User blog comment:Cfp3157/Guerilla Warfare Tourney- Round One: The Desert Fox vs Celina Lucyna/@comment-5559147-20130116160946/@comment-5559147-20130117014507

Okay folks, perhaps you should read again. I said modern soldiers are going to have more experience with modern weapons then, soldiers from 60 years ago. You really want to argue that point. You want to argue that a British Soldier from the 1940's is going to have as much experience on/with the M4 as a member of a military unit that actively used them until recently. You're really going to argue that point? The standard issue rifle for the British forces in WWII was a bolt action rifle, going from that to a fully automatic assault rifle is going to be a change. If you look at examples like Vietnam we see the kind problems that crop up when you've got men and commanders unfamiliar with that kind of fire power in the hands of your average trooper. Their are reason why the next generation of M16s didn't have a full auto-option and a lot of assault rifles still don't. Also modern doctrine is built around indevidual infantrymen having that kind of light weight long range rapid fire, fire power. The doctrine and tactics of WWII were not. So yeah nothings been rebutted. We've got a people not understanding the difference between LMGs or SMG and assault rifles in both form and use. Then we've got people blowing what I said way out of proportion thats all. Nothing approaching a valid counter point let alone a rebuttal.