[walking arsenal]

U.S. Troops Use Confiscated Iraqi AK-47s
Sun Aug 24, 2:15 PM ET

By ANDREW ENGLAND, Associated Press Writer

BAQOUBA, Iraq - An American soldier stands at the side of an Iraqi highway, puts his AK-47 on fully automatic and pulls the trigger.



Within seconds the assault rifle has blasted out 30 rounds. Puffs of dust dance in the air as the bullets smack into the scrubland dirt. Test fire complete.


U.S. troops in Iraq (news - web sites) may not have found weapons of mass destruction, but they're certainly getting their hands on the country's stock of Kalashnikovs — and, they say, they need them.


The soldiers based around Baqouba are from an armor battalion, which means they have tanks, Humvees and armored personnel carriers. But they are short on rifles.


A four-man tank crew is issued two M4 assault rifles and four 9mm pistols, relying mostly on the tank's firepower for protection.


But now they are engaged in guerrilla warfare, patrolling narrow roads and goat trails where tanks are less effective. Troops often find themselves dismounting to patrol in smaller vehicles, making rifles essential.


"We just do not have enough rifles to equip all of our soldiers. So in certain circumstances we allow soldiers to have an AK-47. They have to demonstrate some proficiency with the weapon ... demonstrate an ability to use it," said Lt. Col. Mark Young, commander of the 3rd Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 4th Infantry Division.


"Normally an armor battalion is fighting from its tanks. Well, we are not fighting from our tanks right now," Young said. "We are certainly capable of performing the missions that we have been assigned, there's no issue with that, but we do find ourselves somewhat challenged."


In Humvees, on tanks — but never openly on base — U.S. soldiers are carrying the Cold War-era weapon, first developed in the Soviet Union but now mass produced around the world.


The AK is favored by many of the world's fighters, from child soldiers in Africa to rebel movements around the world, because it is light, durable and known to jam less frequently.


Now U.S. troops who have picked up AKs on raids or confiscated them at checkpoints are putting the rifles to use — and they like what they see.


Some complain that standard U.S. military M16 and M4 rifles jam too easily in Iraq's dusty environment. Many say the AK has better "knockdown" power and can kill with fewer shots.


"The kind of war we are in now ... you want to be able to stop the enemy quick," said Sgt. 1st Class Tracy S. McCarson of Newport News, Va., an army scout, who carries an AK in his Humvee.


Some troops say the AK is easier to maintain and a better close-quarters weapon. Also, it has "some psychological affect on the enemy when you fire back on them with their own weapons," McCarson said.


Most U.S. soldiers agree the M16 and the M4 — a newer, shorter version of the M16 that has been used by American troops since the 1960s — is better for long distance, precision shooting.


But around Baqouba, troops are finding themselves attacked by assailants hidden deep in date palm groves. Or they are raiding houses, taking on enemies at close-quarters.


Two weeks ago, Sgt. Sam Bailey of Cedar Falls, Iowa, was in a Humvee when a patrol came under rocket-propelled grenade and heavy machine gun fire. It was dark, the road narrow. On one side, there was a mud wall and palms trees, on the other a canal surrounded by tall grass.





Bailey, who couldn't see who was firing, had an AK-47 on his lap and his M4 up front. The choice was simple.

"I put the AK on auto and started spraying," Bailey said.

Some soldiers also say it's easier to get ammo for the AK — they can pick it up on any raid or from any confiscated weapon.

"It's plentiful," said Sgt. Eric Harmon, a tanker who has a full 75-round drum, five 30-round magazines, plus 200-300 rounds in boxes for his AK. He has about 120 rounds for his M16.

Young doesn't carry an AK but has fired one. He's considered banning his troops from carrying AKs, but hasn't yet because "if I take the AK away from some of the soldiers, then they will not have a rifle to carry with them."

Staff Sgt. Michael Perez, a tanker, said he would take anything over his standard issue 9mm pistol when he's out of his tank.

And the AK's durability has impressed him.

"They say you can probably drop this in the water and leave it overnight, pull it out in the morning, put in a magazine and it will work," Perez said.



I just found this interesting, any opinions?

[clubsoda22]

Frankly, in combat, in a desert environment, i'd take a good AK over an AR. It's just good insurence to have a gun you can dump a handfull of sand into and have it fire.

Wondering why the brits haven't figured out to drop their POS L85's and grab some enemy AK's

[Erich]

I just saw this on Yahoo! and cruised over here to see what the chatter was on the story. Interesting.

