Plan to Sell Iraqis M-16s

Status
Not open for further replies.
They aren't yet well-trained enough to maintain a tight-fitting weapon like the M16 as it needs to be in that environment.

Speaking of that, who is gonna implement the armorer program?

Blackwater gonna cash in on that too by doing all the factory trained armoring or is Colt going to sell them a nice maintenance package to go with it?
 
It really makes me mad. We put full auto/select fire weapons into the hands of Iraqis, yet we can only get older weapons here from a fixed supply that is aging and mucho mucho bucks!!
 
romma said:
We put full auto/select fire weapons into the hands of Iraqis

That argument doesn't work when the country in question is already awash in full-autos (and RPGs, and bombs big enough to kill tanks, and...)
 
They also prefer the Berretta over the Glock :sigh: . I have not quite figured that one out yet at all. But at least the age old question of AR vs. AK has been answered in one small corner of the world.

The heck of it is they really think that it is superior tools that cause an army to win. They overlook the small things like; training, tactics, doctrine, morale. Yep, it is just that gun that some Candadian invented or a bomb that some German invented that left the US military last one standing in the world. And why should they be buying AK's from China anyway?

Anywho after seeing both in action I will point out that I no longer own or use any AK's only AR's. The Iraq's see the same thing every day and it does give them pause as to why they are carrying an AK instead of the better weapon.
 
Mr. Goodman, clad in olive-green pants and suspenders, told the troops that an AK round is narrow so that it typically goes straight through the enemy, limiting damage to tissue. An M-16 round spins much faster and tumbles when it makes contact with the enemy so that "it causes mass casualty in the body."

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Regardless of the veracity of the tumble and mass trauma thing, and the fact that I paid my own good money for a semiauto version of the M16A4 not an AK, this is funny. A 7.62 is "so narrow" compared to a 5.56?

The print article had a lot of stupid things in it, e.g. the "rounds per minute" comparison between the guns that was the cyclic rate, nothing like a real estimate of how many rounds each could get downrange in a real minute. It also said an AK requires NO maintenance. I read it a few days ago and just rolled my eyes.

Reality: nobody ever won or lost a war just because they were using M16's or AK's.

If we plan to be allied with the Iraqi government, sharing ammo and parts is probably a good idea anyway, and why should we encourage them to buy guns from someone else?
 
"It was like, 'Wait. If I aim I can actually hit something. I don't need to just spray.' "
Do they not send US sergeants who have trained soldiers in the US to do the training on the Iraqis? It would seem to me that any American soldier who tried to pull a stunt as stupid as that would be kicked off the firing line. Literally. I can see how certain operations of AKs would be different from the US standards... but the shooting principle's the same. Line up sights. Pull trigger. If the sights are off, adjust 'em.
It sounds like Iraqi soldiers are mollycoddled to an alarming degree by the US trainers.

Do understand trying to put 'em on the 'welfare wagon' for ammunition. A way to control 'em, and to keep from having troubles with badly-made AKs and crap local ammunition.

This article is very stereotypical. AKs run flawlessly, even without ammo. M-16s are vastly superior in handling and accuracy to all AKs, and all models are match-grade... the AR will jam if you so much as look at it squinty-eyed.
 
The US Military does not train the Iraq's directly. At least not much anymore. It is more of a "train the trainer" type thing. The IA sort of does things on their own. What will be interesting is how long it will be before the guns hit the streets with the insurgents. Very few IA carry AR style weapons. Some group will fully exploit this.
 
ome group will fully exploit this.

Will they be able to get 5.56 in the quantities needed to really exploit it?

I mean, 7.62x39 has to be practically raining out of the trees compared to getting hold of 5.56.
 
TexasRifleman said:
Will they be able to get 5.56 in the quantities needed to really exploit it?

It's to be assumed that the IA and IP will have some ammo depots that can't be that well guarded. IA and IP are also popular for infiltration by BGs. A few rounds go missing from the lockers here and there and who's to know...

In any case, the M16 being a precision weapon, the BGs could do plenty of damage from far off with the ammo that's left in the mag on semi-auto, and then switch to the usual AKs for the close-in fighting. If Marines can do measure of chest cavity at 500 yards, I'm sure the better shots among the BGs can do headshots at 100.

