perfidy

My close personal friend "Geek Lethal," who was actually IN the army [update: during]* Gulf War I: First Blood, responds to yesterday's posts (here and here) about Kalashnikovs and M-16s.

In an earlier phase of life I found myself taking a short (40 hours) course on OPFOR ("Opposing Force"... an entirely unneccessary euphemism for "Russian", since we all knew who we were talking about) small arms.

I trained on the whole Kalishnakov product line: AK47, AKM, AK74, your S (ie folding stock) variant; crummy Egyptian AKMs that nearly fell apart when disassembled; VERY nice East German AK74S', as well as other stuff: your Makarov and Tokarev pistols; your SVD sniper rifle (awesome weapon); RPK machine gun; PK machine gun; the uber-macho DSHKM crew-served machine gun, and various and sundry other lethal Rooskie tchochkes. At the end of the week, range day was a hoot.

Yes, it is true: AKs can take a remarkable beating and still function. Which is great. Yes they are simple to operate and understand.... I taught a 6 year old girl, assisted by my rudimentary German, how to diassamble, reassemble, load, sight, and unload an AKM, with a level of proficiency that she could do it all herself, in under 10 minutes.

But simply functioning is not enough. They aren't alot of use beyond about 250m, which is not great if you're doing alot of fighting in the open, and they aren't terrifically accurate within those 250m. But yes, I can see how their ubiquity and ease of maintenance (ie, none at all) make them preferable to the Colt product they sort of compete with. Now, if you want to accurately shoot at bad guys past 300m, instead of spraying randomly and hoping for a good hit, I'd go with a '16. But that's me. Shit if I had a choice give everybody the good ol' M14. Or revamp the current infantry weapon to a more robust round. Sure a 5.56 will kill you just as dead as a 7.62 round will, but combining M16 accuracy with that beefier round might be a swell thing. Consider the Bundeswehr's G3, for example, as a modern example. Mmmm, maybe not...WAY too many pins and thingies to keep track of and/or lose.

OK rambling now...moving on....

I would also ask the larger question of why dismounted tank crews are running foot patrols in urban back alleys, as in this recent CSM article. Of course they pick up AKs, because there aren't enough M4/16 in the unit TO&E for every crew; they get 9mm pistols as an afterthought because THEY ARE TANK CREWS AND SHOULD BE FIGHTING FROM TANKS! Leave foot patrols to the infantry and MPs.

* n.b. Original post had Mr. Lethal in the sand, shooting at Iraqis. This is untrue. Mr. Lethal's Gulf-War duty was restricted to cavorting with buxom German lasses and dodging half-ton mountain warthogs during the long cold European winter.

Here is Bodhi, looking pensive on the back porch:

[wik] The Future Ministry has replaced the broken image link with a picture of the same dog, with a different expression.

Johno, as for the AK-47 (and its successors, the AK-74 and AKM) it is a wonderful weapon, designed by a genius, Kalishnikov. But the vast majority of Russian products are no where near the AK in reliability or effectiveness. The thing with the Russians is, most of their military equipment is by American standards overengineered. Guns, tanks, planes are designed with the limitations of Russian industry and Russian conscript soldiers in mind.

In some instances, as with their assault rifles, a great engineer can come up with a design that performs very well, and yet is rugged and easy to manufacture. In most other circumstances, the result is shoddy design, limited capabilities and high maintenance. The problem is even worse in the civilian sector. The other example you mentioned, soviet rockets, were designed in the fifties and sixties by another genius, Korolev. The Russians are still using the Soyuz capsule created when Korolev was the Chief Designer for the Soviet space program. Their rocket technology still uses the technology developed under his watch, and slowly refined since then.

In other areas, Soviet technology is notably poor. When we got our hands on the MIG-25, which had been rumored to be an amazing fighter, American engineers were shocked by the crudity of the design. Heavy steel construction, vacuum tube electronics, and so on. Sure, it was fast. But that was about it. Any contemporary American fighter could fly circles around it. Because they didn't have the capability to make fighters out of carbon fiber composites, beryllium alloys, and so forth, they made it out of steel. Areas where computer aided design and other techniques would allow American designers to cut weight and make the design more efficient are clumsy and overengineered.

This ruggedness has advantages, but it is not everything. Better trained American mechanics can keep their more complicated fighters, helicopters and tech wizardry in the fight - and when they are in the fight, that design advantage is overpowering, as we have seen. Russian tanks can not compare to the M1, not even remotely. M1's can engage a Russkiy tank a thousand yards outside the Russian tank's range, while driving 40mph over rough ground, hit it on the first shot, and the round will go all the way through the Russian tank. A T-80 might (might) have lower maintenance requirements. But it doesn't matter if one American tank can kill ten for every one we lose.

