Article

2008-04-16 Afghanistan

Afghan troops told to lay down trusty AK47s

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by GolfBravoUSMC 2008-04-16 11:39|| || Front Page|| [11131 views ] Top

#1 there could be no greater indignity than to be told to hand over your guns and fight with the weapon of the infidel.

Because, you know, the ruskies were dark-eyed afghans, and the USSR was a pure sharia-following islamic state, very friendly to afghanistan, yup, yup, yup.

Posted by anonymous5089 2008-04-16 11:58|| 2008-04-16 11:58|| Front Page Top

#2 Not to mention than besides the russian design of "their" guns, most of them probably are chinese knock-offs.

Posted by anonymous5089 2008-04-16 12:00|| 2008-04-16 12:00|| Front Page Top

#3 Is this an attempt to keep the black market from recycling ammunition stocks out of ANA stockpiles into the hands of the enemy?

Afghanistan & the Afghan Army seem like a poor place to introduce a finicky contraption like the M-16. If you're worried about spray-and-pray, give them modified semi-automatic AKs. There must be enough of them floating about, and the back-conversion kits can't be that much more expensive than converting to the pricy M-16.

Posted by Mitch H.">Mitch H. 2008-04-16 12:15|| http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/]">[http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/] 2008-04-16 12:15|| Front Page Top

#4 Forget the AKs and M16s and give them single shot Sharps .50 cal. buffalo guns. Worked for the buffalo, should do the Taliban quite nicely.

Posted by SteveS 2008-04-16 12:27|| 2008-04-16 12:27|| Front Page Top

#5 The Iraqi's also...

Iraqi Army to Ditch AK-47s for M-16s

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,162878,00.html

Posted by tu3031 2008-04-16 12:27|| 2008-04-16 12:27|| Front Page Top

#6 Heck, I think we should give 'em M-14's.

Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2008-04-16 13:13|| 2008-04-16 13:13|| Front Page Top

#7 I'm still not convinced the M-16 is "the weapon of the future", but it does have some good points. It's ideal for fighting against an enemy at close range, or in an urban environment. I've seen enough people spray a whole clip of ammo at once, but with only about 18 rounds, it's not like emptying a 70-round banana clip from an AK-47. The biggest problem with most of the armies in that part of the world is that they "spray and pray", instead of aiming. When they come up against a well-disciplined army that shoots to kill, they die like flies. That's the reason the Arab armies always lose against the Israelis, and why the Indians repeatedly mop the floor with the Pakis. Fire discipline isn't just to preserve ammo, but is also to increase enemy body count.

Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot 2008-04-16 13:31|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/] 2008-04-16 13:31|| Front Page Top

#8 My favorite Sharps 50 story: Billy Dixon scouted the Texas Panhandle for the Army, hunted buffalo for the train companies, and defended the Adobe Walls trading post against a Comanche attack with his legendary (Sharps.50) buffalo hunting rifle.

In June, 1874, Dixon and a group of 28 men and one woman occupied the five building outpost of Adobe Walls on the Canadian river north of Amarillo. The group was attacked that year by a band of more than 250 Comanches led by chief Quanah Parker, and that is when Dixon went into the history books for firing "The Shot of the Century."

On the third day of the stand-off, a group of Indians was noticed about a mile east of Adobe Walls. It is said that Dixon took aim with his Big 50 Sharps rifle and fired, knocking an Indian off his horse almost a mile away. The Indians left the settlement alone after that.

Posted by GK 2008-04-16 13:42|| 2008-04-16 13:42|| Front Page Top

#9 One additional advantage of the M16 family is that it rapidly becomes useless unless maintained by a disciplined army. Another advantage is cultural and psychological, in that precision and marksmanship are rewarded over spray n' pray.

That being said, tactically from a grunt's perspective in the field, there are better choices than the M16.

Posted by Hector 2008-04-16 13:46|| 2008-04-16 13:46|| Front Page Top

#10 Possibilities:

1 - Different sounding report when fired. Easier to tell if you're hearing bad guys firing.

