1. let me clarify - my position is that a knife and a firearm serve essentially the same purpose - killing people. whil ethe vast majority of what the army does is lethal, in todays reality armies are often called in to use less than lethal force. a stick is perfect for less than lethal force. if I had to commit X time to training, and Y to knife training, I would remove the knife training and replace it with stick training.
2. I understand what you are saying about armor, but a soldier is not a terribly target rich enviroment for a knife. I once saw a friend get hit with a pice of shrapnel from a 155 mm shell, a piece maybe 10 inches by 4 inches - it came zipping through the air and embedded itself in a magazine in his web belt, without breaking his skin. I would not be thrilled about tring to find a spot in a soliders body that I could easiely hit with a knife and kill him. much eaier to shoot.
3. I would be happy to have anybody who actually knows american QCB doctine tell me what I am missing - but from what I know the doctring that the US adopted before the entry into Iraq came directly from Israeli doctine for close quarters - something that I drilled on for tens of thousands of hours. if you look at the opening of the video, you see teams of 3 and 4 men standing very close to each other, going into buildings. this is typically what it is all about - getting two men into a room firing accurate and rapid fire without hitting each other, and having 1 to 2 people close behind them (without getting hit by accident) ready to take their place if one is hit or has a weapons malfuntion.