• UK Soldier Gets Military Cross for Bayonet Charging a Taliban Fighter
    287 replies, posted
It is better to be over-equipped than under-equipped.
[QUOTE=Forumaster;17296526]It is better to be over-equipped than under-equipped.[/QUOTE] Not when you have a 5 mile march in front of you.
[QUOTE=Euphorium;17292949]I didn't know Brits still used bayonets. Great work on his part.[/QUOTE] I'd like to know why people think bayonets are never used anymore and when it's brought up you speak of it as if it were an ancient weapon nobody has ever heard of. I can't think of any army that isn't issued a bayonet or some form of close fighting weapon. We use the M9 and OKC-3S Bayonets. Not to mention the Ka-Bar fighting knife.
[IMG]http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm180/K_thanks_bye/lg-bawls.jpg[/IMG] this man has them
[QUOTE=Nat562;17292444]I disagree, we need less ammo and bigger mother fucking bayonets![/QUOTE] No all we need is long sticks and duct tape.
[QUOTE=SnakeHead;17282367]A US Army combat medic's main weapon is a pistol. But they use rifles too, they just have to be higher qualified with the pistol.[/QUOTE] A US Army 68W's main weapon is a carbine. M4 Carbine, with an optic. Not a pistol. They can use a pistol, but their primary weapon is a carbine.
[QUOTE=Cpl. Combine;17292264] get out, it's people like you that give us a bad name.[/QUOTE] Sorry son, you too for missing the joke.
[QUOTE=Phanny;17292812]uhhh am i the only one who doesnt think he deserves a medal for running out of ammo killing one man it only takes 1 or 2 bullets not a whole fuckin clip[/QUOTE] This isn't counter strike, in real life you don't get a targetting reticule.
[QUOTE=PopLot;17299960]This isn't counter strike, in real life you don't get a targetting reticule.[/QUOTE] lol true, if they had, that guy charging would have been dead before he even killed the Taliban fighter
He's Scottish not British, no brit has the balls for this kind of shit.
He's Manx actually.
[QUOTE=Vasili;17282323]My friend was a medic in Afghan, they had to fix bayonets at one point until they called in an air raid to bomb the hell out of a militant controlled village. Oh and who ever said medics get pistols, they have assault rifles I believe.[/QUOTE] Actually, corpsman can actually opt to not get issued rifle or pistols at all, because technically they are not combatants. However, insurgents don't care and kill everyone without prejudice. [editline]12:53AM[/editline] Oh, I would rather use a shovel or e-tool anyday to hack a person than bayonets. Bayonets take too long to stab then pull out, when an e-tool u can just go to town. But then again, bayos are more long range.
[QUOTE=Tyler_Durden;17300092]He's Scottish not British, no brit has the balls for this kind of shit.[/QUOTE] Uh, who wants to break the news to him. Anyone?
[QUOTE=bobste;17292246]and we all know how we saved everyones ass in ww1 and ww2 if it wasn't for us, you'd be speaking nazi, then we'd have to kill you[/QUOTE] Well...actually Americans were neutral up until pearl harbor. And by then the British had done so much to weaken Germany. If the Americans hadn't stepped it it would have taken longer, but you didn't "save our arses". It was a team effort. Like Iraq and Afghanistan. US forces specialize in fighting an enemy in plain sight. UK have always fought guerrilla wars a lot better than the Americans. Get over the whole "saving of the arse" thing, or else you will be constantly reminded of how a bunch of farmers kicked your arses.
"He ran out of ammunition after killing one man" How the hell did he run out of ammo after killing one guy? Did he miss a bunch of times, or was the guy he killed the Incredible Hulk?
[QUOTE=KG_1;17300257]Actually, corpsman can actually opt to not get issued rifle or pistols at all, because technically they are not combatants. However, insurgents don't care and kill everyone without prejudice. [editline]12:53AM[/editline] Oh, I would rather use a shovel or e-tool anyday to hack a person than bayonets. Bayonets take too long to stab then pull out, when an e-tool u can just go to town. But then again, bayos are more long range.[/QUOTE] Differes from country to country, but also, There's a difference between Medics and Corpsman. Medics in WW1 and WW2 were not combatants. Corpsmen today ARE combatants, so they are required to field a combat weapon, otherwise they are a liability.
[QUOTE=professional;17301167]Differes from country to country, but also, There's a difference between Medics and Corpsman. Medics in WW1 and WW2 were not combatants. Corpsmen today ARE combatants, so they are required to field a combat weapon, otherwise they are a liability.[/QUOTE] Rate you an agree. But yes, it's still true where they can technically choose to have a weapon or not. Or a 9mm or a rifle. Props to that man as well.
[QUOTE=Tyler_Durden;17300092]He's Scottish not British, no brit has the balls for this kind of shit.[/QUOTE] Well done for contradicting yourself, as Scotland is part of Britain. So basically you are saying the Scottish have no balls.
[QUOTE=StukovCA;17296602]Not when you have a 5 mile march in front of you.[/QUOTE] A bayonet hardly weighs anything [editline]02:55PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Sirdangolot5;17300576]"He ran out of ammunition after killing one man" How the hell did he run out of ammo after killing one guy? Did he miss a bunch of times, or was the guy he killed the Incredible Hulk?[/QUOTE] Read the fucking thread, it's been gone over about 50 times now [editline]02:57PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Tyler_Durden;17300092]He's Scottish not British, no brit has the balls for this kind of shit.[/QUOTE] He serves in the RRS but is from the Isle of Mann. Lrn2red
[QUOTE=CanibalMonke;17282506]Just because it involves killing people, doesn't mean we should do it cruelly and inhumanely. Did you also know that you cannot use a .50 Caliber rifle against a human being? We have these set standards so that our soldiers don't become barbaric and savage.[/QUOTE] medics are not supposed to be shot at either as they are supposed to help both sides of wounded soldiers.
[quote=Article]The 24-year-old officer, a member of the 5th battalion The Royal Regiment of Scotland, revealed that he shouted "have some of this" before shooting dead a gunman who had just emerged from a maize field.[/quote] What a crappy battlecry.
[QUOTE=Foda;17301536]medics are not supposed to be shot at either as they are supposed to help both sides of wounded soldiers.[/QUOTE] The problem with that is that the Taliban/Al-Qua'eda/Insurgents don't follow these rules, they'll shoot anyone trying to help coalition forces
[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;17300437]Well...actually Americans were neutral up until pearl harbor. And by then the British had done so much to weaken Germany. If the Americans hadn't stepped it it would have taken longer, but you didn't "save our arses". It was a team effort. Like Iraq and Afghanistan. US forces specialize in fighting an enemy in plain sight. [B]UK have always fought guerrilla wars a lot better than the Americans.[/B] Get over the whole "saving of the arse" thing, or else you will be constantly reminded of how a bunch of farmers kicked your arses.[/QUOTE] no, UK have always fought wars a lot better than the american however US militia starting 1776 eventually beat british colonial forces however all US military failed to beat vietnam farmers
[QUOTE=GoroMan;17301541]What a crappy battlecry.[/QUOTE] Somehow, I doubt catchy battle cries were on his mind in the face of possible death.
[QUOTE=Anteep2;17301756]no, UK have always fought wars a lot better than the american however US militia starting 1776 eventually beat british colonial forces however all US military failed to beat vietnam farmers[/QUOTE] Warfare was way different in the 1700s. Back then people still believed in gentlemanly warfare [editline]03:44PM[/editline] [QUOTE=GoroMan;17301541]What a crappy battlecry.[/QUOTE] Hardly a battlecry, more him saying "Fuck you" to the guy he was shooting
[QUOTE=Morbo!!!;17301838]Warfare was way different in the 1700s. Back then people still believed in gentlemanly warfare [editline]03:44PM[/editline] Hardly a battlecry, more him saying "Fuck you" to the guy he was shooting[/QUOTE] what are you talking about gentlemanly warfare? They were still trying to kill each other, technological limitations made it far more effective just to stand in lines and fire mass volleys.
I'm all for giving him a medal, but he probably quickly realized he had no choice..
[QUOTE=efeX;17280712]where da sidearm pistol yo[/QUOTE] Normal soldiers don't carry a sidearm.
[QUOTE=professional;17280906]Contrary to what you see in video games, infantry aren't issued sidearms usually. The reason being is that Your rifle gets the job done a thousand times better, and that a pistol is just extra weight and space that could've been utilized for another magazine or greande. If they ever came across a situation where a pistol was actually "needed" (confined space like a crawlspace or tunnel for example) officers and occasionally NCOs are issued a pistol.[/QUOTE] Yeah. Though American soldiers often wind up with stuff from home in addition to weapons issued. I suppose brits don't really have anything they can bring from home. Man that sucks, never really thought about that.
[QUOTE=Jack Bryce;17280699]I wonder what that taliban guy was thinking when he saw Adamson charging him...[/QUOTE] "the britsh are still using bayonettes? pfftt-AHOOHAahhh... "
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.