2 - Mebbe we're having a fire sale of existing stocks ahead of FINALLY giving our guys something better.

3 - Recoup a few cents on all the dollars we have spent there.

Posted by M. Murcek">M. Murcek 2008-04-16 14:00|| 2008-04-16 14:00|| Front Page Top

#11 FN makes a few guns that ANA might be able to use. Can't see them sticking with the M16 for very long. That being said, when you pick up an M16 or AR15 you can feel the difference in quality before even firing it. The AK is simpler, but a lot more sloppy of a gun in fit and finish.

Posted by Thrick the Great3539 2008-04-16 14:09|| 2008-04-16 14:09|| Front Page Top

#12 Perhaps having to manage their M16s will instill some discipline in them. Up to this point I can't imagine anything that the coalition has done that might help in this regard. They have only given cultural concession after cultural concession that have done nothing but reinforce their cultural habits in this regard.

Posted by gorb 2008-04-16 14:54|| 2008-04-16 14:54|| Front Page Top

#13 Traditionally, the Afghan will fire his Kalashnikov from the hip as he advances, spraying the enemy in all directions on automatic mode until every bullet has been expended.

Same as most African troops, except the Afghans keep their eyes open.

Posted by Pappy 2008-04-16 14:57|| 2008-04-16 14:57|| Front Page Top

#14 The difference between an army that uses a AK-47 and one that uses an M-16, is the presence of real NCOs. If you don't have that it won't make any difference regardless.

Posted by Procopius2k 2008-04-16 15:12|| 2008-04-16 15:12|| Front Page Top

#15 Don't knock the venerable M-14, guys. Heavy, sure, but it fires a thoroughly non-pansy .308 slug very accurately, and will rock-and-roll as well. I don't know about you, but that's what I look for in a non-hunting rifle.

Posted by Chief Running Gag">Chief Running Gag 2008-04-16 16:34|| 2008-04-16 16:34|| Front Page Top

#16 they will now have too learn how too aim at the target

Posted by sinse 2008-04-16 16:52|| 2008-04-16 16:52|| Front Page Top

#17 Try Butt-Stroking some guy during hand to hand with a M16A4 [Marine].

The American Soldier or Marine full of adrenaline and using a M-14 or the M-1 will cave the thickest enemy skull in even if he's wearing his helmet.

HA!

I know.. I know..
and how many, "FIX BAYONETS" orders will a war fighter hear today. :)

Posted by RD">RD 2008-04-16 17:12|| 2008-04-16 17:12|| Front Page Top

#18 I know.. I know..
and how many, "FIX BAYONETS" orders will a war fighter hear today. :)

RD, remember that Scottish unit down in Basra that ran out of bullets, then charged the enemy with fixed bayonets? And won the engagement? It still happens occasionally.

Posted by trailing wife ">trailing wife 2008-04-16 20:22|| 2008-04-16 20:22|| Front Page Top

#19 Heck, I think we should give 'em M-14's.

M-14s are coveted now - refurbed and deployed for sharpshooter use.

Posted by Pappy 2008-04-16 22:43|| 2008-04-16 22:43|| Front Page Top

#20 RD, remember that Scottish unit down in Basra that ran out of bullets, then charged the enemy with fixed bayonets? And won the engagement? It still happens occasionally.

I do now that you mention it TW.. I need some memory tea plz! ~:)

Posted by RD">RD 2008-04-16 23:54|| 2008-04-16 23:54|| Front Page Top

23:54 RD
23:40 trailing wife
23:29 Redneck Jim
23:11 Hector
23:10 Frank G
23:08 Frank G
23:03 Pappy
23:02 bigjim-ky
23:00 bigjim-ky
22:54 trailing wife
22:54 bigjim-ky
22:52 tu3031
22:45 bigjim-ky
22:44 bigjim-ky
22:43 Pappy
22:41 Beavis
22:35 bigjim-ky
22:31 bigjim-ky
22:23 Grineck Barnsmell2740
22:22 Pappy
22:21 Lumpy Ominerong2204
22:12 Grineck Barnsmell2740
21:45 Mike
21:23 Harcourt Jush7795