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

[mrlloyd.livejournal.com]

They're widely reckoned to be very scary things to face (admittedly most of my evidence comes from the Napoleonic period), and have the advantage of being attatched to the large gun you're already carrying. Of course just because the enemy are close enough that you take the precaution of fitting a bayonet doesn't mean you're going to use it.

I remember seeing one report of a bayonet used in the Iraq war - that it got reported suggests it's still a very rare event.

The only forces who use other melee weapons these days are very specialised. I can think of the Commandos and other special forces who use commando knives (painted black so they're invisible in the dark) and the Ghurkas who use bloody great Kukris and are the only people trained to throw away perfectly good assault rifles if the enemy get too close.

I think one of the key things is that they're very easy to use.