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
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-96 next last
When did the M4 replace the M16 as the standard battle rifle?
To: too_cool_for_skool
2
posted on
05/22/2010 12:00:50 PM PDT
by
Ken522
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?)
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)
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.)
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!)
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)
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.)
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
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)
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)
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
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)
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
To: imahawk
15
posted on
05/22/2010 12:11:55 PM PDT
by
crazydad
(What)
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?)
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)
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)
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!)
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
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-96 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson