The SAW is not for suppression. It, indirect fires, and hand grenades are for killing. Rifles are for suppression; they're the "jab". Belt fed weapons and shrap

The SAW is not for suppression. It, indirect fires, and hand grenades are for killing. Rifles are for suppression; they're the "jab". Belt fed weapons and shrapnel are the "right cross" and "hooks". You would know this if your knowledge on the topic came from operational experience vs. magazines. USMC doctrine in this regard hasn't changed since at least Vietnam. Please, stop pretending to be combat savvy because you got to hang out with the FilMars in the late 80's / early 90's. No shame in that, but please stop trying to BS everyone with the tough talk. HN is better than this. > If every squad had long(er) range capability, this would go a long way to helping squads not have to call in LR support or use the SAW so much. Are you arguing that >5.56mm precision rifle fires are fungible with belt fed weapons? That having more of the former available means less need for the latter? Seriously? One concept that appears not to register with you is the USMC's ability and tendency to task organize and adapt in forward deployed environments. DMRs were de facto standard 1 per squad in AFG post around 2010 but were rarely if ever used in OIF (not including the occasional addition of an actual STA team to patrols). These decisions were and are normally made at the company level by young Marines in the field, not by gun nut keyboard warriors on a couch back home.