Is it true that some soldiers in Europe and Asia used long bows and swords to fight during World War Two? If so, what made them choose this over the gun?
Just one that I know of, "Mad Jack" Churchill, a British commando. As the nickname suggests, he was a little unusual.
Mad Jack might be a bad example. But the sword has several advantages in close quarter combat. It takes more skill, but an expert with one facing down men in a trench with bayonets is liable to do well.
The bow has a few advantages as well, not the least being its relative silence and higher killing power compared to most guns (High powered compound bows have been known to remove limbs). I'm actually surprised they are not still occasionally used in missions requiring stealth.