I only caught the last 10 minutes - closing arguements and the final back-and-forths.

Romney's 5 minute, "welcome to reality, Mr. President" was very damning to anyone still awake. Pulling out welfare numbers, foodstamp increases, unemployment, etc. at the perfect time, and Obama took it like a little biotch...


BTW, not sure who did Obama's make-up but he looked like the Black Howdy-Doody... fitting for an actual 4 year Howdy Doody show

(10-22-2012 10:19 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  LOL.. according to various tweets, Marines and Army soldiers appear not to be happy with Obama either about his removal of bayonets in changing times...

My favorite twitterline of the night so far:
"If you missed the debate, the only thing you need to know is there's now a program to trade your old bayonet for a shiny nuclear submarine. "

But they're letting the President have it for that comment.. (I dont' know if you can call it a gaffe)

Fact Check! RT @rebeccagberg: Um, Mr. President: The U.S. Army still uses bayonets. http://www.army.mil/factfiles/equipment/...yonet.html …
"I still like my bayonet. But what do I know. I only served in two wars. #caring #LynnDebate"

Wow.. and this link really lets PBHO Have it.

Um, Mr. DaSaintFan, Fact Check! Obama never said they no longer use bayonets.

But who fact checks the fact checkers?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...itical-fo/

Quote:In the debate, Obama said Romney called Russia "the biggest geopolitical threat facing America."

Romney said almost exactly that in a CNN interview, saying the Russians "fight for every cause for the world's worst actors." In a later interview, however, Romney softened his language, calling Russia our "No. 1 adversary" in terms of UN votes and emphasized it’s not an enemy of the kind launching missiles at American shores.

We rate Obama’s statement True.

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/false-claim...al-debate/

Quote:In the third and final Obama-Romney debate, the candidates again contradicted each other, while each offered incorrect or twisted factual claims.

■Obama wrongly claimed Romney called Russia the “biggest geopolitical threat facing America.” Actually, Romney called Russia a “foe” and not a “threat.” He said “the greatest threat that the world faces is a nuclear Iran.”

(10-22-2012 08:39 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Hey Barry!!! a person worth a few million dollars running a small factory or service business is a small business. Some bozo running a business out of his garage with one employee doesn't build the economy.

Steve Jobs started Apple out of a garage in California...

(10-23-2012 11:34 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-22-2012 08:39 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Hey Barry!!! a person worth a few million dollars running a small factory or service business is a small business. Some bozo running a business out of his garage with one employee doesn't build the economy.

Steve Jobs started Apple out of a garage in California...

And he built the whole thing with one employee?

Yeah...didn't think so.

(10-22-2012 08:58 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(10-22-2012 08:57 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  http://i.imgur.com/6NgA8.gif

Is this graphic correct? Surprising if true.

I have to block that site because of Fim and Max making sig images that take up more than half of my screen.. (and in some cases all of my screen)..

(10-22-2012 08:57 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  http://i.imgur.com/6NgA8.gif
Is this graphic correct? Surprising if true.

Basically true with a few minor points:

Royal Navy is currently down to one "through-deck cruiser" instead of three as depicted, and is in process of bringing QE2 into service, followed by sister Prince of Wales, which will give it two about the size of the Russian Kuznetsov shown, instead of the three smaller ones. The entire left-hand column for the US is amphibious ships, which have less combat warplane capability than anything in the right hand column except the smaller French helo carrier Jeanne d'Arc and the comparable Royal Navy HMS Ocean (bottom ships shown under both countries). China is bringing into service one about the size of the Russian Kuznetsov or UK QE2/POW, with a second to follow.

The big difference is that the other navies all focus on defense of homeland and surrounding seas, whereas US is the one navy with a global focus.

(10-23-2012 09:14 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Um, Mr. DaSaintFan, Fact Check! Obama never said they no longer use bayonets.

