| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan |
| Weapons failed US troops during Afghan firefight |
| 2009-10-11 |
| In the chaos of an early morning assault on a remote U.S. outpost in eastern Afghanistan, Staff Sgt. Erich Phillips' M4 carbine quit firing as militant forces surrounded the base. The machine gun he grabbed after tossing the rifle aside didn't work either. When the battle in the small village of Wanat ended, nine U.S. soldiers lay dead and 27 more were wounded. A detailed study of the attack by a military historian found that weapons failed repeatedly at a "critical moment" during the firefight on July 13, 2008, putting the outnumbered American troops at risk of being overrun by nearly 200 insurgents. Which raises the question: Eight years into the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, do U.S. armed forces have the best guns money can buy? Despite the military's insistence that they do, a small but vocal number of troops in Afghanistan and Iraq has complained that the standard-issue M4 rifles need too much maintenance and jam at the worst possible times. A week ago, eight U.S. troops were killed at a base near Kamdesh, a town near Wanat. There's no immediate evidence of weapons failures at Kamdesh, but the circumstances were eerily similar to the Wanat battle: insurgents stormed an isolated stronghold manned by American forces stretched thin by the demands of war. Army Col. Wayne Shanks, a military spokesman in Afghanistan, said a review of the battle at Kamdesh is under way. "It is too early to make any assumptions regarding what did or didn't work correctly," he said. Complaints about the weapons the troops carry, especially the M4, aren't new. Army officials say that when properly cleaned and maintained, the M4 is a quality weapon that can pump out more than 3,000 rounds before any failures occur... The brass had better be on this like flies on honey, because even a rumor can be nightmarish for morale. If it is true, that is even worse. |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #11 Chuck has it right here. When a force is overwhelmed everything has failed--the air support, the mortars, the perimeter wire, the machine guns, the personal weapons, and the bayonets. This failure is a failure of command. Someone put these men too far forward for too long. Arrogance has a price and it has been paid in full by these brave soldiers. Navy officers are cashiered for merely running aground. The Army needs to send some Colonels home in disgrace. |
| Posted by: rammer 2009-10-11 22:14 |
| #10 Those weapons have been in use for a very long time. I don't recall seeing these complaints in Iraq or earlier in Afghanistan. Why are we only now hearing this? I am skeptical of the report. |
| Posted by: crosspatch 2009-10-11 21:38 |
| #9 Dirty weapons are always a problem. When 300 plus enemy attack you from prepared positions, dirty weapons are the least of your worries. Media is eager to blame the brass since cannot blame Barry O for sitting on his hands about reinforcements for months. |
| Posted by: Chuck Simmins 2009-10-11 20:45 |
| #8 "M4 is a quality weapon that can pump out more than 3,000 rounds before any failures occur..." Compare to the venerable AK-47/74 design, which will happily pump out 10,000+ rounds without a hiccup, whether you clean it or not. |
| Posted by: Scooter McGruder 2009-10-11 20:17 |
| #7 If the machine gun didn't work at roughly the same time as the rifle stopped working, then it does sound like bad ammo. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2009-10-11 17:18 |
| #6 It's the shutter over the bolt, boys. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2009-10-11 17:16 |
| #5 Mike, that sounds about right. People at the DoD went to great lengths to fix the problems with the M-16, with different barrel twists and heavier bullets, among other things.... Then to make the M4 they shortened the barrel and a lot of the fixes went down the drain. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2009-10-11 17:06 |
| #4 Although the AP with its layers of fact checkers misses it, SSgt Phillips was awarded the DSC for an earlier battle, the "Ranch House" fight. Citation here. So if he's bitching, I'm listening very respectfully. |
| Posted by: Matt 2009-10-11 16:41 |
| #3 ...If these are the M4 carbines they're talking about, then I'm hearing about two problems: first, bad ammo, which was one of the things that gave the original M16 its lousy rep. The other thing is the shorter barrel on the M4 for urban fighting. The rest of the weapon wasn't redesigned, and I gather that's causing problems as well. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2009-10-11 16:29 |
| #2 Exactly. When properly cleaned and maintained. After firing it all afternoon, you ain't gonna have time to get your swabs and clean it out. I always wondered why we have a high-tech brittle rifle, but I suppose there's just too much money in it. |
| Posted by: gromky 2009-10-11 16:25 |
| #1 They've spent too much on them over the last forty years to admit that they were wrong now. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2009-10-11 16:13 |