If firepower is what determines who wins skirmishes why doesn't every country arm soldiers with something like para minimis or SAW's and have the "light machine gunner" have something heavier (like an RPK or something that can reach out and hit at longer ranges)
They are compact, fairly light and can be made lighter and way better at sustained and suppressive fire.
You actually saw stuff like this in WW2 where you had squads where 8/10 men had a BAR, basically everyone who could get their hands on one carried one.
A squad armed like described seems like it would have a massive firepower advantage over an enemy who had regular rifles or carbines
>>65218096 Because firepower dosen't. Combat isn't some "if you have x then you will always win" type thing, that line of thinking is how you get the US in the 1960's.