/AKM/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war.

The engineers behind the t-34 understood the logistical struggles of maintaining entire battalions of tanks where before they only existed in handfuls. Such an exponential expansion of the deployment of tanks, in tandem with the increasing complexity of tank parts and intricacies of tank design, meant that the modern war effort would require logistical feats never before preformed by any army. Innovations of the t-34 would include everything from sloping armor to increase deflection and grazing rates from enemy shells without substantially increasing production cost to simplifying turret design while not stripping functionality to maintain the maximal performance and accessibility while cutting down on logistical profile. The general design ethos of the USSR was to think smarter so they could fight harder, and longer. One of the innovations was its tank treads - rather than being fully bolted on both sides, only one side was bolted, and a raised metal plate was installed to prevent these bolts from slipping out from their position, decreasing the work needed to replace tank tracks while still maintaining full functionality.

This industrious and pragmatic design philosophy is what drove the war machine of the Red Army, making its constituent components consistent and interchangeable, and to make such work easy to preform. Any man or woman, from Siberian tribespeople to West Russian urbanites, could fight with equal skill and capability under the red banner. Meanwhile every German vehicle or weapon required specially trained crews, specially trained engineers, specially trained gunsmiths, all required to jump through the hoops of different corporate designs and methods to keep their weapons of war functional. Where the Germans had tanks so finnicky that only 50% of spare parts would be accepted in any given German tank, you could disassemble 100 T-34s, mix up the parts, and assemble 100 of them again, and they'd all run equally well. In a war of logistics, this streamlining and accessibility is what allowed for the USSR's tanks to stand against the Germans even with numerical inferiority, because of shorter time out of action for logistical or repair work. As the number of T-34s increased, they started to geometrically outnumber them. then, exponentially outnumber them.

Simplified and streamlined designs with accessibility and consistency will win out against the most "advanced" and "complex" of designs, because war is not waged in a way thPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

let's play toy soldiers for a second
realistically who would win in a 1v1 between the good freeworld mercenaries™ aka Blackwater and the bad mercenraries™ aka Wagner? without any support from both their government contractors, just the two mercenaries and their own assets, who is more tough?

The soviet union had this lol. poland is returning to its warsaw pact past

All children should receive firearms training. The basic laws of firearm safety and use at the very least, though IMO marksmanship training is good too - it gives actual hands on use of the weapons and teaches kids to respect them. At my summer camp (church run, 1970's-early 80's) we learned how to shoot, starting with BB guns, going up to 22's and M1-carbines. My grandfather taught me around that time on 38 special revolvers (and some .357 mag), Milsurp 1911's and M1 Garands. We also had a gun club in school (5th graders-8th graders) and high school.

I want to become dastardly cunning counter-manipulator like smart KGB agents in Hollywood moobies i want to have a sleepercell and stop mycover from burning by hiding documents between my nuts. I want to call my old friends damaged goods and have 87 hours to discover the kazakh mule within the network

when are we gonna develop em again?

I constantly see people saying, unconditionally, that oh liberals are a lost cause, neo-Nazis are a lost cause, police are a lost cause, soldiers are a lost cause. And often, yes, it's not worth the effort to engage them and doubly so if you're a single regular unskilled outsider.
However, those assumptions are factually false. There are many well-known examples of people from all those groups becoming antifascists, communists and anarchists. It's obviously a transition which can happen. The question becomes, can it be done reliably enough that it becomes worthwhile to target these groups? That will inevitably depend on current conditions, there's no abstract ultimate answer.
OP made it clear that the military are one of the high-value groups. Every military member we convert is a skilled insider (an espionage dream come true) who won't try to kill our comrades later, one more asset detracting from the imperial machine, and one more who won't get picked up by neo-fascists who want to harass us. The armies are filled with people economically oppressed by the state, only joining for mediocre benefits. I believe if there is an effective way to radicalize military members to socialism, it's a very worthwhile endeavour. Of course, that's a very big 'if'!
>>434 mentioned Eyes Left which is useful for understanding this question. They openly share the perspective of anti-capitalist ex-military personnel, interview people to discover their paths away from the military and towards radicalization, what help they received on their journey (civilian therapists are a noteworthy theme) and other great information. Plus, they're in-network, they can talk to other veterans with sympathy. Other 'unpopular wars' should be a useful case study, like understanding how soldiers in the Vietnam War were able to foster such discontent in the military (e.g. circulating zines, radio).

or even eugenics, you could just as well be killing the strongest people as the weakest.


(THE BODY IS TOO SHORT TOO EMPTY FLOOD DETECTED JANNIES FIX THE FUCKING SITE)
(THE BODY IS TOO SHORT TOO EMPTY FLOOD DETECTED JANNIES FIX THE FUCKING SITE)

Let's talk about state armies, the people employed in them, and how they can relate to the socialist movement.

State armies are particularly interesting:
>they are inherently a powerful force
>their members are employed to serve the state, whether performing imperialist invasion or suppressing internal threats beyond the scope of the police
>their members are often well-trained in skills useful for militant and revolutionary activities
>their members may have unique experiences and expertise in both military tactics and understanding of countering enemy tactics, which may apply equally to local enemies of the people
>they are highly-abused, with high rates of traumatic experience, guilt, disability, economic neglect and suicide
>regardless of drafting and compulsory service not existing in many Western states, large proportions of recruits join purely for economic reasons, rather than any specific desire to join

Considering these starting points, let's ask:
- Which modern military personnel (from support staff to technicians to grunts) would have skills most useful to the socialist movement?
- Are there any reasons military personnel would be inherently incompatible with the socialist movement? Are comrades right or wrong to ostracize them based on their job?
- How did movements like Nazism/Fascism recruit ex-military members so effectively? How about counter-examples like the 43 Group? Is this the same dynamic we see with US 'Patriot' militia movements today? What place do ex-military members currently hold among the socialist movement?
- How should military be considered differently to police and other state law enforcement agencies?
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

it's why most of Europe has a manlet issue aside from the Netherlands and some Scandis. Being a manlet means you're a smaller target which means you're less likely to get hit.

The body was too short or empty.The body was too short or empty. The body was too short or empty.The body was too short or empty. The body was too short or empty.The body was too short or empty. The body was too short or empty.The body was too short or empty. The body was too short or empty.The body was too short or empty.

>I kinda miss it when the military was portrayed as a hyper badass cool boys club, where there was beer and hot chicks everywhere, constantly.
>Why can't we go back to that?
>I wanna play a new call of duty, starting off as some kind of special operations unit
>And in the tutorial, when you do basic tasks an NPC says some shit like
>"Good we have you on the side of the US ARMY, we could really use a soldier like you"
>I wanna watch a movie, and it somehow ties into the US millitary and they film with real military vehicles doing cool shit like in the old transformers movies
>For fucks sake, can't I just have a ton of games that "totally weren't" sponsored by the millitary while subtly nudging you to join
>Like you just spawn in with a brand new sig spear and the character mumbles some shit like "only the best for the army"
>I wanna go and play a new game set in Ukraine or some shit, and the game portrays Russians as mustache twirling supervillains who clearly want to destroy America and everyone in it in the name of being evil

Now we get shit like "I have 2 moms" or some quirky E girl doing stupid shit.

What the hell is Psyops doing?