# Drug use by Iraqi Insurgents



## x westie (29 May 2006)

I was watch the A&E presentation of "Lima Co. a USMC reserve unit in Iraqi, one incident that really stands out is the use of drugs by these terrorists to hype themselves up, these marines told of finding, and it was also shown, vials of drugs with needles{ Adrenalin vials}, also Syrian money, on the bodies of dead terrorists, one marine said that even though one terrorist had taken many hits from M-16's he was still trying to reach for his weapon, pretty vivid description of the kind of people are over there, don't know if this is peculiar to only Iraq, and Taliban in Afghanistan are into this sh**t too.


----------



## TN2IC (29 May 2006)

I seen that show too. It was really intresting. It was on Saturday night.


----------



## Armymatters (29 May 2006)

Reminds me of a story where German soldiers were issued Meth and other drugs during World War II to "enhance" their combat performance.


----------



## C and P (29 May 2006)

Reminds me of propaganda.


----------



## medicineman (29 May 2006)

Brit commandos were issued with Benzedrine tablets to stay awake for prolonged periods in the Second World War.

I've also read and seen interviews with cops that had shootings involving people on various drugs such as PCP and high doses of narcotic painkillers that just didn't respond as one would expect to getting shot, as their bodies and brains had a bit of a disconnect going on.

MM


----------



## Enzo (29 May 2006)

Canadian soldiers used to be issued Rum, whatever happened to that eh?  ;D



			
				C and P said:
			
		

> Reminds me of propaganda.



Huh? Care to explain that statement a bit?

As for the use of stimulants/drugs to improve performance, I'm all for it. Euphoria meets invincibility; yeah, there's a solid combination that will lead to a successful combatant eh. All I think about that is proper shot placement. The only question that this subject brings to my mind is whether I should invest in a Barrett M468 upper for CQB? (I hope I'm not crossing any lines with this picture. It isn't my intention to promote this product for any gain, etc.)







We have armour, they have stimulants. Why doesn't that strike me as inappropriate?  :


----------



## C and P (29 May 2006)

The show was made for U.S. consumption. I just find it interesting the link between Terrorists and drug use. As for stimulants, the pilot who dropped the bomb at Tarnak Farms brought that up as a possible contributing factor for his mistake. (that he was hyped up on uppers.)  As for your firearms masturbation problem I can't help you there pal.


----------



## GAP (29 May 2006)

There has been a history of drug use in the form of alcohol, marijuana, uppers, etc by North American and European troops. OK, so they are human. Good or bad it is there. 

They found some similar stuff on the insurgents. OK

There probably has not been a group of fighters that has not done something. 

The question is: Why is this supposedly an indication of their stamina? 

There are heroic stories of American and Canadian troops in dire situations that have achieved phenomenal feats down through the ages. Was it done on drugs. 

No, it done by training, determination and adrenalin. I have seen truly heroic acts preformed by men on the field of battle, and none of them were on drugs. I have also seen similar acts preformed by the enemy I was fighting and we could only wonder at the stamina it took to accomplish them. Was he on drugs? All we found were some letters and  some rice balls. (Must of consumed them all)

I just don't want us to jump to the conclusion that because there is some drug use, therefore ALL Insurgents use drugs. Right or wrong, depending on which side you are talking to, there is a belief in what you are doing and the motivation to do it.


----------



## TN2IC (29 May 2006)

Enzo said:
			
		

> Canadian soldiers used to be issued Rum, whatever happened to that eh?




http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/subjects/cfao/036-35_e.asp

Now you know.


----------



## Enzo (29 May 2006)

TN2IC said:
			
		

> http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/subjects/cfao/036-35_e.asp
> 
> Now you know.



I was being sarcastic, but thanks TN21C.

