Quantcast
    MAIN INDEX RULES & LEGEND LOG IN  

Slowtwitch Forums: Lavender Room:
How many bayonets do we have?

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All  


Duffy

Oct 23, 12 7:53

Post #1 of 116 (4288 views)
How many bayonets do we have? Quote | Reply

I've searched the WWW to no avail (interesting in itself).

So to the LR brain trust...

How many bayonets does the armed forces of the US have in it's possession today?

How many in 1917?

Same for horses.

I know this is really stupid and pointless, but the difficulty in finding these numbers has me curious. It's like trying to find out how many actual dollars are spent on education in California (hint, it has gone up every year since as far back as 1975 despite the almost universal claim, every year, that there are "drastic cuts").


____________________________________________________
"Sometimes you just have to piss in the sink."

(This post was edited by Duffy on Oct 23, 12 7:54)


Brick

Oct 23, 12 8:03

Post #2 of 116 (4267 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Duffy] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Duffy wrote:
I've searched the WWW to no avail (interesting in itself).

So to the LR brain trust...

How many bayonets does the armed forces of the US have in it's possession today?

How many in 1917?

Same for horses.

I know this is really stupid and pointless, but the difficulty in finding these numbers has me curious. It's like trying to find out how many actual dollars are spent on education in California (hint, it has gone up every year since as far back as 1975 despite the almost universal claim, every year, that there are "drastic cuts").

It is hard to say. Prior to the passage of the draft in May, 1917 the US Army was about 100,000 strong. I do not know how many were drafted and outfitted by the end of the year but it would have been a quick ramp up. You can expect that the US had something more than 100,000 during 1917.

At present we are likely near 1 million men who would have been issued a bayonet. You can expect the US to have supplies to at least double that number. So, probably 2 million bayonets.

The point of the debacle is that what size navy we had in 1917 is an irrelevant metric by which to measure our current force structure. So, Romney was not very smart in using it. Similarly, Obama, in an attempt to be snarky and condescending, displayed a real ignorance of both our military history and current standard issue gear and force size. We very likely had far fewer bayonets in 1917 then we do now and it is a real stretch to suggest that we had more.

Romney's metric was faulty and Obama should have had the maturity to dress him down as a sober and knowledgeable CiC. Instead, he was childish, snarky and either forgetful or ignorant.


Mendeldave

Oct 23, 12 8:03

Post #3 of 116 (4265 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Duffy] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

I wonder if the real political tactic is to spew out such crazy BS that we spend all our time arguing over whether or not we have more or fewer knifes to bring to the WMD fight, enough women in our binders, where our leaders were supposedly born or not, etc, than to realize neither side as our best interest in mind and our attention has successfully been deflected?


Score one more for the political machine I guess.


type-B

Oct 23, 12 8:05

Post #4 of 116 (4260 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Duffy] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Last time I touched a bayonet was July-ish of 2002. . .during basic. I did carry a boot knife in Iraq and Afghanistan.

--------------------------------------------------------

It seemed like a good idea at the time. . .


JSA

Oct 23, 12 8:07

Post #5 of 116 (4257 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Duffy] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

In April of 1917, the US had 200,000 ground troops. Today, the US has 562,000 Army soldiers and 202,000 Marines on active duty. We have another 600,000 soldiers and marines in the National Guard and Reserves. The bayonet is still standard issue for many units.

There have been 330,254 M9's issued to soldiers and marines since 1984. In addition to that, the M11 is primarily used by EOD, but, we used them when I was a 12B, Combat Engineer. Add about another 20,000 M11's issued since 1990.


I have no idea what the numbers are for horses.




“If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went.” - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR


Quel

Oct 23, 12 8:12

Post #6 of 116 (4245 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Duffy] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

The point is: it doesn't matter. While they may still serve a purpose at times, bayonets and horses are largely irrelevant to military capabilities now a days. That's why you have no idea how many of them we have.

I'll throw some of you a bone and ignore the spot-on mockery Obama dished out and some of you can't seem to smartly set aside and focus on the point Romney made.

