1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

What the troops are buying with their own money

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Stebalo, Jan 7, 2006.

  1. Stebalo

    Stebalo Well-Known Member

    Apr 26, 2004

    What the Troops Buy With Their Own Money

    January 5, 2006: American troops in Iraq are discovering, through combat experience, that more changes are needed in the type of weapons they should carry. As the U.S. Army Special Forces have discovered, if you are well trained and know what you are doing, you should carry a pistol, in addition to your rifle. But not the official issue 9mm pistol, but something with a bit more stopping power. The Special Forces prefer a new model .45 caliber (11.43mm) pistol, although 10mm weapons are also popular. The reason for this is that you are most likely to be using the pistol indoors, where your target is going to be really close. You want to knock him down quickly, before he can get at you with a knife, or even his hands. Many troops are getting their own pistols, and most commanders have been lenient on this issue. The same applies to shotguns. Although the army and marines have bought a lot of them (the Benelli M4 Combat Shotgun is a particular favorite), there never seem to be enough of them for some units (that spend a lot of time raiding buildings in hostile neighborhoods.)

    Some troops also buy high tech electronic sights, when the army or marines has not gotten enough good stuff to equip everyone. Combat troops have also found it useful to learn how to use the AK-47, whose larger bullet has more punch at close range, and is more useful when firing through ceilings and interior walls. Some units collect captured AK-47s, select the ones in the best shape, clean them up and keep them handy for some types of operations. But just knowing the basics of operating an AK-47 is useful knowledge, which you’ll never know when you’ll need.

    The troops also appreciated the getting the most realistic urban combat training possible. This included the use of modified (to fire slower bullets that sting, but don’t break the skin) pistols and rifles in “kill houses.” Here, training can be carried out with live ammo. Kill houses are also equipped with vidcams, and the troops particularly like to watch the vids of their performances. Seeing your mistakes apparently makes it easier to correct them.

    All of this stuff is old news to the Special Forces, which have been doing all of this for years. But the army and marine grunts are smarter, better trained and better led than at any time in the past. That’s always been the description of the Special Forces, so it’s not surprising that the better quality “regular infantry” are starting to adopt Special Forces techniques.
  2. Fly320s

    Fly320s Well-Known Member

    Dec 24, 2002
    New Hampshire
    To sum up:

    1. Bigger is better.

    2. Knowledge is power.

  3. Highland Ranger

    Highland Ranger Well-Known Member

    Nov 11, 2003
    New Jersey Highlands
    Good article . . .
  4. Steve in PA

    Steve in PA Well-Known Member

    Dec 29, 2002
    NE PA
    Yeah, those .45's just knock people completely down or all the way across rooms. :rolleyes:
  5. 1911 guy

    1911 guy Well-Known Member

    May 5, 2005
    Garrettsville, Oh.
    Gear is good, guns are a no-go.

    Gear upgrades are common and popular with "the grunts" right now, but personal weapons are very tabboo. This was true before and it is true now. Oddball calibers are out, even if P.W.'s are allowed because of supply, oddball designs are out because of armorers. We have standard platforms and calibers for a reason. C.O. discretion is applicable with the unconventional forces, but it just ain't happenin' in the mainline.
  6. Lebben-B

    Lebben-B Well-Known Member

    Dec 11, 2005
    What's the point of sending an infantryman to Ft S
    The Hague Conventions, which the US generally abides by, prevents the use of open-tip bullets like hollow points. 9mm FMJ isn't the optimum round to use to "Make the bad man stop."

    I do not like the M9, but that dislike is based on personal preferences. But it's not the pistol in the main, it's the ammo. IF I must use FMJ, THEN I need a bigger round to poke a bigger hole in the bad guy, which is all I'm going to do with an FMJ pistol round.

  7. armoredman

    armoredman Well-Known Member

    Nov 19, 2003
    proud to be in AZ
    Does Hague prevent EFMJ?
  8. Preacherman

    Preacherman Well-Known Member

    Dec 20, 2002
    Louisiana, USA
    Yes, Hague prevents any bullet designed to expand or fragment inside the human body. OTOH, Hague does not apply to terrorist conflicts - only to wars between sovereign nations that are signatories to the convention. The USA is not a signatory to the Hague conventions, but has elected to apply its provisions to its armed forces.
  9. LSCurrier

    LSCurrier Well-Known Member

    Jan 16, 2005
    Long Island, NY
    This article was very good.

    I agree that our troops should be armed in a manner that they CAN do their job. If handguns better than 9mm are required then give it to them. If they need shotguns or rifles then give it to them.

    I understand why they would want to use the enemys AK47 as noted in the article, however I would be concerned with that this makes for a confusing and possibly dangerous situation. Not that I want to quote a movie for a statement of fact, but having no firsthand experience and believing the statement to be true, Clint Eastwood noted in Heartbreak Ridge:

    “This is an AK47, the preferred weapon of your enemy. It makes a very distinct sound...”

    With this in mind I don't know how I like our guys using the same weapon as the enemy and the possibilities that this creates a situation where a mistake is made by an AK47 being used and our guy gets fired upon accidently. I understand that the Iraqi Police/Soldiers are using the AK47 alongside our guys and perhaps this not an issue for this reason. Dunno??

    Again, I feel that our guys should be given the tools they need. However, I understand the logistic issues with getting "every" soldier the tools he needs or would like to have and that decisions are sometimes made of who gets what. This concerns me because I know those that are against the Iraq war try to take anything they can and show how Bush and those in control of this war are screwing it up in any way they can. They would be particularly happy to say:

    "Our soldiers are not even supplied with proper weapons! They have to use captured AK47 from the enemy."

