Insurgent Snipers?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
1,719
Location
Western Missouri
I was reading in a gun rag today about what some of the Iraqi insurgents have been capable of doing with milsurp Mausers, commercial hunting rifles, and Dragunov-esque rifles. Basically, shots up to about 500 yards on individual targets of opportunity.

I was wondering, why are they calling these guys snipers?

To me, being able to hit a Humvee@ 500 with a .308 bolt gun, or a Dragunov, or a soldier's head at 200 is something everyone entering the battlefield ought to be able to do.

I can make the kinds of hits these "snipers" are capable of, and I don't come close to approaching sniper level accuracy.

While I understand many insurgents "spray and pray" to me, all this article confirms is just that there are jihadi riflemen, not that our troops are facing real snipers.

(Granted, as I say this, a rifleman is nothing to snort at), just saying, to me, you ain't a sniper unless you are making hits @ a 1,000 with a .300 WinMag.
 
To me, being able to hit a Humvee@ 500 with a .308 bolt gun, or a Dragunov, or a soldier's head at 200 is something everyone entering the battlefield ought to be able to do.

Can you do this?

Insurgents with a scoped rifle are less common but occur. The vast majority of enemy contact we make is currently in the form of IED. The enemy tends not to mass in numbers for any sort of organized attack, that would allow the U.S. Army (often confused for the wrath of God to insurgents) to do what they do best. Any sort of rifle fire is usually hit and run.
 
These guys fit the text book definition of a sniper. A sniper is anyone who fires from a position of concealment at a specific target. Americans have twisted the meaning of the word sniper to include only those who have been to a certified sniper school. Sniping is an action. Accurate sniping is a science and an art form. Don't confuse the two. Anyone can be a sniper, but it takes a special breed to be a "sniper" in the United States military. Much love and respect to those guys.
 
From what I've learned, sniper in the military or law enforcement sense also means intensive training in fieldcraft, intelligence gathering, and other aspects not just marksmanship. So comparing the likes of Lee-Malvo with a Hathcock or Ward or (name escapes me) among military and LEO snipers is quite an insult.
 
The Iraqis snipers for the insurgency use concealed locations and urban camoflage to attack targets of opportunity and then retreating before mass gunfire and artillary can be bought down upon them. They also likely to pass on information they find to other insurgents and scout out regions.

Sounds like snipers to me. Being part of the US military is not a prerequisite to being a sniper.
 
Doing a 200 yard head shot and hitting a torso at 500, is something that every rifleman should be able to do, yea, I can do it, know many that can.

Unforturnately, the military does not teach soldiers how to do it, nor do they give them the tools to do it, nor do they want them to do it. Those ranges are for weapons other than rifles, in the mind of the US military.

However, there is NO REASON that every able bodied American, with a rack grade rifle, with iron sights and surplus ammo can not hit a 20" torso out to 500 yards, NONE.

Before you jump on your key board to scoff, have you recieved any instruction on HOW to do it? Have you made a real attempt at learning HOW to do it?

To call the above insurgents (and myself) snipers is a joke, that is not what a sniper is, but it is what a rifleman should be. However, the media is so ignorant about shooting and marksmenship, that any rifle with a scope is a sniper rifle (hunters take note) and any shot over 100 yards is a "sniper" shot (hunters take note).

If you can not hit 20 torso out to 500 with a rack grade rifle, with surplus ammo, and iron sights, PM me, I will turn you on to the neatest deal you will have ever heard, and you will be amaized!

By the way, there will be 7-10 if us doing just that tomorrow, steel ringing at 500 yards, it is a hoot!
 
my first company commander and a good friend were killed by these "snipers" during my first deployment, they are a real threat.

you have to remember to that the eastern block countries "snipers are much different from what the snipers of the west are. the eastern block countries use "snipers" more like we use sdm's.they use semi auto rifle with low magnification, their job is to support the infantry squad.

now our snipers are used more with bolt action precision rifles like the usmc m40 and the army's m24, they are less of a support the squad role and a more on there on role. normaly in op's and such over watching an area. taking longer shots and engaging the enemy at ranges beyond that of the others "snipers".

you also have to keep in mind alot of people call some guy at a distance taking pop shots a sniper and this just isn't the case. they are called "snipers" but they are not school trainned nor have field craft.
 
