American vs German Weapons - Page 4 - M14 Forum

M14 Forum


American vs German Weapons

This is a discussion on American vs German Weapons within the Military History forums, part of the Armed Services category; [quote=ColdWarPigGnR;2503346] Originally Posted by Whatsinaname181 Dude, no. There are more (unfabricated) accounts of German soldiers conducting themselves with honor and integrity than not. Tell that ...


Go Back   M14 Forum > Armed Services > Military History

42Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Moderator Tools Display Modes

Old February 5th, 2017, 01:53 PM   #46
Lifer
 
Whatsinaname181's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 3,536
[quote=ColdWarPigGnR;2503346]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whatsinaname181 View Post
Dude, no.

There are more (unfabricated) accounts of German soldiers conducting themselves with honor and integrity than not.


Tell that to the Russians, and the Gypsies, and the Poles, and the Czech's, the soldiers of Malmedy, and the Jews.

Here we go. Never a level moral playing field, is it? A bit of cognitive dissonance. It seems we can never have a discussion about WW2 without some kind of finger pointing, German bashing, etc etc. from guys who've never studied anything real outside the History Channel.

Lets ask the Russians how they were treating their populace pre and post invasion. (to the tune of 20+ mil deaths) Lets ask the Russians how they treated ethnic Volga Germans and Reich Germans during their advance to Germany?

Do you know where Himmler got his racial ideas?... The United States. Eugenics.

The Poles were murdering ethnic Germans prior to the outbreak of WW2.

We interned Japanese and even ethnic Germans here in the states, and saturation bombed 2 countries civilian populace day and night.

Never mind that Eisenhower killed Germans after the war in internment camps. Left to starve and freeze out in the cold. The Imperial Japanese were very harsh and brutal as well, much worse than the Germans. But, we never talk about these things, and only Germans did bad things, etc etc.

But I digress:

That being said, I believe the average German infantryman was no more, as you say, "sadistic, racist, meth heads" anymore than American GI's in the Pacific or European theaters. In their eyes, most were fighting Bolshevism, or simply doing their duty when called. I can respect that. War is hell, and bad and often unintended things happen in war.

Ive spent a bit of time studying the Wehrmacht, probably because there are a great many similarities and things that our army picked up from them and because as an Infantry NCO, I feel its important to understand military history. Prior to the disintegration of their moral, cohesion and ability to amass resources and manpower- the average German Infantryman was well trained, disciplined, motivated and adaptable. They maintained a very high kill to death ratio, even in retreat. Most were regular guys doing what they had to do. Some fought for years on multiple fronts.

They aren't responsible for their state policy any more than US Soldiers are now days and history is written by the victor.

Whatsinaname181 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old February 5th, 2017, 02:35 PM   #47
Platoon Sergeant
 
ColdWarPigGnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Southeast, PA
Posts: 331
"Nuts."

Thanks from Rich D
ColdWarPigGnR is offline  
Old February 5th, 2017, 02:51 PM   #48
Old Salt
 
lysander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by M11293 View Post
Lysander,

I actually did not know how extensive US submarine development was post WWI and Pearl Harbor, so I stand corrected. Virtually all US submarines were used in the Pacific Theater, but it was in fact, German submarine technology and weapons that were first used widely and effectively in any navy, and served as the basis for most subsequent submarine development.

But your points 2, 3 and 4 aren't correct; I have no knowledge if 1 is correct or not.

Yes, the scientists I listed were not all German nationals. I should have clarified.

Einstein himself lived in a number of countries throughout Europe, even though he was born in Germany. I saw his home in Bern, Switzerland, which was really cool; he maintained his Swiss nationality upon finally leaving Belgium for the US -some think this is why he was able to leave much more easily than other Jews, as Switzerland maintained "neutrality" albeit bankrolling the Nazis. The other scientists were forced out by the ever expanding Nazi/fascist regimes, which included Germany (Einstein), Italy (Fermi), Hungary (Teller/Wigner), and eventually Poland (Ulam).

Einstein left in 1933 after Hitler took power, Nazis raided his house, set his books on fire, etc; I guess this is one way to be "asked to leave." Of the scientists I listed, I think all were Jewish or had Jewish family of some kind. Maybe "flee" from Nazi extermination of Jews would be better than "defect." I don't think the Nazis asked Jews to "leave the country" before they exterminated them via the Holocaust. Nazis, from my understanding, made it very difficult for Jews to obtain travel permits for outside travel from Germany.

