On the Ground in Iraq

[bluesky]

On the Ground in Iraq
By FrontPage Magazine
FrontPageMagazine.com | November 15, 2005

Interesting read...

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=20190

[CaliTheKid]

I had read on some other boards the author of this article was proven to be bogus. Either way I think it's an interesting read that's probably not too far off.

[PanzerAce]

"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 every time. The most coveted weapon in-theater. "

I think the M2 will outlast any of us on this board as a combat weapon. Intersting point about the weapons that people want are all really WWII/Vietnam era weapons. Seems to echo what I read in Black Hawk Down (yes, the book, not hte movie) about how people laughed at the guy with the M14, but when they realised that he only had to shoot someone once for them to stay down, many of them wanted M14s for themselves. I think the reason is that "back in the day", the ranges being consdiered were very high, so you needed the heavy high power rounds to make sure that you could actually hit someone.

[pogo]

I can't help but notice that most of the good fighting weapons and ordnance are 50 or more years old!

That's a great quote and very telling, overall a very good read. Interesting details about the (lack of) assault and retreat tactics and use of opiates by the bad guys, maybe they're related.

[M1A Rifleman]

Most of this information confirms other data that has surfaced regarding US weapons as early as our experience in Somolia. Many of the supposed problems recently reported with the Berreta pistol have been traced to poor magazines being issued. The M240/249 supposedly requires more attention to cleanlyness than does the old M60 - as was reported over 5-years ago by Jack Stanely in an old Guns mag article.

Big bullets - 45, 30cal, and 50 BMG do have their advantages

[Mike Searson]

If anybody is interested in reading an official report on weapons in Iraq and not internet folklore, PM me with your email address and I'll mail you a copy.

[11Z50]

I wrote a short piece to the forum waaaaay back in March '03 when I was over there.

Don't know if it's still in the archives.

[Mike Searson]

I've emailed about 15 copies of the report...anyone want to share their thoughts?

[M1A Rifleman]

I've emailed about 15 copies of the report...anyone want to share their thoughts?

A good read, thanks.
It confirms my statements regarding bad pistol mags being issued. If you need to limit your hi-cap 9mm to 8 rounds, I will take a 7 rnd 45acp thank you.

It also confirms my readings on the 240/249 MG, however, the reliability appears to be worse than I knew.

Kind of a goofy conclusion on the leathality of the 5.56 mm round though. Sure with proper marksmanship, and shot placement the 5.56 is leathal - but so is a BB gun. The theory of calm marksmanship and shot placement in the fog and frenzy of battle is just that, desk warrior REMF theory.

[Mike Searson]

The theory of calm marksmanship and shot placement in the fog and frenzy of battle is just that, desk warrior REMF theory.

I'd tend disagree with you on that.

It's dependent on the shooter's level of training.

I speak from the perspective of a Marine Infantryman who served in a Marine Expeditionary Unit(Special Operations Capable) ...not the perspective of say an MP reservist who has a rifle thrust in his hands and is on patrol. Simply put, the more you shoot..the greater your comfort zone with the weapon.

There is a prevailing school of thought: "You don't use your sights in combat" this has affected many police acadamies and some civilian marksmanship courses. Some refer to it as point shooting.

I say it's BS.

I have used my sights everytime I've fired my weapon.

The only time it may be valid is if you simply cannot use your sights (behind a barricade, shooting from the wrong shoulder, etc).

Much of the argument of 45 vs 9mm is in this vein...in a combat situation more people hit by 45's in recent conflicts tend to go down because the pistol is weilded by a SeAL, Recon Marine, SF Guy, etc...that is, someone who knows how to shoot a pistol well, shoots regularly, and makes head shots.

Truckdrivers, cooks, repair people, etc are armed with 9 mm...their primary job is not to shoot...or be engaged in combat...these are also the types who do not receive adequate rifle training, either.

From what I understand their "combat course" does not utilize basic marksmanship concepts.

At least in the Marine Corps...the REMF types spend 2 weeks learning nothing but how to shoot...12 hours a day; seven days a week...correct stance, breath control, sight alignment, etc.

[M1A Rifleman]

I'd tend disagree with you on that.

It's dependent on the shooter's level of training.

I agree with some of what you have stated - training IS the factor that make the US Military the best in the world..

[bassplayrr]

I've emailed about 15 copies of the report...anyone want to share their thoughts?

I haven't read it yet. The pictures are very interesting though! I printed a copy out and will make it my porcelain throne reading for the next few days.

-Chris

[jmlivingston]

Mike - I tried to PM you for a copy of that report but got an error message that you were out of storage space. Can you send me a copy at john@jmlivingston.com?

thanks!

[Mike Searson]

I didn't realize the PM box filled up so quick.
Empty now!

[pogo]

I'll have to forward my email to a friend with a pc and print it out, my old mac can't translate the report.