Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Does the U.S. Military still use bayonets? Of course, bayonets are useful for keeping prisoners under control and for "poking an enemy to see whether he is dead"   (slate.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, U.S., U.S. military, Basra, Ft. Hood, prisoners under control  
•       •       •

10660 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Oct 2012 at 11:10 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



261 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-10-23 08:20:32 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: Really? Because to the rest of us, it really seems that Romney said something stupid and then morons are twisting like mad to come up with a justification to make his statement seem deep and clever.


Romney's point was that Iran is apparently looking at putting in a forward base on the Syrian coast to port some warships in, not that they were going to ship oil through there. It cuts close to 3,000 miles from the transit time and makes them an immediate threat to other ships in the Med as well as anyone with a coastline on the eastern side of the Med (guess who that might be? Go ahead, guess). Just from a logistical standpoint that makes it something worth talking about.

Even ships in the Caspian have to do a substantial bit of transiting through some narrow gaps to get into the med which gives other nations plenty of warning that trouble may be afoot.

There is no spin here, it;s simple geography.
 
2012-10-23 08:52:20 PM  
Bayonet charges were already obsolete in 1916
 
2012-10-23 09:28:16 PM  

daxxenos: The WindowLicker: IAmRight: Yup. But '03-'07.

There are probably more training "bayonets" than there are actual bayonets. I do recall seeing them on armory inventory, though, even though no one ever used them.

/never learned to affix one to a rifle/remove one from a rifle or anything like that.

I deployed with one. The Marine Corps has actually tried to incorporate more training with them in the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program (it replaced LINE training).

The Corps even developed a new more awesome bigger bayonet which looks sort of like a k-bar that took steroids. I carried mine with me in Iraq, even on the plane (but they took away my nail clippers). I think I used it to engage a 'steak' that needed turning over on the 'grill' we made out of a 55gallon drum.

That said, the President was right. We need to spend our money more intelligently. Knives on the end of our rifles are not as tactically important as they once were. Functional satellite communications are key. We don't need to buy 2,000 more tanks. We are not using all the ones we have already. We need to spend the money on our tactical and strategic needs. President Obama had an ironclad point. There is no way for Romney to defend his position. (maybe if he had some more battleships...)

As I've said elsewhere, knives on the ends of rifles are pure intimidation. Look up "riot control." A muzzle is scary. A knife on that muzzle is dishdash shiatting time. .  By the way, that you've never been to Chicago is glaring. In Cook County, cops and aldermen and mayors and congressmen and governors and senators are for sale. Someone who can't be bought can't be trusted, and will NOT rise in the Organization. (Let's see? Who is from Chicago, and has the full backing of the Machine? Hmmm? Think, think, think...) (I've bought cops and aldermen. I couldn't afford a governor...)


Shut the fark up, troll.
 
2012-10-23 09:47:50 PM  
Rifle affixed blades are so 19th century.

What we NEED is a new, improved, more intimidating rifle-affixed personal close-in weapon system, or PCIWS, likely to be referred to afterwards as "pixie whiz" in mil speak.

Personally, I'd like something with some really nasty looking blades, that spins. Sort of like a "will it blend" for the intestines of your enemies. Think the ending of "Black Hole".

Since you already have too many things that require batteries in the field, it ought to charge with solar cells, so as to be kind to the environment, yet provide several minutes of close in abdomen slicing, even when encountering body armor. When about to engage, the blades ought to spring out with an intimidating "ka-CHANG!", if the motor action doesn't sound intimidating enough, there should be a digitally synthesized whirring or possibly chainsaw sound. Pulsating red LEDs would be nice here as well, as would crawly, annoying electrical discharges.

In addition, since you're likely to have some sort of annunciation system on it to enhance the sound effect (again, consider the whirring sound of the Intestinizor on "Black Hole"), you could add in an effective multi-lingual intimidation system...imagine "I'm covered in pork fat!" in Arabic, or "You're my 37th victim this month!" in Urdu.

Finally, I think it might even be possible to add in a thrust-triggered 12ga dust round, if you're just not chewing the guy up fast enough, poke him really hard with the business end and whammo! he's pulped. Since the sound of the round going off in the guy might not be loud enough to get the terror factor up to max, an optional "HAHAHA!" or locale-specific mockery might be triggered when the dust round goes off.
 
2012-10-23 09:59:45 PM  
Oh, and it should be easy to clean. It gets really old sitting around cleaning weapons and gear when you really want to eat or hit the sack or both.
 
2012-10-23 10:50:38 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: firefly212: Satanic_Hamster: firefly212: When calling other people dumbsh*t, you should first make sure you're not absolutely farking wrong. The Suez Canal is on the other side of Saudi Arabia, and though some of Iran's oil passes through there, some also goes up the Caspian, then takes the Jon to the Black Sea and enters Russian (and formerly Russian Territories), that said, the overwhelming bulk of Iranian oil goes through neither west-facing passage and instead goes through the Straights of Hormuz to the Asian and South Asian markets. Bandar e Abbas is Iran's largest port, and less than 21% of the oil leaving from there has a destination listed west of Iran. Even if we take your "through the Mediterranean" qualifier that Romney didn't add, still less than half of what gets shipped into the Mediterranean region goes through the Suez, mostly because it's far cheaper to send it up through the Caspian, then pipe it to the eastern Euro region. In short, you are categorically wrong in every way imaginable, may God have mercy on your dumbf^&k soul.

Hey dipshiat: Oddly, no where in your analysis do you mention that Iran is currently sending any oil through Syria.

None of the Piplelinistan Deal has been constructed yet, Syria is not a commerce transit point for Iranian pipeline flows currently, nor is it in any way the most efficient route from Iran to the Mediterranean (piped from Caspian nations costs far less). I do not mention it because it is misleading at best to indicate that Syria's capacity is in any way detrimental or positively effecting Iran.

The point being rebutted was "Iran doesn't ship oil through the mediteranian except throught the Suez Canal dumbsh*t."

The problems with this are as follows.

1. Iran ships plenty of oil to the mediterranean region via the Northern Early, the Western Early, and the Caspian Pipeline... incredible amounts go via Azerbaijan and Georgia, neither of which is Syria or the Suez.

2. Arguing that shipping to the Mediterranea ...


I agree wholeheartedly that Romney said something stupid... my explanation of exactly where Iran's oil goes and how it gets there is in no way a defense of his idiocy, and much to the contrary, I think his lack of understanding of the importance of the Straights of Hormuz is demonstrative of a fundamental misunderstanding and lack of knowledge about the region. It was meant as a refutation of All2morrowsparTs ' attempt at backing Romney up (I think) by baselessly asserting that Iran was somehow dependent on the Suez. I did not address Gdalescrboz's claim that a Syrian port would cut a significant amount off of the transit for Iranian oil. The reality of things is that it doesn't cut a whole lot off of transportation time off of the Southern Early, but having a good web of pipelines would be advantageous to Iranian efforts to bypass sanctions. That said, at this time, it seems like the Pipelinistan agreement, though complete in principle is not well funded, and the instability in Syria and Iraq makes it somewhat unlikely to be built any time soon. Besides that, the cultural gap between the Persians and Arabs is still somewhat of an issue when considering pipeline placement and the potential for sabotage. That said, if the arguement is solely about pipeline placement and Iranian oil exports, we're not being realistic if we think Syria is a major player, considering that nearly 80% of the Iranian exports go east, not west.
 
2012-10-23 11:01:49 PM  
I thought bayonets were pretty much replaced by RJ45s
 
2012-10-24 12:12:39 AM  

Grungehamster: Satanic_Hamster: So.... Bayonets is a talking point.

Romney thinking that Iran and Syria share a boarder and that Iran doesn't have any ocean access isn't.

But remember, the liberal media is out to get Republicans.