All I was saying is the expansion of Nazi/fascist sentiments greatly benefited the Allied pursuit of atomic weapons; this is widely accepted fact. It was German scientists that first discovered fission in 1938, so your statement about German scientists denying the "possibility of an atom bomb" is incorrect. Fission = Boom.

Yes, the Me 163 Komet was maybe not the best example of German rocket technology and aircraft. A better example would be the Me 262, which was also German and the first of its kind. Again, Nazi rocket technology was way ahead of Allied varieties. I see the B26 was the Marauder, an American design? And the Mosquito was British? Wiki says the Ho 229 had a range of 620 miles, like you said, though it has no source reference? Greyfalcon.us says the Ho 229 could fly from Germany to New York City and back without refueling, which was the Nazi Ministry of Aviation (RLM) requirement?

I digress. No more urinating match for me.

'MERICA!
The problem is fission does not automatically equal boom. Thinking that "fission=boom" shows a profound lack of understanding the physics involved in an atomic bomb. Getting a uncontrolled chain reaction to initiate and not fizzle out is quite difficult. There are many reasons, one of the big ones is U-238 is enough of a moderator to prevent U-235 from reacting with any rapidity. The rather simple diagrams of atomic bombs belie the rather complicated nature of these things, even the relatively simple Thin Man Bomb. Which is why the Congo (with huge reserves of uranium) does not sit on a huge stockpile of atomic bombs.

The Ho 229 was built to Hilter's "1000, 1000, 1000", or "3x1000" requirements. These were a set of requirement for a bomber that could carry 1000 kg (2200 lbs) of bombs, 1000 kilometers (620 miles), at 1000 kph (620 mph). There were half a dozen or so aircraft designs submitted against this requirement. I will leave it to you to research the "3x1000" bombers.

Greyfalcon correctly states the Ho 229 had a projected top speed of 620 mph (neither one of the two Ho 229s actually met their target speed with the Jumo 004s, they might have with the higher performance BMW 003s).

You are confusing the Ho 229 with the much larger, and far less developed Horton H.XVIII, or Horton's entry in the "Amerika Bomber" project. The H.XVIII was a much larger aircraft that never made it past the preliminary design stage, and would not have been as "wooden". There were also a number of proposals from many aircraft manufacturers submitted against the Amerika Bomber project as well.

"asked to leave"... That was the whole point of the 1933 law, to make it as unpleasant as possible for Jewish people to remain in Germany, french walking someone to the door is one way to "ask someone to leave".

By the way, Germany encouraged Jews to emigrate, not only did they pass laws to make like difficult and encourage anti-Semitic behavior, they passed laws making it easier for Jews to leave the country, albeit impoverished, at least until 1941, when the war made it difficult for them to find places to go. (https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article...uleId=10007455)


Last edited by lysander; February 5th, 2017 at 07:34 PM.
lysander is offline  
 
Old February 5th, 2017, 03:05 PM   #49
Platoon Sergeant
 
ColdWarPigGnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Southeast, PA
Posts: 331
[quote=Whatsinaname181;2503490]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdWarPigGnR View Post


Here we go. Never a level moral playing field, is it? A bit of cognitive dissonance. It seems we can never have a discussion about WW2 without some kind of finger pointing, German bashing, etc etc. from guys who've never studied anything real outside the History Channel.

Lets ask the Russians how they were treating their populace pre and post invasion. (to the tune of 20+ mil deaths) Lets ask the Russians how they treated ethnic Volga Germans and Reich Germans during their advance to Germany?

Do you know where Himmler got his racial ideas?... The United States. Eugenics.

The Poles were murdering ethnic Germans prior to the outbreak of WW2.

We interned Japanese and even ethnic Germans here in the states, and saturation bombed 2 countries civilian populace day and night.

Never mind that Eisenhower killed Germans after the war in internment camps. Left to starve and freeze out in the cold. The Imperial Japanese were very harsh and brutal as well, much worse than the Germans. But, we never talk about these things, and only Germans did bad things, etc etc.

