Smears, Identify this rifle

The one on the right. Seems to be a short barrel sniper rifle, given the scope and the necessity of carrying a carbine in addition to it… it is magazine fed, or is that chain fed in a clear cover? No rail system, no special gadgets I can see.

Israeli military. Nothing else I can see suggests it us otherwise. You only carry two weapons if the have separate capabilities, snipers usually carry standard issue shortrange weapons on them for when they have to engage short range, and usually has one to three guys attached to them for sighting and covering their flanks, or radio.

He isn’t in a standard infantry stance either, unless your stabilizing for a long range shot. Fact he is farther from the wall, and aiming perfectly horizontal, and his support is along the wall suggests he was the second in, and that a hallway or low window exists there… Otherwise the rifleman to his right would be crossing his lane of fire. The spray can art in the background suggests outside, but that would be moronic, as his rifle support is on the wrong side, despite having a slight advantage in seeing someone wind around the corner first, that’s less than a second and that person winding around would see the sniper and engage him first… this is especially a issue if this person is slowly taking the corner, not exposing himself or his barrel… He would see the sniper first, not his rifleman support.

It is harder to train a sniper than a rifleman, so I’m stumped why if he is sniper, why the rifleman hasn’t prepositioned himself to the other side?

So I guess that isn’t a sniper rifle… but if not, what is it? Why you need a scope and a additional rifle if that isn’t the case?

Fact his support is kneeling in front a stairwell is idiotic by the way… but apparently Israeli Special Forces think this is awesome to do.

Just noticed nobody wants to use their protective glasses either.

More and more I look at this, the more I think they are a bunch of bitches.

Really want to slap these guys.

All that fucking money spent on all those fucking weapons and the United States of America hasn’t actually won a war in over 70 fucking years!

Well, unless you count Grenada. :laughing:

Smears, who posts I can see, not a computer program yabbering about existentialism, who’s meaningless posts I can’t see.


I’m just keeping this thread in play until smears gets around to identifying the gun.

Now, back in the day when I played soldier, it was either an M-16 or a 50 cal machine gun. And a couple of grenades.

Alas, we still lost the war. Though, back then, admittedly, I was rooting for the other side. :wink:


I’d never put you on ignore Iam :wink:

I tried to put you on ignore, and Carleas, but it wouldn’t let me.

Sure they have. They won the War itself. They have military bases in almost every country.

Oh, yeah: the military industrial complex…the war economy.

The whole point of war.

Okay, your point.

Note to Turd:

In that context, really, what difference can it possibly make what we call a weapon?!

Dasein, dasein, dasein. Blah blah blah.

On the contrary, I will be the first to admit that dasein has very little to do with identifying that rifle.

Instead, it revolves far more around a discussion of the particular contexts in which that weapon might used in order to sustain the political agenda embedded in American foreign policy.

My point then being that different individuals will have different [conflicting] personal opinions about it.

And that, when we probe the possible reasons for this, I suggest in turn these opinions are rooted existentially in our individual lives: in our individual experiences, relationships, sources of knowledge and information, etc.

That, in other words, it does not appear feasible for a philosopher to construct an argument that transcends the political prejudices, circumvents the conflicting goods and establishes a frame of mind all reasonable men and women are obligated to espouse.

And it is this discussion that Turd wishes to avoid with me. He clicks me out of existence and does not have to be confronted with the points that I raise at all.

In other words: :animals-chickencatch:

Nam. Yep, that’s what we called it. Some Nam that rhymes with bomb, others Nam that rhymes with lamb.

“The World” then being everywhere else.

Thanks. And I promise not to hold that against you. :wink:

Did you just call that rifle an objectivist?

Bet you did, la la la la la.

The boot is a existentialist.

Helmet is Dasein.

Note to others…

Did he just thump me or what?! :laughing:

You dead Smears?

Post once for yes, twice for no.


After you have identified the name of the rifle, let’s identify the corporation that manufactured it. Then we can note any and all campaign contributions that it made to the politicians that started the war in the first place.

Which, from my own frame of mind, seems like a more substantive discussion.

Maybe we can even trick Turd into participating. :wink:

Are you testing Smears, or you really want to know?

P.S. The dude is aiming at Joker’s ass.

I really want to know. MOUT is a exact science, every variable exactly controlled. This picture is confusing to me, so knowing the gun type matters a lot.

Bad tactics is bad ethics, as it can lead to disasters in the scope of Just War Theory…

If the soldiers are maneuvering ineptly, get smacked up the head and kidnapped or killed more often, they will not only be less restrained in the use of force, but the state more likely to be more vindictive and brutal in counter measures to ensure people don’t mess with their soldiers, like bulldozing houses, issuing or tightening embargoes and checkpoints, use of more airstrikes vs ground forces… ground forces and converse and see eye to eye, know the necessity of judging a situation as harmless or not, or resolve situations manually yet not destructively… a drone strike just blows shit up.

Basically, contrary to the liberal instinct if military always bad, it is of the utmost vital importance that the military, when and where it exists, for it to be exceptionally well trained, and be trusted to deploy with minimal causulties to itself and others, minimizing destructive occurrences which lead to ever more worst cycles of violence, while doing their best to set things right, within their power, when they do.

I trust they think in that picture they just cleared that mechanical room behind them, as well as the hall behind… but however certain they are that the stairs are safe above, they are deeply fucking wrong to have the rifle support team member taking a knee with his side open up to attack.

I really want to know what kind of weapon this other guy is shooting… that is a stabilizing position for snipers, but that looks like no sniper rifle I’ve seen.

Don’t take this as saying I like the idea of military always being deployed, but as a option, it should be a exceptionally well trained and trusted option. One that will do society good to be relied on. Not a inept, bungling force of jokers and wannabes.

Looks like this one: … -Talk.html

It was approved for use against rock-throwing Palestinian protesters. … tion_in_wb