U.S Marines; What would you use?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Disclaimer: Although I am in the USAF, I have never shot anyone or been shot at.

With that out of the way, I'd say take the AK. I'm a mechanical engineer, and it's my job to fix things for Uncle Sam when they break. If I were going to stake my life on the proper function of any man-made object, you better believe I'd want it to be the toughest, strongest, most indestructible device currently available.
 
I would keep my M4 (with 77gr bullets, a better trigger, and my hydraulic buffer). If it ain't broke don't fix it. Longer shots stick with a bolt gun in 7.62.. +1 for the Winmag..

-US Army Ranger and Infintryman
 
40 years ago I shot-up a chi-com light truck at 480 meters with my M-14 using iron sights and NM ball from a prepped shooting position. I got 12 hits on the driver's side. Frt fender, firewall, rear of cab all penetrated. Rounds were stopped by oil drums in bed of truck. I'd swap out the FH on my NM M-14 for a more efficent model but keep it stock otherwise.
 
+1 M14...When I was in boot camp ('94) the PMI brought out an M14 and a M16A2 and fired them both at an 8" block and an ammo can full of sand.

RESULTS:

5.56
8" Block- penetrated hole through both sides of brick
Ammo can full of sand-bullet entered and did not exit

7.62
8" Block-Now gravel
Ammo can full of sand-bullet entered and exited can...bad guy behind sand bag is having bad day!:what:

I never to this day understood that demonstration since they were now going to tell me that they were giving me the 5.56 to carry...WHAT :scrutiny:, I want the other one PLEASE!!!

See pics with post...some Marines who have a choice (snipers) still choose M14 :D

I have no problem with M16/AR15, own some of both, but if I had to choose only one (not my choice at all), it would be the M1.
 

Attachments

  • M1-1.jpg
    M1-1.jpg
    28.7 KB · Views: 36
  • M1-2.jpg
    M1-2.jpg
    35.9 KB · Views: 35
  • M1-3.jpg
    M1-3.jpg
    77.4 KB · Views: 34
  • M1-4.jpg
    M1-4.jpg
    82.6 KB · Views: 30
I am not going to give my pedigree, that part is getting old! My opinion, no one rifle is good for every situation and that is why the major disagreement. Every rifle mentioned in this thread is a good one but for different things. No one gun is gonna be small enough to clear a room, be powerful enough to turn cover into concealment and reach out 1000 yards accurately and with authority.

Personally, I have a tool box full of tools. Tell me what the job is and I know what tool to pull out. JMHO Bill
 
I was always satisfied with my good ol' M-16, but then again, I was a machine gunner. Anyway, if I was to go back in right now and had the choice, I would go with the M16A2 again. I know M14s shoot bigger rounds and blah, blah, blah, but the simple fact of the matter is that I just always was happy and comfortable with my M16.
 
My son just finished 14 weeks of basic at Ft Benning and the training is a lot more complete than it was in the past. You can have the light wt and handling of the m4 in the ar10 platforms that give the firepower of the m14. What is not to like?
 
I think this is still an interesting question, and full of serious, qualified, interesting answers. Thanks, and keep it up. I was never a Marine (I was Army, 95B20), but given my life exposure to various military arms, if I had to go into battle, an M14, or maybe a something like the Springfield Scout or Socom would be a good general purpose fighting rifle. I know I would not be carrying the same amount of ammo that someone with an M16 could carry, but I'd just try to stay disciplined. I'm also a lefty, and guns with a safety like the M1 or M14 work well for me under stress. The 5.56 is/can be devastating on the target, but the 7.62 goes places the 5.56 can't go.
 
The 5.56 is/can be devastating on the target, but the 7.62 goes places the 5.56 can't go.

I like the way you said that. Interesting, no one thinks the 7.62 NATO needs another type bullet. The original worked just fine for most things one needs a military bullet to do.

On the other hand, the AR15/M16/M4 family which was sold on a light high speed bullet, is going with heavier, and much slower bullets.

I will stick with my M1A, just as I did my M14 in Combat.

Marine Corps is going to another bullet entirely. 50 years later, and we still don't have a bullet that works properly out of that POS.

In police work that is called a Clue.

