Mr. President, Marines Still Use Bayonets

[LadyGunSlinger]

Here's Obama's military:

 

[Plasmaball]

He used horses and bayonets to try and prove the point we don't need a lot of navy ships. Which simply is not true. we have 11 carrier groups and need at least 16. We have a need for 2 carriers in the pacific, 1 in the atlantic , 1 in the med, 1 in the Indian ocean and 1 in the gulf with at least 2 more as back up. At least half our carriers are not available at any one time for deployment. You do the math.

More carriers means more cruisers, more destroyers and more support ships.

We have plenty of ships. The advancement of technology means we need less ships.

Thanks for your professional opinion, Admiral.

im here to educate you dumbasses

 

[RDD_1210]

Are you really going to trot out that shit? Again? You get your ass kicked every time. And yet you insist on doing it over and over whenever I've obviously out classed you. Which isn't hard.

Weird how one minute you're racist, the next minute you claim not to be, then you are again. Are you racist AND bipolar? Or just racist?

Weird how one minute you're stupid, the next, you're still stupid. OK, it isn't weird.

and that concludes "Deep thoughts from a racist".

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The attack against Obama is an attack of his use of semantics in a presidential debate. If you're going to sneer at somebody and bring up the "fact" that we no longer need navy vessels because we have fewer bayonets, you'd better be sure that we have fewer bayonets.

He made an idiotic parallel, and he got called on it, as he should be. The man is an arrogant, and ignorant, piece of shit. And people realize it more more every time he opens his idiotic cock sucker.

While I agree with you, the point I'm trying to make is to show just how far the Republican party has fallen that THIS is what they have to focus on after a debate with "America's worst President!"

The Republicans are not the ones that are focusing on it.

 

[del]

The attack against Obama is an attack of his use of semantics in a presidential debate. If you're going to sneer at somebody and bring up the "fact" that we no longer need navy vessels because we have fewer bayonets, you'd better be sure that we have fewer bayonets.

He made an idiotic parallel, and he got called on it, as he should be. The man is an arrogant, and ignorant, piece of shit. And people realize it more more every time he opens his idiotic cock sucker.

While I agree with you, the point I'm trying to make is to show just how far the Republican party has fallen that THIS is what they have to focus on after a debate with "America's worst President!"

The Republicans are not the ones that are focusing on it.

right.

 

[daveman]

We have plenty of ships. The advancement of technology means we need less ships.

Thanks for your professional opinion, Admiral.

im here to educate you dumbasses

Simply not possible. You have nothing to teach anyone.

NOTE: Mindlessly repeating leftist nonsense is not "teaching".

 

[idb]

Did I say that?

See... This is why you are an idiot. Nobody said they weren't needed. It was said that technology... *ponders* Pfft.

Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. Good day to you.

The analogy Obama was trying to draw is that technological advances have changed the way we fight war. It really hasn't, other than making it easier for the grunts on our side to survive. Every single bit of technology you can name that is applied to war was imaginable in 1916, and most of it was supposed to make war impossible. Yet, no matter what, without a guy who is willing to get on the ground and use a knife, we would loose every time. In fact, the reason we are losing in Afghanistan is Obama isn't willing to send in enough troops to get the job done, they have more knives than we do.

Not enough knives? That's why we are losing? Well shit! Give each soldier a dozen knives and a sword then. Maybe a couple spears for backup. We'll kick their asses then!

You're proposing an arms race?

 

[Steelplate]

The analogy Obama was trying to draw is that technological advances have changed the way we fight war. It really hasn't, other than making it easier for the grunts on our side to survive. Every single bit of technology you can name that is applied to war was imaginable in 1916, and most of it was supposed to make war impossible. Yet, no matter what, without a guy who is willing to get on the ground and use a knife, we would loose every time. In fact, the reason we are losing in Afghanistan is Obama isn't willing to send in enough troops to get the job done, they have more knives than we do.

Not enough knives? That's why we are losing? Well shit! Give each soldier a dozen knives and a sword then. Maybe a couple spears for backup. We'll kick their asses then!

You're proposing an arms race?

What? We don't have enough arms? Damn that Obama! The fucking Ruskies have more than two per soldier! We'll be massacred! Vote for Romney....he'll provide funding for top secret military research on how we can get our soldiers to grow at least two more arms/man......That's what the Heritage Foundation told me.....honest!

 

[idb]

TRR: Obama Sticks it to Romney on Bayonets - Washington Times

Smarmy Obama doesn't know SQUAT about his own military.. ALONG with his liberal Zombie posse.. Old SeaWytch claimed otherwise, NUMEROUS times yesterday.

LOL

Pardon?
So, now you're saying that Obama didn't say "none"?
You were foaming at the mouth earlier about him claiming that the military has no bayonets at all.
You've now done a 180 degree turn around...like your candidate has on so many occasions.

 

[idb]

Oh, I forgot to add...................LOL

 

[idb]

Poor leftists.. WRONG ABOUT EVERYTHING..

Obama Flubs: U.S. Has More Bayonets Today Than in 1916 | The Blog on Obama: White House Dossier

So you were lying earlier?
Obama never said "none".

 

[idb]

The election is not about bayonets. The military jsut discontinued bayonet training, as I understand it. But that is irrelevant.
What is relevant is that Obama's foreign policy is a record of failure unrivaled by any president in my lifetime.
Kennedy had the Berlin Wall. Johnson had Vietnam, Nixon went to China, Ford had lust for the Polish people, Carter had detente, Reagan had the implosion of the Soviet Union, HW Bush had the Gulf War, Clinton had Bosnia, W had the Iraq War. Obama has nothing but failure.

I beg to differ

 

[idb]

President Obama said during Monday night's debate that the U.S. Army has fewer horses and bayonets than in the past.

That's true. Although Army Special Forces were on horseback in Afghanistan when they helped defeat the Taliban in 2001, the Army's horses are now used only for ceremonial occasions.

As for bayonets? The last bayonet charge was during the Korean War in 1951.

The bayonet has somewhat gone the way of the horse cavalry, as far as the Army is concerned (although Marines still use bayonets in training).

Two years ago, bayonet training stopped for new recruits, under orders from Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, then head of the Army's Training and Doctrine Command. Sergeants instead focused on more practical skills like hand-to-hand fighting.

"What's interesting," Hertling told The Christian Science Monitor at the time, "is if bayonet training is that important and it's the centerpiece of everything we do, why is it the only place it's taught is at basic training? If it's that important, you'd think all the operational units would have bayonet assault courses."

Horses, Bayonets And The Modern Military : It's All Politics : NPR

Oh look.. it's the so called Independent who runs to every thread about Obama to cover for him..

Your link showed and said NOTHING about the true number of bayonets today.. NOT ONE NUMBER. As usual , your blabber is just that.

Well, it's certainly not 'none', just like Obama said.
He is so knowledgeable wouldn't you agree?

 

[idb]

I am an independant. I support Romney and I have his back everytime I can. Yes, his shit was blabber

Do wither of you morans even know the difference between a bayonet used in 1916 versus one today?

Do we wither?? No, I don't believe either of us wither.

Lastly, who gives a rats behind?? Your boy Obama said there were less bayonets today in the military then in 1916.. He said it with CONTEMPT, DISRESPECT.. That's what he gets for being a jerk, UNPRESIDENTIAL.

Don't you as an Independent have better things to do than carry Obama's nuts around in your mouth all day?

Excellent progress today LGS.
You've admitted that you were wrong.

Now, have a wee rest and next we'll tackle that foamy mouth issue you have...I suspect it just comes down from your head...

 

[Quantum Windbag]

While I agree with you, the point I'm trying to make is to show just how far the Republican party has fallen that THIS is what they have to focus on after a debate with "America's worst President!"

The Republicans are not the ones that are focusing on it.

right.

Outside of this bard no one is even talking about it. You might think this is the entire universe, I don't.

 

[Plasmaball]

Thanks for your professional opinion, Admiral.

im here to educate you dumbasses

Simply not possible. You have nothing to teach anyone.

NOTE: Mindlessly repeating leftist nonsense is not "teaching".

thank you dave, this means absolutely nothing

 

[del]

The Republicans are not the ones that are focusing on it.

right.

Outside of this bard no one is even talking about it. You might think this is the entire universe, I don't.

you don't think, period.

 

[bobcollum]

Without going past the first one, how in the fuck did 32 additional pages occur on this thread in one day?

 

[Steelplate]

I want to know what we are going to do about all the extra arms that our enemies have....hell, just ONE extra set of arms allows a soldier to effectively shoot two rifles at once!

We need to do something about this!

 

[Steelplate]

right.

Outside of this bard no one is even talking about it. You might think this is the entire universe, I don't.

you don't think, period.

which bard? This one?