what the crap?

[a-4-year-old]

Also, you're forgetting that no matter how many people we kill, we are a limited occupational force in a spawning pit for insurgents. We could kill 10 or 15 to each US soldier and it wouldn't make much difference. You're measuring victory in WWI-era terms, not the terms of modern warfare.

Actually, just checking now, it is 14 insurgents per US Soldier and that is a load of bullshit. The truth is that the insurgency is so pathetic that they just get raped in every conflict, and Iraq doesn't exactly breed insurgents like rabbits.

[Dascoo]

Also, you're forgetting that no matter how many people we kill, we are a limited occupational force in a spawning pit for insurgents. We could kill 10 or 15 to each US soldier and it wouldn't make much difference. You're measuring victory in WWI-era terms, not the terms of modern warfare.

Actually, just checking now, it is 14 insurgents per US Soldier and that is a load of bullfeck. The truth is that the insurgency is so pathetic that they just get raped in every conflict, and Iraq doesn't exactly breed insurgents like rabbits.

No you're right, the neighboring countries do.

[ds dude]

We need to bring Next-Gen modern warfare, its obvious that nothings happening in Iraq or Afghanistan. People just keep dieing. The .50 cal barret it outstanding, but is it the best? Is it possible to go to a .75 cal? Or is it just a joke?

[Pie]

We need to bring Next-Gen modern warfare, its obvious that nothings happening in Iraq or Afghanistan. People just keep dieing. The .50 cal barret it outstanding, but is it the best? Is it possible to go to a .75 cal? Or is it just a joke?

The barret has been outdated already.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrett_.50_cal#XM500
Or at least there are more favorable guns since i see little difference in both the barret anbd the XM500
Both are .50 cal
Both have 10 round magazines(Or w/e)
Both are semi-automatic.

[Lord Frunkamunch]

You know, just in case a .50 cal bullet doesn't kill them. MAYBE A BIGGER GUN WILL WIN THE WAR. Terms thrown around at random do not an argument make

[Dascoo]

We need to bring Next-Gen modern warfare, its obvious that nothings happening in Iraq or Afghanistan. People just keep dieing. The .50 cal barret it outstanding, but is it the best? Is it possible to go to a .75 cal? Or is it just a joke?

Next-gen modern warfare?....

.75 cal doesn't determine anything.  You could have a 19 mm (.75 cal) x 12 mm bullet, with almost no propellant (let's say 50 grams). That means low muzzle velocity, and it's basically just a flying pancake.  

If I'm correct there are rifles that 20 mm x 102 mm and that diameter is bigger then .75, so yes it's possible.    

[Radical Terrorist]

Recoilless rifles?

Why would you need a friggin bigger calibre. Yes, killing is primary function for guns, but wounding is an even better objective. It takes 5x the resources and manpower to save and remove a wounded soldier. In ww2, american snipers with hollowpoint bullets were trained to shoot every 3rd german in a line up (when they did the traditional fanning out to search) because the 2 guys on either side of the shot german would have to pull him back, taking off 3 soldiers whereas if he was killed he would be left there and the other 2 would continue on. And as for bigger calibre, I think the .50 is pushing it for armor piercing cause as Dascoo said, you will be increasing the surface area and if you don't increase the power behind the gun (which would make it bigger and clunkier) it will merely dent armor or, as he said, hit it like a flying pancake. All the force would be distributed more evenly across the larger surface area and it loses effectiveness.

[Dascoo]

Recoilless rifles?

Why would you need a friggin bigger calibre. Yes, killing is primary function for guns, but wounding is an even better objective. It takes 5x the resources and manpower to save and remove a wounded soldier. In ww2, american snipers with hollowpoint bullets were trained to shoot every 3rd german in a line up (when they did the traditional fanning out to search) because the 2 guys on either side of the shot german would have to pull him back, taking off 3 soldiers whereas if he was killed he would be left there and the other 2 would continue on. And as for bigger calibre, I think the .50 is pushing it for armor piercing cause as Dascoo said, you will be increasing the surface area and if you don't increase the power behind the gun (which would make it bigger and clunkier) it will merely dent armor or, as he said, hit it like a flying pancake. All the force would be distributed more evenly across the larger surface area and it loses effectiveness.

No I meant a slow moving metal pancake. If it was moving at half the speed of light, it could possibly take out a city. It's all relative to speed.

Recoiless rifles aren't really practical for advanced marksman and snipers.