Following article is illuminating:

MARINE CORPS TIMES

February 15, 2010

The ‘barrier blind’ bullet––SOST rounds to replace M855 in Afghanistan

By Dan Lamothe

The Marine Corps is dropping its conventional 5.56mm ammunition in Afghanistan in favor of new deadlier, more accurate rifle rounds, and could field them at any time.

The open-tipped rounds until now have been available only to Special Operations Command troops. The first 200,000 5.56mm Special Operations Science and Technology rounds are already downrange with Marine Expeditionary Brigade–Afghanistan, said Brig. Gen. Michael Brogan, commander of Marine Corps Systems Command. Commonly known as “SOST” rounds, they were legally cleared for Marine use by the Pentagon in late-January, according to Navy Department documents obtained by Marine Corps Times.

SOCOM developed the new rounds for use with the Special Operations Force Combat Assault Rifle, or SCAR, which needed a more accurate bullet because its short barrel, which at 13.8 inches, is less than an inch shorter than the M4 carbine’s. Using an open-tip match round design common with some sniper ammunition, SOST rounds are designed to be “barrier blind,” meaning they stay on target better than existing M855 rounds after penetrating windshields, car doors and other objects.

Compared to the M855, SOST rounds also stay on target longer in open air and have increased stopping power through “consistent, rapid fragmentation which shortens the time required to cause incapacitation of enemy combatants,” according to Navy Department documents. At 62 grains, they weigh about the same as most NATO rounds, have a typical lead core with a solid copper shank and are considered a variation of Federal Cartridge Co.’s Federal Trophy Bonded Bear Claw round, which was developed for big-game hunting and is touted in a company news release for its ability to crush bone.

The Corps purchased a “couple million” SOST rounds as part of a joint $6 million, 10.4-million-round buy in September — enough to last the service several months in Afghanistan, Brogan said. Navy Department documents say the Pentagon will launch a competition worth up to $400 million this spring for more SOST ammunition. “This round was really intended to be used in a weapon with a shorter barrel, their SCAR car¬bines,” Brogan said. “But because of its blind-to-barrier performance, its accuracy improvements and its reduced muzzle flash, those are attractive things that make it also useful to general purpose forces like the Marine Corps and Army.”

M855 problems
The standard Marine round, the M855, was developed in the 1970s and approved as an official NATO round in 1980. In recent years, however, it has been the subject of widespread criticism from troops, who question whether it has enough punch to stop oncoming enemies.

In 2002, shortcomings in the M855’s performance were detailed in a report by Naval Surface War fare Center Crane, Ind., according to Navy Department documents. Additional testing showed shortcomings in 2005. The Pentagon issued a request to industry for improved ammunition the following year. Federal Cartridge was the only company to respond.

Brogan said the Corps has no plans to remove the M855 from the service’s inventory at this time. However, the service has determined it “does not meet USMC performance requirements” in an operational environment in which insurgents often lack personal body armor, but engage troops through “intermediate barriers” such as windshields and car doors at security check points, according to a Jan. 25 Navy Department document clearing Marines to use the SOST round.

The document, signed by J.R. Crisfield, director of the Navy Department International and Operational Law Division, is clear on the recommended course of action for the 5.56mm SOST round, formally known as MK318 MOD0 enhanced 5.56mm ammunition.

“Based on the significantly improved performance of the MK318 MOD0 over the M855 against virtually every anticipated target array in Afghanistan and similar combat environments where increased accuracy, better effects behind automobile glass and doors, consistent terminal performance and reduced muzzle flash are critical to mission accomplishment, USMC would treat the MK318 MOD0 as its new 5.56mm standard issue cartridge,” Crisfield wrote.

The original plan called for the SOST round to be used specifically within the M4 carbine, which has a 14½ -inch barrel and is used by tens of thousands of Marines in military occupational specialties such as motor vehicle operator where the M16A4’s longer barrel can be cumbersome. Given its benefits, however, Marine officials decided also to adopt SOST for the M16A4, which has a 20-inch bar rel and is used by most of the infantry.

Incorporating ‘SOST’
In addition to operational benefits, SOST rounds have similar ballistics to the M855 round, meaning Marines will not have to adjust to using the new ammo, even though it is more accurate.

