I note that that paticular poster has yet to express his support for those protesting against the regime.

…so you understood that the Aya!!! yell in this on particular posters first post was negative word and ment same as no??

And who are you to call anyone to support anyone in a princible. Should this one particular poster draft a list of all those people victims of other oppresive regimes which you haven’t expressed your support???

propaply…perhaps the Monks drove them self into near martyrhood in order to provocate the masses.
I only wonder what on why it is that Buddish monks are the ignitor of the rebellion. To my knowlidge, such earthly things like type of government aren’t supposed to be such big deal for religiously strong minded monks. Expecially when we know that the Buddhis monasteries have been in good terms with itself buddish generals of the Junta. The junta has build lot of monasteries and tempels to the monks and havent opressed them in the past.
And then this…makes me wonder wheter the motives behind this are as noble and innocent as some of our American friends migth think at the first hand. And the nasty experiences shows that when things like democracy and freedom are taken to work as a tools for some other motives, things doesent lead into paradise upon earth

well to me its Myanmar;)

Anyway, freedom and democracy are good things, at least in theory, But when a flock of really religiously charged people starts to mengle with politics.. of wich has previously nested under golden ribbons provided by the wery same Junta that they are now protesting against….To me that seems bit too odd. You would believe that normal everyday people (the ones that actually cares of freedom) would be that one that protest, not buddish monks…
So I would Really, really love to see the latest accounts of the monasteries and check out wheter some odd deposits have came from the …western shores:)
before rallying around the flag of freedom. becouse, latest events in the world have proved that freedom can be really nasty thing, if its delivered by the wrong guys:diablo:

Aya!!!

Also for Rhodesia, Siam, Zaire, Yugoslavia, DDR and even for Soviet union and for the rest of the “no-longer-existing country names”…

…Whats wrong to use the name Myamar??

Back when we trained with -20 degree celsius and above we used to have three pairs of gloves with us. First was the “leather-green”, very thin and ridicilous green leather gloves, above that were wool mittens and up-most was a leather mittens. Now this arragemnt was quite stiff and it leaved you with only a thump free which was still almoust unusable. The whole set was called “no-can-do” by us and literally it made you unable to do anything which requires dexterity.

…But not with Kalashnikoviks. I managed to disable, clean it (so that it satisfyed the drill instructors) and put back together with “no-can-do”s without any proplem. I was even able to shoot with it even if I didn’t have a fingers free for the trigger (tough the sportsshooters pride was too high and I sacrificed my fingers for the wintergoods for better score:rolleyes:)

Ergonomics can theoretically improve your combat ability, but the marginal between AKs and some more modern and cleaner western rifles are as small as the accuracy and other factors that it would really make any difference.

In the end its rather pointless to depate over “which rifle is the best”. Arm-chair generals are just sticking to nationalistic driven obinions and soldiers who really have to use them picks and chooses the rifle they were trained for. They know their gun and knows how to operate it and when you are in war the confidence towards your main instrument must be as high as possiple. That confidence isen’t aquired by reading internet forums over which gun is better, but with extensive training for the gun. American soldiers would pick M16 and derivates without questions as they are most familiar with it. We finns for examples don’t hesitate for amoment to use our Rk62 nor Swedes for AK5 and so on.

Not with this case. AKs ergonomics aren’t anyway harmfull or conceptually wrong, its just plain and simple. Our Rk62 didn’t even have the luxury of wooden stocks and yet we didn’t complain that its uncomftable to shoot at it…we did complain that its uncomftable to carry it around all the time…and also carrying the other stuff around…and in fact to being in the army at first place…

…but never that it was painfull to shoot at. Not even to lefthanders like myself…

For a weapons mented for military service its bit lame to ask them to be ergonomic or othervice comftable. I bet my ass that everyone carrying somesort of rifle alongside full combat gear grows to hate it to some degree regardless how “nice” it may feel to casual shooters hands.

I’m a sports-shooter so I have great appriciation towards ergonomy but its bit different if you lay still in comftable shooting-range and even too tnese breathing may ruin your competition than it is to be out in the fields where your life is dependable for the gun. I will happily sacrifice all comfortability and some marginal accuracy benefit for the fact that I can thurst 100% that the gun works in blink-of-an-eye situation.

All Kalashnikoviks are practical and it causes you no unbareble difficoulties to shoot and thats all what you need from any assault rifle. Military equipment isen’t supposed to be comftable, it supposed to do it job. In fact small irritating little “charesteristics” are just good for “driving in” new soldiers…Like the words of our battery’s commander “With this we are trying to seek some toughness”:rolleyes: