engage in other established therapies such as PE.