Or military "experts".
A) The fact that this raging douche-nozzle was a Lieutenant General in the US Army explains quite a bit about the problems the Army is currently facing.
B) The AR-15 was never used by the US military in any capacity.
C) There is no such thing as "full semi-auto".
And in my opinion, as well as many other military members, the 5.56mm round is under-powered, weak, ineffective, and pathetic. There are reasons people have been calling for a bigger round ever since I knew what ballistics were, and that's *mumblemumble* decades now. The experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan have not made those calls any softer.
In short, this general got used by CNN like a condom, and he's worth just about as much as a used prophylactic after everything is said and done.
2 comments:
there's a reason the warsaw pact stayed with the 7.62 when they too could have gone to a lighter easier to carry round. there's also a reason i don't own anything in 5.56. it's tough to stop big, brown and fuzzy with the virtual equivalent of a .22 mag. i'll take my rifles with a 3 or 4 in front, my sidearms with a 4 and my brush slug barrel in 12, thanks very much..... (those all work equally well on the 2 legged critters)
I looked up this general's bio. He was an armor officer. The last time I checked the Armor branch was more concerned with main tank guns and heavy machine guns than rifles. Then, he is a "military analyst" for CNN and I doubt if he is doing this for free. He was paid to put on a CNN-editorial-viewpoint demonstration I think.
Why not have a retired infantry NCO type do this demonstration? Probably because he would have called BS on the whole thing.
Post a Comment