Soviet Paratroopers, Afghanistan 1986 & U.S. Check Point, Afghanistan 2012

No worries!

Personally I would rather field a HK 416 than the issued weapons. Taking the idea further a few more grains of powder and lead are more effective, always liked .243 Winchester. 

Now getting ammunition Fed-Ex'ed to the front maybe a logistic problem!

'Who ordered the brick of ammo and the pizza?'

Yeah I actually looked into and looks like the policy was repealed sometime in 2010 which was after I had heard that (sorry). I still haven't seen many images or heard too much of soldiers painting their weapons so I don't know if it's common practice.

The soviet troops look too 'bunched up' with large front profiles exposed. I like to see soldiers making maximum use of cover with just a gun barrel and a minimum amount of target presented.

The sniper would not be operating so close to the line troops.

The Soviet troops seem to 'shine' the clothing would be dull / dusty in that environment.

Interesting comment on the US troops, I did not realize field applied camouflage on a personal weapon was considered 'damage' by Uncle Sam.

If it prevented a few less bullets aimed at me the cost would seem insignificant, living to tell about it after the tour is priceless. Besides the Army's cost per weapon at their volume discount shaves a few Franklin's off each firearm.

They look very nice and both portray underdone subject matter, however I feel the soldiers in the US one look a bit out of place for checkpoint duty (they look like they're prepared for combat) perhaps a name change (Combat Patrol, Afghanistan 2012?) In addition if real US soldiers put desert camo on their rifles they'd be charged for the price of the rifle as damages.

But otherwise they look steller.