Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!pacbell.com!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: ut-emx!osmigo@emx.utexas.edu (Ron Morgan)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Using the rifle suited to the previous war?
Message-ID: <1991Jan7.050917.8026@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 7 Jan 91 05:09:17 GMT
References: <1991Jan5.021828.27885@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: Speech Communication UT Austin
Lines: 31
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: ut-emx!osmigo@emx.utexas.edu (Ron Morgan)

[discussion Nam-era rifles being used in Desert Shield]

I've thought about this, myself. The terrain in Saudi Arabia is about as
different from Vietnam as you can get. Anyone who has driven through the
Death Valley area, for example, knows what I'm talking about. Desert country
is BIG. You say, "I'm going to go sit on that rock over yonder," and an hour
later, you're still walking towards it.

A few words have been posted here about how the M16 is accurate out to 500
yards, etc., but nobody has mentioned that there are darn few shooters out
there, if *any*, who can hit a human-sized target 500 yards out with *open
sights*. I've been shooting for 30 years, and I know I couldn't. Modern scopes
wouldn't have any trouble with the sand.

Imagine facing an entire front line of tens of thousands of troops, every single
one armed with a flat-shooting rifle and a 4X-12X 'scope. The effectiveness
of fire would be simply *staggering*. You wouldn't be able to get within half
a mile of them.

Comments?


 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 =             Ron Morgan             =      National Rifle Association      =
 =        osmigo@emx.utexas.edu       =              Greenpeace              =
 =   "Take a friend shooting today"   =         Amnesty International        =
 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=