C & P: You're welcome to your opinion and I for one would like to thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. I appreciate your input and I only wish that you would put similar energy into completing enough of your profile so that I might take you seriously. As you haven't I suspect that you are a troll sir. Regardless, I'll take a moment to rebut. But first, I'd like to recommend that you explain yourself, otherwise you're just providing fragmented thoughts. _*The show was made for U.S. consumption.*_ Of course it was. But what are you inferring? * I just find it interesting the link between Terrorists and drug use.* As do I, uh, anything further to add to that? * As for stimulants, the pilot who dropped the bomb at Tarnak Farms brought that up as a possible contributing factor for his mistake. (that he was hyped up on uppers.)* Maj. Schmidt is well documented on his thoughts over that matter and has yet to apologize for his "mistake". The fact that he disobeyed orders, well, there's another forum dedicated to that individual. What does that have to do with the display of pharmaceuticals which were taken from the insurgents bodies? If you have any information which you would like to share regarding the insurgents and their use of stimulants, I for one would be quite interested to look at it.

Finally. In regards to your last sentence. 





			
				C and P said:
			
		

> As for your firearms masturbation problem I can't help you there pal.



I don't know you. I am not your "pal". What I am is someone who has lived long and well enough to deserve the same amount of respect that I am now extending to you. The 6.8mm SPC cartridge has been in trials with the US Forces for a brief time and may be a replacement option for many serving overseas. The upper is interchangable with many M-16 variants and allows for the quick transition to a larger diameter bullet that has shown to have improved "stopping power" which could be a deciding factor in MOUT; especially if the opposition is using stimulants or wearing armour. Such information may be of relevance to any soldier who may be required to defend his life; aside from that, shot placement is still paramount. Therefore, as the penetration of the 5.56mm round when used against a soft target,i.e., human, has come into question in Iraq, it is of related interest and is why I felt compelled to include it within this thread.

I understand that the anonymity of the internet allows for the use of such disrespect, language and behaviour; but it's a method that you may want to reconsider for future posts.

Cheers...


----------



## paracowboy (29 May 2006)

the Afghan population is one of the highest drug-using in the world. When surrounded by mind-numbing poverty, and constant violence, it's no surprise that so many turn to mind-altering substances.

They use a form of "chewing tobacco" with hashish or opium in it. Many smoke hashish or opium. Again, not surprising since they live in the nation that produces the most, and highest-grade of each.

As for Iraqi terrorists using drugs, that not surprising either. The term "assassin" comes from the word 'hashishan' which dates back centuries in the Middle East. Look it up, it's fascinating stuff. Terror network that reached well into Europe.

Terrorists in the '60s & '70s were constantly abusing chemicals of various types to create courage where none exists. Why would they not, now?

Further, products made from the fermentation of grape or wheat is strictly forbidden by the Quran. It's been taken to mean no alcohol is permitted. People being what they are, it's hardly shocking that Muslims would find other means to escape reality. 

edited because  I'm an idiot who can't spell ''hashishan''


----------



## C and P (30 May 2006)

Sorry to tick you off. I was Being facetious . As for the profile I filled it. I'm not trying to conceal myself. I didn't know the rules. Say, now that you mention it, your profile is somewhat brief.


----------



## Enzo (30 May 2006)

No worries, I didn't get that at the time; kind of irked me I suppose. You're right about my profile, I should put some time into it myself. It's been like that a long time I suppose, I'll put it on my to do list.

Cheers...


----------



## coachron (30 May 2006)

Enzo:  I am a bit new to some of the terminology you use:  shot placement, "stopping power,"  and soft targets, i.e. humans.  Please develop those themes just a bit.  I take it that a larger calibre weapon is recommended which with careful placement of the shot will deliver more stopping power to the soft target, i.e., the human, drugged or undrugged.  Speaking of the drugs, I had the same reaction as C and P to the U.S. Marines contention that the enemy fights while drugged.  It sounded like the usual U.S. military propaganda designed to demonize and dehumanize the enemy, familiar to those who were fed a steady diet of same after the American invasion of Southeast Asia.  Perhaps you can point to some evidence that consuming drugs of one kind or another will make the enemy harder to stop.  I would have assumed that bullets will tear apart the flesh of the drugged no less remorselessly than the undrugged.  But it is probably beside the point.

The documentary focused as it should on the huge costs suffered by the marines and their families from Columbus, Ohio who, even if they did arrive home safely from Iraq, are left with deep wounds of one kind or another. I detected no celebration or enjoyment on the part of those who shot dead the Iraqi insurgent on drugs.  I think John Lennon got it about right:  Give Peace a Chance!  Bring em home!


----------



## C and P (30 May 2006)

Thank's for the support coachron.


----------



## George Wallace (30 May 2006)

coachron said:
			
		

> Perhaps you can point to some evidence that consuming drugs of one kind or another will make the enemy harder to stop.  I would have assumed that bullets will tear apart the flesh of the drugged no less remorselessly than the undrugged.



My, my, coachron, you are on a roll.  The "fact that bullets will tear apart the flesh of the drugged no less remorselessly than the undrugged" is not the point.  The point is, and it has been documented by many Police Forces in Canada and abroad, that many drugged up individuals when shot continue to attack.  They don't realize that they have been injured and they continue to advance, like 'zombies'.  The same can be said of Professional Athletes who take pain killers and land up doing more damage to bone and muscle by playing when they should not.  These are all documented facts.  I am surprised that as "coachron" you didn't realize this.


----------



## paracowboy (30 May 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> My, my, coachron, you are on a roll.  The "fact that bullets will tear apart the flesh of the drugged no less remorselessly than the undrugged" is not the point.  The point is, and it has been documented by may Police Forces in Canada and abroad, that many drugged up individuals when shot continue to attack.  They don't realize that they have been injured and they continue to advance, like 'zombies'.  The same can be said of Professional Athletes who take pain killers and land up doing more damage to bone and muscle by playing when they should not.  These are all documented facts.  I am surprised that as "coachron" you didn't realize this.


not too mention the use of drugs to enstill fanatical courage and dull pain by forces around the globe, and dating back millenia. The Moros tribesmen in the Phillipines, the Mau Mau and Simbas of Africa, the Chinese in Korea.

Bring 'em home indeed. Once they have achieved their Aim.


----------



## a_majoor (30 May 2006)

Stimulating yourself before entering battle has been around as long as recorded history. The Ancient Greeks would line up, see the priest disembowel an animal and forcast the results of the battle (oddly, both sides would get a "Go get 'em team, Victory is ours!), listen to the _Strategoi's_ inspiring speech, *drink down a ration of uncut wine*, then don armour and lumber into battle. The chanting of various barbarian tribes fighting the Romans was considered to be how they stroked up their courage (sort of mass conditioning), just another means of achieving the same end.

Looking at articles about modern suicide bombers, it seems some are under the influence of drugs, but most are conditioned by being separated from their friends and companions and under close scrutiny/indoctrination by their terror cell. On our side, the close association of the team builds a spiritual bond which also helps the soldier stay motivated under extreme stress. Humans, being human, will do what they think it takes to achieve their goals, and certainly not all of our soldiers are on the side of the angels either.

Resorting to artificial stimulation may be a reasonable response to short term emergencies, and perhaps advances in pharmaceuticals and sports medicine might allow for some real advances in a solder's individual performance. If we go that route, it will be much different from crazed fighters high on PCP or whatever who can absorb the impact of bullets without their brain being aware of the fact just yet. 

As a historical BTW, the Moro warriors in the Philippines were reputed to be high on drugs or some sort of adrenaline high, leading to the adoption of the .45 cal Colt M-1911 automatic pistol in US service. The .45 was considered powerful enough to take down even a crazed warrior when a .38 could not. The larger calibre rifle round being mentioned is interesting, since it is about the same size as the so called "ideal" round for an LMG. Other alternatives in CQB would include 12 gague shotguns firing 00 magnum shot.....


----------



## Enzo (30 May 2006)

coachron said:
			
		

> Enzo:  I am a bit new to some of the terminology you use:  shot placement, "stopping power,"  and soft targets, i.e. humans.  Please develop those themes just a bit.  I take it that a larger calibre weapon is recommended which with careful placement of the shot will deliver more stopping power to the soft target, i.e., the human, drugged or undrugged.



No problem Coach, the simple way to think of it is this. Sometimes the human body is capable of almost superhuman endurance. No two people are alike. In regards to physical damage, one individual may expire due to what may be considered a minor injury (quite literally a broken toe) while another may continue to function regardless of the mortal wounds that they have received until they "bleed out" - when the blood pressure falls to such a low level due to a lack of fluid that the heart is unable to continue providing said blood to the vital organs, etc. Introduce certain stimulants and drugs into the equation and you now have an individual who is artificially stimulated and is of enormous danger considering the altered state that they are in. Case in point, Miami in the early 90s. Metro Dade Police served a warrant on a known drug dealer who was considered armed and dangerous. The dealer ingested a large amount of cocaine and PCP as the team entered his premises and a gun fight ensued. The dealer managed to withstand multiple hits and returned in kind with a 9mm Uzi killing 2 officers and wounding others. The dealer was finally brought down when a SWAT officer managed to close the range and scored 2 hits from a 12 gauge shotgun using slugs. The dealer was shot a total of 33 times, many of those wounds were mortal which means that even with medical attention, he likely would not have survived. The current record holder that I'm aware of is a convicted drug dealer in California currently serving a life sentence; he survived 38 hits (don't ask me how, the doctors are still trying to figure that one out).

In regard to our profession:

"Soft Target" vs. "Hard Target" - To keep this simple, a tank would be considered a hard target, whereas a human is soft, get it? I can go into further detail, but I consider that to be explanatory.

"Shot placement" & "Stopping Power" - When you place the bullet into the target; accuracy matters. If you do not score a vital hit, then the target will not cease activity. Generally, the brain, heart, brain stem, spine, etc. result in a cessation of said activity. This brings us to "stopping power". If you shoot a person in the stomach with a .22LR, then the odds that this person will be incapacitated are low - which means they will likely be able to continue the fight. If you shoot the same individual in the brain with a .22LR, then the likely result is incapacitation - which means that they likely won't be able to continue the fight. Same bullet, different "shot placement". The .22LR is not a combat cartridge, but is still capable of incapacitation. This is considered to be a cartridge with a low "stopping power" - placement is more vital with this round. A 12.7mm cannon round fired from the LRSW (Long Range Sniper Weapon - http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/2_0_35.asp?uSubSection=35&uSection=2) is considered to be a cartridge capable of incapacitation almost regardless of where the round impacts - a knick to the arm may likely result in the loss of the appendage, if not death due to the high velocity and energy of the round. Bear in mind, this was originally a cartridge designed for use against vehicles, i.e., tanks & armoured cars. The 5.56mm NATO cartridge in use with US & Canadian Forces has come into question due to the performance against humans recently. This cartridge is designed for a wide spectrum of use, from "thin skinned" vehicles such as cars and light trucks, etc. to people wearing ballistic protection, i.e., armour. In this matter, the round is found to be "overpenetrating" - passing through the target, which is of concern in MOUT (Military Operations in Urban Terrain) due to the nature of the civilians in the area who may be beyond the target; in this manner, failing to incapacitate the target. Further follow up shots are then required to be certain that the target is "down", i.e., incapacitated. The danger inherent is that you will shoot your target, see him fall and then move on to the next only to find that he is still functioning and a danger to yourself or a section mate.

Those are the rough definitions. In Iraq, the US have been reintroducing the M14 (7.62mm NATO) as an alternative to the M16 in certain conditions - bigger bullet, more energy. There is interest in some circles to return to larger calibre firearms, but funds and development are limited and most of this attention will most likely not result in any major changes anytime soon. The focus may be on increasing the potential of the cartridge for the M16 (the MK262 cartridge is reportedly performing decently) in conjunction with newer armour, vehicles, anti-IED devices, etc. Where you'll find the "uppers" (complete barreled upper receiver in another calibre such as the 6.8mm SPC, 6.5mm Grendel or even a .50 cal Beowolf, that can be installed upon the existing M4-M16 variant in seconds with ease) being used may very well be with SF units and PMF (Private Military Force) contractors who have more input over individual and unit firearm aquisition. The advantages inherent are the ability to carry essentially 2 firearms in one for differing roles, i.e., long range engagement & CQB (Close Quarter Battle).

If opposition combatants are stimulating themselves in order to perform better in combat, then our forces require the tools to ensure that they will be able to meet this threat head on. Having reliable ammunition that ensures incapacitation is paramount to their safety.


----------



## coachron (30 May 2006)

[If you shoot a person in the stomach with a .22LR, then the odds that this person will be incapacitated are low - which means they will likely be able to continue the fight.  If you shoot the same individual in the brain with a .22LR, then the likely result is incapacitation - which means that they likely won't be able to continue the fight.]

So it is good practice generally to shoot the person in the head?  It must be kind of hard to do that.


----------



## George Wallace (30 May 2006)

'You sure you're a coach?  You seem to be missing an awful lot here.  I am sure you picked that quote for some reason other than argumentative.  It doesn't have any relevance to Military rounds, nor Police rounds; if you would have read the whole post.


----------



## C and P (30 May 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> not too mention the use of drugs to enstill fanatical courage and dull pain by forces around the globe, and dating back millenia. The Moros tribesmen in the Phillipines, the Mau Mau and Simbas of Africa, the Chinese in Korea.
> 
> Bring 'em home indeed. Once they have achieved their Aim.


Good comeback. By that argument we should be issuing the troops Pot, so they can come down from all the "Speed" we're making them take!


----------



## Enzo (30 May 2006)

coachron said:
			
		

> So it is good practice generally to shoot the person in the head?  It must be kind of hard to do that.



As with anything practice makes perfect. Anything that is hard to do; well, requires practice.  

Dude, honestly, what's your purpose here? Argument for arguments sake? Nothing that I wrote states enjoyment of killing, etc. I see myself as a professional, are you?


----------



## KevinB (30 May 2006)

Wound Ballistics

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=273976


If you want some definietive stuff on terminal effects - go to tactical forums www.tacticalforums.com and look sup the terminal effect forum - moderated by Dr Gary K Roberts (L/Cdr USNR) 


 77gr Mk262 ammunition works a lot better than M855/C77 in soft targets 











I had some gel shots of it - but I think they are on my home computer 

Anyway follow the links.




As far as the drug use goes - who cares -- two in the heart, one in the mind  ;D


----------



## C and P (30 May 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> 'You sure you're a coach?  You seem to be missing an awful lot here.  I am sure you picked that quote for some reason other than argumentative.  It doesn't have any relevance to Military rounds, nor Police rounds; if you would have read the whole post.
> [/quote
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## George Wallace (30 May 2006)

C and P said:
			
		

> I can speak to that. coachron was my coach.! one of the most insightful hokey minds you will meet! taught me everything I know about the game!



Well that explains it!  Hokey minds don't usually have a clear picture of what is going on.  It takes a clear mind to do that.  If you are the least bit hokey, you should stay home, and not risk injuring yourself.


----------



## Lost_Warrior (30 May 2006)

Wouldn't drug use prevent them from obtaining peace in the big "12 virgin orgy in the sky"?


----------



## coachron (30 May 2006)

Hokey mind?


----------



## C and P (30 May 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Well that explains it!  Hokey minds don't usually have a clear picture of what is going on.  It takes a clear mind to do that.  If you are the least bit hokey, you should stay home, and not risk injuring yourself.


Ha ha! Good point!*&^% typing skills!


----------



## HItorMiss (30 May 2006)

Kev I think you just added a "hole" new meaning to the term "Hearts and Minds Campaign" well done


----------



## coachron (30 May 2006)

Enzo said:
			
		

> As with anything practice makes perfect. Anything that is hard to do; well, requires practice.
> 
> Dude, honestly, what's your purpose here? Argument for arguments sake? Nothing that I wrote states enjoyment of killing, etc. I see myself as a professional, are you?



When it comes to killing, argument for argument's sake is not such a bad thing.


----------



## Cloud Cover (30 May 2006)

HitorMiss said:
			
		

> Kev I think you just added a *hole  * new meaning to the term "Hearts and Minds Campaign" well done



Considering he was talking about wound characteristics ....


----------



## KevinB (30 May 2006)

LOL -- well actually a buddy - ex MARINE FAST guy, has used that one before - so I cant lay claim to the that.

Coachron - actually wrt killing - you had better figured out that a long before you got your selvf in that postion  - decisions take time - time you dont have.
  Boyd's loop / OODA loop - every action path added doubles your reaction time -- so have a analytical debate on shooting someone is a BAD idea.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 May 2006)

C and P said:
			
		

> Good comeback. By that argument we should be issuing the troops Pot, so they can come down from all the "Speed" we're making them take!



OK, explain that one. Who's troops, what 'Speed'?


----------



## HItorMiss (30 May 2006)

Were getting Speed now? how come I was never issued any... maybe they put it in my water...man and here I thought all my enegery and keeness was coming from my desire to be a better soldier  :


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 May 2006)

CandP, coachron,

PM sent.


----------



## Enzo (30 May 2006)

coachron said:
			
		

> So it is good practice generally to shoot the person in the head?  It must be kind of hard to do that.



I was in a rush earlier and had to leave. I'm home now and I have to say, I've been stewing about you for awhile now. I took the time to respond to "your" request for clarification and you chose to focus on that one aspect of my reply. Honestly, you didn't answer, what is your purpose here? If you want to debate killing: moral, amoral, legal or ethical reasons for doing so. Then there are other threads, other mediums. If you have a point that you'd like to make, then take your time and make it, as I did for you. The main reason why I'm taking more time now is for the other people who may read this in the hope that they will have a greater understand of the processes involved in regards to the issue of taking down a combatant who may be on stimulants. That and to show that life isn't as simple as you may think that it is. There is a reason for the training and the use of weapons in the military that civilians and non-combat arms personnel may not realise. I responded technically to your query. I decided to leave emotion out of it. I have some personal feelings about the taking of life, but that isn't the topic of this thread so I am choosing to remain on topic. It isn't my wish to proselytize to anyone, but to hopefully inform if I am able. In regards to this once again so that I am perfectly clear; is it good practice to shoot someone in the head? Of course, if that person is trying to do the same thing to you. Is it hard? Technically, it's a matter of a few to the chest and then slowly working up. Psychologically, I haven't had to do so and I don't think I'll have to worry about it this year; but if it is a situation I'm going to place myself in next year, then I will rely upon my training to carry me through. Would it be better to shoot them in the knees so that they fall down in pain, crippled, and decline further attempts to fight? Of course, assuming that they are able to register pain - hence the topic of this thread. Since there are no guarantees in life, that is why the training is as it is. To ensure that you live. It's really as simple as that.



			
				coachron said:
			
		

> When it comes to killing, argument for argument's sake is not such a bad thing.



Arguing for the sake of arguing, we don't tolerate that in children. Why should any of us have to here? Apparently, you are old enough to know better. If you want to begin a topic of debate, then do so. Take your time, state yourself and then lets see where it goes.

I read your posts. I wondered why you would choose to include a famous photograph of a napalm bombing in Vietnam? You know that war is over correct? You have issues with what you perceive to be propaganda and it's use to dehumanize the combatants that oppose US Forces in Iraq. Honestly, I won't argue that with you, psyops have been going on since before I was born. If that is what you chose to take away from that program, then that is your prerogative. However, what does that have to do with the issue of drugs being used by these combatants? US personnel use drugs as well: coffee, tobacco, pharmaceuticals, alcohol and who knows what else. Drug use is pervasive, we get that. How is that propaganda? Why not start a thread about that (after doing a search to ensure that another thread hasn't already covered it?)?