[Texas Gunman]

I can see the usefulness of a full auto AK, esspecially where they are at, it also sounds like they arent issuing our troops with enough ammo.

TG

[DMK]

I've been assuming that our boys are mostly seeing the 30 caliber AKMs over there and not the 5.56mm AK-74s right? (Can't go by what the press indicates, they are all AK-47s to them)

[SodaPop]

I'm sure there is more 7.62x39 over there than 5.56.


Wondering why the brits haven't figured out to drop their POS L85's and grab some enemy AK's

You mean the SA80?

[SodaPop]

oops

[4v50 Gary]

God Bless our boys & girls for picking up and using the AK. I'm one happy and cheap taxpayer.

[Mark Tyson]

That's a very revealing article - AK lovers rejoice!

[Sir Galahad]

Where ever the AK goes, people fall in love with it. When ever and where ever the SHTF, the AK is there. Reliable, durable, and accurate enough. The 7.62x39 round was partially the child of the bloody, brutal house-to-house combat of Stalingrad. In this, it excels. For urban combat and close quarters, the AK is perfect. The funny thing is, some folks don't like the short buttstock of the AK-47. Now here's Bushmaster selling an AR with a shorty stock. For less than 300 yards, the AK is great. The sights are fine. You just have to practice with them. The safety you have to get used to. There is no tiny cotter pin to get lost during cleaning as with a certain other rifle I know of. But the AK is a lesson in keeping things simple. Will U.S. Army Ordnance Corps learn the lesson? No, of course not. So it will be up to our enemies to equip our troops from time to time.

[Gordon]

I'm NOT Gary! Cheap, but not when it comes to the 'edge' in weaponary! In VN when faced with the AK we had an edge with both the M-14 and M-16. In every battle since we have refined that edge until we come to the M-4. An M-4 es[ecially with a dot optic like Aimpoint mounted is DEFINITIVELY SUPERIOR in CQB! without me going into a huge defense of the M-4 (at least) let me say this: I challenge anyone who doubts to best or closely equal a REPUTABLE,(THUNDER RANCH, GUNSITE, John Farnham ect.) course of CQB fire with a AK series compared to an M-4 !!! There are a wizard or two who can make a good show but even those will 'die' compared to an 'A' ticket operator of an M-4. That said I own 4 or 5 of the Best AK variants(pre ban ) to arm neighbors and ill equipted friends for the end of the world ( or gun confiscation, whatever comes first!). But I think I will(and my sons will) stick to the AR format for CQB and FN-FAL or HK battle rifles for longer fights.. Happiness is to kill your fanatic enemy first! Spraying is playing!:rolleyes:

[clubsoda22]

You mean the SA80?

Happens to be the same exact gun.

However, the british army uses the designation L85A2 for their current rifles. The SA80 happens to be the designation given to the prototype. Just like the M16 is the military designation for the AR15 (That's a bit confusing because the prototype was called the AR15, a name which was then adopted for the civillian version of the rifle.)

The british army uses the L85, which is their military designation for the SA80.

[Sir Galahad]

Gordon, Thunder Ranch and Gunsite are far and away from actual combat. There are several reasons for this:

1.) They're not laying satchel charges under you while you shoot.
2.) They're not shooting RPGs first to take out a Hummer and signal all the faithful to open up with their AKs.
3.) The targets aren't shooting back.
4.) The ARs used are not off-the-rack out of a U.S. Army arms room.
5.) There aren't civilians who smile by day and shoot by night.
6.) There aren't rules of engagement that require the steel plates to fire first before you can engage them.
7.) There aren't morale-sapping liberal reporters right next to you while you're shooting at Thunder Ranch going on and on about the "steel plate quagmire".
8.) You're not fighting a guerilla war at Thunder Ranch or Gunsite.
9.) You have plenty of time to clean your weapon and snazz it up as a civilian.
10.) And last, but not least-----Thunder Ranch and Gunsite are NOT wars!!!!!!!!!!!

[Destructo6]

I can't say I disagree with the logic, given the realities.

However, it eliminates the possibility of recognizing your enemies by the sound of the weapon if both sides are using the same. I would hate to see a friendly fire incident or worse due to this.

