AK's.... A way to identify the Taliban/Al Quaeda?
Discussion
Just watching C4 news now about the terrible events in Afganistan and a bit of footage has got me thinking.
They have been discussing the problem with identifying terrorist/taliban etc from the Police and normal Afgans.
Now what I see is the Afgan Army and Police using identical looking Ak-47's as the insurgents.
Would it not be a prudent use of funds to provide the legitimate security forces with a different gun? Maybe older G3's (as used by the pakistan Army) or FN FAL's suplus from Euro fighting forces? and then keep the supply under control as well as controlling the amunition?
Then start scrapping as many AK's as possible, I know that there will always be AK's but these will be in the hands of insurgents and terrorists, this then will make is so anyone carrying an AK or other uncontrolled weapons like PKMs, Druganovs can be considered instantly hostile?
Also if the ammunition is tightly controlled any weapons taken by the Taliban will be hard to get ammunition for as it will be differnt to AK47 ammunition.
Obviously Arms dealers will work to catch up but most illeagal arms come from Soviet/Chinese supply and not europe, and it will take years before they can re-arm.
Anyway just a thought, I know my knowledge of weapons will be questioned but it the theory I am discussing not the specific weapons.
ETA I know this would not have stopped today events as the killer was on the inside and using an army issued weapon but it could help with other insurgency.
They have been discussing the problem with identifying terrorist/taliban etc from the Police and normal Afgans.
Now what I see is the Afgan Army and Police using identical looking Ak-47's as the insurgents.
Would it not be a prudent use of funds to provide the legitimate security forces with a different gun? Maybe older G3's (as used by the pakistan Army) or FN FAL's suplus from Euro fighting forces? and then keep the supply under control as well as controlling the amunition?
Then start scrapping as many AK's as possible, I know that there will always be AK's but these will be in the hands of insurgents and terrorists, this then will make is so anyone carrying an AK or other uncontrolled weapons like PKMs, Druganovs can be considered instantly hostile?
Also if the ammunition is tightly controlled any weapons taken by the Taliban will be hard to get ammunition for as it will be differnt to AK47 ammunition.
Obviously Arms dealers will work to catch up but most illeagal arms come from Soviet/Chinese supply and not europe, and it will take years before they can re-arm.
Anyway just a thought, I know my knowledge of weapons will be questioned but it the theory I am discussing not the specific weapons.
ETA I know this would not have stopped today events as the killer was on the inside and using an army issued weapon but it could help with other insurgency.
Edited by T89 Callan on Wednesday 4th November 19:36
anonymous said:
[redacted]
And point missed by a mile!I'm saying let the Taliban use there AK's and re-equip the legitimate security forces with something else. This way any insurgence/terrorists can be identified easily as anyone using an AK can be considered hostile.
Please learn to read.
The AK-47 is the weapon of choice for second/third-rate conscript, militia, and paramilitary forces for a reason; it's simple, unbreakable, and doesn't require hours and hours of training just to get it firing.
It typifies the Russian mentality to warfare; that of 'give it loads of welly' which came about because the Russian Army at the end of WW2 was largely a peasant conscript force of illiterate technophobes.
That's why it's used where it is.
I suspect that many in the services would prefer the Afghans to keep AK-47s which are notoriously inaccurate and suffer from not being able to fire from prone, rather than teach them to use something which has a decent killing range and accuracy.
A little story from Afghanistan when the Russians were there;
A US Senator visited one of the US funded Warlords in his house. Sat behind this Warlord were a variety of characters, including a wizened toothless old sod with an equally ancient British .303 Enfield rifle. Said rifle had score marks all over it. The Senator enquired as to what the marks signified 'were they tribal markings, or perhaps an indication of the years of service the rifle had given?'
'no' replies the Warlord, 'they're dead Russians'
This old hillsman would find himself a comfy rock to sit on up a hill and await the Russians arrival. Russians would pile out of BMP carrier with their AK-47s and charge towards the Afghan positions. This chap would be leisurely picking them off from vast ranges as the Russians were having to close 600yds to make up the difference - invariably they'd all be dead before that happened.
It typifies the Russian mentality to warfare; that of 'give it loads of welly' which came about because the Russian Army at the end of WW2 was largely a peasant conscript force of illiterate technophobes.
That's why it's used where it is.
I suspect that many in the services would prefer the Afghans to keep AK-47s which are notoriously inaccurate and suffer from not being able to fire from prone, rather than teach them to use something which has a decent killing range and accuracy.
A little story from Afghanistan when the Russians were there;
A US Senator visited one of the US funded Warlords in his house. Sat behind this Warlord were a variety of characters, including a wizened toothless old sod with an equally ancient British .303 Enfield rifle. Said rifle had score marks all over it. The Senator enquired as to what the marks signified 'were they tribal markings, or perhaps an indication of the years of service the rifle had given?'
