Skip to comments.Obama Pushed Sequestration And Defense Cuts - and Marines still use bayonets
Posted on 10/24/2012 11:25:32 AM PDT by raptor22
Defense Spending: Despite debate assertions, our commander in chief has in fact presided over a shrinking Navy and an Air Force with planes older than their pilots. And what's worse, he planned it that way.
When Mitt Romney accurately said that under President Obama the U.S. Navy had fewer ships than in 1917, our commander-in-chief petulantly and contemptuously responded, "Well, governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military has changed."
As a Marine tweeted Fox News after the debate, they still use bayonets and, yes, we'll have fewer of them under the combined impact of budget cuts already under way and the mandated sequestration under the Budget Control Act.
The president also seemed unaware that the U.S. special operations teams that launched the American invasion in Afghanistan were led by three commando teams who rode in on, er, horseback.
"If we wanted to move, horses were the only way," said Master Sgt. Chris Spence, the team's communication sergeant, who serves with 5th Special Forces Group.
Yes, Mr. President, we now "have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go under water, nuclear submarines."
And, as Romney correctly stated, we will have fewer of them.
We can have the most capable ships in the world, but they can't be everywhere at once with all of them constantly at sea. Some need to be in port, getting refueled and refitted, their crews resting.
The rest have multiple commitments, such as defending the Taiwan Strait, keeping open the Strait of Hormuz, contesting Beijing in the South China Sea or helping defend Europe against ballistic missile attack after Obama scuttled missile defense based in Poland.
(Excerpt) Read more at tcotblog.ning.com ...
“Less” clearly doesn’t mean “none.” He said “less,” not “none.” Why we need to keep harping on this is beyond me. Not to mention Paul Ryan voted for sequestration and half of FReepers support Ron Paul who would take sequestration much, much further.
It’s almost like we enjoy falling into the traps.
What President would, in this day and age, EVER say that we have "ships that go underwater" as examples of modern technology. They've been around for 150 years.
The wording is a 5 year olds. He's on meds. I know it.
Personally, I am not a big fan of bayonets, as they are often bad for the rifle, and truthfully, they are somewhat outdated as bladed weapons go. Instead, I bet the US could produce some amazingly high tech multipurpose swords that would be very effective in close combat.
It is not true that guns are always better, for example with crowd control, guns can either shoot or not shoot. Doing either might benefit the enemy. However, a number of US Marines with a sword in one hand and a pistol in another could, with considerable elan, pass right through the middle of a riot, escorting others in their midst who would be set upon if not defended.
Right now, Marine officers carry swords from the 1820s, and NCOs from the 1850s. I would equip them with a sword as sharp as a razor blade, but made very durable, machine folded like a samurai sword, of high quality stainless, made with a lot of Fullerene carbon.
If they need to cut some foreign devil in half, they should have the tools to do that.
In today's combat, I can't see purposely closing with the enemy to bayonet range. If you are that close, you've ran out of TacAir, arty, rifle ammo, pistol ammo, grenades, flares, and are pretty much soup. Better reach for that K-bar or use the rifle as a club.