Horse Pucky

Obama is so full of it, it would be hilarious if it wasn’t for the fact that he was our President.
His asinine remark about Horses and Bayonets reminded me of a few things. We still use Horses in the Army. A lot of them. Facebook is full of pictures of US Soldiers on Horses in the War Zone. Because nothing is better for rugged mountain patrols than horses.
The latest issue of Guns Magazine (December 2012) page 33, shows an advertisement for US PALM. In this ad it shows a rugged looking cowboy with three grunts behind him, all on horseback. The Cowboy is the senior trainer for the Arizona Cowboy College.
I had the chance to do a mounted patrol in Arizona, in the mountains above Fort Huachuca.
This patrol didn’t end well for me as the horse put me into a patch of cactus, but that’s beside the point. Horses are still a part of the military and will always be so as long as there are Horses.
My favorite part of Boot Camp was the Bayonet Training… after of course the Rifle Training. I loved the aggressiveness. I loved the Pugil Stick work. We all gathered around a circle, two fighters got in the ring and used pugil sticks to beat the piss out of each other. I was pretty good at it. I defeated a couple guys pretty easily, not because I was so awesome, but they just kinda sucked. Well the DS got this big grin on his face, took off his hat and shirt, and was handed a pugil stick. He told me to give him my best shot. A couple seconds later I had landed one on him. He stopped, took a step back and gave me this sickening smile that I will never forget and continues to haunt my nightmares. .. he then blasted me in an uppercut with the pugil stick so hard that it lifted me off my feet and landed me half out of the ring. I was knocked out for a few seconds.
The DS actually gave me a hand up, dusted me off, asked if I was okay. I said I was fine and that I wanted another round. DS patted me on my back, gave me a complement, and declined kicking my ass again. That night after chow the DS said to me that he was surprised I had actually landed a blow on him as no Recruit had ever done that before. It was barely a tap. He said that had it been a real bayonet, I’d have opened up his jugular and he he would have been dead. I said, yeah, but you would have died after my decapitated head stopped rolling around on the ground. He actually laughed.
In the field I only actually used my bayonet once. And that was to spear my rifle into the ground so I could relieve myself.
The US Marines though, those cats take the bayonet a lot more seriously. Their training is far more intensive.
I would not want the US Military to ever drop the bayonet as a weapon. It’s old school, sure, but can be very effective in the hands of a man that is trained and motivated.

15 thoughts on “Horse Pucky”

  1. I think horses have been used in all of our wars except for Vietnam.
    One of my uncles used pack mules in Burma during WWII. The Ghurkas that were with him used them for carrying all their stuff.

  2. To be fair, Obama’s exact words were that “we have fewer horses and bayonets” than we did in 1916. With the development of armored vehicles (and reliable vehicles in general) this is definitely true for horses. Likewise, while the bayonet is most certainly still in use I would suspect that the issue and daily utilization of them is far lower than in 1916. I haven’t found any sources to prove or disprove that one though, so if you’ve got one let me know.

    Definitely not suggesting the man is a military mastermind, just tired of hearing words twisted by both sides.

      1. Eh, that’s conjecture. I’m sure I could find some libtard who would say the exact opposite with just as much conviction. Really just interested in whether or not it’s factually accurate.

    1. From the department of picayune fact-checking: The U.S. Army has 419,155 bayonets in its inventory. The Marine Corps has about 195,334 bayonets (and has plans to acquire 175,061 more).
      And, at last count, the Army had 176 horses.

      Less horses, indeed, than in 1916; but substantially more bayonets.

      1. I don’t know how or where they managed to dredge those numbers up from but I’m impressed. Any idea what the inventory numbers were in 1916? Not that I’m disputing it, that’s a lot of steel any way you look at it, but I’d be curious to see the figures behind the judgement of “more”.

        1. “According to the Wall Street Journal, the U.S. military has at least 600,000 bayonets in stock and plans to acquire 175,000 more.

          Given that there were about 200,000 men in the Army and National Guard in 1916, according to National Review, that would mean that there are three times as many bayonets today and probably will be at least four times as many than before World War I.” (via HotAir)

  3. I would think that the military has MORE bayonets now than in 1916. I believe that the military manpower numbers didn’t rise until a year later when the draft happened for The Great War, so current numbers are higher now than 1916. I’m too lazy to research the numbers but I refuse to let obama think he has wit under pressure. BTW, one of the last things I would ever want to experience is a pissed off devil dog with nothing but a bayonet after saying something about his wife/mom/sister. I would be dead in no less than 10 different & twisted ways.

    1. You could have a point there. I did a little light digging to see if I could find 1916 military numbers but didn’t come up with anything. I’m sure they’re out there somewhere. Also curious what the actual issue numbers are. I know most (all?) branches train with them but do the Air Force, Navy, and Coast Guard deploy them on a regular basis?

    2. This information must be Google-able. Find out for yourself, Mattitude.
      “Pissed-off Marine…”indeed. Maybe so, maybe no.
      All the Marines I’ve ever known were far more mellow than that.
      You really should get out more.
      Before everyone jumped onto the let’s-return-to “The-thrill-of-the-charge-and-the terror-of-cold-steel” bandwagon over the past few days, we should have recalled that, initially, the conversation was about the Navy.
      In 1916, we were newcomers to this “world power” horseshit.
      The battleship production of both Germany and the UK jumped after the turn of the century and both powers went with bigger ships with bigger guns.
      We played catch-up with our “Great White Fleet” world cruise – but all of the battleships involved were already obsolete.
      Google HMS “Dreadnought”. Gamechanger.
      In 1916 our Navy was to be compared against some serious contenders.
      Everybody-who-was-anybody had a Navy that could have swabbed the deck with us but…
      In our dim minds we thought that that amount of ships was “just right”.
      And so it was.
      Now, here we are with a huge Navy relative to the rest of the world and Paul Ryan reckons that we’re deficient.
      Back in Eddie Munster’s home state, might there be some Navy contractors?
      Looks like his home turf has significant coastline on both Lake Superior as well as Lake Michigan.
      Maybe some shipyard biz?
      Can you say; “pork barrel”?
      And finally, regardless of George’s heartfelt testimony, the bayonet is obsolete.
      The Army doesn’t even bother with it anymore.
      The Marines, God love ’em, are traditionalists.
      Finally, even back in 1916, the thought was toward the bayonet being an anachronism.
      The Japanese and the Russians were way into the bayonet even through WW2 but… long-range rifles, machine guns…
      Lacking usefullness and being, generally a sorry-ass sheath knife, didn’t work in its favor either.
      Tactically, the bayonet breathed its last during the Franco-Prussian war.

      1. Who the fuck is Eddie Munster? Oh your playing of the SNL skit? Uh, yeah… have you seen Paul Ryan?
        And he is right because we do need more ships in the Navy. Because unlike every other Nation we have to show dominant military presence around the whole world, not just our coast.
        If we want Peace, the world has to know not to fuck with us. Ronald Regan played the game against the Soviets and crushed them. Now we be weakened our selves and Russia and China and other places are getting frisky again. Because they’ve seen that they can bloody our nose.
        We need more Navy, Airforce , Marines, and Army… all of it.

      2. So, you’re sayin’ that you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.
        Franco-Prussian War, indeed.

        Now, you go vote for whomever you wish – and it’s obvious that’d be the SCOAMF – but you democRATs really do have to get out of the habit of making up bullshit and trying to pass it off as “facts” (especially to people who know better). It just makes you look uninformed and ill-educated.

  4. Yes, I do need to get out more but my disabilities severely limit my mobility so I take what I can get.

    The Navy (as well as the the rest of the world) had more ships around the turn of the century for a reason…airplanes just weren’t “war capable” at the time and just weren’t developed enough to carry more than a few people. Ships were used for everything, not just for ship to ship and ship to shore warfare. They were used for troop and equipment transport and because the military at the time was expanding for the war they needed tons of ships just to ferry troops across the Atlantic.

    Nowadays C-17’s, C-141’s & C-130’s do the same job better and get it done much quicker which means the Navy only needs ships that fight and not so much needs transport vessels.

    Bayonets are obsolete but military tradition trumps use for their issue. They are symbolic and also give a psychological edge to the troops. I *think* that even the Air Force issues bayonets to deployed Airmen now but the last time I was deployed (2003) I wasn’t even issued a rifle. Things have changed since then as the AF is turning into the Army “lite” in certain respects.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *