Let me wipe the shocked look off my face that the govt. isn't providing the military with the tools they need... :|

They should just switch to this....







.950 MF-er!!!!


/pops

Tarl3k: Let me wipe the shocked look off my face that the govt. isn't providing the military with the tools they need... :|

Marines make do!

Hmm that's interesting, I had no idea the M40 wasn't accurate or deadly past 1,000 meters.

ChipNASA: They should just switch to this....



[www.theblaze.com image 604x299]

[www.theblaze.com image 552x299]

.950 MF-er!!!!


/pops

Video of that nasty MFer in action.

 

/clicky on the photo

Seeing as I bought a Henry .22 lever action this morning - bring the gun porn on.

/I'll be out back plinking.

I'm surprised about the claims that enemies are relocating and continue fighting after being hit by rounds at 1,000m. That would have to be body armor. 1,000m is not that far.

Tat'dGreaser: Hmm that's interesting, I had no idea the M40 wasn't accurate or deadly past 1,000 meters.

Yeah. There are a lot of dead guys who would disagree, methinks.

ChipNASA: They should just switch to this....

Heh, go big or go home.



This'll sting a little the next morning.

Barrett now offers a .338 Lapua option, that would be a good option since it combines a proven battle system with the best ammo for the job.

Artisan Sandwich: I'm surprised about the claims that enemies are relocating and continue fighting after being hit by rounds at 1,000m. That would have to be body armor. 1,000m is not that far.

I can walk a kilometer
but its a long way,
its a long way


/obscure?

ChipNASA: /clicky on the photo

Forget that! I like my arm not being ripped out of the socket

Artisan Sandwich: Yeah. There are a lot of dead guys who would disagree, methinks.

Well like they said in the article, takes multiple rounds which is bad for a sniper

soooo.... if these bullets and guns are so bad.. How are Canadians using American Ammo to set sniper records then?

Swiss Sniper Rifle. Shoots the 7.5x55 round, i would reckon better than anything our doodz have ever used in similar caliber.

If the U.S politicians would allow the military to to its job properly with proper tools, we would have been out of there a long time ago.

They should upgrade the unit of Marine scout snipers to include Sgt. Telion.

As already been said on a few blogs, don't trust a article that does not even get the name of the rifle correct that is used in the picture.
It is NOT a M-110.

URAPNIS: If the U.S politicians would allow the military to to its job properly with proper tools, we would have been out of there a long time ago.



agrees

URAPNIS: If the U.S politicians would allow the military to to its job properly with proper tools, we would have been out of there a long time ago.

Herp the Derp!

This talking point is based on the logical fallacy that the military can solve non military problems. Theres a strange masculinity aspect to it as well which ive always found sort of intriguing.

"if only those effette politicians would let us be huge dick swingin' real men and kick some ass, everyth ing'll be fine in a fortnight!"

because, yknow, the military is awesome at setting up infrastructure, creating long-lasting democratic civilian institutions and other fundamental services required to state-build.

Tat'dGreaser: Artisan Sandwich: Yeah. There are a lot of dead guys who would disagree, methinks.

Well like they said in the article, takes multiple rounds which is bad for a sniper

That was in reference to accuracy though. The claim of not enough first strike killing power at 1,000m is surprising.

URAPNIS: If the U.S politicians would allow the military to to its job properly with proper tools, we would have been out of there a long time ago.

100% absolutely farking "A" correct

kvinesknows: soooo.... if these bullets and guns are so bad.. How are Canadians using American Ammo to set sniper records then?

The Marines in the article were specifically complaining about the accuracy of the .50 cal Raufoss round, which is a HEIAP round (High Explosive Incendiary Armor Piercing).

The records set in Afghanistan were probably set with the match-grade ball ammo.

I'd assume if the "guts" in the Raufoss round aren't perfectly balanced, it would lose accuracy at extreme long range.

kvinesknows: soooo.... if these bullets and guns are so bad.. How are Canadians using American Ammo to set sniper records then?

