Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ButThreeLeftsDo

Yesh, poor Iraqi’s. I’ll take an AK over an M16 any day. Especially in a dirty, sandstorm prone desert environment.

The M16 doesn’t fare all that well in urban combat either. The 5.56 doesn’t have the mass to punch through walls and cars nearly as well as the 7.62.


9 posted on 06/05/2007 6:04:27 PM PDT by Arthalion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Arthalion

I agree.


10 posted on 06/05/2007 6:18:46 PM PDT by OldEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Arthalion

AK’s are for illiterate 3rd-world soldiers. They aren’t worth a shit beyond a hundred yards. The M-16 and its varients, is a much more accurate weapon at longer ranges. Most of the combat that I’m aware of in Iraq tends to be urban, or at ranges under 300 meters. The M16 will do fine here.

Don’t get me wrong...I still think the best main battle rifles was/is the M14. I carried one in the Nam and can attest to its ruggedness and reliability. That long barrel got in the way of, or got caught on, anything and everything. Someting like Springfield Amory’s SOCOM would be a better solution. Sure, put a pistol grip on it.

7.62 NATO rules.


19 posted on 06/05/2007 6:58:58 PM PDT by x1stcav (If you continually have to say you support the troops, you probably don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson