Damn. Now that's badass.
Guess we know why Bayo couldn't be included in the KFFL ultimate fighting tourney.
Visit my Bear column at NFLDraftBlitz
I just became the model poster. :eek:
You don't like my point of view, It's not sane.
What makes the green grass grow?
Someone should let the brits know that those sticks in their hands that they fixed bayonets to are called rifles. They shoot bullets. Bullets are much more effective than bayonets.
Just a guess, they ran out of ammo?Originally Posted by kenneth2k1
The fearless Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders. Scots, no? Not your typical lily-livered European. Anyone know anything about this clan of warriers?
They make nice sweaters and socks?
That is badass. No you know why these $hitbird insurgents use roadside bombs.
There is something fishy about this. While a bayonet charge might be a good tactic if you are pinned down by superior firepower or numbers, you would expect to lose a good percentage of your number. While it certainly would take the enemy by surprise as well as scare the scnitt out of them you would expect that 100 armed men would be able to inflict medium to heavy losses on 20 infantry charging with bayonets. Either these 'insurgants' were very bad shots or they were tossing rocks.
I was wondering the same thing. How does an undermanned group of soldiers kill 100 men with bayonetts? I keep thinking of the scene in Indiana Jones, with the guy with the knife and the fancy moves, and Indy shoots him. It just doesn't quite add up.Originally Posted by trevmartini
Seriously, the 'fix bayonet' command is the last order that an infantry officer ever wants to issue. It is a last resort order, and the CF and UK forces are from the same school. In WW1, yes, that order was issued many times. In modern warfare it would only be used in house to house fighting or if a units position was completely overwhelmed and hand to hand fighting was imminent.
This smells. I believe it's embellished and there were probably 10 guys shooting at them and a crowd of onlookers. There is no way that 100 guys carrying Ak-47s could not have inflicted a single fatality in a bayo charge by 20 guys. No way. Just spraying would knock down five of them.
From the GuardianOriginally Posted by Hurricane
An attack by the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders on the Shia militia of Moqtada al-Sadr, close to the city of Amara in southern Iraq received detailed attention this weekend, and it was the Highlanders' weapon of choice that attracted the most - the bayonet. In the age of smart bombs and stupid prison guards, it was somehow surprising that this stone-age piece of kit was still in use.
Bayonets are redolent of batty British bravery, last-ditch stands by men in red tunics, Michael Caine's stiff upper lip at Rorke's Drift. According to an army spokesman, Colonel Ed Brown, it is unlikely that bayonets killed any of al-Sadr's men, but for him its power is more psychological than practical.
If you're defending a position and you see someone advancing with a bayonet, you may be more inclined to surrender," he says. "Soldiers see a bullet as a clean kill, but a bayonet would be a decidedly unpleasant way to go. I've never been bayoneted, but I can imagine it's pretty gruesome." The psychological (some say psychosexual) effect on the user should also not be underestimated. "Putting the bayonet on makes a satisfying clunk," says Colonel Brown. "It's all part of the hardening process, preparing yourself for battle."
This is old but my days in the army wouldn't let this go unanswered:Originally Posted by daninoz
"Blood, blood, bright red blood makes the green grass grow!"
Bookmarks