US Army Considers Adopting an Interim Battle Rifle in 7.62NATO: eventually adopt 6.5

[stanc]

Stan, none of this works against my position.

I am fine with militaries using lead, steel, copper, or Gummi Bears in their bullets as long as they choose their bullet construction to meet military performance parameters.
I am fine with militaries substituting a material in their bullets to conserve strategic resources.
I am NOT fine with the construction and performance of military ammunition being trumped by the concerns of politically correct environmentalists.

It hasn't been trumped. The lead-free M855A1 bullet has better lethality and penetration than the lead-core M855 it replaced.

Pretty sure the Russians don't use steel-core bullets because a tree-hugger got elected and mandated it.

No doubt. The point is, the use of steel-core bullets by the US and Germany when fighting the greatest war in history, and the post-WWII use of steel-core bullets by Russia, China, and many other countries, shows that bullets do not need to be of lead-core construction in order to get the desired ballistic performance and terminal effects.

Or are you just upset because the 123gr weight that you'd prefer for a 6.5 Grendel military bullet seems impractical with lead-free construction?