[Gordon]

The difference between our minimal losses and their getting their clock cleaned , 'mano a mano' is that our soldiers are warrior atheletes just like champion shooters (only different in format) that is : 11bravo's and spec ops. I CAN see support personnel well served by a Krinkov or something like that. But NCO Combat troops these days get trained over and over and over and are even given credit cards to buy optical sights ect , within reason , if there is a short fall.Gun's of these dudes ARE sighted in! I doubt many E-3s even make it to combat anymore, because of extensive live ops. Dunno about marine's they be different I think they could kill with sticks if ordered to! But by the holy Khaki I'll bet the Marines WOULD NEVER spray and pray in combat! Ever see the pathetic 'advanced training of Iraqui's' armed with AK's? While they are spraying from the hip in building clearing acting the fanatic turd world clutzes they are? ? Our boys walk 'Groucho Marx style with M-4's point eye level and move like atheletes between cover. That ghost ring rear sight don't shift in indoor /outdoor lighting like the AK's , but then in the turd world(and former Com block) who uses sights other than snipers and Moisin operators.?Of course no rifle is gonna protect a so;dier from a RPG, Mine, explosive, or getting shoot in back of head when you let your guard down And YES SOME poor guys name is always gonna be on some bullet once in a while!

[Selfdfenz]

The more Iraqi ammo our troops burn up shooting and shooting at Iraqis the better.

Wareout the other guys equipment and use up all his ammo shooting him.

What's not to like.????

S-

Didn't the Brits take this a step further in WWII by making lots of STENS to use/use up captured German ammo ? Seems like I read that comment in a book once.

[JShirley]

I'm certain at least half of the troops in my company would use an AK, if they could...and we have the M4 with M68 CCO (Aimpoint), and most of us also have backup flip-up irons mounted.

A good deal of our training in the past year and half has been CQB drills, with focus on quick presentation, front sight, squeeze, reaquire, squeeze (well, now it's dot on target).

John

[Dave R]

"Sgt. Eric Harmon, a tanker who has a full 75-round drum, five 30-round magazines, plus 200-300 rounds in boxes for his AK."

The guys at AK-47.net must be loving this.

[SodaPop]

The more Iraqi ammo our troops burn up shooting and shooting at Iraqis the better.


That's the best reason for the US to use AK's!!

[Maddogkiller]

.

[Dr.Rob]

Found it really interesting that a US commander more or less said, well my guys need rifles, and we have piles of them around here.

Some REMF is supply says we don't need 'em, we'll get em somehow. Nothing to do with "whats better" it's what they need.

[RustyHammer]

I think we at THR "NEED" at lease one each too!

Sell them at home and finance the war effort ... CMP's next
weapon .... :D

[Steve Smith]

Dr. Rob noticed the same thing that I did. There was no discussion on which was "better." Sadly, there aren't enough rifles for all of our troops there, so they're grabbing what they can. They would do the same if they were recovering homemade rifles from Vietnamese peasants. In this case, they're getting a decent fighting tool.

[Gordon]

"not nough rifles for our troops there" but the gubbamint gave 30,000 M-16s to the Palestinian"police" ! The Gubbamint seems to find plenty guns for everybody everywhere in the world. This is the same gubbamint that wants to cut "combat pay" and 'separation allowances' to troops in Afganistan and Iraq. And can't find drug benefits for our seniors but wants to drop BILLIONS iinto poop hole afrika for AIDS fooling around!:fire:

[rock jock]

This is a news story. It proves nothing. It is not a scientific study of the reliability, controllability, or lethality of the AK vs. the AR either in CQB or gernal patrol duties. Is there any question but that every single one of us would love to have a battle rifle over there if all we were issued was a 9mm handgun?

[caz223]

I see nothing wrong with improvising, after all, their backsides are out there, not mine.
If they need a rifle, and there's one on the ground with 200 rounds of ammo, pick it up and use it...

[hillbilly]

I think the telling part of this article is right here:

"The soldiers based around Baqouba are from an armor battalion, which means they have tanks, Humvees and armored personnel carriers. But they are short on rifles. "

So yes, AKs are better rifles in combat......for troops who are not trained to shoot rifles for a living.

That's another reason why AKs are soooo popular. They are simple to use, especially by people who are not drilled and trained in the fundamentals of marksmanship.

I read another account of combat in Afghanistan. The Northern Alliance troops were intrigued by the American style of shooting. Native Northern Alliance troops always stood up (more manly that way) and fired the magazine dry from the hip. American soliders, Marines, SEALS, etc, shot from the prone when they could and fired aimed shots or short bursts at specific targets with much more lethal effects.