In very specific, limited areas of technology the Russians could outclass us. Sometimes, because a genius was behind the drawing board. Other times, as with the MIG-15 in Korea, it was because the idiot labor government of Britain gave the Soviets their most advanced jet engine design. But that excellence came at a high cost - it took the Russians a lot more effort, money and time to achieve those levels of competence than it would for your average American defense contractor.

It all comes down to the system. Russians are of course no denser than we are. They have notable gifts in mathematics and other disciplines. They have as many geniuses as we do. But - the American system allows efficient teamwork, cross fertilization between different disciplines, and much greater creativity. An average American design team can approximate genius anywhere else in the world, due to our skill at organizing things. When you actually have a genius in charge of a team, you get things like the SR-71, or the Saturn rocket.

Free development in all types of technology - commercial and military - allows development to speed up in every single technology. The computer technology created in the US allowed vast improvements in aeronautical design, in targeting, control systems, stealth, etc. The result is the $200mil F-22. But that fighter is the best. These kind of interacting developments are what make us so frightfully lethal. And it's our system that allows it to happen.

Not that the result is always perfect. People have complained about the M-16 ever since it was introduced. It's twitchy, has a lightweight round, jams easily, and it doesn't look lethal or ominous. Yet we've used it for almost forty years because it's good enough. (We're right around the corner from a new standard issue weapon. The OICW will have all kinds of goodies.)

But on the average, the vastly higher overall American technology base allows us to create weapons that benefit from the capabilities of American industry, and can assume the high education and skill levels of American soldiers.

The World Trib is reporting that US Intelligence believes that the Iraqi WMD are located not in Iraq, but in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley. Some have suspected this before - along with suspicions that top level Iraqi gov't officials had also fled to Syria. The Bekaa Valley is in some senses the best place for the WMD to go - a lawless region home to Hizbollah, Syrian forces, and Iranian agents.

If this report is true, it makes for problems. If we have a fix on where they are, and high confidence that the reports are true, do we go get them? This could provoke further conflict with Syria, and get us enmeshed in the rat's nest of Palestinian terror groups. While there is little doubt that American forces could defeat any of these groups, the action would put further pressure on already overstretched American forces, and the diplomatic blowback of another unilateral (without the approval of France) action would be annoying at best.

Assuming that the report is true, and that we went after the WMD, certain elements would cry even louder about Bush=Hitler and all that, even if we took the smoking gun out of Iraqi intelligence forces' hands.

This could be interesting.

From Associated Press: US soldiers in Iraq have taken to using confiscated AK-47s instead of their standard-issue M16s. This is for several reasons: scarcity of M16s available, scarcity of ammo for M16s, and apparently superior performance by the Russian gun under desert conditions. Also, there's lots of them just lying around out there, and cases fulla ammo too.

The news is spinning this as "our troops have no guns!! They have to steal them!!" And I'm sure there's something to this. So far, while our troops have done an excellent job with what they have, I have been underwhelmed by the planning, support, and logistics infrastructures within which the grunts must operate. And yet, according to Don Rumsfeld, no additional troops are needed.

But there's maybe an upside to this-- Russia has always had the edge over the US in the durable equipment department. Their spacebound rockets can launch in Siberia, for chrissakes, with a support crew of a dozen, whereas ours launch from Florida and sometimes can't handle that too well, and require a support crew of hundreds. Likewise for the guns. AK's are favored all over the world not only because every tinpot 'Stan unloaded all their Red Army surpluses, but because they keep working forever. Or so I hear. I don't shoot. But maybe the US Army could build a gun that doesn't jam in a light mist.

So it occurs to me-- why can't Russia build a half-decent car? One that can do 45 mpg/city and stay under control with two tires blown out at 55? They can send a guy into space at the drop of a hat, but a car baffles them.

Buckethead, I believe this is your arena. pls advise.

Pittsburgh Steelers FB Jerome Bettis is a class-A gentleman.

Check out what he said when asked what he felt about being benched to start the season (via Balloon Juice):

"I was surprised," Bettis said, shortly after Coach Bill Cowher announced Amos Zereoue would open the season as the Steelers' starting halfback. "I wasn't mad, but I was disappointed. As a competitor, all you want is for it to be a decision on the field and it wasn't a decision on the field." Citing a "gut feeling," Cowher revealed his decision yesterday at a news conference as training camp concluded at St. Vincent College in Latrobe. It's the first time Bettis was benched to start a season with the Steelers. . . ."He just said it was a decision he came to," Bettis said. "I've been on the better side of most of Coach Cowher's gut decisions and this is the first time it has not gone in my favor. I can deal with it, having been on the better side of most of them."

