lesscubes

I really don't get the whole caliber debate. The difference between 9mm-.40S&W-.45ACP isn't the same huge gap as between something like .32ACP (7.65 Browning to you Europeans) .380 or 9x18 Makarov. Either way, still a handgun, it's never going to be the hammer of the gods. Some thoughts; -V-Max is a varmint bullet, the tip is polymer and is designed to fragment the jacket and core upon impact. Basically it's designed to turn poor Prairie Dogs into a pink mist. So, horrific, shallow wounds. Poor penetration. -9mm does actually suppress better than .45ACP, if you use a subsonic load like a heavy 147 Grain bullet. Think exhaust system on a car or bike- All other things the same, a 2" Exhaust is quieter than a 3" exhaust. -M855 is known to fragment fairly reliably from carbine barrels, so perhaps the amphetamine-like Khat the Somali militiamen were hopped up on played more than the bullets themselves. -That new striker fired Beretta is the least Italian looking weapon ever. I mean, it looks more like a Hi-Point, even the first gen USP is sexier. -There are so many awesome service handguns out there that it's going to be a heartbreak when they adopt the wrong one or stick with the M9. -(Which should've been the SIG P226 in the first place.)

It is a common goal, and one we ignore too often. However intervention and coercion are not exclusive to any one people. Say, for example, Euromaidan was caused by the CIA, MI5, and lets just throw, say, Mossad in there for good measure... Russia intervened in the politics of what the rest, and I mean the rest, of the world recognized as a sovereign state.As far as forcing culture upon people... Isn't modern communications really responsible for just how much of the west has permeated Russian culture? Film, Radio, and this interweb thing we're arguing with each other over have brought the world closer together. (And farther apart, on a personal level. Damn you facebook!) And, this is conjecture, was there not a gigantic pent-up demand in Soviet Russia for Western cultural imports that was sated after the fall of the USSR? I'm not intimately familiar with Party Doctrine. The extent of my learning is from Western sources. I've always been under the impression that realistic, aggressively pursued or not, worldwide socialism was always the goal of the Comintern until it's dissolution in 1943. (When Stalin, really, REALLY needed Allied support.) Now, were those Authoritarian regimes in inter-war Eastern Europe not created by the dissolution of three empires after the First World War? (As an aside, if Western Imperialism is bad (it was) then so it stands that Eastern Imperialism is as well.) Those buffer states the USSR created from the ashes of the Second World War were carved from the remnants of parts of the former Russian and Austro-Hungarian empires, were they not? Also, as an aside, was the Russian Empire not a legitimate rival to the English Empire prior to WWI? Now, why, exactly, might some of those Eastern European regimes have allied themselves to Nazi Germany? It's easy to explain the Finns and the Baltics, right? Now, if I remember right, the Romanian alliance was formed under heavy pressure from Berlin and a coup. My disparagement of the term "Great Patriotic War" is based in the origins of it. The Wehrmacht didn't cut up Poland alone, the Red Army got it's piece of the pie, did it not? The "Bill for bad deeds..." Were there any good guys or bad guys in the Geopolitical strugals of that era? There certainly wasn't any consensus among western nations. (And, uh, you know the Americans were busy at home and didn't really have any part in continental Europe until 1917 and the east in 1919?) The American ideal (Wife, House, car) doesn't play well with the Soviet system. So to me, I can't see much "nice stuff" in post war Eastern Europe... But, I'm willing to admit my bias. Now, Hungarians, Romanians, and Slovaks did invade Russia. The Czechs themselves had one hell of a resistance movement going against the Germans. They paid dearly for it too. It's unfair to paint them all into the box of collaborator. (Wouldn't you also agree, that another universal goal among people is to try to get home to his family at the end of the day?) Croats and Serbs both fought for and against the Germans. So did Soviets, for that matter. (Ost Battalions and the "Hiwis") The VVS didn't have a viable strategic bomber, it had Sturmovik's, PE-2's and A-20's, (until it copied the B-29 and built them as Tupolevs after WWII.) it couldn't engage in strategic bombing. Meanwhile, our histories tell us that the Red Army wasn't exactly discriminatory in it's actions as it advanced on Berlin. Maybe that's wrong. The Polish Government in Exile was the legitimate government of Poland. Period. There was no "Creation" of a Pro-British regime, it already existed. So yes, the Red Army and Stalin did themselves well to let the Polish Home Army destroy itself in Warsaw. Meanwhile, the Western Allies were slow to react, seeking permission from the USSR to render aid... That didn't go well. Now, The purges. Wasn't Stalin denounced by the party itself after his death for this very thing? Or are the Soviet leaders of the 50's-90's revisionists? Likewise, why did Tartars, Chechens, Cossacks, Ukranians and other non-Russian ethnicities collaborate so much with the Germans? Did they have a reason to do so? I absolutely agree that the Cold War is back on. Of course, Russian Doctrine now reflects this. Separatism is an internal issue, correct? I don't think the Chechens are terribly fond of infidel Americans either... I can't speak to the Georgians or the Moldovans. My bias tells me that anyone who's country used to have "SSR" in it's name probably has a legitimate beef, with the Russian Federation. It's also still a really, really stupid idea to piss off your neighbors like they did. I study history out of personal interest, I want to know why the now is what it is. We aren't doing itself any favors living there. Right now, the Russian Federation looks a whole lot like the past. For my part, I wish my country had intervened a little less in the Middle East and South East Asia... But, we're talking about Russia. Man, that's a hell of a novel there. I need a hobby. Like playing ARMA or something. :o