In the War in Afghanistan in the 1980s, it was common to hear reports of Russian conscript troops (afraid, don't want to be there, not honed to combat readiness) spraying away with AKs while mujhadeen fighters picked them off from 500 yards away with old bolt action Enfields.

I am not saying that US troops should be armed with bolt action Enfields.

I even like AKs and have owned them before.

I am just saying that AKs make more sense for folks who are not, by any stretch of the term, riflemen, or riflewomen, as the case may be.

And no, just because you might have "qualified" on the US Army course of fire one time in basic training years ago, you are not a rifleman, or riflewoman.

hillbilly

[Dr.Rob]

Ok in the last two paragraphs you just called the same group of fighters backwards spray and pray shooters AND lethal with a bolt action rifle. Which is it?

Those people grow up with a rifle in their hands. I'd say that goes a lot farther in making someone a rifleman than any training program you could dish up.

PS back in the days of Soviet involvement in Afghanistan theywere still using rifles they took off dead brits to get a rifle from a dead Russian.

[russlate]

The earlier imported Norinco Paratrooper SKS - D's, made to take the AK mags, were my favorite over M16 or the AK.

For me they felt and balanced wonderfully, shot groups half the size of the AK's, and seemed completely reliable ( I wasn't shooting in combat condits ). But most of all, they felt right. The AK's seemed clumsy and topheavy, the early SPI's too light, but the paratrooper SKS D felt the best. Just my opinion.

I think it was the Czech's that made a 7.62x45 AK round. Neck that to 25 caliber and put it into a lengthened SKS receiver taking 20 or 30 round magazines, and you'd have an ergonomically beautiful gun for fighting.

[Art Eatman]

Dr. Rob, are you referring to this: "Native Northern Alliance troops always stood up (more manly that way) and fired the magazine dry from the hip." ?

Heck, maybe they were "townies". Or, maybe after they got AKs instead of bolt actions, they fell in love with full-auto for full-auto's sake. Regardless, I've seen some footage from the early-on daze in this recent Afghani effort of ours where that exact behavior was caught on-camera. Maybe it's the Afghani Hippies: "Make noise, not war!"

:D, Art

[SodaPop]

Heck, maybe they were "townies".

Maybe since they don't have carnivals or circuses, so many of these people need to load a 30 rounder... as a joy ride?

They are poor ya' know............

[vitiaz]

"The guys at AK-47.net must be loving this."

:neener:

[Destructo6]

I think it was the Czech's that made a 7.62x45 AK round.
That was actually for their Vz-52 rifle, which was later adapted to 7.62x39. Their AK-ish Vz-58 was in 7.62x39.

But you're right, it seems to be a good way to get a little more power without much more length.

[Sir Galahad]

So, Hillbilly, since U.S. Army basic training doesn't make a person a rifleman, what does? A weekend at Thunder Ranch?:rolleyes: May I ask what your MOS was in the army, Hillbilly?

[DMK]

Staff Sgt. Michael Perez, a tanker, said he would take anything over his standard issue 9mm pistol when he's out of his tank. 1) I could use this M9 to defend myself dismounted while I all along wishing that I had an M4.
or
2) I could pick up one of those rusty dusty AK thingamajigs and see how it works.

Yea, that's pretty much a no brainer. :rolleyes:

This isn't a matter of the AK being better than any rifle or as a substitution for any amount of training. This is a matter of an AK and a 9mm pistol being better than no rifle and a 9mm pistol.

[Art Eatman]

Sir Galahad, consider this: I'd shot a Garand a lot before I went into the Army. I went through Basic on the Garand. A year later I went to NCO school and handled a Garand for the first time since Basic. I was amazed at how awkward I had become in handling it. (No range time; just "familiarization".) The other students were mostly from Infantry outfits; it was obvious they were indeed familiar.

Many Army units get little or no instruction or updating of shooting skills after Basic. Worse, support units get no further training in small unit tactics in the field.

Like a lot of stuff: Use it or lose it.

