Long Term Rifle Decisions

[Webstral]

I’ve been thinking while driving (the only time I can actually devote to thinking about Twilight: 2000 these days) about the long-term decisions regarding service rifles in the US after 2002. In the past, I’ve invested a good deal of electronic ink in the reunification of the United States as part of a strategic plan by Colorado Springs. Rather than belabor the details for everyone here who has read the applicable material many times, I’ll summarize by saying that I’ve never bought into the deus ex machina of drought in 2001. I’ve fairly consistently advocated a vision in which the food situation largely stabilizes in the US by early 2001 (with plenty of latitude for local phenomena). From that point onward, Milgov makes use of a growing fleet of airships to reconnect the loyal cantonments across the continental distances.

Given the circumstances, what decision does Milgov make about its standard service rifle? There are some good reasons to direct resources towards the manufacture of M16s, and there are some very good reasons not to. Several alternatives exist, each with strengths and weaknesses. The AK-47 recommends itself, as does the SKS, the M1, the Springfield ’03, or even the Winchester Model 94—among others. The decision Milgov makes about its service rifle at the beginning of Operation Manifest Destiny will be one of the most important ones Milgov makes at this juncture in American history. The ideal rifle will be easy to manufacture, robust, easy to maintain, accurate, serviceable, provide a satisfactory rate of fire, provide adequate firepower, and be easy and inexpensive to train on. Ammunition should be easy and inexpensive to manufacture, too. Since every available design of rifle meets these standards to varying degrees, Milgov’s choice for a standard service rifle will reflect a compromise that will no doubt be agonizing for the Joint Chiefs.

Commentary?

Webstral