Originally Posted by Damien435

Even terrorists who died should be honored because they at least at the courage and faith to fight and die for a cause, something I see missing in all to many of my American compadres.

Noooooo.

Honorable enemies fight on the battlefield. Cowardly dogs who kill helpless civilians, behead construction workers from the safety of their basement, and pay out of work bums to burst out 30 bullets into a marketplace before running away. No, guantanamo is too light a punnishment. They should all be tortured for all they know and burned at the stake in a public square.

Originally Posted by Whispering Death

Noooooo.

Honorable enemies fight on the battlefield. Cowardly dogs who kill helpless civilians, behead construction workers from the safety of their basement, and pay out of work bums to burst out 30 bullets into a marketplace before running away. No, guantanamo is too light a punnishment. They should all be tortured for all they know and burned at the stake in a public square.

I don't think guerilla warfare is perticularaly dishonourable. They are combatants; the laws of armed conflict don't specify "honourable" in them. Now, as for the terrorist in Iraq, which I do believe should bje trated differently then the insurgents, I don't care what happens to them, hell, hand 'em over to the Isreali's.

Damien: the purpose of having a fully automatic grouping on an assault rifle is to avoid the inefficiancies in having designated "assault weapons" in the section/squad. I think it's been discussed on the forum before.

stay on-topic please.

I think a lot of people say they dont like the L94(SA 80). Could anyone explain why?(seeing as im in the UK and want to join the forces)

SA80 gets dirty real fast and jams frequently from what I've heard. It is also a monster to clean. I'm not too sure about the latest incarnations, but things have gotten better. I don't think you have to worry about anything except that the puny 5.56 round won't stop a terr with 1 shot - usually take a good double tap.
Thinking of going SAS?

Going SAS then u don't have to worry about the SA80 as they usually use the M-16 and its variants.
The SA80 is also a poor weapon in that it is strictly right handed. If you're a left handed shooter, you've got issues.

Going SAS....if i joined it wouldnt be though the army, id go into the RAF regiment first, or marines, if i had to go into the SAS the army way and i wanted to id leave and join the army instead and apply.

But if i get pilot(RAF) then thats not going to happen.

And anyway, the SAS is super hard to join, fitness is incredible, and you have to have done a few years service first.

It would be well worth it rhough. The rewards are fantastic. Nothing like a few month's suffering at Hereford...
also, you won't have to mess around with the SA80 - as mentioned - and that would be a nice dream. Since HK blew their brand of fairy dust on the Brit's infantry AR, it is better, but far from perfect. It is still a bullpup, it is still 5.56NATO and it UGGGLYYY
but it shoots-most of the time and is fairly accurate, as far as I've heard.

this issue keeps being raised in this topic, the original sa80 was unreliable, however the goverments invested alot of money upgrading it to the sa80a2 which has gone through many field tests and has won the respect of many soldiers.

research more before you insult a gun.

(ok ive never tried one before so if any serving soldier wants to correct me go ahead, however i have done a fair bit of reseach on the topic.)

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

Going SAS then u don't have to worry about the SA80 as they usually use the M-16 and its variants.
The SA80 is also a poor weapon in that it is strictly right handed. If you're a left handed shooter, you've got issues.

Not to nit pick; but they actually use a C 7 varient:P