Art

[digex]

There is no tiny cotter pin to get lost during cleaning as with a certain other rifle I know of
Why would you clean it? It's an AK, it'll work without being cleaned.
I seriously believe that this is perfectly acceptable. No one is saying that the AK is better the M16. All the article is saying is that these guys are doing their jobs; adapting and overcoming. If people have a problem with that, maybe they should try spending a few weeks (or days, or minutes) in that desert with a 9mm and I will ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE that they'll change their mind.
I'm actually pretty surprised that people here would disagree with our soldiers using these weapons. The AK is a battle-proven rifle that has been used forever and shown it's worth. It may not have the ability to attach 36 lbs worth of god-forsaken gadgets to it, but it'll push a bullet out of the pointy end fast enough to kill the other guy just as dead as the M16.
Perhaps you should disagree with the fact that our boys are over there fighting and dying and apparently don't have enough guns to keep everyone locked and loaded.
Anyway... Just my .02
YMMV

[clubsoda22]

of the people in the article, how many dropped an M4 and picked up an AK? It's not a matter of better (even though i must say i am an AK fan)

[Sir Galahad]

Art, I'm aware of that. I was support myself (Ordnance Corps--small arms repair.) But what I want to know is Hillbilly's military experience. If he has none, then who is he to know what is or is not sufficient military training? The military needs to make a pardigm shift in training, but they've known this since the Battle of the Bulge when support troops were caught completely unprepared. If the army would spend MORE time with skills that are USEFUL such as range time and LESS or, better yet, NO time doing stupid things like Class "A" uniform inspections, D&C, and crap like that, they'd have time for range time. Hell, get rid of class A uniforms altogether and spend the money on ammo. The time the army wastes on BS and frippery is pretty much murder of troops when that time could have been spent on the range.


In the case of these tankers, they probably asked for M4s and someone over at headquarters says, no, according to this, you have all the M4s you need. No, they need more. Why? This says you have all you're supposed to have. But there are men that only have pistols. Yes, they're supposed to. But they need rifles! Why? This says you have as many as you're supposed to. But they need more! Not unless a rifle gets broken or lost. Then it can be replaced. But they're not broken or lost! Right, then why do you need more? Because there are men with only pistols and they need rifle! Then they can use the ones you've already got! What about the men without rifles?!? That's why they have pistols. Who's on first, what's on second, and I don't know is on third----welcome to the U.S. Army. If it doesn't make sense---:rolleyes:----you're in the army now! :banghead:

[c_yeager]

For a tanker or vehicle crew i would think that the shorter size and collapsability (is that a word?) of the AK would make it a good choice. An underfolder AK gets pretty tiny. Of course i think the whole POINT here is that an AK beats the pants off of a 9mm pistol. I dont think anyone is going to argue that point at all.

[jercamp45]

I think this is more a story about the lack of intelligence found in modern logistics. Tankers are not riflemen, but when pressed into that service they need rifles, not pistols!! So, Improvise, Adapt, Overcome!! Available AK's get pressed into service and I applaud that decision over the pencil pushing REMF's idiocy. Though 30 round bursts are not a good way to train by any stretch of the imagination!
I spent four years as a Grunt packing the mighty mattel poodle shooter and was not terribly thrilled by it then. But it was short,light, handy, reliable(if kept clean, except in SAND!), and would hit a man in the chest at 500 meters with a supersonic bullet. And it was what I was given, no other option, period(though I did get to carry my HK91 a couple of times...mainly because the CO wanted to shoot it!) OK. Make use of what you have.
Yes, they improved it since then. Stabilized bullet, dotted sights, battery powered doodads that can be quite handy(surefires in afghan caves).
And they play with it still.....landwarrior, thermal imagery, computers, etc.
Warfare is often about simplicity though, and for close range, reliable combat...the AK is hard to beat. I have owned both...but if the Caca got deep tomorrow, my AK would be the one I grabbed first.
Why? I am not worried about sniping a bad guy at 500 meters. I want a reliable machine with credible thump for 250 yards or less. I want it to take abit of abuse, if necessary, I want it to be able to drop a deer if necessary. I want it to do a simple, yet complicated job...save my butt!!
Yes the silly sights can shift(that is why I like the Valmet/Galil style peep sight!), yes, it ain't real good at long distance. Yes the silly safety sucks the big green one!(Oy Vay, that 'Clack!"). But It WORKS anywhere, anytime, any clime or place!
Heck, for urban warfare, especially in the desert...if you offered me a M-4 with all the doodads or a cheap AK...I'd grab the AK! Same goes for a M9 Beretta and an old beat up 1911A1, though I would prefer one of my customized 1911's, I'd take the basic one over any nine millimeter....especially if ball was all you got for ammo.
Grunts like it simple!
Locate, Close With, Destroy!
Where's the Beer?
What? No Women? Are you sure?(uh, Sir!)
Semper Fi,
Jercamp45