“It does not require us to change our training,” Brogan said. “We don’t have to change our aim points or modify our training curriculum. We can train just as we have always trained with the 855 round, so right now, there is no plan to completely remove the 855 from inventory.”
Marine officials in Afghanistan could not be reached for comment, but Brogan said commanders with MEB-A are authorized to issue SOST ammo to any subordinate command. Only one major Marine 5.56mm weapon system down-range will not use SOST: the M249 squad automatic weapon. Though the new rounds fit the SAW, they are not currently produced in the linked fashion commonly employed with the light machine gun, Brogan said.

SOCOM first fielded the SOST round in April, said Air Force Maj. Wesley Ticer, a spokesman for the command. It also fielded a cousin — MK319 MOD0 enhanced 7.62mm SOST ammo — designed for use with the SCAR-Heavy, a powerful 7.62mm battle rifle. SOCOM uses both kinds of ammunition in all of its geographic combatant commands, Ticer said.

The Corps has no plans to buy 7.62mm SOST ammunition, but that could change if operational commanders or infantry requirements officers call for it in the future, Brogan said.

It is uncertain how long the Corps will field the SOST round. Marine officials said last summer that they took interest in it after the M855A1 lead-free slug in development by the Army experienced problems during testing, but Brogan said the service is still interested in the environmentally friendly round if it is effective. Marine officials also want to see if the price of the SOST round drops once in mass production. The price of an individual round was not available, but Brogan said SOST ammo is more expensive than current M855 rounds.

“We have to wait and see what happens with the Army’s 855LFS round,” he said. “We also have to get very good cost estimates of where these (SOST) rounds end up in full-rate, or serial production. Because if it truly is going to remain more expensive, then we would not want to buy that round for all of our training applications.”

Legal concerns
Before the SOST round could be fielded by the Corps, it had to clear a legal hurdle: Approval that it met international law of war standards.

The process is standard for new weapons and weapons systems, but it took on added significance because of the bullet’s design. Open-tip bullets have been approved for use by U.S. forces for decades, but are sometimes confused with hollow-point rounds, which expand in human tissue after impact, causing unnecessary suffering, according to widely accepted international treaties signed following the Hague peace conventions held in the Nether- lands in 1899 and 1907.

“We need to be very clear in drawing this distinction: This is not a hollow-point round, which is not permitted,” Brogan said. “It has been through law of land warfare review and has passed that review so that it meets the criteria of not causing unnecessary pain and suffering.”

The open-tip/hollow-point dilemma has been addressed several times by the military, including in 1990, when the chief of the Judge Advocate General International Law Branch, now-retired Marine Col. W. Hays Parks, advised that the open-tip M852 Sierra MatchKing round preferred by snipers met international law requirements. The round was kept in the field.

In a 3,000-word memorandum to Army Special Operations Command, Parks said “unnecessary suffering” and “superfluous injury” have not been formally defined, leaving the U.S. with a “balancing test” it must conduct to assess whether the usage of each kind of rifle round is justified.

“The test is not easily applied,” Parks said. “For this reason, the degree of ‘superfluous injury’ must ... outweigh substantially the military necessity for the weapon system or projectile.”

John Cerone, an expert in the law of armed conflict and professor at the New England School of Law, said the military’s interpretation of international law is widely accepted. It is understood that weapons cause pain in war, and as long as there is a strategic military reason for their employment, they typically meet international guidelines, he said.

“In order to fall within the prohibition, a weapon has to be designed to cause unnecessary suffering,” he said.

Sixteen years after Parks issued his memo, an Army unit in Iraq temporarily banned the open-tip M118 long-range used by snipers after a JAG officer mistook it for hollow-tip ammunition, according to a 2006 Washington Times report. The decision was over- turned when other Army officials were alerted.

Just how many years will it take to get this system, rifle/bullet, to work properly? God help our troops.

Go figure.

Fred
 
You may be over reacting. They allways are going to have to switch or "tune " thier ammo to the conditions at hand. I'd be worried if they did just decide for one bullet style deos all.

For example:
55gn FMJ punches right through my steel body armor, 77gn deosn't. .308 deosn't go through either.

77 gn goes through my polymer plates, 55gn deosn't, .308 deos

Different bullets for different fields of battle.
 
Chalk me up with the M14/SCAR-H crowd.

A Scout type M14 with a 1.5-8 IOR and some 20 rounders would be just dandy.

