Ill post the part that Jeff Cooper put in his Aug. 2002 Comentaries below. What do you all think? 9mm wimpy? 223 wimpy? or is this just bad press for these 2 cartriges? Should we all go to 45acp? 45 Colt? 454 ?(I cant hit beans with mine but when I do it smokes a soda can) Should we stock up on AKs? G-3? This should kick off some debates. Pistolcraft has been attracting a great deal of attention over there in the Afghan War. We have much information in these matters from people on the ground, and it seems that most of the material that we have assembled and analyzed during the twentieth century still holds true. Specifically a puny cartridge is a second rate choice, and our combat people up front are scrambling for the old faithful 1911 as best they can. According to Peckworth, who should know, the M9 pistol is not only underpowered but unreliable in heavy service, especially vulnerable to sand in the action. One special forces sergeant reports that it always takes two or more hits from the Parabellum cartridge to incapacitate a man. His report states, "Hitting with a 9 is like firing paint balls. I had to hit one al Qaeda who was coming at me four times before he dropped." Nor is the M16 doing well, either in stopping power or in functional reliability - to no one's surprise. We fought World War I with the 03, and we fought World War II with the Garand - whether that was wisdom and forethought, or simply chance, is a matter for history to decide - but the M16 is a step backward.