The M-16, at nearly 40 inches, is widely considered too long to aim quickly within the confines of a vehicle during a firefights, when reaction time is a matter of life and death. So the M16 is too long and bulky, so we're going to use M4s for a while, and then switch to something that's nearly as long as, and bulkier than, an M16. Riiiight.
Instead of the M-16, which also is prone to jamming in Iraq's dusty environment, M-4 carbines are now widely issued to American troops.
It (the M4) is now viewed as an interim solution until the introduction of a more advanced design known as the Objective Individual Combat Weapon, or OICW.
Great idea! More of that!
Enough of the "one size fits all" mentality
In WW-II, we had the M1-garand for open (European) environments and the M1-carbine for jungle fighting in the Pacific, plus all sorts of special weapons (tommy guns, BARs). Things worked out
Let's just standardize on a full-size battle rifle (7.62 NATO, or maybe .270) with nice optics and backup iron sights, plus something modelled on the MP5 for close-quarter urban environments and to give to vehicle drivers. Plus a nice .45
Let's also kill some multi-billion-$$$ pork program and use the money for training ammo. I'd like to see ALL military get at least an hour of range time every week