"Let's look at the word, Tactical.... It is pretty much synonomous with the word Strategic. In order to define a tactical knife, you have to have a strategy"
In fact 'tactical' and 'strategic' are not synonymous, they are two different, but related, concepts.
'Tactical' relates to short term, small scale actions and the plans, concepts and equipment that are employed in those situations. Small scale can be mano-a-mano, the way a platoon clears a building, the way a small number of attack aircraft strike a ground target, or even the way a piece of information (or misinformation) is applied.
'Strategic' relates to the bigger picture, and the way a general or politician will use the various tactical elements (above) as a whole, usually over a period of time, to eventually overwelm the enemy.
For example, a flight of F/A 18's may attack tanks on the battlefield as targets of opportunity. They take out maybe ten or twenty tanks and use 'tactics' to do so as efficently and safely as possible. The next day the same aircraft attack a fuel refinery. Again they use similar air-to-ground 'tactics' as the day before to maximise their chances of success and minimse their losses. They are successful. The net effect, over the next few days, is to starve *battlions* of [not just] tanks, but aircraft, troop movers and supply vehicles, of fuel, and severely affect their ability to wage war. The tactics are the same, but the strategic use of force is very different from one day to the next, and the effects are profoundly different.
Also, tactics for aircraft will vary according to the political, geographic and meteorological environments.
Similarly, while a soldier uses a 7" 'combat' knife chiefly as a tool (and perhaps to bolster his confidence), some people here on the forum would actually use a 4" folder as a *primary* defensive weapon. Both are tactical knives. Common sense would seem to dictate that the forumite should have the 7" combat knife and the soldier should have the 4" utility. But legal and social conditions prevailing mean that the 4 incher becomes the better option (in strategic terms) for the civilian, when one considers the fallout from the defensive use of a knife. This is where *not* having a 9" rambotron-ninja-deathmonger type affair is *strategically* advantageous, as long as it doesn't leave you tactically 'up-the-creek'.
I can't decide whether there is such a thing as a 'Strategic' knife. Perhaps the switchblade, which has been used to great effect by politicians as part of their political strategies (but whose anti-knife policies haven't been successful in the war on crime) or the blade of an assassin (although to the assassin, the knife would have been a tactical choice, perhaps to the person who employs him it could be considered strategic).
HOWEVER, after all that, I think the definintions of tactical and strategic have become blurred and that 'tactical' as relates to knives is sort of a blend of both.
So I would say that a tactical knife is one whose properties (including materials, design and legality) best suit your idea of the knife's role in a combat situation that you are likely to encounter. Which is probably why most of us don't carry swords anymore.
Confused? You will be...
[This message has been edited by Little claw (edited 04-30-2000).]
