It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should the US army use AK-47s? (my theory)

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 07:31 AM
link   
In my opion we definately should..even though it is a terroist weapon. The would help the us military alot..because of its power, and it is very good for long range it remains more powerful then the M4A1 which we use now..and you guys think we should use the bazooka more then we do now?..the gun is very good for crowed area..and areas you dont know is safe. please reply with your ideas




posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 07:33 AM
link   
Chit-Chat.
Our armed forces only use the best. Why change?



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 07:35 AM
link   
And you don't the that U.S. special force use the AK-47?



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by just_a_pilot
And you don't the that U.S. special force use the AK-47?


I dont think they use them, they might if they run across one. But they do not supplie them.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpittinCobra

Originally posted by just_a_pilot
And you don't the that U.S. special force use the AK-47?


I dont think they use them, they might if they run across one. But they do not supplie them.


Actually they are supplied ak47s by the US military if the people planning the mission feal it is needed(they have a huge selection of weapons actually)...for use in areas where they might come across them so that they 1) if ammo runs out they can aquire some easily. 2) Can confuse the enemy...if the enemy uses ak47s then ifthey shoot at you and you shoot back with a ak47 then the enemy might become aware you are using their type of weapon and might stop shooting at you(LRRPs(lurps) used this technique back in Vietnam.)




even though it is a terroist weapon
Propaganda at work


[edit on 13-11-2004 by kessel]



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Im sorry I dont believe they supplie them. I would be willing to entertain the idea with something to back it up.

[edit on 13-11-2004 by SpittinCobra]



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 07:53 AM
link   
I Beg to differ. SEALs use handguns such as the 9mm SIG Sauer P226 and the MK23 MOD 0 45-caliber offensive handgun with a suppressor and laser-aiming module. They use rifles such as the carbine automatic M4A1 5.56 mm and the AK-47. They also use shotguns, machine guns (MK43 and M2HB), and the HK MP5 9mm submachine gun series, among others. Add to that list sniper rifles such as the M88 .50 PIP and the M-14 sniper rifle, along with grenade launchers, mortars and AT4 anti-tank rockets, and SEALs can choose a weapon to fit the specific task at hand.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Transmission Deployment
In my opion we definately should..even though it is a terroist weapon. The would help the us military alot..because of its power, and it is very good for long range it remains more powerful then the M4A1 which we use now..and you guys think we should use the bazooka more then we do now?..the gun is very good for crowed area..and areas you dont know is safe. please reply with your ideas


The AK is not "good for the long range". And bazooka was not used for decades.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 08:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by longbow
The AK is not "good for the long range". And bazooka was not used for decades.


LOL well I don't know. I blew a pretty good sized bubble with my Bazooka the other day. The comic stunk though.

An M-16 with a .223 will shoot a long way though.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 08:00 AM
link   
encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com...

List of individual weapons of the US Armed Forces

Here is a list of all supplied weapons, no sign of AK.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 08:04 AM
link   
Hmm, my list beats your list


SOG weapons



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 08:06 AM
link   
Ok, SOG has them as a used weapon, that does not mean that they are give to all armied forces.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 08:52 AM
link   
I do not know weapons very well, but there is one soldier in this video that looks like he is using an AK47, but maybe I am confusing it with another weapon.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 08:57 AM
link   
No, its not. It looks like a Ar15 with grenade launcher.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Finally I succeeded in grabing an image from that video.

I was talking about this weapon.




posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
Finally I succeeded in grabing an image from that video.

I was talking about this weapon.



That does look like a Ak. Remember, in the middle east they are going to be more common.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpittinCobra
That does look like a Ak. Remember, in the middle east they are going to be more common.


That's what I thought.

When I played "Hidden and Dangerous" sometimes I would choose enemy weapons because of the availability of ammunitions.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 11:52 PM
link   
From what I understand the Aks have slightly more firepower but a bit less range and accuracy. The big the the Aks have for them is that they are very reliable. For quick skirmishes the M-16/M-4 are probably the best choice. But if your out in battle for a prolonged period of time or your in very dirty conditions (jungle, most deserts) the Aks would be the best choice. If I were fighting in Iraq right now I would want the AKS-74. It's an updated version of the AK-47 called the AK-74 (it was made in 1974 so the reverse # is pure coincidence) only the S version has a forward handgrip and foldable stock. This combined with its excellent firepower but lack of range and accuracy compared to the M-16 make it an excellent choice for CQ combat.




top topics



 
0

log in

join