Better guns mostly. When you have a smaller army you can give your people better equiptment. But they will still never be haopy with it and buy thier own replacement.

Artisan Sandwich: That was in reference to accuracy though. The claim of not enough first strike killing power at 1,000m is surprising.

Oh I agree! I thought the weight and speed was still enough to at least maim.

.338 Lapua Magnum

that is all.

And after awhile, everything out to 1500 yards begins to looks like a sniper solution.
Everything out to 2 miles looks like a M-1 Abrams solution.
Beyond that, utilize a smart bomb launched from a drone being controlled by some guy in Kansas.

We need to relearn that war is shiatty stuff and you have to get yourself dirty and lose good people that you don't want to lose. And even then you may still end up losing the war itself. We have the strength of ten because we have a big shiny army, not because our hearts are pure.

Father_Jack: because, yknow, the military is awesome at setting up infrastructure, creating long-lasting democratic civilian institutions and other fundamental services required to state-build.

Yes, where, oh where would they ever get that notion. 

Not saying it works every time, but it has in the past, and in a big way.

Clemkadidlefark: [cdn2.gamefront.com image 640x306]

URAPNIS: If the U.S politicians would allow the military to to its job properly with proper tools, we would have been out of there a long time ago.

100% absolutely farking "A" correct

That's why Afghanistan is different. Using military power in its traditional, sledgehamer-like capacity WILL NOT win, and would not have resulted in a timely vicotry. Afghanistan (in this case) cannot be won by force. Force should be used to allow capital projects to proceed safely; and, that's why insurgencies are so difficult to fight. You cannot garuantee the safety of the people that are required to do the nation building work that will win the conflict for you. I won't remark on Iraq, wasn't there.

Father_Jack: URAPNIS: If the U.S politicians would allow the military to to its job properly with proper tools, we would have been out of there a long time ago.

Herp the Derp!

This talking point is based on the logical fallacy that the military can solve non military problems. Theres a strange masculinity aspect to it as well which ive always found sort of intriguing.

"if only those effette politicians would let us be huge dick swingin' real men and kick some ass, everyth ing'll be fine in a fortnight!"

because, yknow, the military is awesome at setting up infrastructure, creating long-lasting democratic civilian institutions and other fundamental services required to state-build.

I think the solution he was referring to would not require setting up infrastructure and all. You know, glass parking lot.

Tat'dGreaser: Artisan Sandwich: That was in reference to accuracy though. The claim of not enough first strike killing power at 1,000m is surprising.

Oh I agree! I thought the weight and speed was still enough to at least maim.

The Taliban doesn't have access to lightweight synthetic cold weather gear, and they just go with layers and layers of cotton or wool, especially in the mountains during the colder months. It's like trying to shoot someone through a mattress. At ranges where the 7.62mm's energy is dropping off, it sort of works as padded armor.

/At least that's what I was told.

Shakespeare's Monkey: ChipNASA: They should just switch to this....

Heh, go big or go home.

[wallpaperuser.com image 448x280]

This'll sting a little the next morning.

GO BIGGEST





/muchroomy pops linkey click

Tat'dGreaser: Artisan Sandwich: That was in reference to accuracy though. The claim of not enough first strike killing power at 1,000m is surprising.

Oh I agree! I thought the weight and speed was still enough to at least maim.

Maybe of the Geneva convention would allow for HPBT varmint...I handload .308 Bergers and clock 2900 fps at 168 gr.

Accurate as hell..more accurate than I am....and when they hit....SPLAT!!!

lifeboat: Father_Jack: because, yknow, the military is awesome at setting up infrastructure, creating long-lasting democratic civilian institutions and other fundamental services required to state-build.

Yes, where, oh where would they ever get that notion. 

