Politicians hide themselves away, they only started the war

[venta]

This morning, on the Today programme, I heard various people talking about the NATO troops' actions in Afghanistan. Someone, I forget who, commented that the fighting in the South was "at close quarters, bayonets fitted".

Which staggered me. I maybe haven't been paying as much attention as I should to the fighting in Afghanistan, but the idea that a 21st century soldier is still using a bayonet (I assume it wasn't just a figure of speech ?) had never occurred to me.

Mind you, I also heard a former US Ambassador to NATO describe certain member countries' refusals to commit troops to the most dangerous areas as "pesky". Which was nearly as incredible.

Comments

[zotz]

Bayonets are still issued, yes, and used too. Some fighting's at very close range, especially inside buildings. The same applies to gunfights more widely - I saw an FBI figure for the average range of a gunfight in the US. Less than three feet, I think.

Personally I'm very happy to be in an area without many guns.

[venta.livejournal.com]

The same applies to gunfights more widely - I saw an FBI figure for the average range of a gunfight in the US. Less than three feet, I think.

This is exactly why I was surprised at the use of bayonets. I'd have thought guns at three feet inside a building were a liability[*], but given that that's how they are used I'd have expected the US army (which is mostly who's fighting in South Afghanistan) would choose guns for everything in preference to pointy bits of metal.


[*] like there's a way in which a gun isn't.

[zotz]

Some guns are designed to be used inside, and not just pistols either.

In my limited understanding, a bayonet is still good if you need to reload, and has a strong psychological effect on the poor sucker the weilder is bearing down on.