American military giving Iraqi soldiers 165,000 M-16’s.

[DavidV]

By David from Truth, Justice, and the American Way,cross-posted by MetaBlog

In a move that could be the most enduring imprint of U.S. influence in the Arab world, American military officials in Baghdad have begun a crash program to outfit the entire Iraqi army with M-16 rifles.

Imagine if, after defeating Japan in WWII, the U.S. military trained every Japanese soldier in our military tactics, and handed them our latest rifle.  That would be insane, right?  Right?

Share This

http://ObjectivismOnline.com/archives/003363.html

[Dr. Radiaki]

Even the guns themselves are stupid. M-16's, while accurate, are notoriously jam-happy, fragile and difficult to maintain in all but ideal conditions. The AK-47, on the other hand, makes a much better choice. Almost mythically robust(stories about them being buried, dug up a month later then fired immediately are probably not exaggerated), almost as cheap as they are common not to mention simple to maintain, repair, and build. I fail to see why an inferior American weapon should be substituted.

[Zip]

Even the guns themselves are stupid. M-16's, while accurate, are notoriously jam-happy, fragile and difficult to maintain in all but ideal conditions. The AK-47, on the other hand, makes a much better choice. Almost mythically robust(stories about them being buried, dug up a month later then fired immediately are probably not exaggerated), almost as cheap as they are common not to mention simple to maintain, repair, and build. I fail to see why an inferior American weapon should be substituted.

While I agree with your comments about the cheapness, reliability and availability of the AK I think your info on the M16 might be out of date. The early models did indeed have many of the problems you listed but I can not imagine that in the 44 years it has been in service and through 4 major revisions that thos problems continue at the same rate as the early inferior model. 16 countries world wide use the M16 and that number can not be accounted for by way of coersion of the US military industrial complex.

As a side note Canada is also equipping the Afghan Army with the C7. That too is a bad idea for all the logistical reasons you mentioned in regard to the US's move.

[aequalsa]

Even the guns themselves are stupid. M-16's, while accurate, are notoriously jam-happy, fragile and difficult to maintain in all but ideal conditions.

Maybe they're planning ahead to make our next invasion less difficult.

[pvtmorriscsa]

Ok,

As a bit of a firearm enthusiast, I felt I had to chime in on this. I am one of those weird people that enjoy disassembling, cleaning and assembling weapons to see exactly how they work almost as much as I do shooting them.

The M-16/AK argument is a very long and very old one. If one takes the time to study the creation, design, and sadly eventual standardization of the M16 in the US military it becomes blindingly obvious that it is nothing more than typical mid to late 20th century corporate welfare.

While the rest of NATO switched over to the Fn-FAL, so they may have a standardized rifle and ammo in case the Warsaw Pact decided to get froggy in Europe, we in the states changed over to the M16, a weapon that shoots a completely different and arguably inferior cartridge. Think about that for a minute. Does that even make the least bit of sense?

This story is a few months old, and I thought then about it what I think now, it is yet more corporate welfare. I think it is a sop to Colt because of the Pentagon’s purchase of the HK416 upper receivers to be issued to the fellas at the pointy end of the spear.

The HK416 is an upper receiver replacement for the M-4, the M16’s newest incarnation. It changes fundamentally how the bolt on the rifle cycles. In fact it makes it operate in a way similar to the AK, thereby making it much more reliable in a “holy shit” situation.

The only good thing I have heard was from a fella on another site that claimed to be a two-tour veteran. His take was if everyone on “our” side is shooting the same type of rifle it might ameliorate friendly fire casualties.

All I can say is not matter how many times you repaint, or rearrange a pile of shit; it is still going to be a pile of shit. This goes for the supposedly vaunted M16 as well. It was a turkey when it was a designed, and it will be a turkey no matter how much we spruce it up.

I could argue, throw facts, and cite sources ad infinitum on this subject. When the engine of the world stops, and the lights go out; if I am not in the Gulch, I am going to rely on my 1911A1, my AK-47, and my High-Standard 12 Ga., to get me through.

Rob

[Scott_Connery]

165,000 rifles for ungrateful foreigners, and not a single one for poor tax-paying me. I feel cheated.

pvtmorriscsa and other gun nuts may enjoy this: AR vs. AK vs Nagant

Edited March 8, 2008 by Scott_Connery

[SkyTrooper]

Even the guns themselves are stupid. M-16's, while accurate, are notoriously jam-happy, fragile and difficult to maintain in all but ideal conditions. The AK-47, on the other hand, makes a much better choice. Almost mythically robust(stories about them being buried, dug up a month later then fired immediately are probably not exaggerated), almost as cheap as they are common not to mention simple to maintain, repair, and build. I fail to see why an inferior American weapon should be substituted.

Since this has apparently already been hijacked and turned in to a gun thread, I'll throw in my $0.02 as well. Although my AR15 jams constantly, service M16A2s I've used have rarely jammed, and M4s I've used have never jammed. It's all about maintainence and cleaning.. military units literally spend several hours after getting back from the range on cleaning. AKs never have to be cleaned since the parts are so loose fitting, but your tradeoff is in acuracy. M16 family weapons are far more accurate than ARs so I wouldn't call it an "inferior American weapon." In summary, I'd take an AK47 if civilization was about to collapse and I'd take an M4 if I had time to clean it constantly. Of course as pvtmorris pointed out the H&K 416 is even better but ever getting it is a pipe dream since people would rather pay for the welfare state than hook the army up with guns that don't jam.

Since the Iraqi Army/Iraqi Police are all pretty undisciplined and overall poor soldiers the AK47 suits them much better. However, since their guns will probably be pointed in my direction within the near future, I'm perfectly happy with them having maintainence-heavy M16s which I know they won't clean.

[Dr. Radiaki]

I failed to mention in my last post, but it seems relevant, sand is very good at jamming delicate, close-fitting, machined parts. Should the Iraqi policemen ever encounter sand, they may regret their choice of weapon.

[Matus1976]

Even the guns themselves are stupid. M-16's, while accurate, are notoriously jam-happy, fragile and difficult to maintain in all but ideal conditions. The AK-47, on the other hand, makes a much better choice. Almost mythically robust(stories about them being buried, dug up a month later then fired immediately are probably not exaggerated), almost as cheap as they are common not to mention simple to maintain, repair, and build. I fail to see why an inferior American weapon should be substituted.

Perhaps this is exactly what would make them an excellent choice to provide to the Iraqi Army, only a stable well run army could constantly keep these weapons in good shape. Should the formal army and government collapse, the relatively intolerant to sand and abuse M16's would be worthless in a few months, and if not, there is certainly no worldwide supply of hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition, like that for the AK-47, to keep them supplied.