Glarmorgan Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 The AK 47 is a superb weapon which main advantage (leave the price tag aside) is its ability to operate under any conditions what so ever. I saw how it is dumped into a pit, covered in mud for 10 minutes, but after picking it out - still fired with no problem at all. Israel tried to make its own version of the AK, the Galil. It looked the same and was a part of the fighting forces for quite some time, but was abandoned for the M16 about 15 years ago. Even though the Galil was much heavier, I hated the M16. A couple of drops and you've in a "cease fire" position... Wait, are you Israeli? Nope. Kingdom of Judah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 (edited) Very funny FWIW, a few years ago the Singapore armed forces largely moved away from the M16 in favour of the new locally-designed SAR21. Guns, guns Edited December 24, 2013 by legov Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 Why would the Soviet Union have wanted to emulate the west? I'm not saying it isn't true, I'm intrigued with how that serve the purpose of their propaganda machine as it was then. The whole cold war thing was a beauty contest between the two systems: both sides made claims for themselves to support their own ideology. So Western capitalism claimed that it was a system which was a free paradise which allowed individual geniuses to invent and innovate, while the Soviets were bogged down and stifled by bureaucracy. The claims that the likes of Edison, Ford, Gates and Jobs, did it all on their own are generally exaggerate for the purposes of our ideology but the Soviets recognised the utility of the claim for their own system. So it was easy to see why the gun they had formed a committee to develop and manufacture might be named after the chairman of that committee rather than just the AK47. Every system needs its heroes. On the subject of Soviet heroes, the chap who usually separates proper socialists from theoretical ones (me) is Stakhanov. Heroes always serve a purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts