Petite women handle heavy recoil better then big dudes because there body moves with the recoil impulse. This is because they have less mass, where as a heavy dude will naturally resist the impulse and get black and blue marks after a trigger session. This is especially true for the standing position.
Except they'll be totally unable to hit the target. Oops.

Okay but we are fighting people that are shoot up full of drugs and they will not go down right away with a less powerful caliber. A veteran of Somalia told me about an indigenous drug that grows in the area. You grind it then mix it with hash, and smoke it.
What happens to you is a state of euphoria and a sense of invincibility, then you get anger rush, and you cant feel pain.
If you fight an insurgent on this drug you can shoot limbs of and he will not stop.
Thats why you want a big caliber so you can kill with double taps rather then bursts.

Shot placement and muzzle velocity make a far bigger difference than pure calibre. 7.62mm has a nasty tendency to go straight through the target - which does less damage than a high velocity 5.56mm. Low velocity 5.56mm (such as you get from the M-4 carbine) is far less damaging however. It is worth noting that all the British soldiers I've talked to who've been in Iraq regard the 5.56mm as very deadly indeed, and have nothing bad to say about it. Those who have used various calibres tend to think it's as deadly at short range as 7.62mm - possibly more so. It's worth noting that the SA80 uses a 20" barrel, which gives relatively high muzzle velocities.

What a lame an over used argument for heavy varmint calibers, which is precisely what the .223 (5.56 NATO) really is.
You can buy 30 rounders for the FN FAL.
The HK 417 which is another battle rifle, they have 50 round drums so you need more rounds? Thats your problem solved

Actually that's your problem made much, much worse. Mag changes take at worst 10 seconds, and at "sustained fire" you're only firing a shot every six anyway. All adding an oversided mag does is make your rifle heavier, which makes it harder to hold in the aim position and increases levels of fatigue.
The limit is on carrying rounds, in their impact on the total weight carried by a soldier. There is a limit on the amount that a soldier can realistically carry into battle which has remained pretty much unchanged since the days of the Roman legions. This is set by the need to be able to run fast, over rough ground in short bursts for a sustained period of time. If you add something (e.g. body armour) then something else has to give or performance is way down and the soldier is less likely to survive. You can carry nearly double the number of 5.56mm compared to 7.62mm.
You clearly don't understand what suppressive fire is either, or how long you may have to be doing it for. This isn't just a shot every now and again to keep the enemy's heads down, but a steady rate of fire (one round every second from an infantry section would not be unusual) from the point the firefight is won to the point the breaking assault section starts fighting through the enemy position. Prior to that the rate of fire will be 3-4 times that to win the firefight. You're looking at over 600 rounds per man per hour in that situation. While this is barely possible with 5.56mm (the Platoon Sergeant will be about with ammo replen) it isn't possible with 7.62mm. This restricts your mobility, the length a firefight can last and snarls up your logistic chain.

So what if they got some inspiration from the FN F2000, If FN can't prove in a court of law that Kel-Tec stole anything FN can E'ff themselves.
Kel-Tec is famous for there CCW pistols. I have never heard anyone in person or in any gun magazines including the most reputable Gun Tests ever knock Kel-Tec.

Right, so a company that gets good write ups in US gun magazines against one that pretty much invented the modern assault rifle and certainly invented the design in question. Tough one that...
All that is necessary for the triumph of New Labour is for good men to say nothing whilst CGS.