The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Tactical Rifle & Carbine => Topic started by: tombogan03884 on November 03, 2009, 02:39:25 PM
-
Todays Tactical Wire contained an interesting note ;
http://www.thetacticalwire.com/
The ARMY TIMES was quoted in the NSSF weekly brief as reporting that the Army has requested nearly $10 million from Congress to start solicitations for firearms competition to begin acquisition of a new carbine. The current carbine is the M4. If approved, the first round of tests may kick off as early as late in the summer of 2010 and last for around a year.
-
I think the M-4 is on borrowed time, and has been for some time now. It has seen just too many stoppages in the gulf since the original 1991 war. We have the technology to produce something better, and we should. Every weapon and aircraft in the inventory has time limits before it becomes outdated. The M-4 has well exceeded that time. There are people who love it, as I do, but right now I would be far more comfortable if I were to go into battle with an AK-47. They simply run better in the rough. I only hope they don't make the same mistake they did with the M-9. Bill T.
-
I think the M-4 is on borrowed time, and has been for some time now. It has seen just too many stoppages in the gulf since the original 1991 war. We have the technology to produce something better, and we should. Every weapon and aircraft in the inventory has time limits before it becomes outdated. The M-4 has well exceeded that time. There are people who love it, as I do, but right now I would be far more comfortable if I were to go into battle with an AK-47. They simply run better in the rough. I only hope they don't make the same mistake they did with the M-9. Bill T.
It would save us a lot of money, and cause a lot of old communists to die of laughter, if we just adopted the AK as a carbine, and went .308 as a battle rifle.;D
FQ13
-
It would save us a lot of money, and cause a lot of old communists to die of laughter, if we just adopted the AK as a carbine, and went .308 as a battle rifle.;D
FQ13
As much as I hate to admit it, I couldn't agree more. Bill T.
-
(http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/4921/lwrcar15020.jpg)
Very pretty.
(http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/9776/lancasterak472li5.jpg)
Very practical. Bill T.
-
(http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/4921/lwrcar15020.jpg)
Very pretty.
(http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/9776/lancasterak472li5.jpg)
Very practical. Bill T.
Tsk, tsk!
Close that dust cover soldier! That's what its there for!
Drop and give me twenty! ;D
-
Gas pistonize the incoming inventory. Or am I just over simplifying things?
-
Gas pistonize the incoming inventory. Or am I just over simplifying things?
We just may see that. I'm in favor of it, but that is me. I just want our men to have a gun that runs. No matter what! Bill T.
-
Gas pistonize the incoming inventory. Or am I just over simplifying things?
The caliber is part of the problem, not just the durability of the weapon. 5.56 out of an AR is gret at 300 yards plus, but it doesn't have the umph at 100 feet in urban combat. We could go .308 for everything, but they tend to be heavy, long, and damn hard to control in full auto. The 6.8 would work as a carbine (say designed for 150-200 yards or less with a folding or collapsible stock and 16" barrel for vehicles). But again, for probably $400 per unit, we could have US makers churning out AKs with better aligned sights and rails inside of six months. Spend the cash coming up with an always goes bang .308 (like say the old FN FAL) for a battle rifle and hand out the AKs to support troops and CQB specialists.
FQ13
-
The caliber is part of the problem, not just the durability of the weapon. 5.56 out of an AR is gret at 300 yards plus, but it doesn't have the umph at 100 feet in urban combat. We could go .308 for everything, but they tend to be heavy, long, and damn hard to control in full auto. The 6.8 would work as a carbine (say designed for 150-200 yards or less with a folding or collapsible stock and 16" barrel for vehicles). But again, for probably $400 per unit, we could have US makers churning out AKs with better aligned sights and rails inside of six months. Spend the cash coming up with an always goes bang .308 (like say the old FN FAL) for a battle rifle and hand out the AKs to support troops and CQB specialists.
FQ13
I'd think reintroducing the battle rifle would be a good idea, but how realistic is it to expect a large scale change of 40 years worth of military thinking in that area? And the 6.8 just sounds incredibly redundant. Carbine round is a carbine round. Either make the jump to .30 cal or don't. And we all know that a US military AK ain't going to happen, sorry to ruin the fun. :( Gas piston AR's and M1A's, done.
-
Collect all the M4s and issue M16s. Problem solved. They'll have to get used to the 5.5 inch longer barrel and fixed stock.
