It’s ironic considering Indonesia still recognises Russia, China and Burma…. But they don’t fit the narrative do they?

I’m seeing Mark ‘Chopper’ Read influence here.

Like I said: .280 had a higher penetration capability as well as muzzle velocity. I can’t remember the source but .308 was 4x slower than 5.56 and about 1.9x slower than the .280 thus less of the capabilities mentioned above. The only thing true was that the US did not want a foreign concept inducted into their military simply out of politics…. Nothing else.

7.62… not .308. Remember, ballistics are different. Ammo has a shelf life, once that shelf life is reached, the ammunition becomes unviable. Also, 1960’s America was the boon for military industrial complex. Much like the tobacco and oil industries, it campaigned for the newest and shiniest toys while debunking all criticism against it.

There is no definitive proof to suggest the .280 was a sub-standard round. It provided much higher muzzle velocity and penetration capability compared to the 7.62 round plus much lighter weight. (Moving to 5.56 on the 60’s is proof of this concept.) The only thing correct about this is ‘the US didn’t want a foreign design.’ Remember, military industrial complex was at its strongest right after WW2

Everything except your last statement was true. ‘The US didn’t want a non-US design.’ The .280 was effective in both ballistics and cost effectiveness not to mention weight for the soldier carrying it. It was proven come the 5.56 over the 7.62. The main issue the US had was millions of rounds of 30.06 which had already been made and nowhere to use them.