Not saying it works every time, but it has in the past, and in a big way.

ninja PLEEZ.

rebuilding japan and germany after ww2 was a global effort. it wasnt just the US military. it was a combined effort of the economies of the world, the winning powers sending hundreds of thousands of soldiers, economists, lawyers/judges, industrialists, financiers etc etc for years and years, billions of dollars in comprehensive aid for years and years, a collaberation between the great powers of the world, treaty brokering between civilian govts, plus the complete engagement and participation of the local populatiosn involved. it was a global effort, not a US military one. They did their part just fine but it was hardly them alone. one important part of the equation, but only one.

CptnSpldng: And after awhile, everything out to 1500 yards begins to looks like a sniper solution.
Everything out to 2 miles looks like a M-1 Abrams solution.
Beyond that, utilize a smart bomb launched from a drone being controlled by some guy in Kansas.

We need to relearn that war is shiatty stuff and you have to get yourself dirty and lose good people that you don't want to lose. And even then you may still end up losing the war itself. We have the strength of ten because we have a big shiny army, not because our hearts are pure.

Problem: enemy 1500 meters away and using machine gun.
Solution: Mortar fire - REJECTED - heavy to tote around and look goofy.
Solution: Maching gun counterfire - REJECTED as not Military Channel sexxy.
Solution: longer range sniper rifle and ammo - REJECTED sexxy, but not manly enough - more of an Army kind of thing
Solution: 1500m long bayonet - SEMPER FI!

Head_Shot: Maybe of the Geneva convention would allow for HPBT varmint...I handload .308 Bergers and clock 2900 fps at 168 gr.

Accurate as hell..more accurate than I am....and when they hit....SPLAT!!!

Ha, I don't think that's against the Geneva convention!

TheOther: CptnSpldng: And after awhile, everything out to 1500 yards begins to looks like a sniper solution.
Everything out to 2 miles looks like a M-1 Abrams solution.
Beyond that, utilize a smart bomb launched from a drone being controlled by some guy in Kansas.

We need to relearn that war is shiatty stuff and you have to get yourself dirty and lose good people that you don't want to lose. And even then you may still end up losing the war itself. We have the strength of ten because we have a big shiny army, not because our hearts are pure.

Problem: enemy 1500 meters away and using machine gun.
Solution: Mortar fire - REJECTED - heavy to tote around and look goofy.
Solution: Maching gun counterfire - REJECTED as not Military Channel sexxy.
Solution: longer range sniper rifle and ammo - REJECTED sexxy, but not manly enough - more of an Army kind of thing
Solution: 1500m long bayonet - SEMPER FI!

60mm mortars are the most underused piece of kit around.

Psycoholic_Slag: Father_Jack: URAPNIS: If the U.S politicians would allow the military to to its job properly with proper tools, we would have been out of there a long time ago.

Herp the Derp!

This talking point is based on the logical fallacy that the military can solve non military problems. Theres a strange masculinity aspect to it as well which ive always found sort of intriguing.

"if only those effette politicians would let us be huge dick swingin' real men and kick some ass, everyth ing'll be fine in a fortnight!"

because, yknow, the military is awesome at setting up infrastructure, creating long-lasting democratic civilian institutions and other fundamental services required to state-build.

I think the solution he was referring to would not require setting up infrastructure and all. You know, glass parking lot.

While I don't oppose the glass parking lot solution and I definitely don't think the military should be involved in ANY crotch petting, I am just of the opinion that the military should not be handcuffed to a political agenda. It's a hindrance to getting its designated job done. Once the military is finished, send in the bean counters. Military police forces don't work.

Hahahaha. I looked at that pic, read the caption, looked back at the pic and thought: Daaaamn. They're using carbines with barrel extensions screwed on for sniping?! That thing looks like a jury-rigged complete piece of shiat.

Tat'dGreaser: Head_Shot: Maybe of the Geneva convention would allow for HPBT varmint...I handload .308 Bergers and clock 2900 fps at 168 gr.

Accurate as hell..more accurate than I am....and when they hit....SPLAT!!!

Ha, I don't think that's against the Geneva convention!

I thought HP bullets were Verboten?

Psycoholic_Slag: Father_Jack: URAPNIS: If the U.S politicians would allow the military to to its job properly with proper tools, we would have been out of there a long time ago.