But I digress:

That being said, I believe the average German infantryman was no more, as you say, "sadistic, racist, meth heads" anymore than American GI's in the Pacific or European theaters. In their eyes, most were fighting Bolshevism, or simply doing their duty when called. I can respect that. War is hell, and bad and often unintended things happen in war.

Ive spent a bit of time studying the Wehrmacht, probably because there are a great many similarities and things that our army picked up from them and because as an Infantry NCO, I feel its important to understand military history. Prior to the disintegration of their moral, cohesion and ability to amass resources and manpower- the average German Infantryman was well trained, disciplined, motivated and adaptable. They maintained a very high kill to death ratio, even in retreat. Most were regular guys doing what they had to do. Some fought for years on multiple fronts.

They aren't responsible for their state policy any more than US Soldiers are now days and history is written by the victor.
Actually I have couple of degrees, via the GI Bill. But you don't know me at all, so how would know?

We were talking about German and US weapons during WWII. I postulated that the ultimate weapon was the soldier, and that ours were better. IMO, the German were sadistic in their treatment of conquered peoples, I think history bears this out (there's that whole master race thing), slave labor, the final solution, etc., and, well, they did a bunch of meth.

I'd gladly talk about pre war war Europe, early 20th century American Progressivism, eugenics, etc. but that would be off topic, and its game time.

Prost,

ColdWarPigGnR is offline  
Old February 5th, 2017, 05:49 PM   #50
Lifer
 
Whatsinaname181's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 3,536
[quote=ColdWarPigGnR;2503746]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whatsinaname181 View Post

Actually I have couple of degrees, via the GI Bill. But you don't know me at all, so how would know?

We were talking about German and US weapons during WWII. I postulated that the ultimate weapon was the soldier, and that ours were better. IMO, the German were sadistic in their treatment of conquered peoples, I think history bears this out (there's that whole master race thing), slave labor, the final solution, etc., and, well, they did a bunch of meth.

I'd gladly talk about pre war war Europe, early 20th century American Progressivism, eugenics, etc. but that would be off topic, and its game time.

Prost,

Yeah, we were talking about German vs American weapons and you chimed in with some history channel meth soldier German sadistic crap so....

Cool story about your degrees though.


Quote:
Originally Posted by lysander View Post
Wrong "42"...

The M60 is an FG-42 with a belt feed, not anything like an MG-42.

Proto-type T161:

Lysander, this never dawned on me! I always thought the MG42 basis never made sense. This makes sense.

Not a fan of the M60 though. Ive always had a lot of love for the M240. Never let me down, save some worn feeder pawls.

Whatsinaname181 is offline  
Old February 5th, 2017, 08:30 PM   #51
Squad Leader
 
M11293's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: 10,000+ Friggin Lakes
Posts: 232
Lysander,

You have lost the general basis of my argument and its pretty obvious you never intend to understand, but would rather bicker over ancillary details (such as the example of scaled up versions of the Ho 229) instead of the idea that the Germans, not the US or its Allies, proposed and designed this general technology. This general Ho 229 technology served as the basis of our modern B2 bomber, which also took advantage of the radar negating form first designed by the Germans. That is all I am saying.

I never said anything about the complexity of chain reactions via fission to create weapons. I am a chemical engineer and I also know a thing or two about nuclear chemistry and physics, though I don't have a degree in anything nuclear; assuming I "have a profound lack of understanding" on the subject is poor form since I gave you nothing in my statements to make this claim -fight the argument, not the man. I know the Germans were the first to discover fission, but it was Fermi and friends who confirmed the German discovery and then pushed the German discovery towards self-sustaining nuclear reactions in US programs. We beat them to it, but used their seminal technology, and brains, to get there. Again, we used German science, and Axis scientists, to make the atom bomb.

The idea you created that German scientists, despite discovering fission in 1938 before anyone else, denied the possibility of nuclear weapons is flatly incorrect (you stated this -I didn't). It is also logically inconsistent if one considers how research actually works; people don't discover something ground breaking and then deny the possibility of unproven, untried theory/experiments within a few years. Virtually every country, including the USSR, was aware of the potential of nuclear fission and its role in weaponry. The USSR nuclear program was very close to our Manhattan Project.

I don't understand your argument on Jewish persecution at all, or how it relates to your argument on German vs American technology. Dachau, for example, was established in 1933 (same year Einstein bounced to the US) from what I have read, with Jews entering the camp mostly in 1935 and onward. Sure, some Jews (Einstein, as mentioned previously) were forced out of Axis nations via intimidation, raids, book burning, harassment; others were placed in camps. Encouraging Jews to leave in these circumstances is very different than your "asked to leave" statement. Jews were forced to leave (early thirties) or die (mid thirties and forties). This is why US nuclear technology benefited so much from Axis nationals. You have yet to explain why this widely accepted historical fact some how aides your argument.

Again, we used German science, and Axis scientists to make the atom bomb; fortunately, we employed Axis scientists, who were generally Jewish, to our cause.

We, and other nations, used German technology, such as firearms, submarines, airplanes, rockets, nuclear weapons, etc. to our benefit after WWI, during WWII, and long after.

Thank God for the Jews! Seriously!

Thanks from Ridgerunner79

Last edited by M11293; February 5th, 2017 at 09:46 PM.
M11293 is offline  
Old February 6th, 2017, 09:56 AM   #52
Old Salt
 
lysander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by M11293 View Post
You have lost the general basis of my argument and its pretty obvious you never intend to understand, but would rather bicker over ancillary details (such as the example of scaled up versions of the Ho 229) instead of the idea that the Germans, not the US or its Allies, proposed and designed this general technology. This general Ho 229 technology served as the basis of our modern B2 bomber, which also took advantage of the radar negating form first designed by the Germans. That is all I am saying.
I initially just corrected you by informing you that the Ho 229 could not fly a bombing mission to New York (unless it took off from Portland ME), you are the one that never bothered to check your own facts, and tried to say I was wrong. (Amusingly, using a website that shows that the Ho 229 was a very short range aircraft.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by M11293 View Post
I never said anything about the complexity of chain reactions via fission to create weapons. I am a chemical engineer and I also know a thing or two about nuclear chemistry and physics, though I don't have a degree in anything nuclear; assuming I "have a profound lack of understanding" on the subject is poor form since I gave you nothing in my statements to make this claim -fight the argument, not the man. I know the Germans were the first to discover fission, but it was Fermi and friends who confirmed the German discovery and then pushed the German discovery towards self-sustaining nuclear reactions in US programs. We beat them to it, but used their seminal technology, and brains, to get there. Again, we used German science, and Axis scientists, to make the atom bomb.

The idea you created that German scientists, despite discovering fission in 1938 before anyone else, denied the possibility of nuclear weapons is flatly incorrect (you stated this -I didn't). It is also logically inconsistent if one considers how research actually works; people don't discover something ground breaking and then deny the possibility of unproven, untried theory/experiments within a few years. Virtually every country, including the USSR, was aware of the potential of nuclear fission and its role in weaponry. The USSR nuclear program was very close to our Manhattan Project.
Paul Harteck
Quote:
“We could not have produced the bomb”
Erich Bagge
Quote:
“I think it is absurd for Weizsacker to say he did not want the [bomb project] to succeed . . . It was impossible . . . to separate the isotopes necessary for making an atomic bomb in Germany.
These are quotes from German Physicists interred in Great Britain after the war. Their conversations amongst themselves were secretly taped in an attempt to find out if and where there were more Nazi nuclear research facilities, or other people that might be of use to further British nuclear research. Some of their quotes are above, if you want all of the transcripts, look up: Operation Epsilon: The Farm Hall Transcripts, by Sir Charles Frank. It was published by the University of California, Berkley and University of California, Los Angeles in 1993.

Heisenberg has over the years offered conflicting statements on Nazi nuclear weapons research, ranging from:
“We did not think it was possible,”
“We did not have the resources to make it possible,”
“We didn’t want then to have atomic bombs, so we told them they weren’t possible,” (also, a statement made by Weizsacker)
“We were trying to convince the Allies we weren’t making an atomic bomb so they would not make an atomic bomb…”

Your statement that discovering fission automatically means you think an atomic bomb is possible, is wrong. There were many physicists, many of them on the Manhattan Project that had doubts as to whether the concept would work as theorized. The consensus of most of the German physicists working in the field under the Nazis was that it was not possible to get a working atomic bomb, either because they didn’t think it would work as advertised (a ‘fizzle’ versus a real atomic blast), or because they didn’t have the resources to make it possible. It either case, they did not vigorously pursue the idea.

