US Army begins shipping M855A1 ammo
- Thread starter CV32
- Start date
Now are you talking about yourself or the round
It seems like the US Army is trying anything not to switch back to the expensive 308 round. I think this is a cost saving measure to make up for the lack off punch the 223 has out pass 300 meter's. The truley thing I find shocking is how they are apearing to use the long range hunting bullet's to make up for the lack in FMJ. Any one have the BC report with photo's? Cause it sounds like a Barnes MMX round & Hornady SST hybrid.
It's nice to have people like you on this board. I hate when someone is feeding me bull but I don't know enough to tell if they are pulling the wool over my eyes.
This happens with everything in the media. Anytime I read about something that I have a lot of experience with the media usually has it wrong. You can sway so many lemmings this way.
Funny, I always thought it was only in my field...
Seriously though, todays jurnalism is more like sensationalism, and that is why we have to educate as many friends and coworkers about sport shooting.
So were the Japanese in WWII. They bayoneted the wounded allies to save bullets. What's your point? And please prove to me that the TSX is used in general duty by a military and no little special units please.
I'm only discussing this topic because I want to know if the majority of us are ok with any enemy we face using more devastating bullets than FMJ? If that's the case well, I feel even worse when our boys get shot. The IED comparison is nice but the original topic here was small arms ammo. Can we discuss small arms ammo and "humanity" if there is any left in war? The Hague was about that. The writers of the document were veterans too. They witnessed firsthand the horror of war. The wounds of the poor infantrymen. If a man is shot in his head or vital organs death was almost certain in those veteran's combat duty. But it was the young lads that lost entire arms or legs because of softnose bullets. They believed, rightor wrong, that had that bullet not upset that a soldier could have done his duty and be sent home less damaged. Physically and mentally.
Flame me if you feel the need, but I will remain believing that the veterans of our past were right.
Do you know who KevinB is and what he's doing for a living? Especially, where?
I'm pretty sure you don't.
Yup. And that's why I'm asking him the questions and not you.
Being that he hasn't posted anything that made any sense in ANY terminal ballistics thread, so I don't think him knowing who KevinB (also in the dictionary under "The Chuck Norris of Knight's Armament Co.") is and what he does for a living will change his opinion.
War isn't a tickling contest - people need to get over it and start affording the enemy the same "courtesy" they would afford any one of us.
Incidentally, since we're all being moral relativists, what do the Hague Accords say about beheadings?
-M
Being that he hasn't posted anything that made any sense in ANY terminal ballistics thread, so I don't think him knowing who KevinB (also in the dictionary under "The Chuck Norris of Knight's Armament Co.") is and what he does for a living will change his opinion.
War isn't a tickling contest - people need to get over it and start affording the enemy the same "courtesy" they would afford any one of us.
Incidentally, since we're all being moral relativists, what do the Hague Accords say about beheadings?
-M
Good point Doc.
So be it then. A Biblical retaliation is called for. I posted a long long time ago around here "who took nuclear arms off the table". That's where my heart is. Erase then from existence. I forgot that it's hard to discuss these topics without the emotions of some getting all wound up.
Doc M you are probably too old to ever have to worry about having to see combat. I'll factor that into your opinions. You will never face a gun like our lads have to. I'm too old too but I give a crap about our soldiers suffering wounds. So if you want to be "yourself" like usual go ahead. You guys lost sight of the fact I'm the only one even mentioning our guys getting hurt and killed. Doc M, your Avatar fits. It may be a hated politicians face but that uniform fits you too my friend. You are the one true Google Jedi.
And I know all about Kevin. I used to read posts here for the last 2 years when my bud was logged on. So don't go making assumptions y'all. I got to get a bit of a read on the most active posters. And they are still true to form.
And my grandfather never though he'd see man fly to the moon but we have a tendency to move forward.
No, I am simply able to think for myself and as a result can separate the politics from the bull####.
Seriously though ... it is OK to have napalm dropped on you and burn to death or have a landmine blow your leg off and slowly bleed to death but an expanding bullet is too cruel to be used in the business of killing the enemy?
OK you guys have made some seriously good arguments. I'll go along with the tides of change too. But I seem to remember that history shows us the Japanese did a lot of beheadings in WWII and we never changed bullet types then or since. At least until now. I also know that when the allies fought them they weren't hadicapped by an anemic battle round that is better at varminting than killing humans. So if we need to add hunting bullets to the 5.56mm git-r-done. Besides, the surplus ammo in the future will rock!