-
The caliber is part of the problem, not just the durability of the weapon. But again, for probably $400 per unit, we could have US makers churning out AKs with better aligned sights and rails inside of six months. Spend the cash coming up with an always goes bang.
Bingo. You hit the nail right on the head! Time for us to swallow some pride and give the guys something that runs no matter what. Bill T.
-
First, don't expect the G to go back to a caliber they rejected. .308 ain't gonna happen,
Second don't expect the choice to make sense, it's not being picked by troops, it's being picked by Congress.
Third don't expect simple, they will cram on grenade launchers, smart technology, whistles, bells, and lights
Fourth,don't expect it to actually be BETTER, chances are it will just be different.
-
How about a SCAR in 6.8?
-
To sensible and no R&D budget for the buzzards to loot.
What ever it is you can bet your bottom dollar, it may be cheap, but it WILL NOT be inexpensive.
Only once in US history have the troops gotten the best rifle available and THAT was because they copied the Mauser.
Before the M1 crowd throws a fit I will add that,the Garand became a great rifle, but the Johnson was better at the time of the trials, which is why the Marines landed on Guadalcanal with Johnsons, and Springfield's.
-
The caliber is part of the problem, not just the durability of the weapon. 5.56 out of an AR is gret at 300 yards plus, but it doesn't have the umph at 100 feet in urban combat. We could go .308 for everything, but they tend to be heavy, long, and damn hard to control in full auto. The 6.8 would work as a carbine (say designed for 150-200 yards or less with a folding or collapsible stock and 16" barrel for vehicles). But again, for probably $400 per unit, we could have US makers churning out AKs with better aligned sights and rails inside of six months. Spend the cash coming up with an always goes bang .308 (like say the old FN FAL) for a battle rifle and hand out the AKs to support troops and CQB specialists.
FQ13
What?
-
FQ talking out his Pelosi, again.
-
If I might chime in.....this administration is not going to replace anything right now. Even GWB failed to provide the armored HumVee's, decent body armour or a decent, reliable sidearm. What makes you think the Maximum Barry is going to give two shits and a handshake what the Pentagon wants right now.
Unless you've not noticed, our Generals are STILL screaming for more troops and Maximum is still hemming, hawing and lolygagging around trying to come up with a solution or another excuse.
Men died under the last administration for no good reason, more will die under this one and there is no amount of Hope and Change that's going to change that!
-
Actually Tim, the fault lay with the manufacturer. Production was unable to keep up with demand.
Same as with the perpetual lack of "enough" Destroyers during WWII.
-
The AR will accept the 6.5 grendel or the 6.8SPC or the 50 cal. New uppers!
-
There you go, but again, not enough $ for the vultures.
-
the recent dust tests done by the army, had all weapons tested do very well. the standard colt M4 beat more then a few piston guns.
now i don't know if they "messed" with the guns or the numbers, but assuming the data they released is correct, there really is nothing wrong with the modern battle rifle, as far as reliabilty is concrened.
I personally know a few operators(SEAL, marine recon) for the most part they all took off the rack guns. They also mentioned they like the m14. now it could be they like it becuase thats what they were use to. They can get basicly anything they want and yet they are using the standard service rifle.
I do agree the main prob with the ar platfrom is the 223.
-
Sure enough Tom but why then didn't Congress or the President invoke DOD prioities on manufacturing firms. It's unconscionable to consider that our fine troops went to battle with sub-standard weaponry.
One thing is for sure, if and when the Military gets new weaponry, it WILL be made by the lowest bidder. If they get the highest quaility, as you've already stated, is anyones guess.
-
Tim, how many conspiracy theories have we heard about the ammo shortage, while we have 2 wars going on and gun sales doubling ?
What kind of stink would have been raised had the Gov said no more civilian Body Armor till we have all WE need ?
As to the weapon, I would say, either 6.5 or 6.8 gas piston upper, No R&D required, we've been doing that on the basic platform for 40 years, half the cost of an entire rifle, and you don't have replace the entire inventory of manuals, tools and spare parts, not to mention that you do not have retrain all the armorers and shooters.
-
What?
The 5.56 is a flat shooting cartridge, that when coupled with the AR platform provides very good accuracy at range. 7.62x39 provides greater knock down power up close at the expense of accuracy at range, particularly in a standrd AK configuration. This seems pretty obvious to me Peg.