So, there would have been no bomber, H.XVIII or otherwise dropping atomic bombs on New York.

The problem is the number of free neutrons and the energy they carry. If you just slap together a super-critical mass of uranium 235, the best you should get, according to the math, is a big ‘pop’ of a few hundred pounds of TNT and a scattering of your uranium. To make a real atomic bomb you have get a whole bunch of free neutrons loose inside the nuclear fuel, get almost all of them to hit another fuel atom with enough force to break it apart, and contain all the freshly released neutrons to repeat the cycle, over and over, and at the same time, contain all that energy long enough to allow most all the fuel atoms to fission before the mass breaks up into multiple sub-critical masses.

In theory it sounds easy, but then the translation from theory to practice is always more complicated that people believe, especially if some bright folks worked out how to do it before you got there.

The other thing is that of the nearly 500 eminent scientists working on the Manhattan project, only 20 to 75 were Jewish refugees, depending on how you define “eminent”, in any case, less than 15%.

“it was Fermi and friends”, yeah, “his friends were:

Leo Szilard, Samuel Allison, Harold Angew, Herbert L. Anderson, Norman Hillberry, Thomas Brill, Eugene T. Booth, John Dunning, G. Norris Glasoe, Harold Lichtenberger, Alfred Nier, Warren Nyer, Robert Nobels, Francis G. Slack, William Strum, Alber Wattenberg, George Weil, Marvin Wilkening, Martin D. Whitaker, Leona Woods, and Walter Zinn,

All but two of which were US-born.

To say that all the success of the Manhattan Project is only due to displaced German Jewish refugees is a stretch indeed, and does a serious disserves to the American and British men and women that worked on the project.

Quote:
Originally Posted by M11293 View Post
I don't understand your argument on Jewish persecution at all, or how it relates to your argument on German vs American technology. Dachau, for example, was established in 1933 (same year Einstein bounced to the US) from what I have read, with Jews entering the camp mostly in 1935 and onward. Sure, some Jews (Einstein, as mentioned previously) were forced out of Axis nations via intimidation, raids, book burning, harassment; others were placed in camps. Encouraging Jews to leave in these circumstances is very different than your "asked to leave" statement. Jews were forced to leave (early thirties) or die (mid thirties and forties). This is why US nuclear technology benefited so much from Axis nationals. You have yet to explain why this widely accepted historical fact some how aides your argument.

Again, we used German science, and Axis scientists to make the atom bomb; fortunately, we employed Axis scientists, who were generally Jewish, to our cause.
This was just a comment on the word “defected”; I was just showing that it was an extremely poor choice of words.

Quote:
Originally Posted by M11293 View Post
We, and other nations, used German technology, such as firearms, submarines, airplanes, rockets, nuclear weapons, etc. to our benefit after WWI, during WWII, and long after.
Firearms – French or English invention.
Submarines – Invented by the Americans and perfected by the British, the Germans made a few improvements, but by and large the US and Britain have done the most in this field.
Airplane – American invention.
Rockets – Goddard, and American.
Nuclear weapons – Mostly American work with a few brilliant Hungarians (most os the refugees were from Hungary.

As an aside: Dachau was indeed opened in 1933, but the primary purpose of the camp was for interment of Communists, Social Democrats, trade unionists, and other political opponents of the Nazi regime. Generally speaking the only Jewish prisoners were only there due to their association with one of the above groups. In 1938, the interment of Jewish people into Dachau just because they were Jewish increased, but most were released if they could prove that they were going to emigrate. The automatic “or die” bit didn’t come about until late 1941-early 1942 with the implementation of the “final solution”.

Thanks from Whatsinaname181
lysander is offline  
Old February 9th, 2017, 11:17 PM   #53
Squad Leader
 
M11293's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: 10,000+ Friggin Lakes
Posts: 232
Historians could go on about this for eternity. You can correct all you want on forum banter; publish something, cite it, and then I will cite you.

Again, the Ho 229 and its varsities were used as the basis for the long range Ho 229 version Amerika Bomber you mentioned. This does not negate the fact that their technology (i.e. wing based platform, efficiency improvements, and radar negating technology) changed US and world aviation technological directions.

