In response to:

Actually, U.S. Military Still Uses Lots of Horses and Bayonets

sperry482 Wrote: Oct 23, 2012 6:02 PM
We buy our own knives now, we don't use those old bayonets.
UncleBenny Wrote: Oct 28, 2012 4:40 PM
He's right. The bayonets of today are a far cry from the bayonets of WW1. Blades back then were a foot-and-a-half long, mounted on long, heavy 1903 Springfields. You're talking serious close combat weapon. The little rinky-dink blades of today are good as can openers, not much else. I was in Viet Nam, never carried a bayonet - I had my own Randall knife. Today is no different.

As far as those horses in Afghanistan that people keep yammering about, guess what? They were not US Army horses, they were borrowed from the Afghans. Good luck finding horses in any current unit's TOE, other than for ceremonial purposes.

Last night during the final presidential debate of 2012, President Obama said we have "fewer horses and bayonets" during an exchange with Governor Mitt Romney. The comments were condescending, belittling and Obama implied the use of bayonets and horses was obsolete. This is not the case. Yes, Obama said "fewer" rather than "not at all," but let's take a look at how the military uses horses and bayonets today.

First, the Marines. The Marines have an entire page on their website dedicated to the bayonet, which is used in...