Skip to comments.
Iraqi Army to Ditch AK-47s for M-16s
Military.com ^
| February 27, 2008
| Christian Lowe
Posted on 03/06/2008 10:27:33 AM PST by gandalftb
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-131 next last
Well, I've used them both extensively. If I wanted to fight sometimes and still be able to dig latrines, I'd take the AK. If I want to fight all the time, have an E-tool, and want to shoot accurately to 400 yards and don't mind cleaning my weapon, I go with the M-16.
The Muj don't like M-16s, little access to ammo, parts or armorers. This will also make it easier to spot the friendlies.
Would not want to meet the Muj with them, however.
1
posted on
03/06/2008 10:27:33 AM PST
by
gandalftb
To: gandalftb
This is good. Very symbolic. The good guys always carry M-16s.
2
posted on
03/06/2008 10:31:17 AM PST
by
Yardstick
To: gandalftb; SandRat; tongue-tied; tomkow6; Allegra; All
3
posted on
03/06/2008 10:32:40 AM PST
by
SevenofNine
("We are Freepers, all your media belong to us, resistence is futile")
To: gandalftb
Why don’t they make M-16s in 7.62?
4
posted on
03/06/2008 10:32:55 AM PST
by
WakeUpAndVote
(Pork, just bring the hot sauce!)
To: Yardstick
the AK for upclose....an M-14 for medium long range and to shoot through stuff, a Bolt action for super long range sniping ...and put the Mattel out to pasture....
5
posted on
03/06/2008 10:34:21 AM PST
by
Vaquero
(" an armed society is a polite society" Heinlein "MOLON LABE!" Leonidas of Sparta)
To: Yardstick
The good guys always carry M-16s... until they’re captured by or sold to the bad guys.
How much is this going to cost us the taxpayers?
6
posted on
03/06/2008 10:35:08 AM PST
by
satan
To: gandalftb
"We in the U.S. know that the M-16 is superior to the AK ... it's more durable," (snicker) right, more durable.
Over here in most parts of the US the 16 is the way to go. But over their? NO. They need somthing else. The average American can keep a 16 running under those conditions but folks that grew up with AKs will tire of the constant attention required
7
posted on
03/06/2008 10:36:32 AM PST
by
TLI
( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
To: satan
Hey, I’d like a couple M-16s please. I’m partially paying for them after all!
8
posted on
03/06/2008 10:36:40 AM PST
by
adaven
To: gandalftb
Given the choice, I would take a 308!!!
9
posted on
03/06/2008 10:37:00 AM PST
by
org.whodat
(What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
To: WakeUpAndVote
Why don’t they make M-16s in 7.62?Then they'd have to call them M-21s.
10
posted on
03/06/2008 10:37:21 AM PST
by
USS Alaska
(Nuke the terrorist savages - In Honor of Standing Wolf)
To: gandalftb
I know we spent a bundle on new AK’s a while back, but in retrospect, this is a good move and shows how much both military cultures have learned from each other.
We are better off setting up supply chains on our weapons that are harder to corrupt. They are better assuming our weapons and tactics to build themselves into a powerful, regional nation.
I’m certain the press will soon be running articles on how we are flooding the market in used AK’s in the region now./s
11
posted on
03/06/2008 10:37:41 AM PST
by
Wiseghy
("You want to break this army? Then break your word to it.")
To: WakeUpAndVote
Then it would be an M-14..............
12
posted on
03/06/2008 10:38:05 AM PST
by
Red Badger
( We don't have science, but we do have consensus.......)
To: gandalftb
I bet a bunch of those young internet savy kids next door in Iran would love one of those surplus AK’s!
Do they have Ramadan stockings?
13
posted on
03/06/2008 10:39:14 AM PST
by
The Toll
To: WakeUpAndVote
They do!
14
posted on
03/06/2008 10:39:30 AM PST
by
org.whodat
(What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
To: gandalftb
We will have a lot of M-16’s available when they are replaced in most TOE’s in the not too distant future.
To: WakeUpAndVote
“Why don’t they make M-16s in 7.62?”
Ammunition supply train issues. 308 is bigger and heavier than 223. A soldier can carry more 223 ammo.
Personally I prefer the 308 but I don’t have to carry a battle load.
16
posted on
03/06/2008 10:40:06 AM PST
by
dangerdoc
(dangerdoc (not actually dangerous any more))
To: harpseal; TexasCowboy; nunya bidness; AAABEST; Travis McGee; Squantos; Shooter 2.5; wku man; SLB; ..
Last I heard, FN had the contract to make M-16s (and M-4s, too, I think) for the U.S. military. I don't know if that's still the case.
17
posted on
03/06/2008 10:40:09 AM PST
by
Joe Brower
(Sheep have three speeds: "graze", "stampede" and "cower".)
To: satan
How much is this going to cost us the taxpayers? Put it on the tab. It's $3 trillion so what's a few $ billion.
18
posted on
03/06/2008 10:40:43 AM PST
by
RightWhale
(Clam down! avoid ataque de nervosa)
To: WakeUpAndVote
Forgot to add, the ak is also made in 308!
19
posted on
03/06/2008 10:41:14 AM PST
by
org.whodat
(What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
To: gandalftb
My quibble with the M-16 is the round. The AK-47 has the larger ammunition. Isn’t that important? Put a 7.62 in the M-16 and I have no problem with it at all.
I note others have mentioned this as well.
20
posted on
03/06/2008 10:42:34 AM PST
by
DoughtyOne
(Some think McCain should pick his No 2 now. I thought the nominee was No 2. And that No 1s me off!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-131 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