TheMan13
Well-Known Member
My basic training and AIT was back in the cold war era and we all know the range targets had names
A question to the most recent generation of US warriors: What are the names on those targets today?
Bengazi
- Thread starter NLXSK1
- Start date
My basic training and AIT was back in the cold war era and we all know the range targets had names
A question to the most recent generation of US warriors: What are the names on those targets today?
Doer
Well-Known Member
My basic training and AIT was back in the cold war era and we all know the range targets had names
A question to the most recent generation of US warriors: What are the names on those targets today?
Well, according to the Commander we don't use the bayonet anymore. So, in boot camp do they run at the target and Sipt in its face, like Heidi?
The Boots don't scream KILL!!! anymore, they just spit and run past? Spitting of nasty names as they go by, as the parting shot. Yep, that hurt them. Hurt them bad.
Youth today are taught to be cowards, but nothing is done about the bullies. When the cowards are done we will be easily be ruled by the bullies, as we see now.
TheMan13
Well-Known Member
LoL As if Chicago's history isn't world known for such political tactics for the past century now. Odd how many of those fools do time isn't it?
Urban definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
They just won't spit that poison out!
[video=youtube;CxW8TLtUMfM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxW8TLtUMfM[/video]
... Can you see Andrew and UncleBuck being the same person?!? Maybe he is a pitcher after all
Urban definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
They just won't spit that poison out!
[video=youtube;CxW8TLtUMfM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxW8TLtUMfM[/video]
... Can you see Andrew and UncleBuck being the same person?!? Maybe he is a pitcher after all
Doer
Well-Known Member
Woops, this is very disappointing. Petraeus? Now there is a report that he was not forthcoming in his sworn testimony, early on, in Congress.
Again we thank out system that the Congress is not controlled by the President's party. There would have been no subpoenas, early on.
But, with the next day depositions, on the record, the testimony of the CIA Director doesn't match in substance, (forget the details,) of what has already been reported to Congress.
Right now we get Presidential statement on the Storm. "I just got a full briefing....."
But, he only made that weak kneed statement that didn't even call Bengahzi an Act of Terror, a legal term. This is a President many don't trust. I even like the guy, but it all seems so bully boy. Distasteful. General Powell, Joint Chiefs, to the UN is one thing.
General Petraeus, Director CIA, to Congress, is quite another.
Again we thank out system that the Congress is not controlled by the President's party. There would have been no subpoenas, early on.
But, with the next day depositions, on the record, the testimony of the CIA Director doesn't match in substance, (forget the details,) of what has already been reported to Congress.
Right now we get Presidential statement on the Storm. "I just got a full briefing....."
But, he only made that weak kneed statement that didn't even call Bengahzi an Act of Terror, a legal term. This is a President many don't trust. I even like the guy, but it all seems so bully boy. Distasteful. General Powell, Joint Chiefs, to the UN is one thing.
General Petraeus, Director CIA, to Congress, is quite another.
billybob420
Well-Known Member
To be fair, he said we use "less horses and bayonets" not "no horse and bayonets".
billybob420
Well-Known Member
I remember reading this article, or, I can't exactly remember what it was to be honest... but anyways...
It said the Brits were the last to do a bayonet charge, I think it was in Afghanistan, not too many years back.
Fuckin psychos.
It said the Brits were the last to do a bayonet charge, I think it was in Afghanistan, not too many years back.
Fuckin psychos.
TheMan13
Well-Known Member
This is true, but he actually insinuated that the modern Aircraft Carriers in our arsenal somehow reduce the total ship count. I'm pretty sure that most mentality disabled Americans whom have seen a modern US Naval battle fleet come into port or float by would realize the absurdity of O's statement in whole
Odd that he would take the left coast for such fools, or is that not his targeted audience (see contested states)?
billybob420
Well-Known Member
I guess it was just the wikipedia entry on bayonets I was reading.... I start clicking on shit on wikipedia and I end up reading all sorts of dumb shit. The bayonet article I remember being one of the more interesting.
"During the Korean War, the French Battalion and Turkish Brigade conducted bayonet charges against enemies.[SUP][35][/SUP] United States Army officer Lewis L. Millett led soldiers of the US Army's 27th Infantry Regiment in taking out a machine gun position with bayonets, and received the Medal of Honor for the action. This was the last bayonet charge by the US Army.
The British Army performed bayonet charges during the Falklands War (see Battle of Mount Tumbledown), the Second Gulf War, and the war in Afghanistan.[SUP][36][/SUP] In 2004 in Iraq at the Battle of Danny Boy, the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders bayonet charged mortar positions filled with over 100 Mahdi Army members. The ensuing hand to hand fighting resulted in an estimate of over 40 insurgents killed and 35 bodies collected (many floated down the river) and 9 prisoners. Sergeant Brian Wood, of the Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment, was awarded the Military Cross for his part in the battle.[SUP][37][/SUP] This engagement brought to notice the tactical use of the weapon for close combat and the sheer psychological effect it can have.
British forces in Afghanistan have used bayonets on numerous occasions. In 2009, Lieutenant James Adamson, aged 24, of the Royal Regiment of Scotland was awarded the Military Cross for a bayonet charge whilst on a tour of duty inAfghanistan: after shooting one Taliban fighter dead Adamson had run out of ammunition when another enemy appeared. Adamson immediately charged the second Taliban fighter and bayoneted him.[SUP][38][/SUP] In September 2012, Lance Corporal Sean Jones of The Princess of Wales's Regiment was awarded the Military Cross for his role in a bayonet charge which took place in October 2011.[SUP][39]"[/SUP]
"During the Korean War, the French Battalion and Turkish Brigade conducted bayonet charges against enemies.[SUP][35][/SUP] United States Army officer Lewis L. Millett led soldiers of the US Army's 27th Infantry Regiment in taking out a machine gun position with bayonets, and received the Medal of Honor for the action. This was the last bayonet charge by the US Army.
