In response to:

Hoofbeats of Electoral Doom?

Marek3 Wrote: Oct 24, 2012 12:43 AM

Actually we are using more than in 1914... of course that's because we weren't using horses in 1914 at all, the horses that were used were either British or French. However that wasn't the point, it was the condescending tone by someone who hasn't got a clue, whose only appeal was his "likability" that is the factor here.

Join the Debate!

All comments and users are subject to Townhall's new comments policy.

Marek3 Wrote: Oct 24, 2012 12:48 AM

P.PS American total strength in 1914 was 100K people including National Guard.
Total number of Marines is 214K ( I believe would have to look it up to be sure, but close enough).

Now ALL marines are issued bayonets, therefore we have more bayonets now ( just counting Marines not Army and others) then we did in 1914....
So ahm want to take that one up as well?

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

Marek3 Wrote: Oct 24, 2012 12:48 AM

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Marek3 Wrote: Oct 24, 2012 12:45 AM

Of course that's because we weren't involved in WWI until 1917, in 1914 we had very few people in military but I am sure you and obama knew that :P

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

Read Full Story

Hoofbeats of Electoral Doom?

U.S. Special Operations Forces ride into northern Afghanistan in October 2001 on horseback

This is a picture of US Special Operations Forces riding horses into Afghanistan in 2001. Contrary to the President's snide comments last night, sometimes horses in fact still play an important role in the military -- and their work in Afghanistan will be commemorated with a