@ Spooky, mainly What is the basic ideal world for a Russian citizen? Do your borders look as they do now? Or do they more closely resemble those of Imperial Russia? NATO was a response to basic, core Communist Party doctrine as well as the dangers that a permissive environment created for batshit crazy authoritarian regimes. (Lol "Great Patriotic War") The Soviet Union subjugated all of Eastern Europe... Only Albania and Yugoslavia broke from the party line and it only really worked well for one of them... Until their charismatic leader died and the various ethnic groups started slaughtering each other wholesale... Modern events have shown that the Alliance is still relevant in terms of it's original role. When a former Soviet republic starts leaning west, Russian arms and men flow into that country. Should the Pole or Czech not fear that as well? (Or the Finn, or the Estonian, or Latvian, or...) Also, Hungary 1956 and Czechoslovakia 1968. Or how about how in WWII, when the Polish people launched a general uprising and the Soviet Army simply STOPPED and waited for the Waffen-SS to slaughter them, rather than aid them in any way. Just how many people were murdered in bloody party purges, or killed in ethnic cleansing, or died in the Gulags? (None right? Because that's all Western Revisionist history?) Yes, it's a long time ago, but doesn't Russian media love to call Anti-Russian Ukrainians "Nazis" or "Banderas?" (Yes, Western interests did fund some pretty awful stuff in response to the existential threat the Warsaw Pact presented, propping up Far-Right dictators, brutally incompetent countries like South Vietnam, and of course exploiting the Sino-Soviet split. We were kinda at war then.) The Ultra-Corrupt Governments persistent in post Cold-War Eastern Europe are a DIRECT result of the garbage the Communist system produced. If you can't succeed on your own accord, you have to game the system, lie, cheat, and steal. The modern world, at least as I perceive it, would be more interested in a version of events where Russia wanted to play ball with everyone else. (Wouldn't all of you from the rest of the west agree?) Clearly, the West is out to keep Russia under it's boot as it grows wealthy selling oil and steel to Europe. Clearly. Is Russia still at war with the Western Allies? Rather, are the Western Allies still at war with Russia? Don't like what's going on in former Soviet Republics? Golly, maybe the Soviet Union shouldn't have destroyed itself with corruption, graft, militarism and gross stupidity and y'all could be one happy family still. The "Black Overlord" line is cute, and very helpful to your argument.

If the A3 Beretta can be adopted under the existing contract, I bet that wins. Which, well, cost wise is good but otherwise sucks. They DO need to replace those silly 1930's style flap holsters- yes troops can and do buy their own stuff but some kind of Molded or Kydex MOLLE-mount solution that can attach either to a leg rig or onto a plate carrier should be standard. It also means that those bad contract mags for the M9's that were proven to fail in Iraq and Afghanistan will still be floating around in the supply chain, regardless of the improved mags Beretta will include with the new guns.

It's not a common word but it's generally understood in English. (Sounds like forbidden.) Also know that in the US, parts of German culture and language are common. We drink German beer and eat German food. DA/SA guns have more complicated trigger mechanisms. Hence the extra parts. Taking off SIG Grip panels can be fun for example, the de-cocker assembly likes to fall out. World of Guns is pretty cool, but man, unless you're a gunsmith you aren't taking the gun anywhere near that far apart. (Or you're bored... This is what leads to crawling around the floor for an hour looking for that little detent spring that shot off when you pulled the safety out.) Also, don't go find a shooting range, and do not rent any kind of firearm. You will enjoy it. I think we're all kinds of offtopic now, but... I really do hope that since they ARE already spending money on getting this program going, that it doesn't end up with them sticking with the M9. They've spent millions looking at replacing the M4 before and it's always just lead to more M4's. They've already killed off a few M9 replacements before. Either do it, or stop spending my tax dollars on these programs. Worth noting also, the SIG P228 is already standardized as the M11 in the US Military for Naval aircrew and I believe CIS people. 226's and 239's are used by the SEAL's. H&K has Mk.23's, USP .45's and HK45's spread out with various secret squirrel type guys, Glocks were popular with Army guys in Iraq (who got them out of post-war Iraqi police holsters!) Recon Marines get M45's and old stock M1911's still find ways out into the field. It seems like everyone who isn't a line infantryman who uses his pistol has figured out some way to NOT use the Beretta.

If the M1911 isn't the greatest service pistol of all time, the FN/Browning Hi-Power is. I have one, it's magnificent... Of course, like the M1911 it's also a gun built by hand, with many hand fit parts. The Five-Seven though? Meh, Gimmick round. I'm still dubious about spending money to replace the M9, it's not a gun I'd choose to buy for myself, but it works. At least when you don't cheap out on magazines. (Just like any other autoloader.)