I, admittedly, don't know much about Paul Hartek or Erich Bagge. You have mentioned US scientists relative to many others from other countries. Please recognize that Einstein, Fermi, Teller/Wigner, Ulam, and Heisenberg (Breaking Bad is amazing by the way) were far more famous than most, as well as many of the host you cited combined. Keep in mind, Einstein revealed E = mc^2 in 1905. This discovery was not American; likewise, the 1938 nuclear fission discovery was not American. Also, recognize The Manhattan Project utilized dozens upon dozens of scientists, as you mentioned; i would hope most were American. From Vandterbilt references:

"During the closing days of the conflict, American and British intelligence officials decided to inter many of Germany’s leading scientists at a place known as Farm Hall, in England. Their purpose was simple. By secretly placing microphones in the German quarters, they hoped to learn the extent of the German atomic bomb project from conversations between the detainees. These recorded conversations provide insight into their reaction to the news of the dropping of the atomic bombs on August 6th and August 9th. Heisenberg’s meeting with Bohr during the war, coupled with these recordings and later statements, led many historians to conclude that Germany could have produced the bomb, but that German scientists managed to delay these efforts. This conclusion has become known as the “Heisenberg Version.”

Also Heisenberg stated in 1943, "It is possible that Germany will have, by the end of this year, enough material accumulated to make a large number of gadgets [atomic bombs] which they will release at the same time on England, Russia, and this country."

In summary, in 1942, Nazi leadership redirected their nuclear weapon project to more short term research, as their resources were very stretched at this point in the war. This is documented in many places.

Defect? 6 million dead Jews, and 6 million dead others? This is reason to "defect" (i.e. to disown allegiance to one's country and take up residence in another).

No. Your extrapolation of the French and English as the first inventors of the firearm is false. If we want to grab at straws, and reach back into the bowels of pre-WWII history, we should look to the Chinese as the first inventors of guns in world history. Your argument's faulty logic holds true for technological advancements in firearms (AK47 -the first modern assault rifle; the FG42 and its eventual development into the M60, which you stated), submarines (the Germans dominated this technology well before Americans ever did anything with it -WWI), airplanes/rockets (Ho 229, Me 262, V2), and nuclear weapons (discovery of fission in 1938). This is fact if you reflect on 21st century science, and the influence German technology has had to this day. Let us not reflect on world history (the Chinese and the Wright brothers) everywhere to make distant connections.

I am done with this thread.


Last edited by M11293; February 9th, 2017 at 11:50 PM.
M11293 is offline  
Old February 10th, 2017, 04:46 AM   #54
Scout Sniper
 
JoshN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sunnyvale, Tx.
Posts: 821

Awards Showcase

Really cool vids!

I'd like to think the better weapon is the one that the user has more familiarity, accessibility, available support w/parts and practice.

JoshN is offline  
Old February 10th, 2017, 06:14 AM   #55
Old Salt
 
Rich D's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Big Sky Country
Posts: 1,368
Bottom line. Which is the better? :The German weapons were made by slaves. The American weapons were made by free men and women, who's brothers, sisters, sons and daughters were fighting to keep them free. We had the advantage.

Thanks from Red Leg
Rich D is offline  
Old February 10th, 2017, 07:49 AM   #56
Automatic Rifleman
 
janderso57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Paradise, CA
Posts: 131
Great stuff Tommo!
Thanks for sharing.
I love youtube for all the old military training films.
I wonder how many GI's fell for all that crap?
This a link to the M1 Garand film. Enjoy

Thanks from Whatsinaname181
janderso57 is offline  
Reply

  M14 Forum > Armed Services > Military History

Moderator Tools
Display Modes


Similar M14 Forum Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
German Last Ditch Weapons Herr Trigger Military History 5 October 7th, 2014 11:39 PM
A Swiss, a Belgian, a German, an American -- well you get it! Ric2504 Handguns 10 December 17th, 2012 09:43 AM
Democrat 2012 platform calls for gun reforms TampaSsgt Gun Rights 68 September 14th, 2012 05:35 PM
Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban Seventh Fleet Gun Rights 48 August 15th, 2012 09:52 AM
eric holder/assault weapons ban thomastred Gun Rights 0 March 18th, 2009 04:35 PM



Top Gun Sites Top Sites List