Free Republic

<p>Ben Thomas and three colleagues were driving north out of Baghdad in an SUV on a clear mid-September morning, headed down a dirt road into a rural village, when gunmen in several surrounding buildings opened fire on them.</p> <p>In a brief but intense firefight, Thomas hit one of the attackers with a single shot from his M4 carbine at a distance he estimates was 100 to 110 yards.</p>

U.S. forces rolled over the Iraqi military in just weeks. The plans seemed flawless, and the courage of the soldiers and Marines unflappable. But with the dust settling — and the adrenaline rush of battle now subsiding — military officials are finding some weapons performed as advertised. Others, however, let troops down when they needed them most. Army and Marine officials recently released after-action reports compiling what was right and what was wrong about the small arms with which troops squared off against Iraqi forces. Soldiers and Marines rated the rifles and pistols they carried into battle, and not all...

It’s smaller, lighter and better suited for modern battles. And it might be headed into the hands of U.S. Marines. Marine Corps officials wrapped up testing two new rifles as a possible replacement to the M-16A2 in stock now: the short M-4 carbine and the M-16A4, an upgraded model of the rifle Marines use now. The jury’s still out, but a decision is expected soon. So far, though, the M-4 is garnering praise from the Marines and looks to be a front-runner. However, some soldiers who fought in Afghanistan have expressed concerns about the M-4, which also is standard issue...

This is related to previous Milinet discussion (also posted to GyG'sForum) re Small Arms Performance in Afghanistan, "My Rifle." etc. Please direct all responses to MAJUSMCRET@aol.com