:scrutiny: I guess I should consider myself lucky, being shot at by snipers and living to tell the tale. Although one came close, but I think it was more luck on his part that ability, was firing somewhat rapidly, defenitly not full auto, had two rounds pass near my head, and a third hit the upper edge of the turret just as i was sitting down (didn't realize what the first two rounds were, didn't hear gunshots, just the droan of the rounds flying by) but was outside of my sector of fire and couldn't get an eye on him to return fire. theres a few of them out there that I would consider snipers, the most I don't though, for the same reasons stated above, just having basic marksmanship doesn't make you a sniper.
 
rero360,
hey bro are you on a brad crew or tank? i have spent time in the drivers and gunners hatch of the brad, fun fun especially when you actually get to shoot!
 
Someone firing a surge of bullets at an enemy from a distance while using cover isn't sniping, that is agreed. However, this notion that only the USA can have and/or define just what a sniper is based on how they train their snipers is absurd. Our snipers are some of the finest the world has seen, and no doubt they are more skillfully trained then anything the enemy has. That doesn't mean that there are no insurgent snipers.

Also, as proven by Police snipers, you do not have to shoot at long distances to be considered a sniper (most police snipers set up at less then 100 yards almost all the time). This makes it harder to define who exactly is a sniper. It really is a matter of what you think qualifies as a sniper shot.

I think that we can all agree though, that no one wants to be on the other side of a sniper’s/marksman’s scope.
 
Actually, my comment was in response to the comment that merely shooting a long distance from a concealed position was a sniper. I was not implying that only American snipers are true snipers. The terrorists employ snipers also.

mordechaianiliewicz, you must have been reading SWAT? They covered some of the weapons the terrorists in Iraq are probably using - a Dragunov-type, Mosin-Nagant, and something else I don't remember.
The only reason I mentioned American sniper names is because that's all I can name off the top of my head (but I do know who Simo Hayha was). No disrespect meant towards snipers of other countries.
 
Well, folks, I had no idea this would get that heated so quickly. Um, by the way, with a scope, and a decent rifle, yes, I can hit body shots @ 500, and head shots @ 200. With a scope! Thing is, I think just about everybody should be able to.

Within that range, with most centerfire rifle cartridges, you have windage and elevation as factors, but other factors which involve trigonometry haven't entered the picture quite yet (although they start around 500 yards with some calibers).

To me, a sniper takes those factors into play. He does trig, often in his head, and his territory is minimum 300 yards past mine.

As I said, riflemen are nothing to snort at. We are lucky that the insurgents only have an occasional rifleman. What if we were facing 10 at every engagement who refused to shoot more than 2 or 3 rounds every time. Our boys casualties would be considerably worse.

I'm just saying, I look at myself as a rifleman. I think of these guys as riflemen. I think of a guy who can eat a rifleman's lunch as a sniper. By that definition, the US Army and Marines have snipers. But, it remains to be seen if the insurgents have snipers or not it seems.

To me, shooting from positions of cover and concealment, and moving on isn't sniping. It's simply good tactics against an enemy like the US who can bring air support to bear against anyone who stands up for a head on fight.
 
Possum,

actually I'm an MP riding around in an 1114, normally a gunner but I also go out as TC and driver when need be. I've thought about switching over to tanks in the future, still not sure about it, maybe go with EOD, go back to infantry or finish my career out as a MP.
 
They could be described as marksmen at best, since true snipers are hard to come by there. Maj Plaster gives 3 categories, which I tend to agree:
"potshot sniper", "trained marksman", "one-shot, one-kill sniper"

First have no knowledge on wind&elevation adjustments, being effective within 200 m, ie point and shoot. 50% would be these guys

40-45% insurgents could be called trained marksmen, having scoped rifles and elementary knowledge of using these, only lacking in training (which is gradually gotten over by practise and experience). Range is at least 400 m for small targets (head).

And 5-10% are true snipers, trained and effective.
 
Man, for a country that went to such deliberate great lengths to unlearn sniping and fieldcraft, after every large conflict, it seems kind of disingenuous to disregard others. Think about it, American Civil war, Boer war, and that thing where the Germans beat the French at Sedan all prove the merit of 'snipers', but they're quickly dismissed as soon as the fighting is over. Only the Germans keep anything with a semblance of a sniping program, and that's only because it happened to coincide with their Jager traditions. A while into WW1 and the leadership realize this sniping thing might be useful, and get into it in a moderate way (love the Brit's offset scope:rolleyes: ). after WW1 everything the Entente knew about sniping was dismissed, programs cancelled, and skilled peoples let go. And then another war comes along, and eventually the English speaking peoples decide to look up the WW1 vets still kicking and re-learn everything again. And then after WW2 what happens? They can it all again, lose everyone, except the Marines who keep a small program going. And then Vietnam comes, and the Army has to learn it all again!

