Stretched in Iraq, US may return to UN

[Serb]

Originally posted by Fez
Serb has yet again failed to prove anything of great importance.

It's impossible to prove anything to such complete brainwashed idiot, who denies all given facts, such as you, dumbfez.

It comes down to one fact, the M-16 is better than the AN-94.

Prove it. You pull your claims out of your a$$. I post facts. Which parameter of M16 is better in comparison with AN-94? None except that it's 80 gramms lighter.

He has also failed to understand a 5.45MM round can't go 800M.

1) I said 700m
2) AN-94 is 50% more accurate not because of ammo, but because of its unique, superior mechanism. 5.56 have btter ballistic properties than 5.45, but 5.45 fired from AN-94 CAN shot targets 700 meters away.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Serb

It's impossible to prove anything to such complete brainwashed idiot, who denies all given facts, such as you, dumbfez.

It is impossible to believe somebody who posts sites that mysteriously are all Russian based.

Prove it. You pull your claims out of your a$$. I post facts. Which parameter of M16 is better in comparison with AN-94? None except that it's 80 gramms lighter.

You don't post facts. I am still waiting.

1) I said 700m
2) AN-94 is 50% more accurate not because of ammo, but because of its unique, superior mechanism. 5.56 have btter ballistic properties than 5.45, but 5.45 fired from AN-94 CAN shot targets 700 meters away.

The An-94 isn't more accurate.

5.45 cannot fire a longer range than the 5.56. Sorry that is a fact. The bullet is too light for it to do that.

[Serb]

And yet all of his sites are Russian...

What a dumbass...

You're such an idiot Fez.
I've used YOUR LINK.
YOUR OWN LINK YOU GAVE ON PAGE FOUR OF THIS THREAD.
Go to page four and find your own post with "fancy" pictures. Then look at link you gave- it's world.guns.ru. I just used different section of this site. The section which dedicated to Russian arms.
YOU IDIOT.
In case if you don't remember where you post it, look at this:

Originally posted by Fez
But you dumb russians got more to be worried about the next generation of American rifles...



The M-16's successor:

http://world.guns.ru/assault/as61-e.htm

By the M-16 isn't my favorite. The G-36 is.

[Lung]

Originally posted by Mr. President
Australia can send its tank to help.

We have a tank?

You learn something new every day At least, unlike New Zullund, we have an air force

[Giancarlo]

Well nothing wrong with using the pictures. I didn't bother looking at what they talked about though. There were some errors in the site.

So get off the drugs.

And by the way my favorite gun isn't the M-16 if you haven't figured that out. It is the G-36, used by the Spanish and German militaries. It is superior to the AN-94.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Fez
Serb is a ****ing stalinist...
...
...
An ******* like Serb brings up reality? He is a frigging Stalinist who has no clue.

Me stalinist?

You are:
1) F*cking idiot, the most stiupid son of a b!tch I ever heard.
2) F*cking nazi.
3) Franco's lover.
have a nice day, moron

[Alexander's Horse]

don't hold back there Serb

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Serb


Me stalinist?

You are:
1) F*cking idiot, the most stiupid son of a b!tch I ever heard.
2) F*cking nazi.
3) Franco's lover.
have a nice day, moron

You are all of those but change number three to Stalin and Pol Pot.

You love them.

And you are the frigging moron... how many times do you understand? Russia doesn't even have the capacity to produce anything more than crap! Their military is completely garbage... antiquated... pieces of rusted coffins... these coffins are the boats, tanks and ships.

And the rifles designs look like **** anyways.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Fez
Well nothing wrong with using the pictures. I didn't bother looking at what they talked about though. There were some errors in the site.

So, when you use Russian sites, there is "nothing wrong with this". When I use link YOU POSTED, you saying that this site is bullsh!t.
Great, what a dumbas$.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Serb

So, when you use Russian sites, there is "nothing wrong with this". When I use link YOU POSTED, you saying that this site is bullsh!t.
Great, what a dumbas$.

The site is bull****.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
don't hold back there Serb

Is he really that absolutely stiupid? I don't know, no matter what facts I bring, he just post "it's bullsh!t, it is not...blah...blah...blah...".

[Serb]

Originally posted by Fez


The site is bull****.

Then pictures you took from this site and posted here are bullsh!t too. This makes you a bullsh!ter.

Note, you moron (once again, I remind this just for you) you asked for link to prove what I've said. I took the link YOU posted in this thread and find an article about AN-94. The article from YOUR source. If you call bullsh!t articles from YOUR OWN sources, I can't imagine a source which you consider as relaible.

[Giancarlo]

Serb, if your countrys rifle designs are so good why is the war in Chechyna turning to ****? Oh wait.. it already reached that years ago... the Russian army is fighting a stalemate... recruiting some of the poorest fit men for the job. So does weaponry really worth a damn if the entire military it is serving does not know how to fight in the least?

