Pakistan v India

[Outlaw Yogi]

in many other parts of the world where AK variants are common you'd stick with 7.62X39mm aka Ruski .308 (which the Chinese use in their 'Type10/SKS).

CORRECTION: 'Type 56/SKS ... not Type 10.

ADDITION: SKS was designed by Simonov in 1941, AK was designed by Kalashnikov in 1947.
Russia sold the SKS design to China. Used as PLA infantry service weapon.
SKS has 10 round verticle stack mag with hinge.
SKK is same rifle but uses AK style 30 round banana clip/mag ... Manufactured by Norico (North China arms Company) and sold commercially to civilians via California.

AKS and AKM are both AK variants. One has a folding stock and the other is a cheap arse version made from pressed rather tham milled/machined parts ... I forget which is which.

[Outlaw Yogi]

Correct.

Thankyou.

My mistake.

Yes.

I will amend my statement, "not used in modern war".

"modern war"
https://www.google.com/search?q=modern+ ... e&ie=UTF-8

What is the first modern war?
It has been something of a commonplace to describe the American Civil War as the first modern war. Following the First World War, military theorists such as J.F.C. Fuller began to argue that the manner in which the Confederacy had been crushed foreshadowed the methods of 20th-century warfare.

For clarity's sake >

Modern warfare
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_warfare

Modern warfare is warfare using the concepts, methods, and military technology that have come into use during and after World Wars I and II. The concepts and methods have assumed more complex forms of the 19th- and early-20th-century antecedents, largely due to the widespread use of highly advanced information technology, and combatants must modernize constantly to preserve their battle worthiness.[1] Although total war was thought to be the form of international conflicts from the experience of the French Revolutionary Wars to World War II, the term no longer describes warfare in which a belligerent use all of its resources to destroy the enemy's organized ability to engage in war. The practice of total war which had been in use for over a century, as a form of war policy, has been changed dramatically with greater awareness of tactical, operational, and strategic battle information.

War in modern times has been the inclusion of civilians and civilian infrastructure as targets in destroying the enemy's ability to engage in war.[disputed – discuss] The targeting of civilians developed from two distinct theories.[citation needed] The first theory was that if enough civilians were killed, factories could not function. The second theory was that if civilians were killed, the enemy would be so demoralized that it would have no ability to wage further war.[citation needed] However, UNICEF reports that civilian fatalities are down from 20 percent prior to 1900 AD to less than 5 percent of fatalities in the wars beginning in the 1990s.

With the invention of nuclear weapons, the concept of full-scale war carries the prospect of global annihilation, and as such conflicts since WWII have by definition been "low intensity" conflicts,[2] typically in the form of proxy wars fought within local regional confines, using what are now referred to as "conventional weapons," typically combined with the use of asymmetric warfare tactics and applied use of intelligence.

More recently, the US Department of Defense introduced a concept of battlespace as the integrated information management of all significant factors that impact on combat operations by armed forces for the military theatre of operations, including information, air, land, sea, and space. It includes the environment, factors, and conditions that must be understood to successfully apply combat power, protect the force, or complete the mission. This includes enemy and friendly forces; facilities, weather and terrain within the operational areas and areas of interest.[3]

As the examples you provide (and there is considerable doubt about the utility of smallpox infected blankets ...

It's documented fact the Brits don't deny. The American Indian tribes had sided with the French (thus the introduction of scalping as proof of kill for payment). The Brits organised a peace offering with the potential for a truce. During the meeting the Brits as a supposed sign of good will gave the Indian chiefs woollen blankets. In reality it was a double cross ploy as the blankets had come from hospital patients infected with small pox. Within 6 months the relevant tribes had been reduced to a fraction (20 or 30% .. I forget) of their original population. This episode is cited as the first use of biological warfare, but I read about Chinese catapaulting plague infected body parts from ships over Italian fortress walls centuries earlier. So what was the 1st use of bio agents I don't really know.

and the US efforts in Korea were basically Communist black propaganda)

No mate, I watched a doco many years ago where a high ranking US officer stated the US used B52s to spray Chinese and North Korean troops with biological and chemical weapons. If the yanks hadn't done it, they'd deny it to this day.

The Japanese efforts in China amounted to nought.

No mate, the cholera worked. I don't know how effected the plague infected flees were, but I know they did it.
I read 2 volumes of the war crimes trial the Russians held on Japanese officers involved.

Biological agents are fragile and invariably will only infect and kill about 30% of a population into which they are introduced.

30% of a population is a fair whack of people, particularly in a war of attrition.

Interestingly, the Japanese with their Unit 731 in Manchuria were at the end of WWII the most advanced at producing biological agents. The commander of that unit Shirō Ishii was given immunity from prosecution in return for his revealing the secrets he had developed during the war. Australian soldiers were amongst his victims - indeed their claims under (now) Department of Veterans Affairs was the first Australia heard of it in the 1960s.