How about indicting the President of Iran for inciting genocide? Not even getting into the dispute over the most accurate translation of Ahmadinejad's words, doesn't the idea that his words incited genocide require that genocide happens subsequent to the statement being made?

Apparently not. Can anyone imagine arresting a US President for saying (not taking any explicit action, saying) that a nation we see as a threat must be destroyed?


Oh hell, son, not only can I imagine a President saying that a nation we see as a threat must be destroyed, I'm old enough where I can remember where a sitting President caused a major diplomatic incident making a comment in a mic-test that aired live on national radio in a weekly address with such a comment.

Specifically, Ronald Reagan's little gaff about "I've just signed legislation outlawing Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."

And before that, back in World War II there was quite a lot of noise about destroying Germany AND Japan (up to and including a plan in WW II to pretty much reduce Germany to nothing but farmland--a plan FDR actively was pushing for and would have been the closest we had in the pre-nuclear age to "Glass Parking Lot", and it actually took Truman to temper the Morgenthau Plan to something a bit more reasonable than "Turn the whole of Germany into a giant farm".

So yes, the precedent exists. :3

(Also, if Ahmadinnerjacket's commentary re Israel is "genocide incitement", I want every sitting member of the American Family Association (and probably the Family Research Council, to boot) sitting at trial in the Hague and arrested in the US on charges of incitement to genocide--there is actually more of an arguable case that their hate speech, and particularly the activities of the AFA-linked Scott Lively, HAVE been direct calls for genocide AND have directly incited attempted genocide (including in Eastern Europe via "Watchmen on the Walls", and particularly in Uganda where American dominionist anti-LGBT hate groups have worked with Ugandan legislators in repeated attempts to establish a legal framework explicitly permitting genocide against LGBT people). Alas, since the same hatemongers who are pulling this are the same hatemongers who effectively steeplejacked the GOP decades ago, I doubt we'll see Rmoney calling for a genocide tribunal against the AFA or FRC or Scott Lively anytime soon.)

(And yes, since at least the Rwanda genocide there is a legal framework at least internationally for charges of incitement of genocide--the propoganda broadcasts of Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines have been explicitly cited in the Rwanda genocide tribunals, and the actual order to start the genocide was actually issued by RTLM.)
 
2012-10-24 01:10:50 AM  

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: I thought bayonets were pretty much replaced by RJ45s


No, no. TL13s were replaced by the M22520. Bayonets are still useful for the early identification of candidates for 'failure to adapt' discharges before they become General Discharges, or worse.
 
2012-10-24 01:49:16 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: No, no. TL13s were replaced by the M22520. Bayonets are still useful for the early identification of candidates for 'failure to adapt' discharges before they become General Discharges, or worse.


How so? I haven't seen anyone fail at poking dummies with a bayonet in basic. Regardless of whether they adapted or not, it is still a simple task. I would say the gas chamber would be a better test for ability to adapt honestly.

Also, when I was in basic training they seemed to be giving most recruits the benefit of the doubt and only discharging them when it very obvious they shouldn't be there, to the point that I saw a lot more people not make it through AIT than not make it through basic.
 
2012-10-24 02:19:13 AM  

Gwyrddu: demaL-demaL-yeH: No, no. TL13s were replaced by the M22520. Bayonets are still useful for the early identification of candidates for 'failure to adapt' discharges before they become General Discharges, or worse.

How so? I haven't seen anyone fail at poking dummies with a bayonet in basic. Regardless of whether they adapted or not, it is still a simple task. I would say the gas chamber would be a better test for ability to adapt honestly.

Also, when I was in basic training they seemed to be giving most recruits the benefit of the doubt and only discharging them when it very obvious they shouldn't be there, to the point that I saw a lot more people not make it through AIT than not make it through basic.


You overthought the hell out of that.
A bayonet is the perfect device for field-expedient identification of sufferers of Congential Dumbass Disease.
 
Displayed 11 of 261 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report