[Giancarlo]

The Russian military in its finest and right now, is scared ****less how fast the US toppled the regime in Iraq. What good is a rifle when you have a Apache helicopter blasting the **** out of you?

http://www.post-gazette.com/World/2003042120030421iraqrussiaworldxp8.asp

MOSCOW -- There's a message to the Russians in the swift defeat of Saddam Hussein's military, which was modeled on the rigid Soviet war machine.

The triumph of a high-tech adversary has spotlighted the weakness of Russia's own crumbling armed forces and strengthened the hand of radical reform advocates.

"The Iraqi war has proven once again that a volunteer contract force equipped with state-of-the art weapons and using modern tactics can fulfill any task ... and do it with minimal casualties among civilians," said liberal lawmaker Alexei Arbatov, a leading advocate of a Russian volunteer army.

When the war began, Russian generals forecast a long and fierce battle and expected the United States to suffer massive casualties if it stormed Iraqi cities. Just a week before Baghdad fell, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov extolled the strength of the Iraqi army and said a U.S. victory was "far from certain."

"There were expectations of a new Vietnam," said Yuri Fyodorov, a deputy director of the PIR-Center, an independent Russian think-tank.

Russian generals and diplomats, who also predicted an all-out battle for Baghdad, drew on Russia's own botched experience in the storming and virtual destruction of Grozny, the Chechen capital.

"The U.S. victory in Iraq has become an unpleasant surprise for the Russian political and military elite," said Yevgeny Volk, head of the Moscow office of the Heritage Foundation, the U.S. think tank.

The Iraqi army closely copied the Soviet organization and tactics and was equipped with mostly Soviet-built tanks, aircraft and missiles. Although official military contacts were severed after the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, two retired Russian generals visited Baghdad to advise its defenders, according to Russian media reports. They later acknowledged the visit but denied serving as military advisers.

Many Russians say their army suffers from the same weaknesses that contributed to Iraq's defeat -- badly maintained weapons, poorly trained troops, rigid command and poor coordination.

Retired Gen. Andrei Nikolayev, head of Parliament's defense affairs committee, said the Russian army is similar to the Iraqi army in its low morale and lack of motivation.

"Go on the street and ask who is ready to defend the motherland and you will immediately see unpleasant parallels," he said. "The outcome of a war depends on army's morale."

In an article published this week in the daily Nezavisimaya Gazeta, commentator Maxim Glikin recalled his own experience in the Soviet military in the late 1980s, saying he and his comrades would have surrendered just like Saddam's soldiers.

"We would have thrown away our rifles and changed into civilian clothes before an aggressor approached our unit," Glikin wrote.

The Russian military has declined steadily since the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, lacking funds to modernize weapons, hold exercises and even properly feed and dress servicemen.

Miserable conditions and rampant hazing of young conscripts have led to suicides, desertions, shootouts and widespread draft-dodging. All Russian men aged 18-27 are required to serve two years in the military, but 90 percent avoid the draft.

President Vladimir Putin has sought to reverse the meltdown by ordering a gradual transfer from the draft to a volunteer force by 2010. But the top brass are stubbornly defending a bulky, Soviet-era military on a meager budget equivalent to $11 billion this year. In contrast, Soviet defense spending stood at the equivalent of $155 billion in 1991, the year of the Soviet collapse, according to official statistics. Some Western experts believe it was even higher.

In stark contrast with the computerized, satellite-guided U.S. military, the Russian army's arsenals are of Cold War vintage, precision weapons are few and tactics largely imitate the World War II patterns. A lack of fuel and spares has grounded aircraft and left most navy ships to rust in port.

While the top brass is using the Iraqi war as a pretext to plead for more funds, critics are urging the military to further trim ranks, dump excessive weapons and radically streamline its bloated, antiquated structure.

"Pumping more cash into the outdated defense structure would be a useless waste of money," said Konstantin Kosachev, deputy head of Parliament's foreign affairs committee.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Fez
You don't post facts. I am still waiting.

You problem that you don't accept facts that you don't like. It makes an impossible task to prove something to such person as you. No matter what I say, you will always reply "it's not true". You need some medical help Fez, you have serious problems with your psychics.

The An-94 isn't more accurate.

It's 150% more accurate than AK-74 and 50% more accurate than M-16.

5.45 cannot fire a longer range than the 5.56. Sorry that is a fact. The bullet is too light for it to do that.

"Caliber: 5.45x39 mm
Action: Gas operated, rotating bolt; moving barrel-receiver-gas drive group for delayed recoil action
Overall length: 943 mm (728 mm with butt folded)
Barrel length: 405 mm
Magazine capacity: 30 rounds
Weight, without magazine: 3.85 k g
Cyclic rate of fire: 1800 and 600 rounds per minute variable (see description below for explanation)
Maximum effective range: 700 meters"
pay attention to:
Maximum effective range: 700 meters

http://world.guns.ru/assault/as08-e.htm