I'm surprised you discovered this. I knew about it because my overtly communist grandfather who idolised Lenin and Mao and demonised the Japs had 2 volumes of war crimes trials specifically relating to the 2 biological testing grounds the Japs had - 1 in China and 1 in Manchuria. One was indoors and the other out doors. Russian captives were the most used to see the effects on Caucasians. But most used over all were Chinese.

At the indoor facility captives were injected with bio agents and put in a cell to see what happened.
At the out door facility captives were strapped to posts with their vital organs protected. Then a bio agent infected bomb was detonated so the guinea pig would be hit with infected shrapnel, and then placed in a cell to see the results.

I was unaware the commander got immunity, but not surprised.
I read the 2 volumes of war crimes trials in the late 1970s.

I appreciate your willingness to be corrected, but I'm not a trusting soul and assume you're just trying to save face over pretence of expertise.

[brian ross]

Correct.

Thankyou.

My mistake.

Yes.

I will amend my statement, "not used in modern war".

"modern war"
https://www.google.com/search?q=modern+ ... e&ie=UTF-8

What is the first modern war?

"Modern war" is generally meant to mean wars post-WWII.

As the examples you provide (and there is considerable doubt about the utility of smallpox infected blankets ...

It's documented fact the Brits don't deny. The American Indian tribes had sided with the French (thus the introduction of scalping as proof of kill for payment). The Brits organised a peace offering with the potential for a truce. During the meeting the Brits as a supposed sign of good will gave the Indian chiefs woollen blankets. In reality it was a double cross ploy as the blankets had come from hospital patients infected with small pox. Within 6 months the relevant tribes had been reduced to a fraction (20 or 30% .. I forget) of their original population. This episode is cited as the first use of biological warfare, but I read about Chinese catapaulting plague infected body parts from ships over Italian fortress walls centuries earlier. So what was the 1st use of bio agents I don't really know.

The problem is, you can't add a disease effectively to a blanket as a vector. Smallpox doesn't exist very long outside the human body. Smallpox scabs do, up to a year but smallpox scabs don't transfer very easily the disease to a blanket.

and the US efforts in Korea were basically Communist black propaganda)

No mate, I watched a doco many years ago where a high ranking US officer stated the US used B52s to spray Chinese and North Korean troops with biological and chemical weapons. If the yanks hadn't done it, they'd deny it to this day.

B-52s weren't used in the Korean War. They weren't introduced into service until IIRC 1955, two years after the conflict ended. The claim was made that the US spread diseases using insects in the middle of winter - not terribly smart as the insects were dormant in those temperatures. The Communists produced several propaganda films which made the claim and which were shown during and just after the ending of the Korean War. They depicted Koreans collecting the insects from the ground where they had fallen after release from USAF aircraft. Problem was, the films showed the USAF aircraft doing this but in reality they were flying too high to effectively attempt such an operation.

The Japanese efforts in China amounted to nought.

No mate, the cholera worked. I don't know how effected the plague infected flees were, but I know they did it.
I read 2 volumes of the war crimes trial the Russians held on Japanese officers involved.

No mate, the Cholera didn't work. There was no noticeable increase in deaths due to disease.

Biological agents are fragile and invariably will only infect and kill about 30% of a population into which they are introduced.

30% of a population is a fair whack of people, particularly in a war of attrition.

That is a best prediction not a likely prediction. The fUSSR attempted to weaponise many agents and spent squillions doing it. They didn't succeed very well. When a bomb bursts, the agent is subjected to stresses completely unlike natural ones and would invariably die as a consequence.

Interestingly, the Japanese with their Unit 731 in Manchuria were at the end of WWII the most advanced at producing biological agents. The commander of that unit Shirō Ishii was given immunity from prosecution in return for his revealing the secrets he had developed during the war. Australian soldiers were amongst his victims - indeed their claims under (now) Department of Veterans Affairs was the first Australia heard of it in the 1960s.

I'm surprised you discovered this. I knew about it because my overtly communist grandfather who idolised Lenin and Mao and demonised the Japs had 2 volumes of war crimes trials specifically relating to the 2 biological testing grounds the Japs had - 1 in China and 1 in Manchuria. One was indoors and the other out doors. Russian captives were the most used to see the effects on Caucasians. But most used over all were Chinese.

At the indoor facility captives were injected with bio agents and put in a cell to see what happened.
At the out door facility captives were strapped to posts with their vital organs protected. Then a bio agent infected bomb was detonated so the guinea pig would be hit with infected shrapnel, and then placed in a cell to see the results.

I was unaware the commander got immunity, but not surprised.
I read the 2 volumes of war crimes trials in the late 1970s.

I appreciate your willingness to be corrected, but I'm not a trusting soul and assume you're just trying to save face over pretence of expertise.

No, I am willing to be corrected. You must also remember what the Soviets might have claimed was viewed largely as propaganda by the majority of Australians and shunned during the Cold War and not accorded much publicity. Australian soldiers/airmen/sailors were subjected to experiments by Unit 731. What you described were the worst kind but more often than not they were stripped naked, tied to stakes around a small bomb which contained an infective agent and when they bomb was exploded and their bodies pieced by splinters, observed as to how effective the infection was and how they were affected. Some survived and were shipped to PoW camps in Japan. Post-war they made claims as to their treatment but they were largely ignored and it was their repeated claims against Veterans Affairs and their repeated ignoring which drove them to the MSM. Just as occurred to the victims of Australian Chemical Warfare experiments in Australia - their treatment was too secret to be acknowledged until several books were published on it.

[Outlaw Yogi]

Yeah I already mentioned that, without citing the nakedness, but I knew about if in the late 1970s.
You've just found out from Wiki or some web source because you were challenged on your incorrect diatribe.

The fact is you typed crap stating biological weapons had never been used in war.
I pointed out your mistake, you changed it to never used in modern war, which is wrong too.

Someone who supposedly served in the ADF should have a reasonable idea of what constitutes modern war, and you apparently don't.
Brian, you're a complete fake, and a pretty flaky one at that.

[Valkie]

Now, now

We all know bwyannnnnnnn
Knows everything
Has done everything
Been everywhere
Is expert in all things
Never makes an error
Is omnipotent and is almost a God

In his own mind, that is.

[brian ross]

Yeah I already mentioned that, without citing the nakedness, but I knew about if in the late 1970s.
You've just found out from Wiki or some web source because you were challenged on your incorrect diatribe.

Nope. I first heard of Unit 731 in the late 1970s as well. I read up more extensively during the 1980s when I did a special study of NBC warfare.

The fact is you typed crap stating biological weapons had never been used in war.

Well, as I said, I corrected my statement. I thank you for your correction.

I pointed out your mistake, you changed it to never used in modern war, which is wrong too.

*YAWN*, yeah, sure, whatever, mate.

Someone who supposedly served in the ADF should have a reasonable idea of what constitutes modern war, and you apparently don't.
Brian, you're a complete fake, and a pretty flaky one at that.

Nope. I am neither a fake nor flaky. You are using a dictionary definition of "modern war". I am using a fairly well known definition. "Modern war" is usually take to be post-WWII - something I was taught at ADFA during my Master of Defence Studies degree by several well known academics, including Colonel David Horner. You do know who David Horner is, don't you?

[Valkie]

Google it

Bwyannnnnn does

[Serial Brain 9]

We need to reduce the population not wipe it out.

‘With a massive Nuclear War it wouldn’t kill everyone - the preppers and hunters will survive.

City Slickers haven’t got a hope - they think Milk, Meat and Vegitable magically appear on supermarket shelves.

I would struggle myself these days - but if i was able to find a gun and ammunition i think i could do ok.

In Britain a few years ago they ran a test/study to see how long it would take for social order to break down if the food supply was cut.
The result was 4 days till lawlessness.

As for using firearms to survive, you need to stick with a common calibre so ammo is easier to source, and that varies from country to country.
So in Oz if using civilian firearms you're best sticking with .22, .243 and 12guage
If using a military or paramilitary weapon you best stick with .223 aka 5.56mm
in many other parts of the world where AK variants are common you'd stick with 7.62X39mm aka Ruski .308 (which the Chinese use in their 'Type10/SKS).

When the ammo runs out you'd be best with a compound bow, because while it takes time you can make your own arrows.

Of course the most useful tool of all is a large knife.
And it'd be worthwhile having binoculars or a field telescope in your kit too.
But the most important item to have is a water bottle.

I would go with the .22 for sure.. 100%

7.62 - no good as Australian Defence hardly uses it anymore
5.56 - Australian Defences uses a lot of but how do you get it? - so no
12 gauge too big to carry a lot but would be handy if you are a shit aim
Bow might be handy - if you could use one
Knife most important
Water bottle 100%
Bino’s a luxury
Flint would be nice too

[brian ross]

7.62 - no good as Australian Defence hardly uses it anymore

I am sure that will be news to the ADF... The ADF orders quite large quantities of 7.62x51mm rounds for use in GPMGs, LMGs, Miniguns and sniper rifles...

5.56 - Australian Defences uses a lot of but how do you get it? - so no

How about strotting down to the local gun shop? 5.56x45mm M855 and SS109 rounds are quite common, you realise?

[Serial Brain 9]

7.62 - no good as Australian Defence hardly uses it anymore

I am sure that will be news to the ADF... The ADF orders quite large quantities of 7.62x51mm rounds for use in GPMGs, LMGs, Miniguns and sniper rifles...

5.56 - Australian Defences uses a lot of but how do you get it? - so no

How about strotting down to the local gun shop? 5.56x45mm M855 and SS109 rounds are quite common, you realise?

Read above - what round did I say that I would carry?