Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Afghan Taliban Small Arms Procurement and Use

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Afghan Taliban Small Arms Procurement and Use

    C.J. Shivers of the NYT has been spending time downrange with a surge battalion from the 101st Airborne operating in Ghazni province. They've done an interesting job at the command and intel section level of documenting captured weapons.

    Some of the finds have been historically interesting. Follow the discussion here in the At War blog that Chivers writes for the NYT-

    Taliban Gun Lockers: The Rifles of Rural Ghazni Province - Feb. 1, 2011 NYTimes.com
    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
    "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

  • #2
    The lesson of this is that moral is really the most important part in any conflict.The details are fascinating and there is even a degree of romantism(those who ever heard of Kipling will get it).The other lesson is that there's nothing like a simple and battle tested equipment.The polymers filled with electronics of today won't handle that kind of (ab)use.

    I'm thinking to salvage some old tools and some reloading equipment.Just in case I'll have to fight an insurgency 40 years from now.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

    Comment


    • #3
      I've fired an M-1 Garand often and it's a remarkable, powerful, straight-shooting rifle. So too I'd imagine a Lee-Enfield. Those are manly weapons with which to defend the frontiers of freedom, Mihais.;)
      "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
      "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

      Comment


      • #4
        In a way,Sir, I think we should be very grateful to the Soviets.They saturated the market with AK's that also created a different tactical approach than what was traditional to the area.We managed to neutralize that by training ,tactics and technology.If they would resort to a wider use of trained marksmen and snipers Western losses will soar.So far they didn't managed to do that.Granted,it's not an easy task to build such a force.

        About the frontier of freedom,I pray I'm just a lunatic and a paranoid.We've been there a few hundreds years.It's a crappy place to be.
        Those who know don't speak
        He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

        Comment


        • #5
          Mihais Reply

          "In a way,Sir, I think we should be very grateful to the Soviets.They saturated the market with AK's that also created a different tactical approach than what was traditional to the area.We managed to neutralize that by training ,tactics and technology.If they would resort to a wider use of trained marksmen and snipers Western losses will soar.So far they didn't managed to do that.Granted,it's not an easy task to build such a force...."

          Basic rifle marksmanship was heavily invested, in my view, by the U.S. Army. By all accounts, the marines take it even more seriously. I really wouldn't speak for foreign armies one way or another. I've not fired an M-4 carbine but the M-16 truly was deadly out to 300 meters with a trained rifleman possessing a zeroed weapon.

          I'm stunned to see Afghan troops in battle using our M-16s. Their basic employment of the weapon is abysmal and differs little, really, from their equally abysmal firing positions with an AK.

          "...About the frontier of freedom,I pray I'm just a lunatic and a paranoid.We've been there a few hundreds years.It's a crappy place to be."

          If by "...we..." you mean the Romanian people, I'd concur. You are my first line of defense.;)
          "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
          "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

          Comment


          • #6
            Their use of the rifle gives a big credit to Lt. Col's Dave Grossman theory about the role of posturing in combat.Big noise,little effect.There is also,maybe, a refusal to be effective killers.

            IIRC there was also an article by Chivers about the Afghan marksmanship(both ''ours'' and ''theirs'') in which he identified the root causes of this situation.From I got from our training mission NCO's there is a huge problem with communication.The Afghans simply don't understand how a firearm works.And some of those trainers(granted only a few)even went native and knew the language.The fact the recruits don't read isn't helping either.To be honest,I'm glad they can't shoot straight.The ANA won't be of any use to us in a few years.What they didn't learned they won't be able to use when they will change sides.

            About the frontier,I meant the American people defending the rest of us from whatever rises S. of Rio Grande

            There was an argument by Alvin Toffler about the 21st century being marked by the opposition between North and South instead of the traditional East vs. West.That's even consistent in part with our dear Huntington.It seems to apply equally well to US,Europe and Russia,although the actors are slightly differrent.The Marxists(a pox on 'em) might even say it's class warfare at world level
            Those who know don't speak
            He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Mihais View Post
              In a way,Sir, I think we should be very grateful to the Soviets.They saturated the market with AK's that also created a different tactical approach than what was traditional to the area.We managed to neutralize that by training ,tactics and technology.If they would resort to a wider use of trained marksmen and snipers Western losses will soar.So far they didn't managed to do that.Granted,it's not an easy task to build such a force.
              Look up the terms "jezzail" and "jezzailich"; and speaking of Kipling, the Arithmetic of the Frontier. The Afghans/Pathans were once famous for their marksmen.

              It is tactically cool at the individual level, but it may have become counterproductive for them now: The British started using collective punishment and butcher-and-bolt operations; the Soviets also did that and added a third-dimension to engagement via artillery and air (thats when the Stinger operator toppled the sharpshooter in their popular imagination); the ISAF also has air and artillery to pound them if they get too annoying, as Chivers notes. Nowadays it has just become more practical for them to sneak up as close as possible before opening automatic fire, exploiting their foes' ROE.

              Comment


              • #8
                I found the part about ammunition interesting. I always made it a point to collect enemy ammunition for examination. It tells you a lot about who you're fighting and who their friends are. I was amazed at what people will try to shoot in a gun, alarmed when I found new ammunition from previously undisclosed sources.
                Reddite igitur quae sunt Caesaris Caesari et quae sunt Dei Deo
                (Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things which are God's)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Cool post as ever, S-2.
                  All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
                  -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    mihais,

                    In a way,Sir, I think we should be very grateful to the Soviets.They saturated the market with AK's that also created a different tactical approach than what was traditional to the area.
                    i don't know-- i'd rather our troops be facing off against a bunch of taliban armed with old british-empire bolt-action rifles than old soviet-era AK-47s, SKS, etc.

                    you don't get trained marksmen and snipers just because you gave them a bolt-action rifle.
                    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It's the mindset that matters.Warrior cultures that faced the colonial empires,the Afghans, Berbers or the Boers being the first that comes to my mind were famed for their marksmanship.Skill was born of need.Each round counted.

                      If you look at modern marksmanship training,they don't pour bullets in the target,even if the weapon is capable of rapid fire.Each one is calculated and there is even an attempt to simulate scarcity by issuing only a few bullets.

                      Modern Afghans(for that matter all third world fighters that have access to AK's and are awash in ammo) replaced that careful approach with posturing.

                      Look at the problem this way.If the Taliban was capable of fielding any given day 200 trained marksmen that were also experts at fieldcraft and tactics(and a similar number in training or R&R),equipped with Mosins,SVD's or something more modern our casualties would have been easily doubled or tripled.I'm not claiming this force would have been a war winning force in itself.Just an augment to the typical Taliban outfit.
                      They tend to start the engagements and thus they usually have the advantage of the opening salvo,but that's most of the time ineffective.If among those PKM 's and Ak's there would be one guy that actually hits something with his first round,it's a game changer.
                      For some reasons that I'm still trying to figure,only the Chechens were capable of using these kind of force to it's full capabilities.Perhaps because they were the most educated among the insurgents of the last 2 decades and they had formal military training.
                      Those who know don't speak
                      He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        mihais,

                        It's the mindset that matters.Warrior cultures that faced the colonial empires,the Afghans, Berbers or the Boers being the first that comes to my mind were famed for their marksmanship.Skill was born of need.Each round counted.
                        of course, there has to be some advantage to being awash in ammo and automatic weapons vice precision shooting, or else people wouldn't transition in the first place. in fact, the US Army went through a similar phase in the 50s. there's always been an obsession/culture within the US armed forces to emphasize precision, which is the reason why the US stuck with the garand/m1 carbine/M14 combo long after the Soviets transitioned to the AK-47. this did not go over well when the US fought the vietnamese with badly-designed M16s.

                        moreover, note that the british/french/americans pretty much ran over native opposition armed with bolt action rifles all the way until the 50s, precisely when the transition to automatic arms began.
                        There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I don't mean to drift too badly, but I find the concept of U.S. marksmanship to be exemplified by the fact that the vast majority of the M-4 / M-16 platforms in use these days are limited to 3-round burst. No more Rock & Roll / Spray and Pray, depending upon how you look at it.

                          Those 7.62 x 39 AK rounds look identical to standard Russian ammo like "Wolf" - steel cased, copper-clad steel projectile. Very inexpensive, yet effective. They won't do the damage that a 5.56 or 5.45mm round will do, but they can penetrate body armor. I'm sure the 7.62 x 54R is still in heavy use as well, a rimmed cartridge that is what? 100 years old?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            1. Level 3 and 4 body armor can defeat 7.62x39,7.62x54 and .308.

                            2.Without getting too much into how Europeans of 3-4 generations ago ruled the world,I'll only say that La Coloniale wasn't ####ing around the natives.In our terms,their ROE's were more laxed and the national will to win was there.That is no amount of marksmanship was going to win the war for the insurgents.It did win engagements,though.
                            3.If you look 50-60 years ago,it's the time when the insurgents finally manage to get both a powerful backer and foreign sanctuaries.Weapons,any sort of weapons cease to be scarce.
                            4.My point,again ,is not that bolt action wins wars in general.It's that accurate long range fire causes casualties and reduces the options for patrolling in particular and moving around(or just staying in the FOB in relative comfort) in general.Snipers/marksmen aren't invincible,but they are a force multiplier.The rest of the squad armed with AK's and MG's is present anyway,to cover the presence of the sniper and protect him from countermeasures.

                            Given the particular ROE's in A-stan and the Byzantine national policies of the gazillion of nations involved we can only be grateful that their ambushes do not manage to actually kill/wound more frequently.And that happens because the Taliban can move and protect it's force,but they can't manage to handle the final phase-shooting straight.Being shot at is stressful.But is less stressful than actually losing people.How more casualties MIGHT have influenced tactics,strategy and national policies is speculative at this point and I'm glad that's the case.
                            Those who know don't speak
                            He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by astralis View Post
                              mihais,

                              of course, there has to be some advantage to being awash in ammo and automatic weapons vice precision shooting, or else people wouldn't transition in the first place. in fact, the US Army went through a similar phase in the 50s. there's always been an obsession/culture within the US armed forces to emphasize precision, which is the reason why the US stuck with the garand/m1 carbine/M14 combo long after the Soviets transitioned to the AK-47. this did not go over well when the US fought the vietnamese with badly-designed M16s.

                              moreover, note that the british/french/americans pretty much ran over native opposition armed with bolt action rifles all the way until the 50s, precisely when the transition to automatic arms began.
                              M-16 wasn't badly designed. It was the poor training, rumors about this wonder rifle that didn't need cleaning, and the decision to switch propellant, that generated so much bad press.

                              Direct impingement system need way more cleaning to work properly. The tight tolerances produced a very accurate weapon, but not very forgiving. M-16 did everything Eugene Stoner designed it to do.
                              "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X