What country is the arsenal of today?

[DMK]

During WWII, the Brits stood their ground and stopped Hitler in his tracks. The Chinese gave the Japanese a bloody nose even if they weren't as successful. Huge numbers of insurgents gave the occupying forces a real rough time.

These brave defenders were largely armed by small arms manufactured right here in the USA. The Arsenal of Democracy.

So say we had a declared world war III, right now. Who would have made most of the small arms? Where do the majority of the small arms of the defenders of aggression in the major wars today come from?

What are today's M3 greasegun, Thompson SMG, M1 Carbine or Liberty pistol?

 

[Cosmoline]

These brave defenders were largely armed by small arms manufactured right here in the USA.

Where did you get that idea? We helped, but we certainly didn't provide all their arms. We didn't make the UK's small arms. The Chinese communist and nationalist forces had a collection of arms from captured Arisakas to colonial Mausers. We supplemented this with our own contributions for our own purposes. The partisans in east europe didn't get many weapons from us.

 

[harvester of sorrow]

We didn't make the UK's small arms.

No, but we did collect all types of rifles and pistols to help them arm their homeguard, as well as providing them with all manner of thompsons, savage enfields, and browning machineguns under Lend-Lease. They paid us back after the war by dumping many of them into the Atlantic.

 

[DMK]

We helped, but we certainly didn't provide all their arms.

I never said all. However, the Brits and commonwealths did get a bunch of Thompsons, S&W revolvers, 1911s and Savage Enfields via Lend-lease.

 

[El Tejon]

Today's arsenals are in Russia and the People's Republic of China. Our industry could gear up overnight but our government would never allow that.

The 60 year old AK-47 has replaced the M3, M1 carbine, and whatever a "Liberty pistol" is (do you mean Liberator???).

 

[Outlaws]

During WWII, the Brits stood their ground and stopped Hitler in his tracks.

Ummm..... If I recall England was being level with air raids and on a path to utter destruction until we got involved.

 

[DMK]

OK, let's get past the whole England thing. You guys are missing the question in the thread.

The 60 year old AK-47 has replaced the M3, M1 carbine, and whatever a "Liberty pistol" is (do you mean Liberator???).

Um, yea.

Yea, I was thinking AK too. Are AK's being used widely by both sides of today's major conflicts?

Are handguns even a consideration in armed conflict anymore?

 

[RCR29]

m3/Thompson SMG of today would have to be the MP5
M1 Carbine I don't really know since it was developed for use rear eschelon troops whose duty would require firepower greater than an m1911a1 and less than an m1 garand. Maybe an M4
The Liberty pistol of today....The AK

 

[Roadwild17]

The way I always heard, if Hitler had not changed the air attacks from the RAF to the cities and industry, the UK as we know it today would not exist.

But as far as making the "guns of freedom" that would definitely be the AKs. The AK is even on some countries flag after a fight for independence (or maby its a postage stamp, not 100% here).

 

[Outlaws]

I think FN and HK would be considered the "civilized world" supplier...with our government being Colt for the standard issue. AK's of various nationalities for the rest of the world.

 

[DMK]

m3/Thompson SMG of today would have to be the MP5

I think FN and HK would be considered the "civilized world" supplier

Hmm, real good points.

Especially if you consider anti-terrorist units as front line soldiers in the "war of terror"

So we got votes for Russia and China for AKs with Germany and Belgium for the majority of subguns, PDWs and 5.56 AWs.

 

[harvester of sorrow]

The AK is even on some countries flag

That would be the flag of Mozambique.

 

[Cosmoline]

The 60 year old AK-47 has replaced the M3, M1 carbine, and whatever a "Liberty pistol"

Don't overestimate the US contribution to small arms during WWII. Our arms industry was tiny before the war, and lacked capacity to supply our own needs. Sewing machine companies had to make rifles. The M1 carbine never had a role anywhere close to the AK-47. A little over six million M-1's were made, which pales in comparison with other arms. And the liberator was a failed experiment. It would be more accurate to say that the AK-47 replaced the Mauser and the Mosin-Nagant as the world's leading firearm. Over 17 million Lee Enfields, 25 million Mosins, and at least as many Mausers were churned out in total. Indeed, Ball estimates worldwide production of military Mausers at 100 million. The US small arms industry of the time had never made that many of anything. For example, only about six million Garands were made in total.

Are handguns even a consideration in armed conflict anymore?

They never were much of a consideration. In war they have a secondary role, if even that.

Nations purchase small arms from many sources. The US supplies some, though most of our arms industry concentrates on high-end weapons systems. In that field we are the absolute world leaders. European outfits such as FN produce most of the high-end small arms. East Europe, the former USSR and China probably produce most of the less costly small arms. The insurgent groups tend to be armed with an array of WWII and Cold War firearms they've stolen or bought on the grey or black market.

 

[ReadyontheRight]

I believe the US supplied a few aircraft, tanks, ships, beans, MA Deuces and other bits of heavy metal to the effort as well.

As far as cranking out arms goes, check out the newer players getting into the game - DPMS, Stag Arms, Rock River, etc. Machine/Assembly shops building a very modular and proven rifle. The US could gear up pretty quickly to produce lots and lots of M16s. It's the heavy machinery and computers that we need to make sure we can continue to produce.

We will turn quite a corner on this front when Chinese automobiles start taking over the US market.

England overcame a phenomenal challenge in WW2 - militarily and politically - but I hope that any folks who want to point out how well the UK fought back can also appreciate that the USA was invaluable to victory. Especially since we diverted post-Pearl Harbor rage, recruits and resources in the other direction for a few years.

That would probably not work today.

 

[Fu-man Shoe]

This is an interesting thread.