FQ13
-
OMG!!!! So many things at the start of this thread I agree with!!!!
I agree with Tom 100% on government being far to proud to admit it was a fool's mistake to have gone away from .308... They'll NEVER go back to it now. No matter what. Hence, the need for the creation of the 6.8 (as close as they'd dare get without embarrasing themselves).
I also agree with a new sidearm being a MAJOR need / issue for the military. Again, same stupidity will apply for calibers (it'll HAVE to be a new one altogether). MAYBE 9mm stands a chance to live on... Doubt it.
Doing things cost effectivly has ever been even the smallest priority for our government??? THANK GOD the "new upper" idea is out the door completely if only for this reason alone. (I won't go into reliability issue's)
In the past members of the UN tried to agree on a single rifle for everyone (the FAL), but stupid American pride, and political payoff's lead to our opting out of it while near everyone else jumped on the bandwagon.
What I expect... This is just my guestimate... With our "new world PC government" wanting so desperately to show we're a "team player", I believe 100% BO will ask the UN to come up with a rifle / sidearm combo accepted for all members, and the US will be the FIRST to jump on the wagon this time! I'd also venture a wild guess that both weapons in said combo will be sporting this moniker.
(http://www.fnmfg.com/FN-Logo-White.gif)
-
The 5.56 is a flat shooting cartridge, that when coupled with the AR platform provides very good accuracy at range. 7.62x39 provides greater knock down power up close at the expense of accuracy at range, particularly in a standrd AK configuration. This seems pretty obvious to me Peg.
FQ13
Go back and reread your post. you don't mention 7.62X39 in that portion so This post seems to be a complete contradiction of that one.
From BM
What I expect... This is just my guestimate... With our "new world PC government" wanting so desperately to show we're a "team player", I believe 100% BO will as the UN to come up with a rifle / sidearm combo accepted for all members, and the US will be the FIRST to jump on the wagon this time! I'd also venture a wild guess that both weapons in said combo will be sporting this moniker. FN
Probably instead of bigger they will go with smaller, faster, and even LESS effective. ( 5.7 ? )
-
Go back and reread your post. you don't mention 7.62X39 in that portion so This post seems to be a complete contradiction of that one.
From BM
What I expect... This is just my guestimate... With our "new world PC government" wanting so desperately to show we're a "team player", I believe 100% BO will as the UN to come up with a rifle / sidearm combo accepted for all members, and the US will be the FIRST to jump on the wagon this time! I'd also venture a wild guess that both weapons in said combo will be sporting this moniker. FN
Probably instead of bigger they will go with smaller, faster, and even LESS effective. ( 5.7 ? )
Man, if I could tell you how bad I hope that's not the case... But it may be... :'(
-
The 5.7 is a submachinegun round so they'll probably never adopt rifles chambered for it. All these problems could be avoided if they adopted the .276 Pederson for the M1. It's short enough to chamber in M14s and they could have chambered AR10s for it and still be using them.
-
Go back and reread your post. you don't mention 7.62X39 in that portion so This post seems to be a complete contradiction of that one.
5.56 out of an AR is gret at 300 yards plus, but it doesn't have the umph at 100 feet in urban combat?
Seems pretty clear to me Tom. But its silly to argue about this. The point is we need a bigger round and a tougher platform. The AK will work for a carbine, not a battle rifle, but it aint going to happen no matter how much sense it makes. Given that, the 6.8 for carbine or .308 for battle rifle will work. Probably not seeing the .308 either. Honestly though, can you imagine the money we would save and how happy the average grunt would be if they were given a new and improved M14, FN FAL or AK over the M16/M4?Can you picture much money we would save by being able to skip trials and just buying the licence and starting production tommorow? But hey, that makes sense. We can't have that.
FQ13
-
5.56 out of an AR is gret at 300 yards plus, but it doesn't have the umph at 100 feet in urban combat?
Seems pretty clear to me Tom. But its silly to argue about this. The point is we need a bigger round and a tougher platform. The AK will work for a carbine, not a battle rifle, but it aint going to happen no matter how much sense it makes. Given that, the 6.8 for carbine or .308 for battle rifle will work. Probably not seeing the .308 either. Honestly though, can you imagine the money we would save and how happy the average grunt would be if they were given a new and improved M14, FN FAL or AK over the M16/M4?Can you picture much money we would save by being able to skip trials and just buying the licence and starting production tommorow? But hey, that makes sense. We can't have that.
FQ13
I guess what I was getting at was how can it have more "umph", as you put it, at 300+ yards than at 100 feet?
From 300 to 600 you are getting into it's medium to minimum effective range as far as man-stopping power. I know some will disagree with that statement, but that's my opinion.
Don't take me wrong, FQ, I most certainly agree with the' bigger round needed' argument, and really like the .308. It's just that your comment seemed backwards and somewhat contradictory as far as muzzle velocity goes. That's all.
-
I guess what I was getting at was how can it have more "umph", as you put it, at 300+ yards than at 100 feet?
From 300 to 600 you are getting into it's medium to minimum effective range as far as man-stopping power. I know some will disagree with that statement, but that's my opinion.
Don't take me wrong, FQ, I most certainly agree with the' bigger round needed' argument, and really like the .308. It's just that your comment seemed backwards and somewhat contradictory as far as muzzle velocity goes. That's all.
Its cool Peg, and I could be ass backwards here. My thought was killing power vs stopping power". At 300 meters, I'll settle for him being shot and yelling for a medic, he's far away and out of the fight. At 30 meters, I want him dead right the hell now. .556 ain't going to do that as reliably as 7.62x39, .308 or 6.8. If its marginal for 250 ilbs. hogs, its equally marginal for other mammals of similar size.
FQ13
-
It even takes multiple hits to stop the 100 to 150 pound rice burners our troops have been shooting for 40 years.
But a lot of that is not related to the CALIBER. It is more a function of the 1800's bullet technology that our troops are saddled with. civilians are not limited to non expanding FMJ and can use more effective ammunition.
-
It even takes multiple hits to stop the 100 to 150 pound rice burners our troops have been shooting for 40 years.
But a lot of that is not related to the CALIBER. It is more a function of the 1800's bullet technology that our troops are saddled with. civilians are not limited to non expanding FMJ and can use more effective ammunition.
The no "dum dum" clause of the Geneva convention is arguably the stupidest international agreement ever made since the Roman Britians invited the Saxons to "protect" them from the Vikings. Honestly, we can use fuel air explosives and napalm but not hollow points? Its like living in New Jersey. Five times with FMJ or once with JHP,the result is the same, but at least you're legal. ::)
FQ13 Who figures this must make sense to someone who understands why when you shoot someone you don't mean to kill him. That person is not me.
-
It was the Hague Convention, not the Geneva that limits troops to ball ammunition.
-
Wasn't there something that also forbids some types of shotgun ammunition in war? Bill T.
-
Laws of War :
Declaration on the Use of Bullets Which Expand or Flatten Easily in the Human Body; July 29, 1899
The Undersigned, Plenipotentiaries of the Powers represented at the International Peace Conference at The Hague, duly authorized to that effect by their Governments,
Inspired by the sentiments which found expression in the Declaration of St. Petersburg of the 29th November (11th December), 1868,
Declare as follows:
The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions.
The present Declaration is only binding for the Contracting Powers in the case of a war between two or more of them.
It shall cease to be binding from the time when, in a war between the Contracting Parties, one of the belligerents is joined by a non-Contracting Power.
The present Declaration shall be ratified as soon as possible.
The ratification shall be deposited at The Hague.
A proces-verbal shall be drawn up on the receipt of each ratification, a copy of which, duly certified, shall be sent through the diplomatic channel to all the Contracting Powers.
The non-Signatory Powers may adhere to the present Declaration. For this purpose they must make their adhesion known to the Contracting Powers by means of a written notification addressed to the Netherlands Government, and by it communicated to all the other Contracting Powers.
In the event of one of the High Contracting Parties denouncing the present Declaration, such denunciation shall not take effect until a year after the notification made in writing to the Netherlands Government, and forthwith communicated by it to all the other Contracting Powers.
This denunciation shall only affect the notifying Power.
In faith of which the Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Declaration, and have affixed their seals thereto.
Done at The Hague the 29th July, 1899, in a single copy, which shall be kept in the archives of the Netherlands Government, and of which copies, duly certified, shall be sent through the diplomatic channel to the Contracting Powers.
-
It even takes multiple hits to stop the 100 to 150 pound rice burners our troops have been shooting for 40 years.
But a lot of that is not related to the CALIBER. It is more a function of the 1800's bullet technology that our troops are saddled with. civilians are not limited to non expanding FMJ and can use more effective ammunition.
;D Now that's funny there! ;D ;D
I say split the differance between a military carbine, and BR. Have Glock get off their "Perfect" butt's and poop us out a semi-auto .308 rifle with a 18" med.-heavy barrel! The FAL is a fine starting point for whatever their new design may be.
My personal favorite option: Tell our military. "Here's your catalog, start shopping."
http://www.dsarms.com/
-
What about the Israeli Galil? An AK base that supposedly addressed the shortcomings of the AK like sight radius and improvements over the few negatives that the AK has.
-
its still a ak, a whole slew of reasons why we won't use it.
-
They behead our soldiers and civilian contractors, and plaster videos of it all over the Internet, but God help us if we shoot one of their towel heads with a hollow point. Total insanity! We are being played for buffoons on the battlefield by not only our enemies, but by a sitting President who needs forever to decide to give what his top General asks him for. Bill T.
-
Galil's are a fine option to. And proof Israelies are on the ball when it comes to making great weapons and training troops (though I think it should have a left side charging handle)! And the one ugly fact of the AK design is that it just doesn't lend itself to great long range accuracy (even Dragunov's were never all THAT impressive :().
Also, of primary importance. Our government is to proud to adopt another countries weapon (proud: read as "STUPID, BULL HEADED, ARROGANT"). We will require a completely new platform, or nothing at all. ::)
-
Laws of War :
Declaration on the Use of Bullets Which Expand or Flatten Easily in the Human Body; July 29, 1899
.
.
.
The present Declaration is only binding for the Contracting Powers in the case of a war between two or more of them.
It shall cease to be binding from the time when, in a war between the Contracting Parties, one of the belligerents is joined by a non-Contracting Power.
Seems to me the Taliban and so-called insurgents are not one of the Contracting Powers, and therefore whacking the little towel-heads with JHPs is right in line with the agreement.
And if you want to argue (I'm looking at you FQ) that Iraq or Afghanistan are Contracting Powers, the next paragraph pretty much releases us from our obligations.
Has anyone seen any analysis on wounds our guys have received to determine whether the other side is playing by these rules?
-
I was wonder when someone was going to pick up on that sentence. Well done Path!
No one I know of plays by the rules! We no longer line up 1000 troops and trade volleys at the opposing force. We haven't done that since we kicked the British out of here...
Change the rules, blow the little shits to Kingdom come!
-
The logistics chain is barely able to supply the current ammo demand. Where are 5-6 billion rounds of JHP coming from?
-
As I see it, the one imperfection that makes the AR a better choice than ANY of the current production rifle/carbine/long guns mentioned is the drop free magazines. If I'm fighting for my life and run dry I DO NOT want to be juggling rifle, empty mag and full mag while I try to "rock" one out and the other in, (keeping track of which is which) while also holding onto my rifle and working the mag release. I want to hit the button and slap in a new mag slap the bottom, hit the bolt release and back to fighting.
-
And if you want to argue (I'm looking at you FQ) that Iraq or Afghanistan are Contracting Powers, the next paragraph pretty much releases us from our obligations.
H
You're looking in the wrong place Path. The Hague and Grneva conventions are mutually reciprocal contracts that simply say do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Useful and nice, but they are not some sort of binding moral document, merely quid pro quo. If the other side does not honor their obligations, or never signed the treaties, or continually flouts the laws of war by not wearing uniforms, hiding amongst civilieans or targeting them, the only rule of war is rule #1, don't lose.
FQ13
-
Here's another thing about those conventions.
They only apply to STATES (country's if you will ) We have not been fighting a "Nation since April of 03 when Iraq collapsed.
They DO NOT apply to NON state organizations such s Al Queda, even if they DID abide by them we would not be required to do so.
-
The only rule of war is rule #1, don't lose.
FQ13
+1 !
1,) The United States should immediately drop out of the U.N.
2,) Reclaim the U.N. building by giving them 60 days to leave.
3,) Turn the building into an arms bazaar. Everything in one location. Guns, ammunition, reloading equipment and components. Allow Dillon, Hornady, RCBS, etc. free rent to help promote and create new jobs. Keep all bullets and assorted heavy materials on the lower floors.
4,) Close GITMO, march all the prisoners out to the beach for immediate execution for war crimes against the United States. That solves that problem. Now there are no prisoners!
5,) Issue hollow point ammunition to all troops. (This ammo can also be stored in the U.N. building which will be renamed GITMO, Guns, Incendiaries, To Mutilate, Opponents.)
6,) Put Glen Beck and Oliver North in charge of this entire operation, with their salaries paid out of Hussein's "stimulus money". Problem solved! Bill T.
-
Bill,
Ya left out Unca Ted! What's his new title gonna be!
+10000000
-
+1 !
1,) The United States should immediately drop out of the U.N.
2,) Reclaim the U.N. building by giving them 60 days to leave.
3,) Turn the building into an arms bazaar. Everything in one location. Guns, ammunition, reloading equipment and components. Allow Dillon, Hornady, RCBS, etc. free rent to help promote and create new jobs. Keep all bullets and assorted heavy materials on the lower floors.
4,) Close GITMO, march all the prisoners out to the beach for immediate execution for war crimes against the United States. That solves that problem. Now there are no prisoners!
5,) Issue hollow point ammunition to all troops. (This ammo can also be stored in the U.N. building which will be renamed GITMO, Guns, Incendiaries, To Mutilate, Opponents.)
6,) Put Glen Beck and Oliver North in charge of this entire operation, with their salaries paid out of Hussein's "stimulus money". Problem solved! Bill T.
My only objection is with North. I have issues with the guy. Beyond that I am on board and would highly reccomend Ted as a replacement. Can you imagine the TV adds he would make for an arms baazar? God, I would pay money to watch them. ;D
FQ13
-
We also need to start offering performance incentives to all of our troops in the field. For example, $100.00 per month for life for every soldier who kills a Taliban insurgent. This would be much like the incentive clauses in NFL contracts. This would be paid upon commitment of the deed. If a soldier kills 2 Taliban to his credit, it kicks in immediately. The next month his family gets $200.00 that month, and every month there after for life.
Again, this should come out of Hussein's stimulus money, or from the House Of Representatives pension plan, which has been gold plated for years. Much better. These clowns get it for wasting the taxpayers money, why shouldn't our boys get it for killing the enemy's of the United States?? When a soldier get 5 or more kills, he gets an extra thousand per month for life. Just like the fly boys of WW II, 5 kills = 1 Combat Ace.
For the fighter jockeys the same would apply, but with a slightly different pay scale because they can lay waste to dozens of these guys in one shot. For extraordinary service, like the capturing of Saddam Hussein, that's it. These guys go home, retired for life with a $10,000,000.00 bonus We are offering the big bucks reward to the wrong people. Give it to our guys.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6JpBo7nVxs
These guys get a free house on the golf course in Palm Springs, and a $100,000.00 gift certificate from Cabela's. Every Taliban would be dead in 6 months, and a bunch of guys would be dressed in digital camo on Rodeo Drive! Bill T.
-
Bill,
Ya left out Unca Ted! What's his new title gonna be!
+10000000
Retaliation Czar ;D
My only objection is with North. I have issues with the guy. Beyond that I am on board and would highly reccomend Ted as a replacement. Can you imagine the TV adds he would make for an arms baazar? God, I would pay money to watch them. ;D
FQ13
Conservative, Christian, Decorated Combat Veteran, who sticks to his values and takes the fall for his superiors with out whining.
I'm not surprised that FQ has issues with a guy like that.
-
Conservative, Christian, Decorated Combat Veteran, who sticks to his values and takes the fall for his superiors with out whining.
I'm not surprised that FQ has issues with a guy like that.
Violated his oath to uphold the Constitution, obeyed unlawful orders, obstructed justice by destroying or hiding evindence, took the Fifth in uniform in front of the US Senate. I'm surprised you don't have issues with a guy like that.
FQ13
-
I have to go with FQ on this one.
Ollie could have taken the one for team like G. Gordon or taken the blame.
He could have refused to answer and claimed national security, even if he got charged with contempt
As a USMC officer he never should have lied under oath.
No excuse.
-
How about instead of the "Home Shopping Network", we have the Guns Shopping Network. Direct from the former U.N. Building. Bill T.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqJsziuDJTg
-
The logistics chain is barely able to supply the current ammo demand. Where are 5-6 billion rounds of JHP coming from?
I got some bullet molds and can start cranking them out in the garage.
;)
-
I wanna see the "Terrorist Kill of the Week" commercials!!!