Warning

 

Close
Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Cancel Confirm
AR15.COM
4/14/2003 3:17:25 AM EDT
From the Washington Post article about the newly freed POWs  (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20070-2003Apr13.html):

"For members of the 507th, the three-week saga began when the maintenance convoy took a wrong turn into Nasiriyah and rolled into "an ambush waiting for us," in the words of Johnson. With bullets and explosions everywhere, Miller, his rifle jammed, began shoving in bullets one by one and firing single shots.

"We were like Custer," recalled Sgt. James Riley, 31, Pennsauken, N.J. As the senior soldier present, it fell to him to surrender.

"We were surrounded," he said. "We had no working weapons. We couldn't even make a bayonet charge - we would have been mowed down."
********************************************

Feeding single rounds into his M-16?  The statement in the last paragraph "we had no working weapons") implies multiple failed weapons.  What do you make of this?  Is the Army giving "non-frontline" folks the worn out junk, hoping that they will never have to use it?

A friend of mine in the USAF was deploying to Afghanistan.  He said that the M-16s they were issued were junk.  Beat up, bent, and some had 5-digit serial numbers.  He had an armorer look at his and the opinion was that the rifle would not last long if her actually started using it.  He started kicking up sand over this (As a MSgt he wasn't about to take his people into a high-threat environment without reliable weapons).  His boss told him to sit down and shut up, but he went over that dork to a colonel who made sure that everybody got good weapons.  Politically, he decided that stirring that muck was probably detrimental to career progression, but he had to do what was right.
4/14/2003 4:08:38 AM EDT
[#1]
It sounds more like a typical 'we don't need these, we're a maintenance unit' attitude toward cleaning/maintaining weapons.

I'm not saying all support troops are lax when it comes to weapon maintenance but I saw a lot of it where I was.
4/14/2003 4:21:22 AM EDT
[#2]
Not to go OT, but whatever happened to the OIC of this group? The rear of the convoy gets captured and now there are indications that they didn't maintain their weapons? Is he or she toasted yet??
4/14/2003 4:32:09 AM EDT
[#3]
The Marine's Combat Service Support Detachments' "Mobile CSSDs" are heavily armed (50s, MK19s, lots of m240s).
The Army should adopt some of this doctrine...
4/14/2003 4:41:24 AM EDT
[#4]
.
.
.
.
.
Nope, I'm not going to say anything.
4/14/2003 4:48:15 AM EDT
[#5]
The fact that the weapons failed to function is a maintenance issue.

The fact that the soldiers did not know correct immediate action to bring their weapons back to the fight is a training issue.

The weapon system is sound.
4/14/2003 5:02:35 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
The fact that the weapons failed to function is a maintenance issue.

The fact that the soldiers did not know correct immediate action to bring their weapons back to the fight is a training issue.

The weapon system is sound.
View Quote


[b]BINGO![/B]
Couldn't have said it better myself.
4/14/2003 5:56:56 AM EDT
[#7]
Sounds like a little CYA to me.  [i]"Uh, we didn't kick ass like the other soldiers, uh, cuz our, uh, weapons ALL jammed.  Yeah, that's it, all the weapons jammed"[/i]
4/14/2003 6:11:29 AM EDT
[#8]
I hate to second guess but if you are having a feed problem and have to feed rounds singularly into a M16 question has to be asked did he have spare magazines and at were was his LBE?  Does sound alot like maintance/training issues.

De Oppresso Liber
4/14/2003 6:15:16 AM EDT
[#9]
These folks spend most of their time getting in and out of vehicles.
I assume, that they probably didn't even wear their "LBE".
They also probably didn't have mag pouches attached to their body armor.

When the convoy was hit, and they got out, they most likely didn't have much with them.

Then again, maybe not, who knows?