Which pistol/rifle combo would you carry into war?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seeing that the most engagements don't exceed 300m, I would take the AK-47 and Tokarev TT-33 in 7.62x25.

Both can be found on every continent, both have seen action in all types of terrain and environments and both have distinguish themselves on countless battlefields. As such this would make both parts and ammo readily available lowering concerns for repairs and ammo. They're light in weight allowing me to carry more ammo. Seeing that the possibility is that I would be facing the same weapon systems thus the same ammo, it would hide the fact that I'm in the area and instead of hoping that a buddy gets it so pickup their ammo, I can just pickup what I need from the enemy dead.

You know, I would really like to see the age vs weapon choice correlation...

v.

My age: 53 in June
 
Last edited:
I'm way too old now, and I'lll leave that **** to you younger guys...but

if bad things came my way, I have a custom Mauser 98 in .308 Win and a 1911 (tactical version so I can see the sights)...probably take a pockes size .357 snubbie, just in case.
And lunch.

FWIW, back when I WAS young enough, I learned on an M-14 and later M-16 but I carried a 12 Ga Winchester pump...but that was many years ago.

mark
 
"G19/AK, either 47 or 74 depending on the theater and availability of 7.62 versus 5.45. "

What he said...

A person can learn to use any tool, and even become highly skilled with a poor one. Get a good, reliable tool, even a common one.
 
Hopefully, if that ever happened, I would hope the weapon would be carrying ME into it, like a tank.
 
FNH SCAR 17 and Walther P99

Would never ever take a Glock any Glock into combat. Last time I was dumb enough to do that it almost got me killed.

Remember for this question your ammo is FMJ by treaty.

Va herder
 
Well, this is an interesting exercise in preferences, but, really, the answer is far simpler.

You carry based on what ammunition is supported in the supply trains.

In US supported logistics, you want to carry a .308, no problem. You just better like humping that can of ammo, too. (And, you'll prefer that can after the first time you flop in the mud wearing a 250 round belt of ammo; which will trip you into whatever vile bog is least nice to wallow in.)

Really, there's a lot to be said for spiffy things like, oh, a BM-59--Garand action, magazine-fed, and .308--unless you have no supply for it.

But, I'm biased, I can admit it. My preferred long gun for warfare? Easy: Battalion Landing Team with an entire MAU(SOC) at the edge of the littoral. As the smart man said; comes the time I need a side arm, there'll be plenty laying on the ground to choose from.
 
Last time it was the Beretta M9. That was 20 years ago. From what I understand, it would be the same thing today.

If I had my druthers, it would be an HK USP45.

(We Corpsmen are not issued offensive weapons. At least back then. Interpretation of the Geneva convention was that our sidearm was for our personal defense, and the defense of our patient only.)
 
It would be easier for me to say what I WOULDN'T carry. I would not carry anything in .223/5.56x54 nato, especially an AR, nor would I carry a Glock. Now before you start bashing me, understand that I'm not bashing either weapon, I just don't trust either one of them.
I might consider a HK 93, but would rather have a HK 91 or CETME. And as for a pistol, a hi-cap 1911, or a CZ97 or Witness/Tanfoglio clone.
 
Last time it was the Beretta M9. That was 20 years ago. From what I understand, it would be the same thing today.

If I had my druthers, it would be an HK USP45.

(We Corpsmen are not issued offensive weapons. At least back then. Interpretation of the Geneva convention was that our sidearm was for our personal defense, and the defense of our patient only.)
And every enemy out there respects the fact that you aren't offensively armed, right? Somehow, I don't think that I would rely on that theory...
 
CollinLeon,

Trust me, it wasn't my idea. I didn't make the rules. I would much rather have had the M-16, or the M-14.
 
The truth of the matter is that once the bullets start flying corpsmen and medics usually have plenty to do that doesn't require the use of a rifle. As someone has already posted, there were always spares around.
 
For the rifle, Bushmaster ACR, or FN F2000, or PTR 91F, or an Arsenal SGL 21. There are so many good choices... :) For the pistol, either my tricked out Kimber Custom II, or a Glock 21, or a CZ 97. Again, there are so many good choices. :D
 
My Choices:

AR 15
Beretta 9mm

Well, this is an interesting exercise in preferences, but, really, the answer is far simpler.

You carry based on what ammunition is supported in the supply trains.

I agree with Capnmac......would love a .308 but choose the lighter AR15...and 5.56 fits supply chain as well.

Simple choice considering supply of parts and ammo availability!

As the smart man said; comes the time I need a side arm, there'll be plenty laying on the ground to choose from.

This reminds me of a great movie! And I suppose what ever we would choose there would be plenty of other choices lying around!

I Am 45......and hope I never see or have to make such choices...(Would do it if need be)....I pray my 3 sons never have to do it either!.....But Thank God...And God Bless all the Armed Forces that have done it, and are doing it NOW!

Hats Off to all of them!
 
For me it would be the M60 and colt 70 series if ammo wasn't a problem, that way if they by some slight chance get passed the hellfire i was unleashing i could put em down pretty quick with a .45
 
When I went to war I was issued a 90,000 ton aircraft carrier and about 60 fighter and attack aircraft. Worked pretty well off Vietnam.
Be safe
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top