Nothing, just proving you wrong again. YOU said the US soldiers
WEREN'T swapping out/using AK-47s in combat in Iraq. You asked me to
prove it and I did.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Rob

You still haven't proved it. The aricle you provide simply states soldiers only
issued side arms are being permitted to carry AKs in addition to their side
arms. Nowhere does the article say anyone is substitution the AKs for their
M-4s. In fact the article says soldiers are only being allowed to carry AKs
because there is a shortage of M-4s. Once again you have lied.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Yeah, the official statement is "permitted"... as if any high command
could prevent the soldiers from using captured stock in close combat
situations. The US soldiers in Iraq have been using AK-47s for months
and I never suggested they turned in their M4s for the weapon... just
that they swapped-out (switched main arms) for the AK-47 in street
fighting. With all the plentiful ammo they could fire full auto all
day and not run out. They also don't have the cleaning requirements of
the M4 and have much better durability under harsh conditions.
I didn't lie at all. The official US Govt, does that much better
Really Dan, are you just a little jealous you can't have an AK-47/74
yourself? They are excellent weapons and the new Nikonov AN-94 is even
better. I still want to "procure" one if I can but the cost would be
prohibited. They are most used by Russian MoD troops and SFs. Our
Govt. has had a hard time trying to get their hands on a few.. lucky
*******s the ones that did. I suppose the Secret Service Armory
already tested one out or maybe the French who worked with their paras
a while back. The Poles were nice enough to let Western troops try out
their Beryl but this rifle is nowhere near the AN-94 in capabilities.

Rob