Herp the Derp!

This talking point is based on the logical fallacy that the military can solve non military problems. Theres a strange masculinity aspect to it as well which ive always found sort of intriguing.

"if only those effette politicians would let us be huge dick swingin' real men and kick some ass, everyth ing'll be fine in a fortnight!"

because, yknow, the military is awesome at setting up infrastructure, creating long-lasting democratic civilian institutions and other fundamental services required to state-build.

I think the solution he was referring to would not require setting up infrastructure and all. You know, glass parking lot.

I thought he was referring to killing civilians, which is probably the most effective way of winning a war. Apparently they try to minimize that kind of thing, nowadays.

ChipNASA: ChipNASA: They should just switch to this....



[www.theblaze.com image 604x299]

[www.theblaze.com image 552x299]

.950 MF-er!!!!


/pops

Video of that nasty MFer in action.

[www.theblaze.com image 543x287] 

/clicky on the photo

I'm surprised none of them broke their collarbones shooting that thing.

BTW I'm amused that "murder hole" is a terminology in current usage by the military.

Head_Shot: Tat'dGreaser: Head_Shot: Maybe of the Geneva convention would allow for HPBT varmint...I handload .308 Bergers and clock 2900 fps at 168 gr.

Accurate as hell..more accurate than I am....and when they hit....SPLAT!!!

Ha, I don't think that's against the Geneva convention!

I thought HP bullets were Verboten?

Bullets made by HP? Wouldn't they cost just as much if not more than the rifle they're fired out of?

Ball Zitch: Psycoholic_Slag: Father_Jack: URAPNIS: If the U.S politicians would allow the military to to its job properly with proper tools, we would have been out of there a long time ago.

Herp the Derp!

This talking point is based on the logical fallacy that the military can solve non military problems. Theres a strange masculinity aspect to it as well which ive always found sort of intriguing.

"if only those effette politicians would let us be huge dick swingin' real men and kick some ass, everyth ing'll be fine in a fortnight!"

because, yknow, the military is awesome at setting up infrastructure, creating long-lasting democratic civilian institutions and other fundamental services required to state-build.

I think the solution he was referring to would not require setting up infrastructure and all. You know, glass parking lot.

I thought he was referring to killing civilians, which is probably the most effective way of winning a war. Apparently they try to minimize that kind of thing, nowadays.

They are all civilians. It's just that some are non-combatant.

urger: Seeing as I bought a Henry .22 lever action this morning - bring the gun porn on.

/I'll be out back plinking.

Been thinking about one of these in .357, because why not?

ChipNASA: They should just switch to this....



[www.theblaze.com image 604x299]

[www.theblaze.com image 552x299]

.950 MF-er!!!!


/pops

NO CLICKS for The Blaze.

urger: Seeing as I bought a Henry .22 lever action this morning - bring the gun porn on.

/I'll be out back plinking.

Bought a Henry Commemorative Edition in the .22 version with nice wood and brass work for my son-in-law a few years ago as a Christmas gift. He already had plenty of guns for hunting, and promptly mounted that one on a wall, just for display. I collect guitars rather than guns, but completely understood.

Head_Shot: Tat'dGreaser: Head_Shot: Maybe of the Geneva convention would allow for HPBT varmint...I handload .308 Bergers and clock 2900 fps at 168 gr.

Accurate as hell..more accurate than I am....and when they hit....SPLAT!!!

Ha, I don't think that's against the Geneva convention!

I thought HP bullets were Verboten?

HPBT is a misnomer, IMHO. The (small) hollow is a byproduct of the manufacturing technique and does not have the same functional effects as a true hollow point, nor is it intended to. They did ban them, briefly, until someone with a little more information overruled that decision.

MFAWG: urger: Seeing as I bought a Henry .22 lever action this morning - bring the gun porn on.

/I'll be out back plinking.

Been thinking about one of these in .357, because why not?

I've been thinking of getting a box of low brass and relearning on my Grandfather's gun.



Fun Gun Porn.