Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I am not a gun expert so plez help.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 12:03 AM
Original message
I am not a gun expert so plez help.
Why does our military have AK-47's?? The weapons lost were AK-47's which, I think they are weapons of choice of Russia, China, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
1. Try this forum:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
2. They were being given to Iraqi police/military
We actually do keep quite a few Kalashnikovs lying around to hand out to our Loyal Native Allies in far-flung parts of the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 12:06 AM
Response to Original message
3. Because you can bury them in the dirt and dig them up and they still work.
They use a very easy to find bullet. Same reason soldiers had tommy guns in WWII. You need something that kills and works well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 12:11 AM
Response to Original message
4. we don`t use ak-47s
we bought them because they are dirt cheap,very reliable,and were standard issue for the iraq army. before the usa invaded iraq saddam gave away ak 47`s to anyone who wanted one so there was a shortage of ak`s for the "new iraqi" army...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 12:18 AM
Response to Original message
5. Because M16's rifles suck...
They jam a lot...not good if you are getting shot at.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capn Sunshine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 03:12 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. well..if you keep them dust free they are OK
but Iraq is a huge freaking sand pit so jam city. It was bad enough anywhere the dust blows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. Not really
The first one I was issued (years ago) had this problem, the magazine carrier was machined wrong and held the clips down just about 1/16" and that made the very tip of the bullets hit the flat part just below the loading ramp. So it would not feed bullets at all, and it had nothing at all to do with dirt. It was just a plain old fashioned case of shitty workmanship and poor quality control standards. The effect was to make that rifle a single-shot weapon that jammed on ever single shot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 12:31 AM
Response to Original message
6. Rent "Lord of War" it is an enjoyable watch and will give you a whole new perspective
Edited on Sat Sep-29-07 12:31 AM by greyhound1966
on the arms dealing business, which BTW, we are the masters of by several orders of magnitude.

The AK-47 is the preeminent small arm of the world, cheap, accurate enough, lethal, and durable beyond caparison.

We use the M-16 simply to keep Colt in business. It is complicated, requires too much maintenance, and is relatively underpowered.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 02:52 AM
Response to Original message
7. It's what Iraquis are already familiar with (and probably cheaper than M-16s)
compatible with their existing supplies.

who did we buy them from?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
man4allcats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 03:07 AM
Response to Original message
8. I always thought from what I've heard that the AK-47 was
a better gun, and apparently in certain respects it is, but check out this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6BpI3xD6h0

Also, you can google "M-16 vs. AK-47" (no quotes) for additonal information.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
-..__... Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 09:14 AM
Response to Original message
10. Actually, the Russians haven't used AK-47s since the 90's
Their main service rifle is the AK-74... basically an AK-47 chambered for a more powerful round (5.45x39).

Never mind which platform is better. The AK-47 vs M-16 debate has sparked way too many debates (flame wars), on practically every gun related forum out there. There's no one good answer.

From a logistical/supply stand point, arming the Iraqis with AK's makes sense because we can barely keep up with ammunition demands for our own troops. At least with the AKs, there's probably warehouses overflowing with stockpiled ammo to keep them fed for a long time to come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. AK-47 used a 762 mm and the AK-74 uses the 545mm
The 762mm is basically the same bullet as a 308 cal. and the 545mm is the same as a 223 cal. They are not a more powerful round and neither is the M-16 round wgich is also a 545mm or 223 cal compared to the M-14 round which was the 762 mm or 308 cal.. It is bacause they believe more people are taken from the battlefield when you wound than when you kill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-30-07 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #11
18. 5.45x39mm is actually the equivalent of .215 caliber
It's a comparatively rare caliber bullet to find in America. The .223 caliber you mention is actually closer to the 5.56x45mm cartridge that is the standard NATO round, not to mention the standard for virtually all government-issue M16s and M4s.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
12. Thanks for the replys. How about about this reason:
When found on the body of an insurgent, it's harder to trace back to it's origin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. And they are dirt cheap on the world market
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freethought Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. Bingo!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freethought Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
15. This is why
American Soldiers/Marines are not issued AK-47s. They carry the current model of the M-16 Rifle, I don't know what it is called now, but that uses a .223 bullet.
However they have handed over AKs to what passes for the Iraqi security forces, and lots of them.
Reason being is quite simple. AKs are easy to manufacture and therefore quite cheap. The AK is the most used and most produced paramilitary gun in history. That is one of the genius aspects of its design. It is not made with "aerospace" precision or with ultra-tight tolerances. Certain parts of the gun can stamped which makes it easy to manufacture and those parts that are machined do not have to be machined to extreme tolerances. The AK was made to be easy to produce, cheap to make, able to tolerate punishment, function reliably on the battlefield and it does all of those swimmingly. China, Russia can produce them faster than hotcakes.
This often makes them the first choice when you have to buy arms in bulk and with little time. AKs are easy to come buy and not expensive. For instance, many years ago I had to do some gun training for a job. We were given the opportunity to try and AK and another military type rifle
from a corp. called Heckler & Koch. This was before the assault weapons ban. You could get an AK for a few hundred dollars retail, the Heckler & Koch would cost you over $1000.00 and that was nearly twenty years ago.
U.S. military does not actually use the AK, but when they arm someone else it is often their first choice for its availability and cheap price.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-29-07 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. And if they are "lost" they would be harder to trace. nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-30-07 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. I have seen some US troops use AKs on occasion
This probably started in 2004 with the bullet shortages, when NATO rounds were in short supply but Warsaw Pact 7.62 rounds were everywhere. I think Poland equipped the Iraqi government with a number of AK-74-style Tantal carbines, so US troops had plenty of time to get acquainted with AK rifles out of sheer necessity. Commanders tried to discourage the troops' use of AKs instead of AR-series M4s and M16s, because the sound produced by an AK-series is markedly different from that of an AR-series, and they had enough problems with friendly-fire issues (re: Pat Tillman) to deal with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Jul 25th 2014, 07:10 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC