Why don't soldiers carry swords anymore? Obviously I get that it shouldn't be the first thing you try to use but if your attacker disarms you you'd be a lot better off with a katana or wakizashi or something than you would with literally nothing, or the stupid bayonets they give soldiers
the Japanese carried swords in WW2 and they were pretty effective with them. Lots of American soldiers died from banzai charges when the Japanese ran out of ammo or something
Other urls found in this thread:
en.m.wikipedia.org
army.mil
telegraph.co.uk
twitter.com
More useless gear to get caught on shit instead of an extra magazine? Bravo when do you start working for the DoD?
if an attacker disarms you from your rifle and your pistol, he probably too your sword too, dumbfuck
god i hate today's kids
that's why we have bayonets you dumb weeb
long pointy thing on a stick will beat sword anytime, just look at history
and if the japs did so well with swords why did they lose lmao
Okay then we should give soldiers spears too. But spears are a lot harder to carry around. Spears only beat swords because they are longer but if the enemy doesn't have spears but you have swords you will win.
I just said bayonets aren't good for that.
It would be like a last ditch thing and it doesn't have to be from being disarmed. You realize ammo isn't infinite, right? If a soldier runs out of ammo without a backup weapon he is screwed and it's over, especially since they don't even train soldiers in martial arts and stuff anymore
How would it be useless? I just told you why it wasn't useless
do you know what a tactical retreat is?
>a good run is better than a bad fight any day of the week
Okay but retreat isn't always an option. If you are surrounded on all sides or something you can't just retreat back to your base and pick up more ammo. You're going to have to fight one way or another and I'd rather have a sword than nothing, especially if the only thing the other guy has is a knife.
This isn't even my opinion. Like I said the Japanese in WW2 did lots of banzai charges and used their swords a lot and were actually pretty effective with them considering they were fighting in an age where everyone thought swords were "obsolete"
Some still do.
Why does he have a hinged door on his belly?
What the fuck do you think a rifle with a bayonet is? It's a makeshift spear retard. It's also pretty damn useless in modern warfare.
Swords were obsolete, they failed miserably when they came against Americans instead of disorganized and ill equipped Chinese peasants.
It's the teleportation portal. Nothing personnel, kid.
Okay and what's your point? I'm not saying swords should be the first weapon soldiers go to. But they work when you've got nothing else. And banzai charges killed a lot of Americans in the war, if we could talk to them I bet they wouldn't say the sword "failed miserably"
>swords are useful for literally any application in modern combat
Ell oh fucking ell.
I'll assume it's not a troll for a second, and it's because the bayonet is considered better than a sword in literally every way, and is also attached to the end of a fucking gun. There is literally not a single reason anyone on the entire planet should take a sword over a bayonet.
Bayonet charges were pretty successful for a time once swords got phased out. Now we don't do them anymore. Wonder why?
OKAY, WHAT'S YOUR FUCKING POINT ABOUT BAYONETS? Why are you retards so hung up on bayonets? I already said bayonets are a thing and we should have them, I'm just saying SOMEONE in the squad should have a sword to go along with it. That's all. A sword will always beat someone holding a bayonet, you'd have to be an idiot to not see how. I'm just saying that if shit hits the fan and you're out of ammo, it'd be a lot nice to fall back on something like a sword besides just a bayonet, especially since you can't slash and hack with a bayonet like you can a sword. And now that plate armor is gone which is what killed off the sword anyways, nobody is going to be able to defend against a sword.
A sword only weighs like 2 pounds, so what's the big fucking deal about bringing one along for every couple of guys
Yeah the militaries of the world would rather have knives considering they're much smaller and easier to use than some LARP sword. Maybe if we were still living in the Musket age and we were talking about Calvary then maybe but nah swords are obsolete. This is like asking "Why don't soldiers carry black powder muzzle loaders anymore?!". Literally fuck off back to
you fucking weeb.
Because it's tool in a soldiers kit that has multiple purposes you fucking moron.
Jesus Christ you're fucking stupid. Am I saying that we should get rid of bayonets? NO. I'm saying we should ADD a couple soldiers having swords here and there instead of relying JUST on the fucking bayonet for everything
well... technically they lost because we Atom Bombed the Living shit outta them
Why carry an extra piece of gear when bayonets supplemented swords over a hundred years ago and bayonets haven't been used for anything other than a utility knife in decades? You dense mother fucker. Commit unalive at your soonest convenience.
You do realize a bayonet attaches to the end of the rifle, right? You do realize that most modern day infantry keep them locked up so they don't have to owe a piece of useless equipment to Uncle Sam when it gets lost, right? You do have two brain cells to rub together, right?
Based and swordpilled
Every single banzai charge was defeated by units with even a tiny bit of combat discipline during the pacific war. Tell me, which islands did the USA get defeated and expelled from by IJA/IJN retard charges?
I wish you’d fucking retreat out of your life you damn ol dummy
Okay, how about: the Philippines, Guadalcanal, Singapore, etc. etc. The Japanese absolutely steamrolled the Allies during the beginning of the war idiot
lol gottem
>A sword will always beat someone holding a bayonet, you'd have to be an idiot to not see how.
>the guy holding the spear that shoots bullets is at a disadvantage
literally, objectively wrong on all counts from the opinions of all cultures. A sword is a sidearm and at a significant disadvantage. especially when you were talking early modern period when you might actually use a bayonet or a sword. You don't see many swords used in WWI but you do see a lot of trench art sword bayonets cut down to 6-10" to make them usable as combat knives and workable bayonets.
>a lot of american soldiers died from banzai charges
A. wrong
B. guess what the enlisted class had instead of cheap machine made gunto's?
>bayonets
With bayonet charges only right? Not a single shot fired nuh uh.
>A sword will always beat someone holding a bayonet
???? No. Did you think swords just made spears obsolete? Are you retarded?
A bayonet is effective in any remotely realistic situation where a sword would be useful, but doesn't add any significant extra weight, nor a large unwieldy object to the soldier's kit. And the knife is obviously also a tool with many uses, which a sword is not.
>Guadalcanal
>banzai charges working
Now I know you're trolling.
en.m.wikipedia.org
>Philippines
Not won because of fucking swords you dumb motherfucker.
>Singapore
Also, not won because of fucking swords. Do you know why? It's because swords are fucking useless. Even the japs knew this and only kept them to reinforce their moronic "bushido" samurai bullshit. It would be like issuing cap and ball revolvers to NCOs and Officers in the US Army to try and draw on some western rustic cowboy nonsense.
and that's why soldiers don't carry swords, or even bayonets. because fighting does not take place at arms length any more, or really even at rifle ranges. the maintenance of large infantry forces today is just an enormous racket, like everything else to do with government.
for the U.S. Military it's as much about welfare as anything.
>running out of ammo and surrendering to the godless yellow savages we mistook to be men
if we had known everything we know now about the bataan death march and coregador we wouldn't have stopped at two nukes.
are you like 14? Teacher just get to common cores WWII's page before talking for 3 months about the holocaust?
That is why you have a sidearm and a combat knife.
And if your whole platoon runs out of ammunition during a fight, well, your generals and commanders are pretty pathetic at planning. No wonder your side lost.
Also, the most successful Japanese defenses were on islands where the garrison commander prohibited or discouraged pointless ass banzai charges. Kurabayashi knew this, and so did Yahara.
>it's because they accomplish nothing other than getting your men killed for no benefit at all.
you are now aware that swords were only used as items of power/rank and that the average foot soldier used the newest and greatest invention the spear.
reach > everything else
swordfags btfo
>for no benefit at all.
Okay tell that to all of the dead soldiers who died from banzai charges. You fags are so fucking stupid lol I don't even know why I'm trying to get opinions from you idiots that have never even been in the military or some shit. All of you are just armchair soldiers talking shit about stuff you know nothing about. Have fun being a nerd, fag
Trolls used to be creative.
Wow, an actual retard.
as far as I'm aware, it was only sncos and officers that carried swords in imperial japan, and the average slope had a cavalry size bayonet
>swords were only used as items of power/rank
The OP you're responding to is a retard but that doesn't mean you need to say equally retarded shit. Yeah, the spear was the principal weapon on the battlefield for most of human military history, but that doesn't mean that swords were only ceremonial objects owned by the wealthy. For starters, the Roman Legions during the Republican and early Empire eras used swords almost exclusively on the battlefield, with the exception of their javelins that they threw prior to an engagement.
Around the same time period, Alexander's army was obviously centered around the sarissa, but his soldiers also carried swords as a backup weapon once pikes were inevitably broken or the unit was flanked.
Lots of people think of Japanese military history as being dominated by the sword, and contrarians who know a little bit will tell you that the spear (yari) was actually the primary weapon used by most soldiers. But they also fail to mention that after the Warring States Period, Japan entered an era of smaller scale warfare where swords were increasingly used on the battlefield as opposed to spears, because there were no longer massive armies of ashigaru to be used and battles were instead of a much smaller scale.
>tl;dr
OP is a retarded fag, but you're almost as stupid if you genuinely believe that swords were *only* used as ceremonial weapons.
Lets settle this debate lads, would you rather have a british infantry platoon bayonet charge you, or a japanese ww2 platoon all rush at you with 9000 times folded grorious nippon steel.
For the sake of argument all weapons are out of ammunition
real men carry what ever this is called
For quick access to spekku
The bayonet line breaks the sword charge because massed Spears is extremely difficult/impossible to charge with light (unarmored) infantry.
Ww2 era rifles with bayonets are Spears.
Parrying a sword slash is easier than getting skewered so I'll take the nips.
The malnourished Nip is probably half my size, both in weight and height, so I'd rather deal with them than a platoon of professional, well-fed, well-trained humans.
As a HEMAfag I can say it takes objectively a lot more training to teach someone how to use a sword effectively than to tech someone how thrust with a knife tied to the end of a rifle.
>you'd be a lot better off with a katana or wakizashi
holy fuck youre actually retarded AND a weeb
Who won those battles? Was it the guys charging with faggy swords?
Or, was it the guys with endless reinforcements and combat discipline?
Oh okay, so you're admitting that the Americans won because they had more guys and tanks and shit and not because they were actually better at fighting. I'm glad you agree, you fucking moron.
A properly sharpened and honed katana can cut through body armor.
Along with stealth there is an obvious advantage there.
lol read some history kid, and lay off the jap kids cartoons.
you lost the war nip, stop bitching about it over 70 years later
While op is a massive faggot, and a retard to boot, we can all agree that swords are cooler, yes?
This thread reminds me of one of mootles old bait furfag threads where he b&d everyone.
Except its sword weebs
What a dick. Clever, but still.
To start, firearms are violence at a distance. If you’re out of ammo, you’re out of violence and out of luck.
So let’s take a look at the M16 and bayonet combo because it is significantly shorter than WWII era weapons. M16 is about 39 and a half inches. The bayonet’s blade is 6 and 3/4. Take away a few inches for mounting and call the bayonet’s blade length 4 inches. You’re left with a 43 and a half inch long spear. A katana’s blade length is about 28 and some change inches. Call it an even 29. Add 8 inches or so for the handle and you’re left with a 37 inch long piece of metal that you have to carry around with you on top of everything else.
You remember the whole “violence at a distance” thing? That’s been known for centuries, which is why spears were so successful. What’s a little faster swing speed if I can stab you in the face before you get to me? The entire goal of close combat is to break contact and get your enemy at a distance. So why not start off with a weapon that’ll allow you to stab them at a distance?
Last point right here. A bayonet is not just a bayonet. It’s a can opener, knife, tent stake, screwdriver, etc. while a sword is just a sword. So why not give yourself a lighter and more useful piece of kit instead of carrying a single use weapon that will almost never see any use?
based Estonian brothers
swords are perfect for cold conditions when your rifle and bayonet are iced up and they can't be attached in time when you're smelling the brush-Russian sneaking up to you. Secret Finnic tactics.
What the fuck is up with this guy's body shape? Looks like a cartoon character. Like he's got a big pudgy torso (or possibly muscular, can't tell under the clothes), but then his legs look like sticks. Is this a Finnish troll or something? What kind of diet do these people eat? I think trolls eat unbaptized Christian babies, don't they?
He's a bean pole, the jacket looks gortex style so it makes them look swole
>steel
>will slice through kevlar, which has six times the tesile strength of steel, and plates.
>lets ignore that stab proof vests are made with kevlar as well
Yeah. Sure kid
Let me try cutting you in half with a katana, while you're wearing nothing but cheap kevlar """armor"""
>What user thinks
Banzai is so cool running through bullets and cutting a few people down in a glorious sacrifice. I love jap dick and anime
>What it was
Mock surrender with grenades
Maybe you should try to banzai all the bullies and your step-dad who mocked you for liking anime since you think it's so cool and effective
>A sword will always beat someone with a bayonet
How. How do you beat someone holding a gun with a knife on the end with a fucking sword? Provided you catch him out of ammo, he still has the range advantage and can easily stick you while you wind up for a swing.
i can tell youre a massive weeb who doesnt shower because you think only katanas can do this. also, please, find me a katana that can cut through ar500.
>while you wind up for a swing.
OP is a fag but I don't think you understand how swords are used
feels bad don't it?
Jow Forums is truly the easiest board to bait
>they were pretty effective with them
on what fucking planet? all those charges accomplished was them getting gunned down by the guys who actually had ammo.
fucking neck yourself with barbed wire, you knuckle dragging cretin.
oh, so the better alternative is to run at the guy who has a fucking gun with a sharpened stick of metal? great job retard, you gonna cut the bullet in half next?
