Re: bayonettes are too a useful device

John spake thusly upon matters weighty: 

> Sounds cute--but how realistic?  How often do crowds seriously resist 
> troops trying to put them down?  Maybe I'm just thinking US crowds,
but 
> IIRC in LA once the Guard showed up with the armored Hummers w/
machine 
> guns on top, the city got real quiet real fast.  It's of course 
> different in places like Northern Ireland where you have serious 
> terrorists manipulating the crowd and providing backbone as well as 
> sniper and bomb-throwing support to the riot.

Without sarcasm, I'd note that even the angry underclass in the US 
tends to have better conditions and more experience with a legal 
system and a stable government than the average person in the third 
world or some of the other hotspots around Europe. And then (as you 
say) we throw in provocateurs and agitators.... 

> >Of course, it assumed that there was no crowd control. The crowd was 
> already >beyond control... :-)
> 
> All it takes is one .50 cal to regain control.  Really, most mobs have

> no stomach for real fighting.  They're just there to loot something.

Not quite. All it takes is a .50 cal and the ROE that lets you even 
consider using it. For those who remember the Philadelphia paper 
article on Somalia that LOS put us on to, you'll recall the situation 
go out of hand really fast because that is a country where everyone 
seems to have a gun, lots of folks seem to use a narcotic substance, 
and the value of a human life seems questionable even to its 
inhabitants.  The US had .50s and all manner of other toys, but that 
didn't stop an operation turning into a real cock up. 

> Besides, who wants to paint up a couple hundred (small mob) civillian 
> figures for use in a one-off sort of scenario?

True. 
 
.  Note also that kids tend to flock around troops that don't 
> have a reputation for brutality (see: US Army in Europe during WWII) 
> and if one of them happens to have grenade. . . And don't forget that 
> baby carriages make a good place to hide weapons, with or without baby

> included.

In the Somalia piece, as I recall, there was one case of a man 
advancing firing his AK while clutching his baby. (Or a baby). That 
makes for a tough choice for the soldier facing that. I don't know 
about you, but I'd feel pretty rotten if I had to (accidentally even) 
take out a baby. You know it isn't the baby's fault.....

As you pointed out, civilians can make for interesting 
'complications' in scenarios. Witness the VC - blend with local 
populace really easily. You can understand why US servicemen 
eventually developed the 'kill it. Let god worry about who it was.' 
approach in some cases. But such scenarios do break up the monotony 
of two guys lining up on opposite sides of the board in 
attack/defence scenarios.....

Tom.  
/************************************************
Thomas Barclay
Software Specialist
Police Communications Systems
Software Kinetics Ltd.
66 Iber Road, Stittsville
Ontario, Canada, K2S 1E7
Reception: (613) 831-0888
PBX: (613) 831-2018
My Extension: 2036
Fax: (613) 831-8255
Software Kinetics' Web Page: 
     http://www.sofkin.ca
SKL Daemons Softball Web Page: 
     http://fox.nstn.ca/~kaladorn/softhp.htm
**************************************************/