I am not going to bash the AR, or even really the 5.56. I grew up in rural MT. The .223 is and always will be a varmint cartridge to me, because that is what I used it for. The one time I tried it on deer sized game, I wasn't impressed. Can't say the same about the 7.62...it puts dicks in the dirt.

And I love my M1A. With the 22" barrel it wouldn't be my first choice for going through doorways, but the 18" version should be adequate, and I'll take 6 to 8 twenty round mags of 7.62 over 10 thirty round mags of 5.56 any day of the week.
 
You may be over reacting. They allways are going to have to switch or "tune " thier ammo to the conditions at hand. I'd be worried if they did just decide for one bullet style deos all.

For example:
55gn FMJ punches right through my steel body armor, 77gn deosn't. .308 deosn't go through either.

77 gn goes through my polymer plates, 55gn deosn't, .308 deos

Different bullets for different fields of battle.

Just use one that will get through all of them. 7.62 NATO armor piercing.

It will center punch all typical plates used by infantry today.

Once more 7.62 NATO solves all those pesky problems.

I carried 17 magazines with 19 rounds in each for my M14 in Vietnam. About 6 months through my second tour with the 3rd Marine Division, a Brigadier order me to turn my M14 in and draw a M16. He had his aid get my unit, service number etc. So I turned in my beloved M14, and they issued me a Brand new XM16E1.

Walked around the building tuned it back in. Went over to the BAS (Battalion Aid Station) and assembled a Franken M16 from the rifles in the KIA barrel. In those days I new which ones had good chambers and such. Used a A1 Buffer With a E1 receiver.

My rifle was fairly reliable. But I now carried 32 twenty round M16 magazines loaded with no more than 16 rounds. Carried a pair of slip joint pliers to bend them square, and had to do it quite often.

Yea, I carried about 100 morre loaded rounds with the Matty Mattel, but I would rather carry less 7.62. And that is when my life depended on what I carried.

No, I believe we need a new round a tweener. Smaller than the 7.62 NATO but bigger and more powerful than the 5.56 NATO. In the interim, the 7.62 will take care of business With just one choice of bullets, armor piercing, and it will do it all.

Go figure.

Fred
 
I haven't had to use it in combat, but I carried a M16A2 during my time in the USMC. I privately own an AK-47, AR-15 and have extensively fired a CETME. The CETME is boner-inspiring at the range, but IMO it's too much rifle for personnel. On top of the fact that the brass is larger and in quantity, heavier. The 5.56 just seems like a glorified .22 Magnum round, but has the benefit of ammunition not weighing as much. My AK-47 platform however is probably the best of both worlds.
Of the three, I've never had a malfunction with it but it does weigh more than the AR. Assuming I were going to Afghanistan/Iraq, I'd take a high end AK. Ranges won't be over 200 yards hardly ever in street and house to house fighting. The 7.62 round has plenty of power to penetrate doors, wooden fences and etc. It also has the benefit of having a common round with many enemy combatants. You wouldn't have to worry as much about running out of ammo should lines be cut off.
 
Assuming I were going to Afghanistan/Iraq, I'd take a high end AK. Ranges won't be over 200 yards hardly ever in street and house to house fighting. The 7.62 round has plenty of power to penetrate doors, wooden fences and etc. It also has the benefit of having a common round with many enemy combatants. You wouldn't have to worry as much about running out of ammo should lines be cut off.

Actually recent reports state, that half the ground combat contact are happening at ranges of + greater than 300 meters. That sort of rules out the AK and it's 7.62X39 "ComBloc". It ain't as good as the AR past 300 meters, to much dispersal, at least from an AK.

The Taliban use heavy and medium weapons to stay out of the effective range of the M16/M4 system. What you are saying was true in Iraq, but A-stan is a totally new war for our present troops. Spending most time out in the "Bush" without vehicles to carry your gear.

Keep in mind the mission and the ground. The AR problem is at that +300 Meter range, according to the reports and the reason they are going to the new open tip cartridge for the Corps. IIRC the new round is the MK318Mod0. Better down range performance.

Go figure.

Fred
 
Real world

I spent time in Vietnam with the USMC in 1968 and reality is that you carried whatever was issued to you, M-16 in my case but some of the guys carried M-14's. As your tour evolves you begin to carry other things that a squad needs in it's arsenal. Before I was wounded I was carrying my M-16, four LAWS (Light Antitank Weapons System), four bandoliers of .60 cal machine gun ammo, 4-5 hand grenades. That's my best memory of what I had, and I was damn grateful for it. Our squad operated well because, like all Marines, we were a team and the wants of any individual weren't our problem. Here's your gear, do your job, MOS 0311 (grunt).
 