'no' replies the Warlord, 'they're dead Russians'
This old hillsman would find himself a comfy rock to sit on up a hill and await the Russians arrival. Russians would pile out of BMP carrier with their AK-47s and charge towards the Afghan positions. This chap would be leisurely picking them off from vast ranges as the Russians were having to close 600yds to make up the difference - invariably they'd all be dead before that happened.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Oh my god please read the OP for f
ks sake, you have still missed the point.I'm not saying get rid of all the AK's, I'm saying (for the third time!) re-equip legitimate security forces with something different so that anyone using an AK (as the terrists will still do) can be considered immediately hostile so we don't have this confusion between secureity forces and terrorists.
And yes, some stolen/ransacked police weapons will make it into Taliban hands but the numbers will still be very low.
Please please read the OP.
Dunk76 said:
The AK-47 is the weapon of choice for second/third-rate conscript, militia, and paramilitary forces for a reason; it's simple, unbreakable, and doesn't require hours and hours of training just to get it firing.
It typifies the Russian mentality to warfare; that of 'give it loads of welly' which came about because the Russian Army at the end of WW2 was largely a peasant conscript force of illiterate technophobes.
That's why it's used where it is.
I suspect that many in the services would prefer the Afghans to keep AK-47s which are notoriously inaccurate and suffer from not being able to fire from prone, rather than teach them to use something which has a decent killing range and accuracy.
A little story from Afghanistan when the Russians were there;
A US Senator visited one of the US funded Warlords in his house. Sat behind this Warlord were a variety of characters, including a wizened toothless old sod with an equally ancient British .303 Enfield rifle. Said rifle had score marks all over it. The Senator enquired as to what the marks signified 'were they tribal markings, or perhaps an indication of the years of service the rifle had given?'
'no' replies the Warlord, 'they're dead Russians'
This old hillsman would find himself a comfy rock to sit on up a hill and await the Russians arrival. Russians would pile out of BMP carrier with their AK-47s and charge towards the Afghan positions. This chap would be leisurely picking them off from vast ranges as the Russians were having to close 600yds to make up the difference - invariably they'd all be dead before that happened.
Agian another reason for re-equiping the security forces, if the west is serious about training the Afgan Police/Army to decent levels then something a bit more accurate that they are trained to use properly would give them an advantage.It typifies the Russian mentality to warfare; that of 'give it loads of welly' which came about because the Russian Army at the end of WW2 was largely a peasant conscript force of illiterate technophobes.
That's why it's used where it is.
I suspect that many in the services would prefer the Afghans to keep AK-47s which are notoriously inaccurate and suffer from not being able to fire from prone, rather than teach them to use something which has a decent killing range and accuracy.
A little story from Afghanistan when the Russians were there;
A US Senator visited one of the US funded Warlords in his house. Sat behind this Warlord were a variety of characters, including a wizened toothless old sod with an equally ancient British .303 Enfield rifle. Said rifle had score marks all over it. The Senator enquired as to what the marks signified 'were they tribal markings, or perhaps an indication of the years of service the rifle had given?'
'no' replies the Warlord, 'they're dead Russians'
This old hillsman would find himself a comfy rock to sit on up a hill and await the Russians arrival. Russians would pile out of BMP carrier with their AK-47s and charge towards the Afghan positions. This chap would be leisurely picking them off from vast ranges as the Russians were having to close 600yds to make up the difference - invariably they'd all be dead before that happened.
T89 Callan said:
Agian another reason for re-equiping the security forces, if the west is serious about training the Afgan Police/Army to decent levels then something a bit more accurate that they are trained to use properly would give them an advantage.
Perhaps I was too subtle.The reason the AK is used, and will remain in use, is that it was originally designed specifically for technically inept peasants without ready access to gun oil or bog roll. Precisely the environment in Afghanistan.
Dishing out G3s or FALs will only achieve three things a) major cost, b) major headache, and c) major stoppages.
Once all the G3s and FALs have jammed silly, the lot with the AK-47s are free to go in gung-ho.
Judging by what my chum in the TA has relayed about his tour in Helmand, a fair number of the blighters are still running around with old British .303s which chuck out cruise missiles compared to the 5.56 Nato stuff.
Dunk76 said:
A US Senator visited one of the US funded Warlords in his house. Sat behind this Warlord were a variety of characters, including a wizened toothless old sod with an equally ancient British .303 Enfield rifle. Said rifle had score marks all over it. The Senator enquired as to what the marks signified 'were they tribal markings, or perhaps an indication of the years of service the rifle had given?'
'no' replies the Warlord, 'they're dead Russians'
This old hillsman would find himself a comfy rock to sit on up a hill and await the Russians arrival. Russians would pile out of BMP carrier with their AK-47s and charge towards the Afghan positions. This chap would be leisurely picking them off from vast ranges as the Russians were having to close 600yds to make up the difference - invariably they'd all be dead before that happened.