    Perhaps I've been thinking about this too much. :rolleyes:

    Last edited: Jan 8, 2006
  10. grimjaw

    grimjaw Well-Known Member

    May 9, 2005
    "Our soldiers are not even supplied with proper weapons! They have to use captured AK47 from the enemy."

    They could just chamber the M16 for 7.62x39 and give it the best of both worlds.

  11. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Feb 16, 2003
    Ft. Worth
    Only with the best and brightest of the bunch :evil:

    Where the heck are they getting hold of 10mm while in country?
    Does ammoman ship to Iraq?

    Somehow that one smells a little.....
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2006
  12. CypherNinja

    CypherNinja Well-Known Member

    Nov 18, 2005
    Willoughby, Ohio
    LOL. Maybe they're ordering from DoubleTap.
  13. Double Naught Spy

    Double Naught Spy Sus Venator

    Dec 24, 2002
    Forestburg, Texas
    The second sentence is wholly untrue. Whether or not troops are supplied with proper weapons is always an issue for any military

    From the article,
    It is not that US Troops have to use captured AK-47s. It is that they find captured AK-47s useful for certain types of work than by using M16s. It has not been uncommon for American troops to use captured implements against their enemies. It has been done by Americans since as early as the Revolutionary War.

    Similarly, captured American weapons have been used by the opposition to fight Americans as well.

    If you could equip a soldier with every type of weapon and protection needed for all circumstances, for example CQB urban fighting, jungle fighting, short range open field, long range open field, riparian, mountain, littoral, hot, dry, wet, cold, frozen, etc. etc. etc. then you would have a soldier so overloaded as to not be of sufficient size and strength to actually move with the all inclusive gear.

    Part of the reason for using captured weapons is that they may be situationally better to use than the standard US gear, but like US gear, also have significant limitations.
  14. lance22

    lance22 Well-Known Member

    Apr 12, 2005
    Minn Uh So Tah
    Larger hole can't be bad

    Unless a head shot is attained, stopping power is about making an enemy lose blood until either their muscles don't work or they can't breath. As already pointed out, it has nothing to do with "knocking them down".

    A larger diameter hole will tear a greater area of tissue than a smaller hole. This has little to do with kinetic energy, save for a deeper hole will expidite more bleeding than a shallow hole. If a .40 and a .45 hole were punched into the same mass delivering the same kinetic energy, which subject would bleed out faster?

    I think these lessons were learned 100 years ago when our military in the Philippines wanted to replace the service revolvers and it's amazing that we have to keep learning as it is history repeating itself.
  15. Taurus 617 CCW

    Taurus 617 CCW Well-Known Member

    May 25, 2003
    Northern Idaho
    I sold a lot of Glock 17's to GI's being deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq last year. The only problem was that they wouldn't be able to get them back in country once they left. That makes for an extreme out-of-pocket experience. I would feel better knowing that my weapon was better than the "average issued" though. I guess you can't put a price on something that saves your life.
  16. Parker Dean

    Parker Dean Well-Known Member

    Jun 30, 2003
    Corpus Christi, TX
    I, too, would like to know more about this. Like what kind of gun are they buying (1911, Glock, etc.), where are they getting their ammo, and what kind of ammo do they like? Inquiring minds want to know, dammit! :)
  17. fluffygrrl

    fluffygrrl Member

    Jan 3, 2006
    the problem with bigger is better comes from your own wrist.

    sure, if there´s one you and one bad guy and one shot to decide the matter, give me as big a caliber as i can possibly hold still, and the DE hand cannon comes to mind.

    but, if you are stuck in a baricaded room that you can´t leave because of enemy armor patrols out in the street, on enemy snipers up on buildings or whatever reason, and there´s a bunch of bad guys stumbling in, you need to be able to fire two, three, maybe half a dozen clips. with the .5 caliber any human being has stiff wrists after maybe 6 or 9 shots. you may think you personally are made of steel, but you are not, your hand will go stiff, you won´t be able to aim and then you die.

    which is why the side arm is lower caliber than you can possibly hold. the side arm is there to give you a chance all around in unexpected situations, otherwise you could just carry a 1 shot tank blaster and that´d be it.
  18. Jeff White

    Jeff White Moderator Staff Member

    Dec 24, 2002
    Alma Illinois
    There is very little truth in that article.....just another internet site passing on military urban legends.........Jeff
  19. bogie

    bogie Well-Known Member

    Jan 2, 2003
    St. Louis, in the Don't Show Me state
    Fluffster, the .45 isn't gonna make your hand go dead after 100 or so rounds. Plus, if you're shooting folks in close quarters, and you've got a moment or three in there, you'll have a very nice 7.62x39 automatic carbine that you can use for a while...
  20. progunner1957

    progunner1957 member

    Nov 14, 2004
    A wolf living in Sheeple land
    Terrorists deserve no mercy, no quarter

    Since terrorists do not qualify for the terms of the Hague Conventions, why not use hollowpoint ammo?? It makes sense - it's called "keeping your troops alive."

    Some will say, "But then the terrorists will use HPs against us." If it were me, I'd be willing to take that chance in exchange for more effective pistol ammo. The terrorists can and will do worse than using HPs against our troops. Every time a U.S. soldier fights, it's a fight to the death - its kill or be killed.

    To be captured by the terrorists guarantees having their heads hacked off on the internet - just like these savages have done to helpless, bound civilian non-combatants they have captured.

    Terminate 'em all with extreme prejudice - let God sort 'em out. That's what I think.

Share This Page