Not exactly a lack of places for them to hide. Snipers are already a problem in Iraq.

mljdeckard said:
BS in Farsi is literally "Aakhhh!"

Hey, that's the same sound I make when I hear BS too! Usually comes from a politician or a talking head on teevee. We're not so different after all :D
 
But it's also tougher to maintain and could strain the Iraqis' supply and maintenance systems

Not a problem, the U.S. in one way or another will have a presence in Iraq for quite some time to come along with the hard earned dollars of the American people.

Nice to know my tax dollars are being spent to outfit a foreign army while the right to own the same gun is denied to me, the one who is footing the bill.
 
Wait - did anyone else catch this:
... the U.S. began quietly converting the Iraqi army over to the M-16, the main rifle for U.S. soldiers for more than 50 years.

I didn't think we'd been issuing the M-16 since 1957. Even according to the mostly accurate, somewhat self-contradictory Wikipedia article, it's only been issued since 1967 (or 1961, if you just read the sidebar). And main rifle implies that most soldiers are using it, which didn't happen until around '65 (again, according to the Wiki article).

2007 - 1965 = 42 years. Did the author just make a typo (and mean to write "more than 40 years?" Go ahead and tell me I'm just being pedantic.
 
I asked one of my vet friends about this today and he thinks it's hilarious. Supposedly the only cleaning procedure in the IA was to pour some diesel down the barrel of the AK every so often. Is that even a good idea:eek: He also said that M16s will rust over there much faster than you would think. Seems akin to giving a sixteen year old a Ferrari to learn how to drive. Maybe nothing will work by the time the insurgents get them.
 
Diesel motor oil, not diesel. And it does not really matter a bit.

The ARs will be abused and misused and within a year 90% of the ones that are not ''missing'' will be inop.

The terrorists won't fare much better.
 
I smell a goverment funded kickback for Colt. For a company that has been on the verge of collapse for so long to suddenly get a contract for 27 million smells fishy. Giving Iraqis M-16s is the worst idea I've ever heard, it will lead to dead IAs and dead GIs. Iraqi Generals and Ministers must have gotten a pretty good payoff to agree to this.
 
Keep your friends close and your enemies closer!
We need someone to sell all our used junk to as we transition to a new weapon system. We sold the Germans the Smoking piece of S#$% F-4 Phantom! Think about it. Are we losing anything by arming the allies with our inferior junk? I have several AR's but I carried the M-16A2 and the M-4 for yrs and they are kinda some crap!
 
Air Force Security forces. I spent several months at Holloman AFB where the German Air force trains to this day with the same junk we use as remote control targets for other weapons! That jet smokes like a Chipped Power stroke Diesel!
 
I know a number of people who flew the Phantom and they enjoyed every minute of it. It was the United States' main fighter aircraft for many years.

The smoking engines were upgraded in the late seventies with smokeless burner cans. Why the Germans continued to fly with smoking engines I have no idea.

Pilgrim
 
The F4 was and is one of the great warplanes in history. I suspect you've been talking to other non aviators too much.
 
That argument doesn't work when the country in question is already awash in full-autos (and RPGs, and bombs big enough to kill tanks, and...)

Not an argument. Merely a statement pointing out the repeated ludicrosy of our goverment and it's mentality..

I wonder if we had a foreign invader threatening to come here if they would do the same for us?
 
We sold the Germans the Smoking piece of S#$% F-4 Phantom!

Yeah yeah we sold them F104's too and their pilots were able to fly that thing where ours just crashed it.

They took a dangerous aircraft like the Starfighter and made it work. It's motivation not equipment, same with the Iraqis.
 
The biometric information was burnt onto compact disks and then given to Iraqi authorities as a way of safekeeping the weapons. If one goes missing, the solider assigned the weapon will be held accountable.

How can you hold someone that is dead accountable for anything? Being worried about the bag guys getting ahold of our rifles illicitly is a valid concern, but what about battlefield pickups?

-Teuf
 
The problem is that we are giving the Iraqis the wrong weapons. We should be issuing them something in a nearly unique cartridge, that only we can supply. Or something that doesn't have the effective range of .223, like .45 subguns or something of the like.


Best idea I've heard all day, Grey.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top