Finally: murder, death, killing. I'm going to assume that you're against all of those things. Well, here's what you do. You perform your duty as a Canadian citizen and write to: your MP, your MLA, your senator, the Min of DND, the PM and anyone else who has a responsibility to listen to you. Become involved in a campaign against international war, war in general, the clubbing of seals, Celine Dion and anything else that upsets you. Once you've accomplished that, then come back and we'll talk. In the meantime, know this. The Canadian Forces set about the tasks that the Executive initiates for them. The job is to conduct said tasking as professionally as possible within the mandate that is prescribed. Simple. The taking of human life may fall under this via the ROEs (Rules of Engagement) and if it does, so be it. If you want to debate the morality of the taking of life by the CF, you aren't debating a thing; but the people, those professionals who choose to sacrifice in order to ensure that you have the freedom, safety and ability to do so.

Cheers...

P.S.
Infidel, quite the scope for such a short barrel eh?


----------



## KevinB (31 May 2006)

Enzo -- Schmitt and Bender Short Dot 1.1-4x -- allows me to shoot the people I need to without accidentally wacking the wrong guys 
  Kinda like a Aimpoint and a ACOG rolled into one.


----------



## Enzo (31 May 2006)

Infidel - Schmitt and Bender Short Dot 1.1-4x eh. Not cheap by any means, but I like the versatility. Your barrel seems short (CQB), you have a longer upper also?


----------



## KevinB (31 May 2006)

Enzo said:
			
		

> Infidel - Schmitt and Bender Short Dot 1.1-4x eh. Not cheap by any means, but I like the versatility. Your barrel seems short (CQB), you have a longer upper also?



Yeah a few  ;D

But in a pinch at 4x the 10" can drop stuff at ~400m


----------



## Colin Parkinson (31 May 2006)

Enzo
A friend of mine has been trying to flog the 6.8mm AR to the Malaysian military. A number of specialists units over there did pick it up. The 6,8 does seem to resolve some of the criticism of the 5.56 round. Any word back from field operators using it as to their opinion yet?

Let us not forget the Somali mess who regularly consume Khat. I suspect that Khat was a significant factor in helping the US retrieve their guys, a little difficult to maintain discipline and tactical manoeuvre with kids semi-high on drugs.

There was also a good interview with one of the girls belonging to the Tiger’s suicide squad in Sri Lanka. It is clear that the mental conditioning is ongoing to ensure that they will attack when required. Also I believe that some Iraqis suicide bombers have been found to have radio controlled vests so their handlers can denote the vest if the bomber fails to do so. The Pal’s have also used women that have been “dishonoured” as a source of bombers, convincing them that they can wipe the slate clean with their death.


----------



## Enzo (31 May 2006)

As posted above, the use of drugs for some combatants goes back before Jesus was in diapers. Of course, this could simply be propaganda by the ministry of misinformation, but I prefer to believe the history books (albeit written by the winners of course).

Psychological and physiological training is a factor for any fighting force. Everyone has their preferred tactics. We phased out the "beatings" a long time ago, but so many others may choose to employ whatever they wish. Morals to the side. So why the disbelief by some that providing drugs to combatants is solely propaganda?

Infidel - 10" to ~400m, I'm impressed. I like to think I'm good, but that's something I've yet to try. ;D


----------



## TCBF (1 Jun 2006)

"Infidel - 10" to ~400m, I'm impressed. I like to think I'm good, but that's something I've yet to try."

- Of course, if they legalized pistol hunting in Canada, we could join the Army having experienced 400m shots with 10" (and less) barrels.  Since the communists in Ottawa have banned short barreled pistols, this is obviously what they have in mind.


----------



## 1feral1 (1 Jun 2006)

coachron said:
			
		

> .  It sounded like the usual U.S. military propaganda designed to demonize and dehumanize the enemy, familiar to those who were fed a steady diet of same after the American invasion of Southeast Asia.



Hey, I think I smell a hidden 'political' agenda here???

Why is all this VN quotes, references and pics coming up anyways? Don't go comparing that war to this one, as this one effects you (and me), and all westerners. I am suprised you have not brought the word OIL into your one sided discussions.

