As some of you know, the AK-47 is among the easiest of fire arms to produce, the most invunerable to jammming, and extremely easy to maintain. It would cost far less for the U.S to use the AK-47 than it would for them to use the M-16 or the M4 carbine, both of which need special cleaning kits to ensure long-term use. And they both require weeks of training for soldiers to use them correctly
On average at a distance of 30 metres, unloading a full clip of an ak on full auto you would only hit your target once. This is not the kind of weapon the US should use.
On average at a distance of 30 metres, unloading a full clip of an ak on full auto you would only hit your target once. This is not the kind of weapon the US should use.
alot of us are thinking of the accuracy and whatnot, which is why they made the AK-74 (or at least I think so) to be more accurate, (further research lead me to the soviet union making it, thx wikipedia, I might be able 2 trust u :P) and it's reliability and cost is just about as much as the AK-47. Plus, everyone is thinking of far, open battlefields. We need to start thinking CQC guys. The AK-47 is perfect for that. Close Quarter Combat would be perfect for the AK, I.E. having to inside a building to do whatever, inside guard duty, etc. etc. Point is, the AK is a perfect weapon as far as CQC.
By the way the British army is the best. And why would you want to use terrorist guns and third world country war weapons if you are the biggest superpower in the world with the 2nd best army.
Interesting point about the type of combat (perfect for zsc lol)But most of the battles fought by ground troops in Afghanistan are from a fairly long range and so the AKs qualities as a CQC weapon would be rendered useless.
Everything has pros and cons, but it should be worth noting that the AK-47 is obsolete by modern standards. Besides, it's all about symbolism. How would it look if the US was using guns produced by its former enemy?
parsat has a good point there. Our image is fairly important to us. and important to our morale at that
From a strategic point of view, US supply lines could come under more threat as the Taliban would be able to use US ammo and could potentially spring more ambushes on them. In the Taliban could use the ammo of dead US soldiers.
There's always the AK-74, which has the same accuracy almost as the M-16, and BTW most real combat only takes place from about 350 yards away, why would we then need a rifle that can shoot from over 500 yards that isn't a sniper rifle? In world War 2 the Germans developed a weapon known as the MP44, very similar to the AK accept for the lack of reliablity. It was as accurate as the AK-47 in the face of rifles that could shoot from over 1,000 yards away! yet it killed more russian soldiers and performed better than any other gun besides the MG-42 in the Eastern front.
My point: An ak-47 is accurate enough to get any wartime job done. And the only reason why the United States is so effective against the users of the AK is because they have the best support vehicles, best air support and best tanks anywhere else exept for Europe. Besides, Iraqi insurgents and terrorists aren't always as well trained as the U.S troops are. In all, an AK-47 has the accuracy you need and the reliablity to keep you alive untile the end. After all the vietnamese killed over 50,000 U.S soldiers with no other support besides artillary. U.S used m16s NVA used the AK-47. And the NVA defeated the south veitnamese, who also used the M16 and the AK-47.
ONE MORE THING hwo do you explain the fact that some US trooops have MP5s, shotguns, and use handguns? Have you considered what those people are doing? i'm sure they don;t just hunker down while the men and women using M16s kill everyone using an "obsolete" weapon. They shoot back because their weapons are accurate ENOUGH to do their job. Any anything out of range would require the use of a sniper.
The AK-47 would be a good weapn for teh U.S. but look what if there using the gun and the our soilders here it theyll think oo our enemies firing at us,then probaly ambush or air strike. So it would be bad for the U.S.
