How the AK-47 Rewrote the Rules of Modern Warfare

[CougarKing]

I doubt anyone saw this coming.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8353427.stm

Over 100 million AK-47s are believed to be in circulation


The inventor of arguably the world's most infamous machine-gun wanted to be a poet in his youth, he has revealed.
Russian celebrities and politicians have been paying tribute to Mikhail Kalashnikov, who turned 90 on Tuesday, at a Kremlin reception.
Mr Kalashnikov is the inventor of the AK-47 assault rifle, beloved of guerrillas around the world.
At the ceremony, President Dimitry Medvedev handed Mr Kalashnikov the prestigious Hero of Russia award.
Accepting the award, he fired off a brief patriotic poem he wrote.

(...)


"There are many bad poets out there without me. I went along a different path," he said.
(...) 

 

[CEEBEE501]

I found this the other day and thought some people here might find in interesting, The author of the article, C. J. Chivers,  also wrote the book  "The Gun".

article:
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/11/ff_ak47/

book:
http://www.amazon.ca/Gun-C-J-Chivers/dp/0743270762/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1288887029&sr=1-1

 

[a_majoor]

Uber cheap and reliable infantry weapons and other commercial technology adapted to military use (i.e. cell phones, the Internet) may be bringing a change to warfare almost as great as the introduction of pikes and crossbows (and later gunpowder) in the 14 and early 1500's.

The aristocratic warrior who trained from childhood to use weapons and armour was swept away by rulers who could raise mass armies of peasants, since these new weapons were quite effective with minimal training, and masses of peasants were not only cheaper than warriors, but could be quickly and easily replaced. A Knight, Samurai or Janissary required literally a lifetime of training, and replacing one of them took a generation.

In today's context, western military forces with their expensively trained soldiers and masses of equipment would represent the knights and warrior classes, while insurgents with AK-47's, RPG's and IED's are the new peasants.

We still have lots of advantages, most especially a productive society and massive logistical apparatus which can project and sustain power around the world, but on a tactical level, these new "peasants" can meet formed bodies of professional soldiers on an almost equal basis.

 

[vonGarvin]

We still have lots of advantages, most especially a productive society and massive logistical apparatus which can project and sustain power around the world, but on a tactical level, these new "peasants" can meet formed bodies of professional soldiers on an almost equal basis.

I disagree.  These "peasants" are exactly that, and we don't need a generation to train a soldier: we need only a few months, and the skill level of our soldiers is infinite compared to the peasants.  And we can call upon the power of our Air Forces to smite those "peasants".

On another plane, our soldiers are infinite compared to the "rabble" on the moral plane.  We don't just kill, rather, we bring prosperity and hope to the people: just don't get in our way, or we'll take you out.

 

[CombatDoc]

In today's context, western military forces with their expensively trained soldiers and masses of equipment would represent the knights and warrior classes, while insurgents with AK-47's, RPG's and IED's are the new peasants.

We still have lots of advantages, most especially a productive society and massive logistical apparatus which can project and sustain power around the world, but on a tactical level, these new "peasants" can meet formed bodies of professional soldiers on an almost equal basis.

Yup, and we saw how well that worked out tactically for the "peasants" during Afghanistan operations in 2006/2007 (e.g Op Medusa).