Name me a war that did not use this dehumanising 'technique'. Look at some of the propaganda posters from Canada (and her allies) against the Germans in both world wars, plus the Japanese threat too. You should see some of the Australian posters. At the end of the day, 'home fires' propganda aided in the overall war effort to boost production and keep the public pumped, while letting the lads at the pointy end know back home are fighting too.

Think too of names of the enemy over the wars. Huns, Jerry, Nips, Charlie, Gooks, Skinnys, Matchstickmen, etc. even the targets we shoot are human-like. The running Russian, Fig11's, 12/59's, machinegunners, etc. We are not out there for the olymic medal, are we.

We all know the first casualty in war is always the truth. The only thing that changes over time is the technology, but at the end of the day life at the pointy end is still that. There is NO glory in death, dying and killing.

Stoned or not, if 'Achmed' is doing drugs to muster up some testosterone, I don't really care, either way, wpn in hand, running towards or away, he's gonna be biting the brass tylenol in any allied soldier's 'centre' of mass - not head shot  : sighting picture, and that includes mine!

War is truly a four lettered word, but sometimes its a necessity to preseve peace and our way of life! If you got a cancer, you don't feed it, you cut it out quicksmart before it gets you. Right now there are arseholes in your own country who are hellbent on killing you and others. If you deny that, you again are not with it. You'd think with 62yrs behind you, you'd know better. I am not no snotty nosed 17yr old mate, I'll be 47 this year, and I do have military experience as you openly admit you do not have.

Okay coachron, time to put out the bong, and finish that warm beer. Feel free to your head from the sand now, and gag down a DIRTYgreat big reality tablet.

Next thing you'll be posting a quote from a John Lennon song. Oops, you done that already.

My thoughts,

Wes


----------



## TCBF (1 Jun 2006)

Of course, sometimes a headshot IS 'center of visible mass', that's why we can all group four inches at a hundred meters, right?



Tom


----------



## KevinB (1 Jun 2006)

;D


----------



## Kal (1 Jun 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> But in a pinch at 4x the 10" can drop stuff at ~400m



All from shooting from a helicopter, into a moving car (of the opposite direction), raining, in the dark, with gail force winds, and with an unsupported, off-hand shot...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (1 Jun 2006)

coachron said:
			
		

> Enzo:  I am a bit new to some of the terminology you use:  shot placement, "stopping power,"  and soft targets, i.e. humans.  Please develop those themes just a bit.  I take it that a larger calibre weapon is recommended which with careful placement of the shot will deliver more stopping power to the soft target, i.e., the human, drugged or undrugged.  Speaking of the drugs, I had the same reaction as C and P to the U.S. Marines contention that the enemy fights while drugged.  It sounded like the usual U.S. military propaganda designed to demonize and dehumanize the enemy, familiar to those who were fed a steady diet of same after the American invasion of Southeast Asia.  Perhaps you can point to some evidence that consuming drugs of one kind or another will make the enemy harder to stop.  I would have assumed that bullets will tear apart the flesh of the drugged no less remorselessly than the undrugged.  But it is probably beside the point.
> 
> The documentary focused as it should on the huge costs suffered by the marines and their families from Columbus, Ohio who, even if they did arrive home safely from Iraq, are left with deep wounds of one kind or another. I detected no celebration or enjoyment on the part of those who shot dead the Iraqi insurgent on drugs.  I think John Lennon got it about right:  Give Peace a Chance!  Bring em home!
> 
> ...


----------



## Enzo (1 Jun 2006)

Infidel - Seems to me that you've zeroed in on the situation eh?  :soldier:

Anyone else notice that there hasn't been a rebuttal from Ron as of yet?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (1 Jun 2006)

Let's not troll. You've made good observations. Leave it there.


----------



## Enzo (1 Jun 2006)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Let's not troll. You've made good observations. Leave it there.



Seen. I'll keep myself sorted.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Jun 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> ...As far as the drug use goes - who cares -- two in the heart, one in the mind  ;D



Inf-6, an especially poignant quote, knowing the "quotee".  

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## TCBF (4 Jun 2006)

So their kids are as high as our kids...   NEXT!


----------

