arndt@lymph.DEC (02/19/85)
It has now been confirmed. The serial numbers of weapons taken from the communist forces in El Salvador match those from weapons lists found in warehouses in Grenada!!! Keep chargin' Ken Arndt
david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) (02/21/85)
> It has now been confirmed. The serial numbers of weapons taken from > the communist forces in El Salvador match those from weapons lists > found in warehouses in Grenada!!! I, for one, am skeptical about a claim that the Soviet Union inscribes its assault rifles with serial numbers. Perhaps someone could enlighten me; what earthly purpose would such a system serve (except to drive up a defense contract, which is not as high a priority in the USSR as it is in the US)? David Rubin {allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david Hello? Is this the Treasury Department? Yes, I'd like to report a stolen automatic rifle, model M-16, serial number...
brower@fortune.UUCP (Richard Brower) (02/22/85)
The purpose for the Russians inscribing serial numbers on weapons
is so that brass can make sure that each soldier keeps his or her
own weapon clean, oiled and working. US weapons are inscribed with
serial numbers for that reason also, not to drive up costs.
--
Richard A. Brower Fortune Systems
{ihnp4,ucbvax!amd,hpda,sri-unix,harpo}!fortune!browerclt@pur-phy.UUCP (Talmadge) (02/23/85)
>> It has now been confirmed. The serial numbers of weapons taken from >> the communist forces in El Salvador match those from weapons lists >> found in warehouses in Grenada!!! >I, for one, am skeptical about a claim that the Soviet Union inscribes >its assault rifles with serial numbers. Perhaps someone could >enlighten me; what earthly purpose would such a system serve (except >to drive up a defense contract, which is not as high a priority in the >USSR as it is in the US)? I find it fascinating that anyone could doubt the utility of serial numbers, *especially* on weapons, and *especially* in a totalitarian system such as the Soviet Union. Pray tell what you do if a defect is discovered in a particular factory lot of AK-74's two weeks after the weapons have been distributed to the field? Under your system of no serial numbers, the soldiers would have to live (bad choice of words) with a potentially defective weapon, or the goverment would have to go about testing each recently issued weapon for, say, undue stress in a particular element of the firing mechanism. With factory lot numbers, or even better, individual serial numbers, you can quickly isolate defective products. Other advantages of serial numbers include the tracing of stolen property (and yes, even a utopian government such as the Soviet Union has crime problems!), tracing the abuse of fire arms, etc... This isn't to say I'm not skeptical about the original article. Maybe Ken Arndt (I'm not trying to impugn on his character, just skeptical) could post his source of information. Carrick Talmadge. UUCP: {decvax,ucbvax,harpo,allegra,inuxc,seismo,teklabs}!pur-ee!Physics:clt INTERNET: clt @ pur-phy.UUCP Notes: AK-74 is a trademark of the Soviet Union. Hello? Is this the Treasury Department? Yes, I'd like to report a stolen thermonuclear device in the 20 megaton range, model G-20000A, serial number...
david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) (02/23/85)
> The purpose for the Russians inscribing serial numbers on weapons > is so that brass can make sure that each soldier keeps his or her > own weapon clean, oiled and working. US weapons are inscribed with > serial numbers for that reason also, not to drive up costs. > -- > Richard A. Brower Fortune Systems > {ihnp4,ucbvax!amd,hpda,sri-unix,harpo}!fortune!brower Maybe there are serial numbers (though I think soldiers can be held responsible for their equipment without tatooing it), but this does not satisfactorily support the claim. Precisely, then, what is meant by the claim that the numbers of guns in El Salvador and in Grenada match? Certainly, they cannot be in the same place at the same time, and I doubt we're talking about a manifest which stated AK-47 #4300293 was in this Grenadan wharehouse on June 30, and was subsequently recovered in El Salvador on August 15. Please recall that one of the "windfalls" our administration eagerly pointed out after the Grenadan invasion was that the large cache of Soviet-made weapons could be smuggled to the Afghan mujahadeen, and the Soviets would be unable to prove American involvement. Now they wish to claim that, while the Soviets lack the means to follow the flow of their own weapons (an assertion which I was willing to accept), the US can. Well excuuuuse me for being just a wee bit leary of such an apparently self-contradicting assertion. This administration has not shown much hesitancy in making self-serving claims, and I'll have to see some proof before I'll buy it. Has anyone seen anything other than the report of an administration claim to support the original assertion that there is proof, via serial numbers, of substantial shipment from Grenada to El Salvador? Presented with such evidence, I would concede that the invasion of Grenada was justified; if you folks really have seen something, OTHER than another bald assertion by an administration spokesman, you have the opportunity to see a centrist who thinks VERY poorly of Reagan eat some crow. David Rubin {allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david
cathy@ru-cs44.UUCP (Cathy Garlick) (03/01/85)
So communist weapons found in Grenada ? So what? I don't see how that justifies and invasion on the part of the US. So what if the guerillas in El Salvador use Soviet weapons? Don't the contra in Nicaragua use weapons supplied by the US? I fail to see the difference. Cathy Garlick (mcvax!ukc!ru-cs44!cathy) Univ. of Reading Whiteknights Reading U.K.
gjk@talcott.UUCP (Greg Kuperberg) (03/03/85)
> So communist weapons found in Grenada ? So what? I don't see how that > justifies an invasion on the part of the US. So what if the guerillas > in El Salvador use Soviet weapons? Don't the contra in Nicaragua use > weapons supplied by the US? > > I fail to see the difference. ... > Cathy Garlick (mcvax!ukc!ru-cs44!cathy) I think the issue here is that Reagan's opponents believe that the Sandinistas in El Salvador exist because of popular support, while the Reagan Administration maintains they exist because of Soviet support. This was the rational behind mining Nicaragua's harbors, I suppose. Some of his opposition, in order to prove Reagan wrong on absolutely every point, go so far as to say, "Not only is it the case that the contras do not depend on Soviet support, they don't *have* Soviet support," in which case connecting weapons in Grenada to those in El Salvador proves one of the President's points both in El Salvador and in Grenada, where there is a similar controversy. --- Greg Kuperberg harvard!talcott!gjk "2*x^5-10*x+5=0 is not solvable by radicals." -Evariste Galois.