Replies

M16 are pee shooters. It is a wonder the Iraqi are going along with the plan. For the life of me I cannot figure out why our Army and Marines have not gone back to the 7.72 round as standard issue. Damn kids now adays could get used to a little recoil. One aims, shoots to kill. Not put a little hole in someone, where their target often can get away. Blow their damn leg or arm off, if you can't pump a few into the kill zone.
I have owned twenty twos, shot Win. 222 and 250, owned a custom Rem. 243 1" barrel BDL, 7.65 Mauser, and shot plenty of rounds from Springfield 306.
I for one would never have choosen such a small bore round. The least the Army could have done is used a high end 6mm round if they where so concerned with new recruits getting their shoulders bruised. But the old NATO round should have been keeped in service all to use. Not just snipers. The Army went along with the PC gang. Now both or Soldiers and Marines have an undersize/powered field rifle to contend with. As far as the arguments always given about how a small bore high velocity bullet can do all kinds of damage, fine. But in the reality one wants to knock down their target with one well placed round. Not have to put a half dozen holes in them.

I agree. To me, there is one good reason for the 5.56 round. You can carry a lot more of them. Other than that I don’t get it. The recoil is something the flash suppressor and the release of the gasses as they work the action should mitigate for nearly every shooter. And like you said, if they couldn’t have a bullet bigger than a varmint round, they could have chosen a 6mm round, like the .260 Rem.

What the Iraqi Army badly needs is medium and heavy weapons like al-Qaeda and the Madhi Army has.

Of the three biggest (non-Western) armed groups in Iraq the Iraqi Army is the most outgunned of the three.