We learned our Navy lesson regarding number of ships after Pearl Harbor. Battleships were out, carriers were in. I'm not sure why people are having such a hard time coping with something that became blatantly obvious more than 70 years ago, never mind citing numbers from almost 100 years ago. Quoting 1916 Navy ship numbers as if they mean something is ridiculous. If we decommissioned our Naval carrier groups and used the funds to invest in a bunch of 17 foot skiffs, we'd have more ships than we did in 1916. But who the fuck would do that?


Brick

Oct 23, 12 8:13

Post #7 of 116 (4242 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [JSA] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

JSA wrote:
In April of 1917, the US had 200,000 ground troops. Today, the US has 562,000 Army soldiers and 202,000 Marines on active duty. We have another 600,000 soldiers and marines in the National Guard and Reserves. The bayonet is still standard issue for many units.

There have been 330,254 M9's issued to soldiers and marines since 1984. In addition to that, the M11 is primarily used by EOD, but, we used them when I was a 12B, Combat Engineer. Add about another 20,000 M11's issued since 1990.


I have no idea what the numbers are for horses.



Our numbers are off. Here is one of my sources:

Mobilizing for War

Though the United States had joined the fight, it would be some time before American troops could be fielded in large numbers. Numbering only 108,000 men in April 1917, the US Army began a rapid expansion as volunteers enlisted in large numbers and a selective draft instituted.

http://militaryhistory.about.com/...erview/a/wwi1917.htm


(This post was edited by Brick on Oct 23, 12 8:16)


Brick

Oct 23, 12 8:15

Post #8 of 116 (4227 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Quel] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Quel wrote:
The point is: it doesn't matter. While they may still serve a purpose at times, bayonets and horses are largely irrelevant to military capabilities now a days. That's why you have no idea how many of them we have.

I'll throw some of you a bone and ignore the spot-on mockery Obama dished out and some of you can't seem to smartly set aside and focus on the point Romney made.

We learned our Navy lesson regarding number of ships after Pearl Harbor. Battleships were out, carriers were in. I'm not sure why people are having such a hard time coping with something that became blatantly obvious more than 70 years ago, never mind citing numbers from almost 100 years ago. Quoting 1916 Navy ship numbers as if they mean something is ridiculous. If we decommissioned our Naval carrier groups and used the funds to invest in a bunch of 17 foot skiffs, we'd have more ships than we did in 1916. But who the fuck would do that?

A 17 foot skiff is not a ship. It is a boat. Big difference. As CiC Obama should know the difference and Romney had better learn.


Old Hickory

Oct 23, 12 8:16

Post #9 of 116 (4226 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Duffy] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Condescending response by the leader of the free world doesn't make for interesting conversation. Does it?


Duffy

Oct 23, 12 8:16

Post #10 of 116 (4221 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Brick] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Quote:
The point of the debacle is that what size navy we had in 1917 is an irrelevant metric by which to measure our current force structure. So, Romney was not very smart in using it. Similarly, Obama, in an attempt to be snarky and condescending, displayed a real ignorance of both our military history and current standard issue gear and force size. We very likely had far fewer bayonets in 1917 then we do now and it is a real stretch to suggest that we had more.

I agree with this.

Does anyone else find it curious that the bayonet numbers are so difficult to find?

All the "news" stories talk about who got the better of the exchange and some even say "we still use bayonets", but you'd think the job of a journalist is to get the facts out there. If I did that for a living the first thing I'd report is the actual number of bayonets and horses we have now compared to back then.

Of course, this is all totally stupid and irrelevant (perfect for The Lavender Room), but who cares? I already voted anyway.


____________________________________________________
"Sometimes you just have to piss in the sink."


JSA

Oct 23, 12 8:20

Post #11 of 116 (4202 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Brick] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Brick wrote:
JSA wrote:
In April of 1917, the US had 200,000 ground troops. Today, the US has 562,000 Army soldiers and 202,000 Marines on active duty. We have another 600,000 soldiers and marines in the National Guard and Reserves. The bayonet is still standard issue for many units.

There have been 330,254 M9's issued to soldiers and marines since 1984. In addition to that, the M11 is primarily used by EOD, but, we used them when I was a 12B, Combat Engineer. Add about another 20,000 M11's issued since 1990.


I have no idea what the numbers are for horses.



Our numbers are off. Here is one of my sources:

Mobilizing for WarThough the United States had joined the fight, it would be some time before American troops could be fielded in large numbers. Numbering only 108,000 men in April 1917, the US Army began a rapid expansion as volunteers enlisted in large numbers and a selective draft instituted.http://militaryhistory.about.com/...erview/a/wwi1917.htm


You are looking at Army soldiers for your 108,000 number. My 200,000 number is all ground troops, not just Army. In addition, it includes the national guard. I have the military history book at home from my ROTC days. So, both numbers are accurate, but, include different groups.


“If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went.” - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

(This post was edited by JSA on Oct 23, 12 8:21)


Brick

Oct 23, 12 8:22

Post #12 of 116 (4191 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [JSA] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

JSA wrote:
Brick wrote:
JSA wrote:
In April of 1917, the US had 200,000 ground troops. Today, the US has 562,000 Army soldiers and 202,000 Marines on active duty. We have another 600,000 soldiers and marines in the National Guard and Reserves. The bayonet is still standard issue for many units.

There have been 330,254 M9's issued to soldiers and marines since 1984. In addition to that, the M11 is primarily used by EOD, but, we used them when I was a 12B, Combat Engineer. Add about another 20,000 M11's issued since 1990.


I have no idea what the numbers are for horses.



Our numbers are off. Here is one of my sources:

Mobilizing for WarThough the United States had joined the fight, it would be some time before American troops could be fielded in large numbers. Numbering only 108,000 men in April 1917, the US Army began a rapid expansion as volunteers enlisted in large numbers and a selective draft instituted.http://militaryhistory.about.com/...erview/a/wwi1917.htm


You are looking at Army soldiers for your 108,000 number. My 200,000 number is all ground troops, not just Army. In addition, it includes the national guard. I have the military history book at home from my ROTC days. So, both numbers are accurate, but, include different groups.

Perfect. Thanks.


JSA

Oct 23, 12 8:23

Post #13 of 116 (4187 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Duffy] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Duffy wrote:
Quote:
The point of the debacle is that what size navy we had in 1917 is an irrelevant metric by which to measure our current force structure. So, Romney was not very smart in using it. Similarly, Obama, in an attempt to be snarky and condescending, displayed a real ignorance of both our military history and current standard issue gear and force size. We very likely had far fewer bayonets in 1917 then we do now and it is a real stretch to suggest that we had more.


I agree with this.

Does anyone else find it curious that the bayonet numbers are so difficult to find?

Nope. I gave the current numbers. I am not surprised no one kept track of the number bayonets in 1917.


“If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went.” - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR


type-B

Oct 23, 12 8:23

Post #14 of 116 (4185 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Duffy] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Duffy wrote:
Quote:
The point of the debacle is that what size navy we had in 1917 is an irrelevant metric by which to measure our current force structure. So, Romney was not very smart in using it. Similarly, Obama, in an attempt to be snarky and condescending, displayed a real ignorance of both our military history and current standard issue gear and force size. We very likely had far fewer bayonets in 1917 then we do now and it is a real stretch to suggest that we had more.


I agree with this.

Does anyone else find it curious that the bayonet numbers are so difficult to find?

All the "news" stories talk about who got the better of the exchange and some even say "we still use bayonets", but you'd think the job of a journalist is to get the facts out there. If I did that for a living the first thing I'd report is the actual number of bayonets and horses we have now compared to back then.

Of course, this is all totally stupid and irrelevant (perfect for The Lavender Room), but who cares? I already voted anyway.

Maybe not the US. . .but I remember hearing about this over the net when I was in Mosul. Fucking hardcore.

"In May 2004, approximately 20 British troops in Basra were ambushed and forced out of their vehicles by about 100 Shiite militia fighters. When ammunition ran low, the British troops fixed bayonets and charged the enemy. About 20 militiamen were killed in the assault without any British deaths."

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0bd_1249524865

--------------------------------------------------------

It seemed like a good idea at the time. . .


Duffy

Oct 23, 12 8:24

Post #15 of 116 (4182 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Quel] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Quel wrote:
The point is: it doesn't matter. While they may still serve a purpose at times, bayonets and horses are largely irrelevant to military capabilities now a days. That's why you have no idea how many of them we have.

I'll throw some of you a bone and ignore the spot-on mockery Obama dished out and some of you can't seem to smartly set aside and focus on the point Romney made.

We learned our Navy lesson regarding number of ships after Pearl Harbor. Battleships were out, carriers were in. I'm not sure why people are having such a hard time coping with something that became blatantly obvious more than 70 years ago, never mind citing numbers from almost 100 years ago. Quoting 1916 Navy ship numbers as if they mean something is ridiculous. If we decommissioned our Naval carrier groups and used the funds to invest in a bunch of 17 foot skiffs, we'd have more ships than we did in 1916. But who the fuck would do that?

I agree. I'm not the person who "can't seem to... set aside" Obama's dick move. Romney made a stupid point.

I don't know how many different ways I can say that Romney got de-pantied here. I don't know how many ways I can say this whole thing is largely irrelevant.

Romney said what he said and it was kind of dumb. I'm not defending it in any way. Obama said what he said, came across as a dick and may be factually wrong.

The point this thread is to determine what the actual facts are. And a side point I'm trying to make is that seemingly zero journalists are actually interested in finding the numbers.


____________________________________________________
"Sometimes you just have to piss in the sink."


Miguelon

Oct 23, 12 8:25

Post #16 of 116 (4177 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Duffy] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Bayonets could be useful in case of a Zombie Apocalypse. Once you run out of bullets...


Duffy

Oct 23, 12 8:26

Post #17 of 116 (4167 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [JSA] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Quote:
Nope. I gave the current numbers. I am not surprised no one kept track of the number bayonets in 1917.

I know, but if I keep ignoring you this thread will last longer.


____________________________________________________
"Sometimes you just have to piss in the sink."


JSA

Oct 23, 12 8:27

Post #18 of 116 (4158 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Quel] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Quel wrote:
The point is: it doesn't matter. While they may still serve a purpose at times, bayonets and horses are largely irrelevant to military capabilities now a days. That's why you have no idea how many of them we have.

You sure?


“If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went.” - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR


Quel

Oct 23, 12 8:29

Post #19 of 116 (4151 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [JSA] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Yes.

How many insurgents in Iraq/Afghanistan were killed by bayonet?


Brick

Oct 23, 12 8:30

Post #20 of 116 (4145 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [JSA] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

JSA wrote:
Quel wrote:
The point is: it doesn't matter. While they may still serve a purpose at times, bayonets and horses are largely irrelevant to military capabilities now a days. That's why you have no idea how many of them we have.


You sure?

To be fair, you and I have a solid idea as to how many have been issued. That does not mean we know how many the US has. In other words, we can estimate the number "in the field" but not available for issue.


type-B

Oct 23, 12 8:30

Post #21 of 116 (4140 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Quel] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

At least 20. See here: In May 2004, approximately 20 British troops in Basra were ambushed and forced out of their vehicles by about 100 Shiite militia fighters. When ammunition ran low, the British troops fixed bayonets and charged the enemy. About 20 militiamen were killed in the assault without any British deaths.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0bd_1249524865

--------------------------------------------------------

It seemed like a good idea at the time. . .


Quel

Oct 23, 12 8:32

Post #22 of 116 (4122 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [type-B] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Awesome! I stand slightly corrected, though would still deem them "largely irrelevant".


Duffy

Oct 23, 12 8:33

Post #23 of 116 (4110 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Quel] [In reply to] Quote | Reply




____________________________________________________
"Sometimes you just have to piss in the sink."


Quel

Oct 23, 12 8:37

Post #24 of 116 (4094 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Duffy] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Romney's horses would beat the enemy to death in a horse dancing competition.




iRan

Oct 23, 12 8:38

Post #25 of 116 (4085 views)
Re: How many bayonets do we have? [Quel] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

"largely irrelevant"

Pretty sure that the people doing the actual fighting, in this case the British soldiers, would disagree.

Maybe you should have said bayonets are not optimal?


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All  
 
 
 



Your Racing Helmet
What helmet brand do you anticipate most often using while racing in triathlons?
Giro
Rudy Project
Specialized
Louis Garneau
Lazer
Bell
Kask
Casco
Other