[SadistAtHeart]

We need to bring Next-Gen modern warfare, its obvious that nothings happening in Iraq or Afghanistan. People just keep dieing. The .50 cal barret it outstanding, but is it the best? Is it possible to go to a .75 cal? Or is it just a joke?

No more video games for you.

[Pie]

No more video games for you.

I swear, your cat was already dead when i nailed it to your door, Video games made me do it!

[Radical Terrorist]

Oh ok, since video games made you do it, parents and the press will all blame it on video games and you get off Scott free.

[Pie]

Oh ok, since video games made you do it, parents and the press will all blame it on video games and you get off Scott free.

Of course, Like i told you, the cat pulled a gun on me... I mean, it was already dead...
Jeffy likes apples!!!

That aside, It takes more then just saying some words and getting new technology, I mean you can't just say, Shazzam!, And get a new gun out of nothing.

[Radical Terrorist]

They pay scientists big bucks to develop these things.Unfortunately, it seems that maybe too much time, effort, and attention is put into making something to take a life rather than something to save it.

[Pie]

They pay scientists big bucks to develop these things.Unfortunately, it seems that maybe too much time, effort, and attention is put into making something to take a life rather than something to save it.

Scientist one: We could try to find a cure for cancer?
Scientist two: Pfft, Cancer sucks, Lets just make shit that kills people.
Scientist one: Something that kills cancerous people?
Scientist two: What? Now how did a moron like you become a scientist?
Scientist one: I dunno, Jesus?

The system works.

[Svirin Kerath]

Also, you're forgetting that no matter how many people we kill, we are a limited occupational force in a spawning pit for insurgents. We could kill 10 or 15 to each US soldier and it wouldn't make much difference. You're measuring victory in WWI-era terms, not the terms of modern warfare.

Actually, just checking now, it is 14 insurgents per US Soldier and that is a load of bullfeck. The truth is that the insurgency is so pathetic that they just get raped in every conflict, and Iraq doesn't exactly breed insurgents like rabbits.

I totally called that, without even researching the stats on how many are killed per U.S. soldier. Oh wait but no, statistics

are always very inaccurate.

=(

But yeah, they get raped in every conflict! That's why "combat operations in Iraq have ended" right? That's why we're still there 4 years later, right? That's why a civil war started, right? Cause we rape them all the time?

[a-4-year-old]

Recoilless rifles?

Why would you need a friggin bigger calibre.

Range. That is all.

Also, you're forgetting that no matter how many people we kill, we are a limited occupational force in a spawning pit for insurgents. We could kill 10 or 15 to each US soldier and it wouldn't make much difference. You're measuring victory in WWI-era terms, not the terms of modern warfare.

Actually, just checking now, it is 14 insurgents per US Soldier and that is a load of bullfeck. The truth is that the insurgency is so pathetic that they just get raped in every conflict, and Iraq doesn't exactly breed insurgents like rabbits.

I totally called that, without even researching the stats on how many are killed per U.S. soldier. Oh wait but no, statistics

are always very inaccurate.

=(

But yeah, they get raped in every conflict! That's why "combat operations in Iraq have ended" right? That's why we're still there 4 years later, right? That's why a civil war started, right? Cause we rape them all the time?

"Combat operations in Iraq" are over because the insurgents left the government/political arena, the troops that are there now are making sure the Iraqis set up their democracy, If we stay, they could create a stable government, if we leave then they have no chance for that and everything we have done so far will be meaningless.

Yes, statistics should be weighed very lightly, The insurgent death rate could very likely be much higher than that, since we don't stick around to count their dead.

[PaFel]

Recoilless rifles?

Why would you need a friggin bigger calibre.

Range. That is all.

Bulls*it. Newest Barrett bullet with extanded range (accurate at range of 2500 meters) is smaller than .50. It's 10.57mm as I good remember.

[Dascoo]

Recoilless rifles?

Why would you need a friggin bigger calibre.

Range. That is all.

Bulls*it. Newest Barrett bullet with extanded range (accurate at range of 2500 meters) is smaller than .50. It's 10.57mm as I good remember.

Uhhhh the .416?

[PaFel]

Uhhhh the .416?

Lol. I wanted to dissagree but when I counted 10.57 to inches (to be sure) it was 0.416 ...

So yes. But in the program I watched they fired it from Barrett M99.

[Dascoo]

I bet it was Future weapons.