Yeah, Jack. I don't recall haveing a choice when we switched from M14 to M16. Who'd these guys steal ammo from? Sounds just like the "my rifle will shoot 1 moa all day off hand". Everybodys got a story, once in awhile they are true from someone who actually knows what he is talking about. Maybe tommorrow.
 
I don't know how true this is but, it's interesting. It was sent to me.




This email from a Marine who's in Iraq




This is a must read. I think it is very important that you all find time to read this.......it is worth the time spent.

Subject: Combat Firearms "Report Card" from Iraq

This email from a Marine who's in Iraq . No politics here; just a Marine with a bird's eye view opinion:

US Weapons:

1) The M-16 rifle:
Thumbs down. Chronic jamming problems with the talcum powder like sand over there. The sand is everywhere. Jordan says you feel filthy 2 minutes after coming out of the shower. The M-4 carbine version is more popular because it's lighter and shorter, but it has jamming problems also. They lack the ability to mount the various optical gunsights and weapons lights on the picatinny rails, but the weapon itself is not great in a desert environment. They all hate the 5.56mm (.223) round. Poor penetration on the cinderblock structure common over there and even torso hits can't be reliably counted on to put the enemy down.
Fun fact: Random autopsies on dead insurgents show a high level of opiate use.

2) The M243 SAW (squad assault weapon):
.223 cal. Drum fed light machine gun. Big thumbs down. Universally considered a piece of ****. Chronic jamming problems, most of which require partial disassembly (that's fun in the middle of a firefight).

3) The M9 Beretta 9mm:
Mixed bag. Good gun, performs well in desert environment; but they all hate the 9mm cartridge. The use of handguns for self-defense is actually fairly common. Same old story on the 9mm: Bad guys hit multiple times and still in the fight.

4) Mossberg 12ga. Military shotgun:
Works well, used frequently for clearing houses to good effect.

5) The M240 Machine Gun:
7.62 NATO (.308) cal. belt fed machine gun, developed to replace the old M-60 (what a beautiful weapon that was!!) Thumbs up. Accurate, reliable, and the 7.62 round puts 'em down.

Originally developed as a vehicle mounted weapon, more and more are being dismounted and taken into the field by infantry. The 7..62 round chews up the structure over there.

6) The M2 50 cal heavy machine gun:
Thumbs way, way up. "Ma Deuce" is still worth her considerable weight in gold. The ultimate fight stopper - puts their dicks in the dirt very time. The most coveted weapon in-theater.

7) The .45 pistol:
Thumbs up. Still the best pistol around out there. Everybody authorized to carry a sidearm is trying to get their hands on one. With few exceptions, can reliably be expected to put 'em down with a torso hit. The special ops guys (who are doing most of the pistol work) use the HK military model
and supposedly love it. The old government model .45's are being re-issued en masse.

8) The M-14:
Thumbs up. They are being re-issued in bulk, mostly in a modified version to special ops guys. Modifications include lightweight Kevlar stocks and low power red dot or ACOG sights. Very reliable in the sandy environment, and they love the 7.62 round.

9) The Barrett .50 cal sniper rifle:
Thumbs way up. Spectacular range and accuracy and hits like a freight train. Used frequently to take out vehicle suicide bombers (we actually stop a lot of them) and barricaded enemy. It is definitely here to stay.

10) The M24 sniper rifle:
Thumbs up. Mostly in .308 but some in 300 win mag. Heavily modified Remington 700's. Great performance. Snipers have been used heavily to great effect. Rumor has it a marine sniper on his third tour in Anbar province has actually exceeded Carlos Hathcock's record for confirmed kills with OVER 100.

11) The new body armor:
Thumbs up. Relatively light at approx. 6 lbs.and can reliably be expected to soak up small shrapnel and even will stop an AK-47 round. The bad news: Hot as **** to wear, almost unbearable in the summer heat (which averages over 120 degrees). Also, the enemy now goes for head shots whenever possible. All the bull**** about the "old" body armor making our guys vulnerable to the IED's was a non-starter. The IED explosions are enormous and body armor doesn't make any difference at all in most cases.

12) Night Vision and Infrared Equipment:
Thumbs way up. Spectacular performance. Our guys see in the dark and own the night, period. Very little enemy action after evening prayers. More and more enemy being whacked at night during movement by our hunter-killer teams. We've all seen the videos.

13) Lights:
Thumbs up. Most of the weapon mounted and personal lights are Surefire's, and the troops love 'em. Invaluable for night urban operations. Jordan carried a $34 Surefire G2 on a neck lanyard and loved it. I cant help but notice that most of the good fighting weapons and ordnance are 50 or more years old!! With all our technology, it's the WWII and Vietnam era weapons that everybody wants!! The infantry fighting is frequent, up close and brutal. No quarter is given or shown.

Bad guy weapons:
1) Mostly AK47's. The entire country is an arsenal. Works better in the desert than the M16 and the .308 Russian round kills reliably. PKM belt fed light machine guns are also common and effective. Luckily, the enemy mostly shoots like ****. Undisciplined "spray and pray" type fire. However, they are seeing more and more precision weapons, especially sniper rifles. ( Iran, again)

2) The RPG:
Probably the infantry weapon most feared by our guys. Simple, reliable and as common as dog****. The enemy responded to our up-armored Humvees by aiming at the windshields, often at point blank range. Still killing a lot of our guys.

3) The IED:
The biggest killer of all. Can be anything from old Soviet anti-armor mines to jury rigged artillery shells. A lot found in Jordan 's area were in abandoned cars. The enemy would take 2 or 3 155 mm artillery shells and wire them together. Most were detonated by cell phone and the explosions are enormous. You're not safe in any vehicle, even an M1 tank. Driving is by far the most dangerous thing our guys do over there. Lately, they are much more sophisticated "shape charges" (Iranian) specifically designed to penetrate armor. Fact: Most of the ready made IED's are supplied by Iran, who is also providing terrorists (Hezbollah types) to train the insurgents in their use and tactics. That's why the attacks have been so deadly lately. Their concealment methods are ingenious, the latest being shape charges, in Styrofoam containers spray painted to look like the cinderblocks that litter all Iraqi roads. We find about 40% before they detonate, and the bomb disposal guys are unsung heroes of this war.

4) Mortars and rockets:
Very prevalent. The soviet era 122mm rockets (with an 18km range) are becoming more prevalent. One of Jordan 's NCO's lost a leg to one. These weapons cause a lot of damage "inside the wire". Jordan 's base was hit almost daily his entire time there by mortar and rocket fire, often at night to disrupt sleep patterns and cause fatigue (It did). More of a psychological weapon than anything else. The enemy mortar teams would jump out of vehicles, fire a few rounds, and then haul ass in a matter of seconds.

Fun fact:
Captured enemy have apparently marveled at the marksmanship of our guys and how hard they fight. They are apparently told in Jihad school that the Americans rely solely on technology, and can be easily beaten in close quarters combat for their lack of toughness. Let's just say they know better now.

Bad guy technology:
Simple yet effective. Most communication is by cell and satellite phones and also by email on laptops. They use handheld GPS units for navigation and "Google Earth" for overhead views of our positions. Their weapons are good, if not fancy, and prevalent. Their explosives and bomb technology is TOP OF THE LINE. Night vision is rare. They are very careless with their equipment and the captured GPS units and laptops are treasure troves of Intel when captured.

Who are the bad guys? Most of the carnage is caused by the Zarqawi Al Qaeda group. They operate mostly in Anbar province (Fallujah and Ramadi). These are mostly "foreigners", non-Iraqi Sunni Arab Jihadists from all over the Muslim world (and Europe ). Most enter Iraq through Syria (with, of course, the knowledge and complicity of the Syrian govt.), and then travel down the "rat line" which is the trail of towns along the Euphrates River that we've been hitting hard for the last few months.

Some are virtually untrained young Jihadists that often end up as suicide bombers or in various "sacrifice squads". Most, however, are hard core terrorists from all the usual suspects (Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas etc.). These are the guys running around murdering civilians an masse and cutting heads off.

The Chechens (many of whom are Caucasian) are supposedly the most ruthless and the best fighters. They have been fighting the Russians for years. In the Baghdad area and south, most of the insurgents are Iranian inspired (and led) Iraqi Shiites. The Iranian Shiia have been very adept at infiltrating the Iraqi local govt.'s, the police forces and the Army. They have had a massive spy and agitator network there since the Iran-Iraq war in the early 80's. Most of the Saddam loyalists were killed, captured, or gave up long ago.

Bad Guy Tactics: When they are engaged on an infantry level they get their asses kicked every time! Brave, but stupid. Suicidal Banzai-type charges were very common earlier in the war and still occur. They will literally sacrifice 8-10 man teams in suicide squads by sending them screaming and firing AK's and RPG's directly at our bases just to probe the defenses. They get mowed down like grass every time (see the M2 and M240 above). Jordan 's base was hit like this often.

When engaged, they have a tendency to flee to the same building, probably for what they think will be a glorious last stand. Instead, we call in air and that's the end of that more often than not. These hole-ups are referred to as Alpha Whiskey Romeo's (Allah's Waiting Room). We have the laser guided ground-air thing down to a science. The fast mover's, mostly Marine F-18's, are taking an ever increasing toll on the enemy. When caught out in the open, the helicopter gunships and AC-130 Spectre Gunships cut them to ribbons with cannon and rocket fire, especially at night. Interestingly, artillery is hardly used at all.

Fun facts:
The enemy death toll is supposedly between 45-50 thousand. That is why we're seeing less and less infantry attacks and more IED, suicide bomber ****. The new strategy is just simple: attrition.

The insurgent tactic most frustrating is their use of civilian non-combatants as cover. They know we do all we can to avoid civilian casualties and therefore schools, hospitals and especially Mosques are locations where they meet, stage for attacks, cache weapons, and ammo and flee to when engaged. They have absolutely no regard whatsoever for inflicting civilian casualties. They will terrorize locals and murder without hesitation anyone believed to be sympathetic to the Americans or the new Iraqi govt. Kidnapping of family members, especially children, is common to influence people they are trying to influence but can't reach, such as local govt. officials, clerics, tribal leaders, etc..

The first thing our guys are told is "don't get captured". They know that if captured they will be tortured and beheaded on the internet. Zarqawi openly offers bounties for anyone who brings him a live American serviceman. This motivates the criminal element who otherwise don't give a **** about the war. A lot of the beheading victims were actually kidnapped by common criminals and sold to Zarqawi.

As such, for our guys, every fight is to the death. Surrender is not an option. The Iraqi's are a mixed bag.. Some fight well; others aren't worth a damn. Most do okay with American support. Finding leaders is hard, but they are getting better.

It is widely viewed that Zarqawi's use of suicide bombers, en masse, against the civilian population was a serious tactical mistake. Many Iraqi's were galvanized and the caliber of recruits in the Army and the police forces went right up, along with their motivation. It also led to an exponential increase in good intel because the Iraqi's are sick of the insurgent attacks against civilians. The Kurds are solidly pro-American and fearless fighters.

Morale:
According to Jordan , morale among our guys is very high.They not only believe that they are winning, but that they are winning decisively. They are stunned and dismayed by what they see in the American press, whom they almost universally view as against them. The embedded reporters are despised and distrusted. They are inflicting casualties at a rate of 20-1 and then see **** like "Are we losing in Iraq " on TV and the print media.

For the most part, they are satisfied with their equipment, food, and leadership. Bottom line though, and they all say this, is that there are not enough guys there to drive the final stake through the heart of the insurgency, primarily because there aren't enough troops in-theater to shut down the borders with Iran and Syria. The Iranians and the Syrians just can't stand the thought of Iraq being an American ally (with, of course, permanent US bases there).


Anyway, that's it, hope you found it interesting.
 
You can tell a real vet, but you can't tell him much. Today I told a cop standing in the road in the dark he was stupid. He got in his car and pulled me over. He came up to my window and asked why I said that. I told him because he is stupid. I almost hit the dumbass. He was standing on a highway in the dark dressed in black next to his car with lights on. After some discussion he said he appreciated my honesty and let me go. It may have been better for me to take my meds and keep quite. Too late.
 
Not Marine but ex-Army. Does iron sight 20" AR with another 24" 6.8 SPC scoped upper count?

That will take care of my short range and medium range threats and I can carry both on person with plenty of mags/ammo on vest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.