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

Skip to comments.

US rifles not suited to warfare in Afghan hills
US rifles not suited to warfare in Afghan hills ^ | May 21, 2010 | AP

Posted on 05/22/2010 11:58:33 AM PDT by too_cool_for_skool

KABUL, Afghanistan — The U.S. military's workhorse rifle — used in battle for the last 40 years — is proving less effective in Afghanistan against the Taliban's more primitive but longer range weapons.

As a result, the U.S. is reevaluating the performance of its standard M-4 rifle and considering a switch to weapons that fire a larger round largely discarded in the 1960s.

The M-4 is an updated version of the M-16, which was designed for close quarters combat in Vietnam. It worked well in Iraq, where much of the fighting was in cities such as Baghdad, Ramadi and Fallujah.

(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: afghanistan; banglist; guns; m16; m4
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 next last
When did the M4 replace the M16 as the standard battle rifle?
1 posted on 05/22/2010 11:58:33 AM PDT by too_cool_for_skool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

Bring back the M14!


2 posted on 05/22/2010 12:00:50 PM PDT by Ken522
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

Give them back the Browning Automatic Rifle, the M-14, and the M-60.


3 posted on 05/22/2010 12:00:56 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

This story seems to get dragged out once very six months


4 posted on 05/22/2010 12:03:03 PM PDT by big'ol_freeper ("Anyone pushing Romney must love socialism...Piss on Romney and his enablers!!" ~ Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool
Bring back the M14 again. The Garand can fire more rounds per minute than the M14 and it is 30-06. Did they take away the 50BMG? I saw a video of a Hummer with a 50BMG mini gun that fired at the M2 rate and then over 3000 rounds per minute. It sure rocked the Hummer.
5 posted on 05/22/2010 12:03:06 PM PDT by mountainlion (concerned conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

Just tell them to get the Israeli Galil. That thing takes a beating in the desert and keeps on shooting.


6 posted on 05/22/2010 12:04:10 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ken522

No, rechamber the M-4 to fire the 6.5mm X 39mm round.


7 posted on 05/22/2010 12:06:41 PM PDT by Perdogg (Nancy Pelosi did more damage to America on 03/21 than Al Qaeda did on 09/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

For close in work nothing beats a Thompson.BAR with a cut down barrel aint bad either.


8 posted on 05/22/2010 12:07:51 PM PDT by HANG THE EXPENSE (Life is tough.It's tougher when you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

When targets presents themselves at very long ranges of fields of fire the M4s will be inadequate.


9 posted on 05/22/2010 12:08:06 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: big'ol_freeper

Absolutely, and it’s bunk. A 5.56mm round from an M4 will still perforate 1/8” plate steel at 500 meters. if it’ll go through steel plate at that distance, it’ll go through a combatant at that range (most of the combatants encountered in Iraq and Afghanistan do not wear body armor). Is it as potent at a 30-06 or 7.62x51? No, but it’s still carrying the energy and power of a 45 ACP “up close and personal” (like 7 yards). A single shot may not kill your target, but they are going to have a VERY bad day.

The issue isn’t the firepower packed by the soldiers, it’s the insane ROE that limits return fire. If you didn’t see the fire coming from a given individual - even if they have a weapon slung on their shoulder - you cannot return fire. Perfect ROE for the enemy to take a pot shot and go back to goat-herding, unopposed.

The new snipers will be charged with long-distance observation, predominantly, to keep an eye out - well out - for the very situation where a 600m away goat-herder takes a single pot-shot and re-shoulders his weapon before the round strikes or is heard. Having spotters dedicated to extreme range only - and equipped to return accurate fire at that range - is the only thing that has any chance of working with the current ROE.


10 posted on 05/22/2010 12:09:19 PM PDT by PugetSoundSoldier (Indignation over the Sting of Truth is the defense of the indefensible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

The M1 Garand did pretty well in the hills and mountains of Italy in WW2... And had a good power punch.. Ok I am biased.. I love my Garand.


11 posted on 05/22/2010 12:10:08 PM PDT by crazydad (What)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

I’d be happy to let em try out my Socom .308...


12 posted on 05/22/2010 12:11:47 PM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ken522

I used to think that then I got to shoot an FN SCAR in 7.62. It is awesome, isn’t that heavy, mounts optics that are a pain on the M-14, has a folding stock which is nice for getting in and out of vehicles. Way nicer than the M-14 in the Sage stock.


13 posted on 05/22/2010 12:11:51 PM PDT by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SandRat

give them Napalm, and the delivery system for it

let them have BBQ’s


14 posted on 05/22/2010 12:11:53 PM PDT by SF_Redux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: imahawk

I agree...


15 posted on 05/22/2010 12:11:55 PM PDT by crazydad (What)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SF_Redux

Flame Throwers and Zippo Tracks too.


16 posted on 05/22/2010 12:13:22 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

I love the M-4. It’s so much better for someone like me with short little arms.


17 posted on 05/22/2010 12:13:58 PM PDT by ViLaLuz (2 Chronicles 7:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandRat

Just like in Saving Ryans Privates. “DONT SHOOT EM,LET EM BURN”!


18 posted on 05/22/2010 12:14:43 PM PDT by crazydad (What)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool
Stories about weapons generate lots of responses on FR.

Maybe some of you gun experts can comment on this. I'm not any type of expert of this but from what I've have read is there is no perfect type of rifle for our soldiers. A rifle that's ideal for one environment is not necessarily best for all environments. That seems common sense.

The M14 was very heavy and not suited to many environments but seems ideal for Afghanistan. But if my memory serves me correctly, didn't Bill Clinton order large amounts of these weapons destroyed by executive order? It seems I read this somewhere. These weapons were safe and secure in armories on military bases. They were as safe as the gold in Ft. Know. Now we need them for Afghanistan and we don't have enough. Is this correct or am I prematurely senile?
19 posted on 05/22/2010 12:24:04 PM PDT by truthguy (Good intentions are not enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Is it cheaper to rework a receiver and replace a barrel than to purchase a new rifle chambered for another round? I don’t think the round you suggest has much greater range than does the 5.56.
Clinton order over fifty thousand of our M-14s destroyed while he was president even thought the NATO 7.62 was and still is an excellent round. My preference is the 30.06 cartridge if a new round is chosen to extend a rifleman’s reach.


20 posted on 05/22/2010 12:25:03 PM PDT by em2vn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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