Fix Bayonets!

[wonga66]

As can be seen in this clip of British soldiers practicing bayonetwork
the bayonet is a useful piece of kit.

That the IDF is the only country on Earth not to issue its soldiers with bayonets is inexplicable!

[wonga66]

Tight Israeli Quartermaster Officers refuse to equip IDF soldiers with even a cheap pike-bayonet to line their greedy pockets with gelt. The result is that an Israeli at close quarters is defenceless and has no intimidatory power against even an Arab street-urchin!



And even if they were equipped with bayonets, the poor, unwilling, soft-bellied, demotivated Israeli recruits would never use a bayonet to actually draw blood, "because it's not Jewish and cruel!"

[Zelhar]

Bayonet is pretty useless in current warfare. It won't penetrate a protective vest. But modern carbines are still useful in close quarters. So a bayonet would simply make them more cumbersome and less usable. Of course it is unthinkable to use bayonets against unarmed targets.

[wonga66]

If the Arab urchin picked up a stone and was about to throw it in to your face and smash your maxilla for life, would you then consider him 'armed'? Would you think of bayonetting him? If you saw him reaching to pick up a stone, would you prrempt and bayonet him? Or would you wait until he has thrown at you, as the imbecilic & evil Zahal 'Code of Ethics' orders: "Don't fire until fired upon", "Don't respond to stone throwers" etc etc!

Of course it is unthinkable to use bayonets against unarmed targets.

A soldier with a bayonet is very intimidatory, and the daily occurrence of sloppy, sleepy, dopey, slovenly and lackadaisical obtuse Israeli soldiers having their M16s ripped from their hands by Arab urchins would be less likely just by walking around with bayonets fixed!

[Zelhar]

I imagine that the urchin is located at least a stone throw away and thus beyond the range of a bayonet. But if he is within contact range then I would prefer clubbing with the gun, a kick, or a similar strike, rather then spilling out his guts which would be so gross and then the clean up after which I don't even want to think of.

[mord]

20 Brits used against 100 Iraqis in 2004                           http://defensetech.org/2010/01/29/bayonets-hit-the-mark/   









Bayonets Hit the Mark

I wasn’t sure my post from yesterday would garner such a reaction, but I’d say the pros outweigh the cons 10:1.

Many of you mentioned that the last known bayonet charge might have been executed by a squad of Brit troops in Basra back in ’04.

Well, a little Googleing and low and behold it turns out that bunch of maniac Scots from the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders got ambushed by about 100 Mahdi militiamen near Basra, fought it out, and when they ran low on ammunition, fixed bayonets and went to town.

Based on an after-action report found at this link, the intimidation factor of the bayonet and the surprise such a charge caused among the enemy used to engagements at a distance were pivotal.

    The bayonet charge by British troops in Basra achieved tactical success primarily because of psychological and cultural factors. It also shows that superior firepower does not guarantee success by either side. In this case, the value of surprise, countering enemy expectations, and strict troop discipline were three deciding characteristics of the bayonet charge.

And, reading the report, you can’t help but come away from it thinking that while the insurgent is courageous in a sense that he’s willing to commit suicide in an attack on his enemy, and that he’s cunning in his building and implementation of weaponry, and that he’s agile in his ability to move quickly in tight spaces and mingle with the population — in the end their internal propoganda that the coalition are wusses just doesn’t make sense.

    Propaganda by Sunni and Shiite jihadists regularly advertised the perception that American and British soldiers were cowards. Similar rhetoric increased after the battles of Fallujah in April2004, perhaps to steady the resolve of militia fighters in the face of aggressive coalition attacks.

    In addition, British convoys did not engage significantly during previous ambushes, which probably validated the narrative for many Mahdi militiamen. Because many of the Mahdi fighters were teenagers, it is also likely that the Mahdi army used these ambushes for training and recruiting. The attacks were an opportunity for young fighters to use weapons in combat with little risk of serious reprisal.

Who would you pick in a hand-to-hand standoff — in a eyeball to eyeball fistfight? A Scot highlander or a pencil-necked Mahdi bomb clacker?

I pick the guy who eats haggis. Like this dude…

    “I wanted to put the fear of God into the enemy. I could see some dead bodies and eight blokes, some scrambling for their weapons. I’ve never seen such a look of fear in anyone’s eyes before. I’m over six feet; I was covered in sweat, angry, red in the face, charging in with a bayonet and screaming my head off. You would be scared, too.”

    Corporal Brian Wood
    Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment

In the end, the Brit counterassault killed 35 bad guys and left three UK troops lightly wounded.

Keep the bayonets brother!

PS — And here’s another young Brit who had to resort to his rifle blade when the chips were really down:

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2010/01/29/bayonets-hit-the-mark/#ixzz1BEfFNhoz
Defense.org

[Utmager]

Poor sad Israeli sods deliberately denied shields, mace, bayonets, no stun guns, tasers & buckshot....!

[maelgwyn]

Ill use a sharpend entrencing tool against a bayonet anytime ! Used to great effect by the MVD in Lithuanian fascist riots back in the 1980s!

[Yirmayahu]

A bayonet isn't just a weapon, it's also a tool. The intimidation factor of a bayonet at the end of a rifle is quite impressive. True, that a bayonet would not penetrate body armor, but the problem is that most people are trained to shoot for the torso as to damage body organs. Disabling an adversary by damaging the sensory organs is much more effective and can buy time in a scuffle. Head and neck shots are much more effective in taking an enemy out, although I'll be the first to admit that hitting the head or neck is much more difficult than the broad profile of the thorax and abdomen. So, yes, a bayonet won't harm a person with body armor, but it does a hell of a job on a person without that protection and if in doubt, jab the neck, eyes or slash across the throat in situations when it is either them or you; all is fair. And as for an "unarmed" person that is sort of untrue. There is always something within grasp that an adversary can use as a weapon; scissors, a baseball bat, a hammer or screwdriver or anything else that cause bodily penetration or cause blunt force trauma. When target practicing I like to aim for the head of the silhouette and not the larger parts. If you can train yourself to group on the head then hitting the larger parts of the silhouette are much easier. Shoot like your life and the life of your wife and kids depends on it because the way things are getting the possibility of having to protect yourself and your family is more of a probability rather than a possibility.

[maelgwyn]

YIP! Battle of Bayonne where it all started !  Cheers mate !

[mord]

YIP! Battle of Bayonne where it all started !  Cheers mate !

Yes i thought i was the only one here that knew that.When they ran out of ammo they made their rifles into spears with knifes

[maelgwyn]

Yip! I think that it was the French Royalist Army ?

[wonga66]

A good depiction why bayonets are needed!