Thoughts on the military and military activities of a diverse nature. Free-ranging and eclectic.

Monday, May 14, 2007


This is coolbert:

"Iraqi Army receives M-16 and M-4 rifles"

I must say I was more than mildly surprised when I read this. "Issue M-16 rifles to the NEW Iraqi Army?"

It seems like a foolish idea. That entire country would seem to be just one huge weapons depot. Saddam was madly in love with all sorts of weaponry and spent ungodly amounts of oil dollars buying "stuff" from all over the world.

Including the AK in all it's varieties and manifestations.

What is this all about?

I am not sure?

Sounds like Vietnamization from the late 1960's?

You would think that American advisers and "experts" would re-build the Iraqi military with weaponry that the Iraqi is already very familiar with. If at some point in the future, the Iraqi themselves wants to upgrade, let them do so. But right now the AK is more than adequate for the task. And will be for some time to come.

I have a bad feeling this will raise expectations in an unwarranted manner that will all come to nought!

From comments to the FreeRepublic web site article: [my own comments in bold!]

"I believe it would be better for them, and us, if we left them to a rifle they understand and know how to use."

"Good gawd. The country is awash in AK-47s. What a waste."

Absolutely right on!! There must already BE A SUPER ABUNDANCE OF AK AND AMMUNITION ALL THROUGHOUT IRAQ!! The AK is effective! Why need a new weapon?

"Most of the fighting in Iraq is street-to-street. Short range. The extra accuracy of the M-16 is not required."

Exactly. The city fighting as going on in Iraq does not require long-range accuracy. All militaries of the world realize that firefights in modern warfare almost always occur at a range of 200 meters or less.

"The shift from AK to AR is a sign they are becoming professionals."

"This is a great idea. I think the Iraqis will get a lot of pride from arming themselves with the small arms symbol of the free world."

"I like the symbolism of this. The Kalashnikov is a symbol of third-worldism, communism, and terrorism. The M-16 is a symbol of the free world and being on the right side of history."

As to the three above comments, they used to say the same thing about the South Vietnamese. The ARVN was originally equipped with the Garand M-1 and the Garand Carbine. ARVN troops were in a disadvantage when facing AK armed VC and NVA. Having the M-16 helped, but not THAT much!!

"This is just plain stupid."

This person is thinking in a similar fashion to myself. It is not so much stupid as just NOT NEEDED!

"The M-16 series rifle requires a LOT of maintenance and training for same. The M-16 is particularly sensitive to sand. Iraq has plenty of sand."

The M-16 IS susceptible to the talcum like powdery sand of Iraq in a manner that the AK is NOT!

This does strike me as being a bad idea with good intentions??




Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home