>hurr i was trolling all along
this board has the second lowest IQ out of all of them.
>Is this a Finnish troll or something?
he's Estonian ackhually
its satire jackass
Don't call my shitpost satire.
But yeah. Y'all niggas are dumb as fuck.
this thread was already so dumb that your post was drowned out in the sea of autism, the intellectual bar was set so low that your post was mistaken for being serious.
The only time a modern soldier is going to be within the reach of a sword it's going to be in a circumstance of clearing a tight area. Usually this shit is thought out in advance and loadouts are addressed accordingly. Even if there is some spur of the moment action and they're forced to move on a position or are overrun, a pistol or combat knife is going to work better in an urban situation and if it's the latter you can bet your ass the entire area is getting blown to shit.
What I want to know is what kind of life you've lead up until now that's allowed your critical thinking skills to become so pathetic that the romanticization of "days of the blade" could convince you that carrying a giant fucking piece of metal around jutting off your back or side would be a good idea when most foot soldier operating happens in areas where a physical footprint of said sword is going to get you killed by someone with a gun while you're trying to unsnag yourself off an obstacle.
I really hope this is bait and you're not actually this unbelievably daft.
>the year is 2022
>russia invades estonia
>be me, russian soldier
>no real resistance at first
>makes it to capital
>after a solid 3 hours of firefight the enemy side appears to be running low on supplies
>white flag goes up
>single autist runs out with sword and stabs you
>tfw
This guy gets it. It's called Combined Arms sweaty, look it up.
No, it goes Jow Forums with the lowest, followed by /v/, and then Jow Forums
The fact that /b/ isn't in the top three is proof that god is dead and this whole site needs to be nuked before it degenerates further.
Why aren't soldiers trained extensively in knife combat and hand-to-hand as a true last ditch effort?
Errybody is wearing kevlar, new or used.
Also, easily defeated by pipe or a rifle barrel.
That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Bastard Sword" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Katanas deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.
I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana.
Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.
Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.
Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.
So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Katanas:
(One-Handed Exotic Weapon)
1d12 Damage
19-20 x4 Crit
+2 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork
(Two-Handed Exotic Weapon)
2d10 Damage
17-20 x4 Crit
+5 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork
Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Katanas in real life, don't you think?
tl;dr = Katanas need to do more damage in d20, see my new stat block.
no, Jow Forums beat out /v/
Swords are pretty much officer symbols and are good for ambushing, but even then a charge of Nips with machetes to a bunch of unaware GIs would've been just as effective.
The issue sword died with the Horseback Calvary. You'll get cases of ballsy people rushing someone with a sword every now and again, but combat's changed.
>banzai charges were effective
lol no they weren't fag
da bayonet useless lol
In a very few cases during the Pacific campaign against Japan, Japanese banzai charges achieved temporary success, overwhelming and causing panic in a section of the front lines.
In almost every case, units on the flank or reserve were able to respond and throw the japs back, inflicting massive casualties.
It’s a tactic of suicidal desperation.
>army.mil
>6. No more bayonet assault course against rubber tires...but lots more pugil and combatives against a thinking opponent.
>The bayonet assault course has been a staple of bayonet training since World War I. But that's when bayonets were prevalent on the battlefield. The last time the U.S. had a bayonet assault was in 1951, and the rifle we now use in combat isn't meant for bayonet charges. Now, Soldiers will see more pugil drills in pits and on obstacle courses. This, combined with additional hours in combatives, will "warriorize" our Soldiers.
Bayonets are a waste of time for modern combat and carbines are too short to give you a meaningful over just a knife.
The Brits had a bayonet charge as recently as 2010 or some shit, in Afghanistan. The more hilarious part is that it worked and they fucking #rekt the Taliban they were assaulting. I think the absolute madman of an officer that ordered it got a medal for it, probably just because of how fucking funny it was.
Found it.
It was a NCO, not an officer though.
>Cpl Jones ordered three of his men to fix bayonets before breaking cover and leading them across 80 metres of open ground raked by enemy fire.
What an absolute lad
>too short to give you a meaningful over just a knife.
Christ, what the fuck do they put in their water rations? DMT?
jesus fuck, their nation might be a cucked disaster but their armed forces are something to behold
It's a fairly common occurrence. Canada is a mess but JTF 2 is still bad ass.
Germany is cucked as all hell, but the KSK, SEK and GSG9 are all badass mofos