To answer the OP's question, I'm gonna have to give it up to the
People's Republic of China.

Them Chinese dude's dont **** around. Sure, they make a lot of
cheap junk right now, for the American consumer market, but they
could tool up to start cranking our various weapons, such as the
ever prolific AK-47 virtually overnight, EN MASSE.

And when I say virtually overnight, I mean pretty darn quick.

You'll hear some folks say, from time to time, that the reason the
United States won WW2 was that "we outproduced them"...there is
a lot of merit to this statement. Unfortunately, it's the same merit
that is gonna hand the victory to the PRC. They can, quite simply,
out produce us.

They don't have to be 'better', they simply have to have more of them.

What do you think would prevail? 100 troops with precision milled M4's,
or 1000 troops with crudely stamped and poorly finished Ak's?

Sometime's it all just a numbers game. I'm afraid This is one of those times.

Look around you. Try and find a product that's NOT made in China.

Now imagine all of those companies are cranking out weapons components.

...

Now some people will say that America simply has to get it's presses and
mills rolling again. "we could tool up overnight if we had to", is the defiant
call to arms. This is a very positive, can-do sentiment, and I'm glad that it
still lives...We're gonna need more of that.

However (comma) America has lost it's industrial base. The United States
operates on a so-called service economy. Manufacturing is no longer what
the majority of the population is gainfully employed in.

Try as you might, you just cannot re-tool a Starbucks or a Dry-Cleaners
to start producing weapons or weapon components.


Put *that* in your pipe and smoke it.

Fu-man Shoe

 

[jwalk]

Sorry everyone, just can't let this go,

Quote:
Ummm..... If I recall England was being level with air raids and on a path to utter destruction until we got involved.

So when exactly did we start producing Spitfires, Hurricanes, and anything but a handful of pilots to the British? The Battle of Britain ended in October 1940, more than a year before Pearl Harbor. I just wondered how we claimed to stop Germany single handedly. Oh well maybe I'll just watch some more History Channel.:banghead:

 

[antarti]

However (comma) America has lost it's industrial base. The United States operates on a so-called service economy. Manufacturing is no longer what the majority of the population is gainfully employed in.

You're getting ahead of yourself.

Where are we going to get all the steel from for the effort, those formerly American foundries that have started partnering with the Chinese (buying ownership stake in the company) in the NorthEast?

Even our scrap steel (like the twin towers) goes to China these days. Some AK and some steel-core ammo might be made with that and pointed at an American.

That's a little harder to put in a pipe and smoke, don't you think?

ETA: The M1 carbine and M3 grease gun are nicely replaced by the AK-74U Krinkov, at least IIRC that's the proper designation for it.

 

[harvester of sorrow]

I just wondered how we claimed to stop Germany single handedly

I would say that until June 6 of 1944, the Russians and the Eighth Air Force working from opposite sides stopped Germany.

 

[ReadyontheRight]

Are handguns even a consideration in armed conflict anymore?

Are rifles even a consideration anymore? It's BOMBS taking out our troops in Iraq.

In a WW3 scenario, we're talking horizon+ weapons superiority being the major driver.

Given the history of a certain recent Democrat Administration being funded by and sharing technological info with Chinese regimes, I fear for our technological superiority in long-range weapons a lot more than I fear a bunch of 100-yard AK-47s stamped out in government factories across the Chinese countryside.

 

[ReadyontheRight]

Sorry everyone, just can't let this go,

Quote:
Ummm..... If I recall England was being level with air raids and on a path to utter destruction until we got involved.

So when exactly did we start producing Spitfires, Hurricanes, and anything but a handful of pilots to the British? The Battle of Britain ended in October 1940, more than a year before Pearl Harbor. I just wondered how we claimed to stop Germany single handedly. Oh well maybe I'll just watch some more History Channel.

You are right. England kept fighting. Nice job.

However...Are you saying England could have defeated the Facists in Africa, Italy, France and eventually Germany without the USA?

V1 rockets, V2 Rockets, ME262...Could England have kept from being invaded by Germany if the USA had not entered the European war?

 

[jwalk]

ReadyontheRight:

Nope. It just sounded like the only reason England stopped Germany was because we got involved. They stopped them without us in the Battle of Britain. Do I like their chances of going on with life as they knew it if we didn't get involved? No. Sorry, if anyone wants to start a thread on WWII I'll post there. Big general statements ie England was on a utter path to destruction until we were involved just bug me and are usually wrong.

So here's my big generalization pertaining to today's arsenal. How about all the haji's running around from Palestine to Pakistan, supplied with whatever country wants to make a few bucks, Russia, China, N. Korea. Sure doesn't seem like they're having a lot of trouble finding their next martyr or paying a kid fifty bucks to set up an IED.

 

[mrmeval]

England was out producing Germany while being bombed. They managed to thwart the automatic targeting of the vengence weapons and such. It's a hard call what would have happened if the US had not gotten involved but I think they'd have left the Germans bleeding badly.

I don't forgive them turning the arms we donated to them into rebar and won't donate to them ever again. These were personal firearms sent for their defense.

If they continue their folly of alignment with the EU I think I'll pop some popcorn and watch the muslims eat them.

 

[ReadyontheRight]

Wow.

 

[Cosmoline]

Are rifles even a consideration anymore? It's BOMBS taking out our troops in Iraq.

Small arms are taking their share. And small arms are defending our troops. We could return the favor and start dropping MOABs on the infested neighborhoods, but DC would never allow it.

 

[ReadyontheRight]

Small arms are taking their share. And small arms are defending our troops. We could return the favor and start dropping MOABs on the infested neighborhoods, but DC would never allow it.

Point well taken. Rifles...and men/women motivated and trained in their use...are STILL the primary tools of Liberty.