Hey Tom... I didn't write that, it was a direct copy from a tweet... but yes he said "less bayonets and horses"

Are there more or less infantry/foot soldiers now than in 1917? More, I do believe.

Every soldier is STILL issued a bayonet.. therefore he was wrong.

Quote:According to the official U.S. Marine Corps website, every Marine is STILL required to complete a bayonet training program ... because "the weapon becomes just as effective [as a rifle] in close combat situations."

Where did that quote come from? And just because they still train on it, does that mean they issue them to ALL Marines?

And what about the other branches of service. I thought I read that the Army has stopped the training program on the bayonets a few years back.

And I did not mean to imply that you said that, sorry for the confusion.

Heh, attack of the racist killer billboards.

Quote:However, in a war dominated by roadside bombs and insider attacks, hand-to-hand combat is pretty rare. Few Marines or soldiers ever use a bayonet and service members on patrol do not equip their rifles with bayonets.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/10/23...nd-horses/

(10-23-2012 03:14 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Where did that quote come from? And just because they still train on it, does that mean they issue them to ALL Marines?

And what about the other branches of service. I thought I read that the Army has stopped the training program on the bayonets a few years back.

And I did not mean to imply that you said that, sorry for the confusion.

Yep, they still issue them as standard equipment to all Marines, at least they did as of a couple of years ago. And I think the Army still trains with them (But I don't know about the issuance of them)

(10-23-2012 03:48 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  

(10-23-2012 03:14 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Where did that quote come from? And just because they still train on it, does that mean they issue them to ALL Marines?

And what about the other branches of service. I thought I read that the Army has stopped the training program on the bayonets a few years back.

And I did not mean to imply that you said that, sorry for the confusion.

Yep, they still issue them as standard equipment to all Marines, at least they did as of a couple of years ago. And I think the Army still trains with them (But I don't know about the issuance of them)

According to the article Tom posted they are still standard issue for the Marines.
"But the bayonet is still standard issue military equipment for the U.S. Marine Corps starting at basic training. Marines train in how to use the bayonet in close combat warfare."

Yes, but we've all seen countless footage of Marines, etc. patrolling the streets of Iraq and Afghanistan. And I don't remember once seeing a bayonet on a weapon.

(10-23-2012 03:59 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Yes, but we've all seen countless footage of Marines, etc. patrolling the streets of Iraq and Afghanistan. And I don't remember once seeing a bayonet on a weapon.

Bayonet charges are unusual but not unheard of, even in the modern army (and note that they didn't start out with the bayonets on their weapons - why have a sharp pokey thing on the end of your weapon until you need it?).

Quote:The fire was so close and at such an angle (a close quartered, L-shaped ambush) that the only way to defeat it "was to put boots on the ground," said Falconer.

So he immediately ordered his men to dismount and fix bayonets.

"When the order came to dismount and attack, it was just like what we’'ve done dozens of times in training," said Rushforth to the Sun. "We were pumped up on adrenaline — proper angry. It'’s only afterwards you think, ‘Jesus, I actually did that’.'”"

The six soldiers charged across open ground, pausing only to throw themselves to the ground to avoid enemy fire, and return a bit of their own. In a few small sprints, they had traversed to the first trench, into which they immediately leapt, coming face to face with the enemy.

The fighting was close quarters and intense.

"Basically, it was short, sharp and furious," said Wood, who was later awarded the Military Cross for actions that day.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-most-...z2AAhpQteh

Yeah, "fix bayonets" is pretty much universal for "**** just got real."

(10-23-2012 03:59 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Yes, but we've all seen countless footage of Marines, etc. patrolling the streets of Iraq and Afghanistan. And I don't remember once seeing a bayonet on a weapon.

Tom, they have this thing called a scabbard which they carry the bayonet in when it's not attached to the rifle. Normally a bayonet is not attached to the rifle unless ordered. That's been true since World War One at least. If you look thru pictures taken in World War 2 more times than not you will not see a bayonet attached to the rifle but you will see a scabbard on their web belt.