Just how effective is the bolo vs. firearms? ... as stupid as the question may sound
While not
efficient (casualty rate among bolomen was obviously high), just the same when employed properly tactically, the result can be
effective.
Here's a continuation of Fulton's
article:
Like all good guerilla fighters, the Filipinos were improvisers. They took advantage of the tropical topography with its exceptionally high grasses (well over six feet tall), dense jungles, and winding, constricted trails, to mount ambushes using a tactic called “the bolo rush”. The Philippine bolo is a fearsome, short (16” to 18”), single-edged, razor-sharp cutting weapon. Every farmer had one and knew how to use it, whether for harvesting crops, hacking trails through jungle, or taking off a limb in a fight. A large force, often 100-200 “bolo men” would lie hidden near a trail. When a smaller American patrol came along in single-file, Filipino snipers would fire, forcing them to drop for cover. At a signal, the bolo men would rush the soldiers lying prone on the trail, inevitably losing many in their ranks to rifle fire but occasionally overwhelming the Americans with their sheer numbers and the ferocity of the charge. Commissioned officers and sergeants, armed only with the Colt .38 revolver, were a primary target.
Think about it! There you are, suddenly sprawled in the mud of a narrow jungle trail, scared as hell, hearing the thud of hundreds of feet and screams in a language you don’t understand. You can’t see more than a few feet because of the thick grass and vegetation. Suddenly several blurry shapes are running towards you. And all you have in your hands is this “little popgun”. It is not a question of getting off a quick shot or two. With the Colt .38, if you did not hit each attacker in a vital part, the head or heart, the bullet would go right through the man. For the attacker it was a terrible, sharp pain but a small, clean hole that would not slow his momentum. For you it could mean death in a few seconds. Understandably there was major anger from men in the field over the inadequacy of the Colt .38 (and sometimes the limited stopping power of the otherwise excellent Krag 30-40 rifle).
Complaints were made to the Army’s Bureau of Ordinance ...
As an aside, though the clamor for a higher caliber sidearm [.45] is more associated with the encounter with the Moros, as Fulton pointed out the origins can actually be traced back to the US military's earlier experience with the bolomen of northern (Luzon) and central (Visayas) Philippines.