The British Army performed bayonet charges during the Falklands War (see Battle of Mount Tumbledown), the Second Gulf War, and the war in Afghanistan.[SUP][36][/SUP] In 2004 in Iraq at the Battle of Danny Boy, the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders bayonet charged mortar positions filled with over 100 Mahdi Army members. The ensuing hand to hand fighting resulted in an estimate of over 40 insurgents killed and 35 bodies collected (many floated down the river) and 9 prisoners. Sergeant Brian Wood, of the Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment, was awarded the Military Cross for his part in the battle.[SUP][37][/SUP] This engagement brought to notice the tactical use of the weapon for close combat and the sheer psychological effect it can have.
British forces in Afghanistan have used bayonets on numerous occasions. In 2009, Lieutenant James Adamson, aged 24, of the Royal Regiment of Scotland was awarded the Military Cross for a bayonet charge whilst on a tour of duty inAfghanistan: after shooting one Taliban fighter dead Adamson had run out of ammunition when another enemy appeared. Adamson immediately charged the second Taliban fighter and bayoneted him.[SUP][38][/SUP] In September 2012, Lance Corporal Sean Jones of The Princess of Wales's Regiment was awarded the Military Cross for his role in a bayonet charge which took place in October 2011.[SUP][39]"[/SUP]
billybob420
Well-Known Member
This is true, but he actually insinuated that the modern Aircraft Carriers in our arsenal somehow reduce the total ship count. I'm pretty sure that most mentality disabled Americans whom have seen a modern US Naval battle fleet come into port or float by would realize the absurdity of O's statement in whole
I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to say but it would make sense to me that the more advanced your naval fleet is the less you would need to "reach and touch" people.
TheMan13
Well-Known Member
These modern Aircraft carriers are what require such enormous fleets to cruise the world. Other smaller ships around it provide support and defense essentially for the city on the ocean that these carriers literally are. I can assume you've never seen the fleets that I speak of here?
billybob420
Well-Known Member
Yes, they need support vessels, but there's still less of them. The idea that an aircraft carrier with 90 aircraft could replace a few torpedo ships is not hard to understand.
Not sure what seeing them has to do with anything, but no, I've never seen an entire fleet before.
TheMan13
Well-Known Member
They also move across large bodies water with numerous Naval/Marine assault contingencies of which they support a distance from the theater. Trust me the number of ships is awe inspiring brother 
Furthermore, as no other country maintains a Navy near our size or strength, we are now burdened with policing the world with this smaller number of ships and that is a big problem. Remember that Libyan war O committed us too, he used solely this Navy to do so as the UK and France (Liberal buddies) lacked the forces necessary to protect their oil interests in the theater. O also released our oil reserves here on that land at this same time with the sole intent to further help those countries. What did we get in return?!?
Furthermore, as no other country maintains a Navy near our size or strength, we are now burdened with policing the world with this smaller number of ships and that is a big problem. Remember that Libyan war O committed us too, he used solely this Navy to do so as the UK and France (Liberal buddies) lacked the forces necessary to protect their oil interests in the theater. O also released our oil reserves here on that land at this same time with the sole intent to further help those countries. What did we get in return?!?
billybob420
Well-Known Member
I'm not saying it's not, all I'm saying it's the number has gone down.
Damn, is that what we're arguing about?
Also, I'm implying our current navy would probably beat the piss out of our WW2 navy, even with it's, what, 10x more ships (not terribly sure). The reason I say that, our planes fly higher faster and carry a better payload. Ships are better too, sonar and all that shit has come a long way.
Damn, is that what we're arguing about?
Also, I'm implying our current navy would probably beat the piss out of our WW2 navy, even with it's, what, 10x more ships (not terribly sure). The reason I say that, our planes fly higher faster and carry a better payload. Ships are better too, sonar and all that shit has come a long way.
billybob420
Well-Known Member
I'm fairly certain that marines don't have ships. The navy taxis them around.
TheMan13
Well-Known Member
My point exactly
Only 30% of our military voting for this election, record high suicide rates among these same individuals ...
See any problems? I believe O has written and spoken about oppression in the past, so WTF gives here?!?
Are you contending that O in anyway financially or politically supported our armed forces ever? This Commander & Chief thing is a user entitlement granted to O by nothing more than the 2008 election results correct? How is that office perceived around the world today?
billybob420
Well-Known Member
My point exactly
Only 30% of our military voting for this election, record high suicide rates among these same individuals ...
See any problems? I believe O has written and spoken about oppression in the past, so WTF gives here?!?
Are you contending that O in anyway financially or politically supported our armed forces ever? This Commander & Chief thing is a user entitlement granted to O by nothing more than the 2008 election results correct? How is that office perceived around the world today?
I'm contending there's less vessels in the navy.
billybob420
Well-Known Member
Actually, forget it, I'm not contending anything, forget I ever posted.
TheMan13
Well-Known Member
LoL That was Mitt's point exactly. I think in a round about way you are actually getting it
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
And that is a bad thing?
Doer
Well-Known Member
When you absolutely have to change the game in the face of a close attack, there is nothing like a vicious bayonet charge, at the right moment.
The defense of Little Round Top north flank at Gettysburg is another fine example. It is the quintessential element of surprise. The defenders turn to Attack. Brilliant and usually works if you have the balls. Suddenly, the attackers are the ones that flee from the blade in the gut. It is like a squad of Knights, a horse, at the sally port. Didn't expect that, you Franks!
Similar threads