Hats off to that! No grandstanding, no pouting, just acceptance that Amos Zereoue looks like lightning in the preseason. I wonder if he's come to terms with the fact that he's lost a couple steps?

As a Cleveland Browns fan, I should by rights gibber, spit, and hurl feces at the very mention of the hated Steelers, but Jerome Bettis has always been a class act, a great competitor, and a terrifying running back. I hope he gets to play in the coming season and can rack up enough yards to tie Jim Brown in the record books. Tie. Not beat. I couldn't handle that.

Hopefully Bettis will handle the end of his career in Pittsburgh better than Rod Woodson did. Both are/were beloved in that town, and Woodson did nothing to make his leaving the city easy to take. Jerk.

[update] To be fair, I should point out my particular situation.

First, I married a Pittsburgh gal and vastly prefer the Steel City over Cleveland as a place to spend time. In fact, when the Browns and Steelers are NOT playing each other, I can even root for the Steelers to win a game. Bill Cowher is the perfect coach for that city.

Second, as far as I'm concerned, the Steelers are merely ancestral rivals rather than sworn enemies. My football enemies are two: the Broncos, especially Horse-Face (John Elway to the rest of the country), and of course Art Modell. My formative years were spent watching Elway and the Broncos steal playoff after playoff from the Browns, and the images of the Fumble and the Drive are tattoed somewhere deep in my reptile brain forever, right down next to the bits that keep me breathing and my heart beating. As for Art... let's just say it's a good thing he doesn't go back to Cleveland much.

Via loyal reader and stalwart Ph.D candidate in History NDR, I see that an academic in Egypt is preparing a lawsuit against "all the Jews of the world" for stealing artifacts during the Exodus.

I'm not sure whether to file this under "Lead Pipe Cruelty" or "Darwin Award Contender."

Here's my cryptically pithy remark of the day--
Mankind: Erasing doubt daily about the origin of the species.

[update] NDR in an email tells me he is considering a "counter suit for unpaid wages due to slave labor." Ohhh yeah!!!

Various news sources have noted that we could have had power grid reform in motion TWO YEARS ago if the President and some members of Congress wouldn't insist on including Alaskan drilling priveliges in the same bill.

Alaskan drilling has been repeatedly rejected for the time being. Yet, in his effort to get a pet project through Congress, the Administration, like all the ones before it, are willing to hold up urgent and necessary changes.

Thanks, guys. Way to go.

A statement from Minister Pythagosaurus:

As a veteran of a hundred failed marketing campaigns, I know that it's important to establish a brand and stick with it if you want to have a prayer of succeeding. People need to recognize your name and learn to trust it.

Firmly casting aside those hard-earned lessons, I am discarding the no-longer-helpful "Pythagosaurus" moniker as I discarded the "Johnny Two-Cents" moniker some months ago. Though both have served a purpose, neither is mellifluous enough, or short enough, to suit my needs.

Therefore, from here forward, I shall be simply known as "Johno" or, if you wish, "Minister Johno the Aggravatingly Indecisive." Whichever you prefer. End transmission.

The Ministry supports Minister Johno in his decision, and is pleased. We extend our best wishes to him and his family, whom the Ministry shall be releasing to his custody forthwith. All hail Minister Johno, master of the pithy metaphor! 

In our continued efforts to expand our readership, we have done things of questionable morality. And certainly of questionable taste. Given that we at the Ministry believe that the ends not only justify, but in fact require the means, we have registered for N. Z. Bear's Blog Beauty Contest.

One of the rules of the Beauty contest requires that we link to three of the other contestants. Therefore, following is our links, and the reasons we admit to linking them:

• Stylishcarp is from Jefferson Parish, LA. His blog includes this, which we found memorable:

  SHERIFF
  HARRY
  LEE'S

  16th Annual
  Chinese, Cajun,
  Cowboy
  Fais-Do-Do

• Don't be a hero talks about Chinese astronauts and doesn't call them Chinkonauts, for which we admire her.
• My Completely Random Life talks about the culture wars, and asks this important question: Which band has had more cultural impact: Nirvana or New Kids on the Block? In context, it's more interesting than it sounds.

So there you have it. Now vote for us by giving us links!

[Update] Just to be clear, this blog has been in existence since July tenth. Archives prior to that date are from Johnny Two-Cents, which is now defunct.