RE: Why not use old stock M1911's? The Marines pretty much used them up for the (MEU)SOC pistol program, that's why they bought the M45's from Colt. They shoot so much that they were destroying those 60-70 year old frames pretty quick. Big problem with re-introducing the 1911 is that it's a hand-fit gun. Shoot out a barrel or brake a part in the trigger group and someone needs to carefully file-fit a new one. On a poly pistol or something like a SIG, the parts just drop in, no fitting. Handguns never replace a rifle, but aren't a bad thing to have in addition to one.

I shoot as a hobby, and only as a hobby, so take my words with a grain of salt. I don't like the Beretta 92. The controls are funky, it's very large for what it is, and it doesn't offer much positive over other 9mm's on the market. SIG makes a better DA/SA gun in it's 22x series guns. Major police departments in the US pretty much all run either a Glock, a S&W M&P or the SIG 226 or 229. And the reason for that isn't just limited to aggressive marketing by those companies. That all said, I don't get looking at replacing them at this point in time. Unless the Armed forces stocks of Beretta's are just absolutely worn out, why replace them? Perhaps focus on getting new guns to those few who really, really run their handguns hard but not as a broad program. The M&P is nice, anyways. I don't like the trigger but the gun feels as good in the hand and points as well as anything short of a Browning High Power or M1911. Cops like 'em. Edited to add- The Caliber thing is goofy. 9mm=.45ACP in a modern load. Unfortunately Jacketed Hollow points are verboten , yet we've devised so many actually devious and horrible ways of maiming the enemy since they were banned...

One thing I get when I read various Pro-Russian sentiments expressed is, why exactly must it always be Russia versus "the West"? It seems like the basic argument is always along the lines of "you lie!" or "but _____ did this!"

Those graphics had me riiiiight up until the Guns/People statistic. One point where traditional American and European logic tend to diverge. (HuffPost is generally pretty liberal, no surprise there.) But, most of that jives with what I know and see. I work at a small-ish business and get to see a whole lot of the logic of the Boss... Opportunism is probably the greatest plague the US suffers from. The country has always rewarded people who strike out at opportunity. However, it's also rewarding people for gaming and exploiting the system. American Exceptionalism is responsible in equal parts for the greatness of the US and the failings of the US. Unscrupulous behavior is why I feel the income disparity is so bad, why the middle class is dying out, why the medical/insurance system is so broken. The dangers of an open system, I'm afraid.

There was never any secret to Churchill being very, very anti-Soviet and anti-Stalin. He sparred very heavily with FDR on how to deal with Stalin. (And of course, there's the unproven notion popular in Russian circles that it took so long for the Allies to invade France primarily to let the Wehrmacht keep killing itself on the Eastern Front and chew the Soviets up with them.) Worth noting that the Russians had done very well imposing THEIR will on Eastern Europe, refusing the return of the old Exiled governments in Poland and Czechoslovakia, and shipping masses of Pro-western politicians, soldiers, partisans, etc. to the Gulags (or worse, see the Warsaw uprising.) It was entirely reasonable for the UK to plan for war with the USSR then. (Do you think the USSR had no plan for invading Western Europe after the war? Did they have no plan for responding to a Allied attack?) As for prolonging it? No. More like bringing it to a quicker conclusion. The USSR had been considered an Enemy to the West longer than Hitler had. One of the core goals of Communism was it's spread world wide. A marriage forced at the barrel of a gun wasn't going to change that.

I tend to bitch and moan and gripe about the state of things, riiiight up until I see one of these discussions and I get all defensive and start wanting to spout all sorts of positives... Funny how that works. The US is deeply flawed, much like every other great culture today and throughout history.

The straw man argument is so, so popular... Spooky, does Russia have a dog in this fight? That you know of? Also, you do realize that McCain kind of does his own thing right? Not every action by a US politician is actual sanctioned US policy. Kinda crazy right? That kind of thing happens when you have a multi-party democracy instead of... Whatever the hell the Russian Federation is. (Read as, Barack Obama doesn't have complete control, of the Government or even his own Party, like Vladimir Putin) Also worth noting McCain's personal history, if you want some kind of insight into his actions. You're entirely right that the US may not have levied sanctions against the Saudi or Qatari governments. You also know exactly why- only you'll ignore it because it doesn't fit your narrative. (That the US and EU specifically back movements that are anti-Russian in nature only, and have no other reason to do so.) All those things said, a lot of Americans don't care for supporting the House of Saud, or the Pakistani government, or any number of other US backed regimes.

Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence are at the fore of the US public conscious right now- high profile cases involving star athletes, and the media is really running with it. There is a lot of activism and campaigns to raise awareness... ... But we aren't teaching and rewarding honesty and honor, but correctness. And that scares the ever loving crap out of me. The idea that an APP can help is part of the moral/emotional disconnect that would cause these abuses to become more prevalent. I hope Europe has a more balanced take on the issue.

It's not a fun time to be a young adult in the US...