The whole "stand-off" rationale for the .308 self-loader being a viable insurgency weapon is GIGO.
The presumption seems to be predicated on standing off at 500+ meters against small units armed with the M-16 pattern rifle supposedly unable to hit with lethality beyond three-hundred meters, which is a ludicrous presumption.
If a sizeable chunk of the military turned on these self-styled militia forces, and the latter tried to stand off the former at 500 meters in "shoot and scoot," these M1A fans are dead men scooting.
The heroic rifleman scenario requires the "enemy" to drop their entire combined arms doctrine and get themselves picked off. Yeah, that's likely.
What to do about getting chain gunned by air assets? Arty? An M-1 Abrams? An M242 on a Bradley? A Ma Deuce on a Humvee?
One freakin' M252 mortar crew can bang away from about 80-5600 meters--from complete cover.
This is not even to mention that whomever you face will likely be better organized and have better comms, no matter how much better motivated or rifle equipped you feel.
A "modern" insurgency isn't going to play "patrol and ambush" with the US Armed Forces, or factions of it, and long survive as an effective force. A successful insurgency makes itself so much a part of the civilian community that no one can be trusted and a climate of paranoia exists in the oppressor's forces. Culturally, we might not go for the suicide bomber, but a potent insurgency, far from a rifleman's fantasy, is going to be long on pistols to the head, up-close urban assassination, car bombs and the like, not romantic shoot-outs with the jackboots in the open countryside like a Civil War reenactment.
Might as well pick which MBR is best for zombies as select one for facing off with rogue combined arms units.
In an insurgency, the best weapons you can have are the ones the OPFOR never sees except for in their lethal effects on randomly selected establishment supporters dumped in alleys and rivers. Fear, political instability, and sapping the will of the oppressor to wage war are the key goals of an outgunned force, not putting a 308 through a guy's vest before being burned alive by napalm dropped by CAS.
Like it or not, the DC snipers were closer to the probable reality of an anti-governmental insurgency than is any scenario in which an MBR has any true advantage.
Garbage In Garbage Out. A semi-auto .308 is a great range toy, but that is all it really is anymore absent a total, post apocalyptic, dog eat dog on the individual level type of SHTF. Anything featuring tyrannical government, you might be better served spending a grand on a private purchased Rohrbaugh than on a battle rifle predicated on a fantasy.
History likes to rhyme? The pre-Tet Vietcong and the various Iraqi insurgencies are the blueprints, and they didn't and don't prominently feature battle rifles.
The presumption seems to be predicated on standing off at 500+ meters against small units armed with the M-16 pattern rifle supposedly unable to hit with lethality beyond three-hundred meters, which is a ludicrous presumption.
If a sizeable chunk of the military turned on these self-styled militia forces, and the latter tried to stand off the former at 500 meters in "shoot and scoot," these M1A fans are dead men scooting.
The heroic rifleman scenario requires the "enemy" to drop their entire combined arms doctrine and get themselves picked off. Yeah, that's likely.
What to do about getting chain gunned by air assets? Arty? An M-1 Abrams? An M242 on a Bradley? A Ma Deuce on a Humvee?
One freakin' M252 mortar crew can bang away from about 80-5600 meters--from complete cover.
This is not even to mention that whomever you face will likely be better organized and have better comms, no matter how much better motivated or rifle equipped you feel.
A "modern" insurgency isn't going to play "patrol and ambush" with the US Armed Forces, or factions of it, and long survive as an effective force. A successful insurgency makes itself so much a part of the civilian community that no one can be trusted and a climate of paranoia exists in the oppressor's forces. Culturally, we might not go for the suicide bomber, but a potent insurgency, far from a rifleman's fantasy, is going to be long on pistols to the head, up-close urban assassination, car bombs and the like, not romantic shoot-outs with the jackboots in the open countryside like a Civil War reenactment.
Might as well pick which MBR is best for zombies as select one for facing off with rogue combined arms units.
In an insurgency, the best weapons you can have are the ones the OPFOR never sees except for in their lethal effects on randomly selected establishment supporters dumped in alleys and rivers. Fear, political instability, and sapping the will of the oppressor to wage war are the key goals of an outgunned force, not putting a 308 through a guy's vest before being burned alive by napalm dropped by CAS.
Like it or not, the DC snipers were closer to the probable reality of an anti-governmental insurgency than is any scenario in which an MBR has any true advantage.
Garbage In Garbage Out. A semi-auto .308 is a great range toy, but that is all it really is anymore absent a total, post apocalyptic, dog eat dog on the individual level type of SHTF. Anything featuring tyrannical government, you might be better served spending a grand on a private purchased Rohrbaugh than on a battle rifle predicated on a fantasy.
History likes to rhyme? The pre-Tet Vietcong and the various Iraqi insurgencies are the blueprints, and they didn't and don't prominently feature battle rifles.