4 U.S. Weapons of War That Need to Be Retired Now

Soldiers are taught to keep their weapon clean. The M-16 has served several generations of fighting men and women over five decades and is still the most respected combat rifle for distances beyond 300 yards.

The piston system is better but a phase out/phase in program can be employed to replace them if necessary rather than retiring them all at once.

The F-35 has it's pluses and it is supposed to replace the F-18 but it is also going to present a whole new set of challenges to the Navy and USMC because it isn't the platform everyone hoped it would be.

 

F 35 - failed project. Expensive and unreliable aircraft. F35 no chance survive in a duel against Russian SU35. Projects F35 created for corruption in the Defense Ministry and the Pentagon.
As for the M16 - rifle on the fan. For example, the Afghan Taliban prefer "Kalashnikov". Because reliable in all conditions.
When shooting close contact with the enemy in a real battle (battle city, mountain, forest, swamps .... winter, autumn .... rain, snow, sand, dust) - "Kalashnikov" is preferable. In-dash and hunting hares with ideal conditions for shooting and maintenance of weapons - M16 will be fine. But not in real combat conditions.

P/S:
I see the comparison takes place against M16 vs AK74. But AK74 - an outdated automatic weapon. In the Russian army is armed with AK12. And he has other specifications.





The police in Russia has such weapons. (PP-200)

 

I think the one they really need to retire is the F-35.
Why is that still a thing?

 

It's still a thing because George W. and every Congress during and since his Presidency wanted it built. An exercise in tracing all the various contractors and sub-contractors by state and size of Congressional delegations will probably enlighten people as to how defense bills and budgets get the way they are, especially huge cost plus projects. As I've said before, the biggest threat to U.S. security is the American Congress and those who vote for them. I have no problem with the F-35; I have a problem with how much they cost. Do away with corruption in defense contracting and the costs go way down, at least on most of this stuff.

 

The T-72 was manufacured in HUGE numbers....but only about 1500 to 1600 are currently battle ready.

At tops 1600 T-72's vs over 6000 M1A2 U.S. Abrams Tanks????

Forget about it!!

AboveAlpha

 

The whole debate over which rifle is better really doesn't mean much nowdays as if your Nations Soldiers are close enough to actually SEE American Soldiers carrying M4's or M-16 Varients.....that means your Nation has already lost the war.

AboveAlpha

 

Yeah, right.

 

We didn't fight this as a war.

My family members who were in it were not even allowed to SHOOT...until they were shot at.

AboveAlpha

 

More fairy tales, please.



Apparently those 2 million civilians you slaughtered were "shooting at you". No less than sticks and stones.


You are not convincing anyone with these cheap lies.

 

This coming from a guy who thinks the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan was a PEACE KEEPING STROLL IN THE PARK!!! LOL!!!

AboveAlpha

 

Sure. Tell that to the millions killed by an AK.

 

There would be many more millions dead if the total number of people shot by AK-47's had been shot by M-16 and Varients of them.

The FACTS are....the rare of survival is HIGHER is you are shot by an AK-47 rather than an M-16 or Varient of it.

AboveAlpha

 

There is a company in the process now to manufacture AK 47s in the US because they can no longer be imported into the US. It seems that the AK is reliable effective weapon, maybe the US should adopt it. It has been used world wide.

 

500 yards, 600 yards, that's not the point. The point is that a rifle is an inanimate object, its usefulness is determined by the person using the rifle - the rifle AND the rifleman are a weapon system. Training, competency, dedication, the ability to act and think, determine the outcome. Is a SEAL with a lever action 30-30 out of the action? Is the average civilian on the street suddenly a Rifleman because someone puts the best assault rifle in his hands? No and No, the SEAL is still extremely deadly and effective because he will use the tool he is given to the utmost, the civilian is ineffective because he does not know how to use the tool he is given.

Its ridiculous to talk about rifles without the Rifleman.

- - - Updated - - -

So what? Contrary to your claim, the Russians invaded and conquered another nation. Because they didn't appear to do it to your liking (where you there?) is irrelevant.

 

Who cares? Both are proven combat weapons, wielded by a variety of forces. You are engaged in a water cooler pointless discussion.

 

I know a great deal about weapons and rifles and the AK-47 is the weapon I would chose if I had one weapon I could chose to have with me marooned on a Deserted Island or lost in the Amazon...etc.

The AK-47 is a simple weapon that does not jam even if you drop it in water or mud or sand..etc.

It will fire ever time.

Now....if I am on the Battle Field and I have a choice between an AK-47 and an M-16 or M4 or other Varient....I am going to chose the M-16.

Sure I will have to take care of it and make sure I don't try to fire it after dropping it in the mud....but make no mistake.....a Soldier with an AK-47 will find himself with a 5.56 x 45 mm round between his eyes well before he can get within effective firing range with that AK-47.

AboveAlpha

 

Well....who cares about anything?

This discussion was not so pointless when the U.S. decided to go with a lighter higher velocity round that allowed a Soldier to carry a much greater amount of ammo.

AboveAlpha

 

I was in the Ukraine, Georgia, Russia and many other former Soviet States from the late 1990's on.

This issue is all about Putin BREAKING A DEAL WITH THE U.S.

The DEAL was...we buy and destroy all old Soviet Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Weapons in the Ukraine, Georgia, Russia...etc.....and Russia promises NEVER TO INVADE THESE NATIONS!!!

Putin broke the DEAL.

He will regret doing so.

AboveAlpha

 

Ah, "and you are linching blacks" argument. Not impressed.

But that is irrelevant. What is really important is that your supposengly mighty undefetable army was screwed by a bunch of peasants with AKs. There are fresher examples as well. How does this "war on terrorism" thingy workin'? Taliban must be on verge of collapse. Oh, wait, it is not.

Apparently your supposed "power" and "might" only work when you (*)(*)(*)(*) something up in 3rd world countries. Each time you you fought USSR during those proxy conflicts it didn't end so nice and well for you, despite all your chest trumping.

 

They've basically figured out a way to make it uncancelable, They've spread out orders to other nations so the US can't cancel it without losing the economies of scale that made the aircraft affordable to the other nations that are part of the "global partners" building the darn thing. In addition they've spread out the production to other nations.

I think the American taxpayer has been snookered on the F-35, but I'm not sure of how to unravel ourselves from it.

 

I had a number of family members who were in Nam and two died there so I have very strong feelings about how the at the time President Johnson's REFUSAL TO ALLOW THE U.S. MILITARY FIGHT AND WIN THE WAR IN VIETNAM.

The U.S. Military was not even allowed to BOMB HANOI....where huge numbers of Soviet Supplied SAM's were sitting right in a large PUIBLIC SQUARE.....RIGHT OUT IN THE OPEN....and a very easy target for our Air Force Pilots and Naval Aviators to bomb and destroy.....BUT THEY WERE NOT ALLOWED TO!!!

There is some what of an acurate History of this in that movie....FLIGHT OF THE INTRUDER....so watch it.

When President Nixon ordered the 24 Hour AROUND THE CLOCK UNRESTRICTED BOMBING OF NORTH VIETNAM...in Linebacker I and Linebacker II.....this forced the North Vietnamese to come to the Peace Making Table as Nixon's campaign promise was to get the United States Military out of Vietnam.

Massive wings of B-52's dropped enormous amounts of bombs which years later in the 2000's former North Vietnamese Soldiers told of how within moments ENTIRE NORTH VIETNAMESE DIVISIONS WOULD BE VAPORISED as these massive Carpet Bombing Campaigns went on.

There was NEVER a doubt that had the U.S. Military been allowed to fight the war....it would have won the war.

But they were not allowed to fight the war and EVERYTHING was micromanaged by President Johnson.

Two of my Family Members paid the ultimate price of Johnsons STUPIDITY.

HOWEVER..............................................................................................................

...................when the Soviet ASSASINATED Afghan Leaders.....they then created the event and situation that was used to justify their invasion of Afghanistan.

In what is one of the most HORRIFIC AND DISGUSTING PLAN EVER PERPETRATED UPON ANY NATIONS PEOPLE IN WORLD HISTORY.........the Soviets dropped HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS AND PERHAPS OVER A MILLION.........of ANTIPERSONEL MINES THAT LOOKED LIKE TOYS!!!!!!

The Soviet's designed mini bombs that when picked up by a CHILD.....WOULD EXPLODE....and either KILL OR MAIM THE CHILD!!!

When this issue was brought before the U.N.....the Soviet's denied they were doing it but CIA TEAMS that were in Afghanistan at the time who were being funded by money that was being appropriated primarily by SENATOR CHARLIE WILSON.....and I am sure some of you have seen the movie........

......but what they don't discuss in the Movie is how our CIA TEAMS BROUGHT BACK EVIDENCE as they brought back HUNDREDS OF TINY BOMBS DISGUISED AS TOYS!!!

Some were made to look like CRAYONS....DOLLS.....BALLS.....TOY ANIMALS....TOY SOLDIERS....PENS AND PENCILS....AND OTHER SHAPES THAT A CHILD WOULD PICK UP BECAUSE THEY WOULD WANT TO PLAY WITH IT!!!!

These BOMBS were designed to DETONATE BY MOTION OR INCREASES IN ELEVATION!!!

They were AIR DROPPED BY AIRCRAFT.....and they were made VERY BRIGHT IN COLOR....in the manner that would ATTRACT A CHILD!!!

Disgusting!

AboveAlpha

 

Sorry, but you are wrong. Contrary to popular opinion of the time, the Soviets never "placed mines inside of toys". This has been repeated and repeated for decades now, with the vast majority of people simply repeating the same things over and over again.



Those were the mines in question, the Soviet PFM-1. This was an anti-personnel mine which was designed to "flutter" to the ground much like a sycamore seed, and when it strikes the ground arm itself. The US used almost the exact same mine at that time.



US Made BLU-43.

Now the major difference is that the Soviets often painted theirs in bright colors, the US painted them olive drab. But this is what was picked up by the Afghan children, not "bombs placed inside of toys".

And if I am wrong, please, provide me some evidence to support your claims. But I knew of this way back in the early 1980's, when we covered the PFM-1 and other mines in training. The fact that children were confusing them with toys was known even then, but the propaganda experts could not help but expand on the story.

Remember, I only care about truth and accuracy. But there were not placing bombs in toys, simply anti-personnel mines that were thought by young children to be toys.

 

Lol ... the USSR went bankrupt over Viet Nam and the rest of the Brezhnev Doctrine died with it; the Soviet Union had to beg the West for wheat after 1973, it couldn't feed itself even with vast tracts of prime farmland. It's allies in the ME faded at the same time, and in Africa it's proxies failed to murder enough people to amount to anything that made them any sort of asset, so please stop embarrassing yourself; the U.S. and its allies fared a lot better than your silly country did. All it can do now is run petty extortion rackets on its tiny neighbors like some small 3rd world despotism, and even that is failing.

 

Sure, what was preventing your mighty glorious undefeatable US army from winning that war for previous 8 years?

I bet Soviet SAMs were the exact reason, why they were prohibed to bomb Hanoi.
Viet Nam airforce has lost, what, one hundred aircraft? Nevertheless you've managed to lose over 3 thousand aircraft. Special thanks to those Soviet SAMs.

Tell me more about losing 60 000 american troops as KIA and dropping as many bombs and explosives, as was used during WW II, without even fighting a war. Your stories are so entertaining.

So what?
Besides, YOU ARE LYNCHING BLACKS!!11111 argument again.

Yes, yes, stop screaming so loudly. That is not going to help you.
I doubt anyone would believe these "boonga-woonga special mines to kill children" CIA-fabricated propaganda stories, unless they are retarded hippies or something.

Killing or miaming children on purpose has no military value whatsoever, on the countarary, it antagonises local population badly and that is rarely the piont of any invader.




Unlike that perfectly well proven results of using agent orange by US airforce resulting in catastrofical mutations in future genetation of Vietnamese children.
But, alas, those were not intended to cause these effets.
Of course I can post some photos of them, but I won't, because these are both disgusting and offtopic.








As a side note, it is nice to see I made Stasser so butthurt he even forgot about his own promise to ignore me.

 

Of course they use other nations; the tax codes encourages off-shoring and money laundering, and many of these contractors are no longer U.S. companies any more, either, not to mention the banks and other businesses involved; there isn't an American owned bank within a mile of Wall Street, hasn't been for a while, which makes the Occupy Wall Street 'movement' look pretty clueless and ridiculous, they should have named themselves Occupy Greenwich, Conn, but that's another topic,