Reminds me of a story my dad told me from around the end of WW2. New conscripts were queueing up to get issued a weapon and most were hoping for a Sten or Thompson. The RSM told them to hope for a boring old SMLE as with the others you need to be close enough to kick the enemy in the balls before you can be sure of a kill and it might take 15 rounds you have to hump all over europe. The old SMLE will do it from 1500 yards and you only have to carry one bullet per dead german. . . . . 'no' replies the Warlord, 'they're dead Russians'
This old hillsman would find himself a comfy rock to sit on up a hill and await the Russians arrival. Russians would pile out of BMP carrier with their AK-47s and charge towards the Afghan positions. This chap would be leisurely picking them off from vast ranges as the Russians were having to close 600yds to make up the difference - invariably they'd all be dead before that happened.
You mean like the whole 7.62x51mm NATO round thing? Making private/government munitions non-interchangable? That would probably be uber-costly for the Afghan govt, but I can imagine a few manufacturers who would like the idea. It would take years to replace all the AK's in officialdom, though, and it would only take one dodgy copper to "lose" his gun, or a Taliban/other raid on an arms depot to get around it, so hardly efficient.
I've handled the LE .303 and the AK47, I know which I'd prefer in a fight and it wouldn't be the AK. The LE is still a formidable weapon, very accurate at long range with a high rate of fire in the right hands, no such thing as a flesh wound, a real stopper.
On a more serious note the logistics for the OP's suggestion would be just about impossible to implement, as said previously everyone and his dog has an AK there even though they sound like a load of old bolts in a biscuit tin.
On a more serious note the logistics for the OP's suggestion would be just about impossible to implement, as said previously everyone and his dog has an AK there even though they sound like a load of old bolts in a biscuit tin.
glazbagun said:
You mean like the whole 7.62x51mm NATO round thing? Making private/government munitions non-interchangable? That would probably be uber-costly for the Afghan govt, but I can imagine a few manufacturers who would like the idea. It would take years to replace all the AK's in officialdom, though, and it would only take one dodgy copper to "lose" his gun, or a Taliban/other raid on an arms depot to get around it, so hardly efficient.
AK's are 7.62, thought NATO was entirely 5.56 these days?
OnTheOverrun said:
glazbagun said:
You mean like the whole 7.62x51mm NATO round thing? Making private/government munitions non-interchangable? That would probably be uber-costly for the Afghan govt, but I can imagine a few manufacturers who would like the idea. It would take years to replace all the AK's in officialdom, though, and it would only take one dodgy copper to "lose" his gun, or a Taliban/other raid on an arms depot to get around it, so hardly efficient.
AK's are 7.62, thought NATO was entirely 5.56 these days?Some AK style rifles also shoot the russian 5.45x39mm cartridge. (AK-74 family / 100 series) Some AK's can also be chambered for NATO 556
ETA
Edited by ErnestM on Wednesday 4th November 21:20
T89 Callan said:
I'm saying (for the third time!) re-equip legitimate security forces with something different so that anyone using an AK (as the terrists will still do) can be considered immediately hostile so we don't have this confusion between secureity forces and terrorists.
And yes, some stolen/ransacked police weapons will make it into Taliban hands but the numbers will still be very low.
Please please read the OP.
Still doesn't change his point. The G3s you suggest as an alternative - as used by pakistan's army. Doesn't take a hugely vivid imagination to see how large numbers of those could be relieved of their official duties and squirreled across the border.And yes, some stolen/ransacked police weapons will make it into Taliban hands but the numbers will still be very low.
Please please read the OP.
T89 Callan said:
They have been discussing the problem with identifying terrorist/taliban etc from the Police and normal Afgans.
Unfortunately, a rather large number of Afghans, as in the public, have AK47s. Therefore, the use of the AK as a terrorist identifier will not work, as the civilian population have them. ErnestM said:
OnTheOverrun said:
glazbagun said:
You mean like the whole 7.62x51mm NATO round thing? Making private/government munitions non-interchangable? That would probably be uber-costly for the Afghan govt, but I can imagine a few manufacturers who would like the idea. It would take years to replace all the AK's in officialdom, though, and it would only take one dodgy copper to "lose" his gun, or a Taliban/other raid on an arms depot to get around it, so hardly efficient.
AK's are 7.62, thought NATO was entirely 5.56 these days?Some AK style rifles also shoot the russian 5.45x39mm cartridge. (AK-74 family / 100 series) Some AK's can also be chambered for NATO 556
ETA
Edited by ErnestM on Wednesday 4th November 21:20
OnTheOverrun said:
Yes, I remember when our lads were forced to swap their SLR's (7.62) for the SA80 (5.56) that they used to be able to shoot the enemy and kill them, now they shoot them and it just really annoys them. . . . . .
The SLR was a bit of a monster by all account though - the stories some of the ex-Guardsmen I worked with at my last place were enough to make your toes curl. One chap said it was basically a semi-automatic SMLE. However, stories of soldiers putting 5 or more 5.56 rounds into a nutter with an AK47 without any apparent effect are equally hair-raising.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff