In 2008 Afghanistan firefight, US weapons failed

[snopes]

Eight years into the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, do U.S. armed forces have the best guns money can buy?

Despite the military's insistence that they do, a small but vocal number of troops in Afghanistan and Iraq has complained that the standard-issue M4 rifles need too much maintenance and jam at the worst possible times.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091011/...apons_failures

[jimmy101_again]

There is no such thing as the best gun money can buy. Since there is no such thing as the "best gun".

Soldiers have complained about (and had problems with) the M-16 and it's variants for more than 40 years. It has a high rate of fire, excellent range and is light in weight. The cost of those characteristics are that it is more sensitive to dirt than are simpler weapons. The simpler weapons are generally heavier and somewhat less accurate.