In contrast to that, the Russians never killed their program ("In Russia, Progrom kills you!"), they didn't set astronomical goals, they just wanted soldiers with the ability to be effective on chosen targets to a few hundred yards, while the rest made cannon fodder. And their simple, frugal, extremely tested and proven technique is obviously going to be the model insurgents in urban areas choose.


And even being picky, the US has a table describing the categories of snipers they recognize:

6-4. TYPES OF ENEMY SNIPERS AND THEIR CAPABILITIES

The three general types of snipers are the specially trained and equipped individual, the trained marksman, and the civilian irregular. Each has different characteristics of operation and may be used to accomplish different purposes. Countermeasures effective against one type may be less effective against another.

a. Specially Trained Sniper. The most dangerous sniper is the individual who has been specially selected, trained, and equipped with a modern scope-mounted sniper rifle. These individuals are expert shots and are trained to select key individuals as their targets. They can hit at great range (sometimes out to 1,000 meters) and are skilled in avoiding detection. They are normally members of an organized, armed force and wear a standard uniform that may be modified to provide better camouflage. Their actions are carefully integrated into the overall plan of operation. This sniper is the most difficult to counter effectively. Until recently, there were not many potential adversaries of the US that could produce significant numbers of such individuals. Many armies in the world now have a renewed interest in snipers. More and more sniper training is taking place, with an increase of high-power rifles that are available at a reasonable cost on the world arms market. US forces can expect to see more and more trained snipers with improved weapons systems during future urban operations. Some of these may be equipped with rifles and night observation equipment that are among the best in the world. The US Army and its Western allies already have a relatively large number of this type sniper, as do several states of the former Soviet Union, and the Peoples Republic of China.

b. Trained Marksman. A trained marksman is a common sniper often found in urban combat. This sniper is a trained soldier, equipped with a standard issue weapon, who is an above-average shot. He normally has fair to good field craft skills and is difficult to detect in the urban environment. He may be employed singly or in teams to create confusion among friendly forces, cause casualties, or harass and disrupt the tempo of operations. He is often used by the enemy in an economy-of-force role as a rear guard or covering force, while the main enemy force withdraws. He may also be placed on the perimeter of a defended urban area to provide early warning of the approach of friendly forces and to disrupt and cause them to deploy early. The trained marksman is a dangerous foe. He can be found in fairly large numbers in the armies of many potential adversaries. He is normally a member of an organized, armed force and wears a standard uniform. He may, however, be a guerrilla fighter, in which case he may not wear a recognizable uniform but will normally carry his arms openly.

c. Armed Irregular. The third general type of sniper is the armed irregular. He may have little or no formal military training but may have experience in urban combat. He may or may not wear any distinguishing uniform and may even appear to be merely another of the thousands of noncombatants found in a large urban area. He may or may not carry his weapon openly and may go to great lengths to avoid identification as a sniper. His fires are normally not accurate, and he seldom deliberately targets specific individuals. His actions are not normally integrated into an overall enemy plan, although his attacks may be loosely coordinated with others in his general area. Although this type of sniper has the least ability to cause heavy losses among US forces, he has high value as an element of harassment, and in some stability and support situations he may achieve results far out of proportion to his actual ability to cause casualties.

d. Range of Sniper Attacks. The typical range for a sniper attack is 300 to 600 meters with medium-caliber rifles. Shots from 800 to 1,000 meters are the exception. Heavy sniper rifles (caliber .50, 12.7-mm, 14.5-mm, and 15-mm) with ranges of 1,200 to 1,500 meters are now available around the world. These heavy sniper rifles were originally intended as antimateriel weapons for stand-off attack against high-value targets, such as radar control vans, missiles, parked aircraft, and bulk fuel and ammunition storage sites. They are only marginally accurate enough for long-range shots against individual personnel. It is their ability to shoot through all but the heaviest shielding material, and their devastating effects, that make them valuable psychological weapons. The ability to shoot through common urban building materials makes these large weapons valuable as countersniper tools.

e. Equipment Trends. Several other equipment trends will result in a greater threat to US forces from urban snipers in the future.

(1) The quality and quantity of night observation devices sold on the world market is increasing daily. In the near future, even trained marksmen may be equipped with devices to allow accurate fires at night.

(2) The use of simple, direct-view optical sights on military rifles is increasing. Although not in the accuracy class of true sniper weapons, these sights make the trained marksman a much more dangerous foe. This is especially true within the shorter ranges (less than 200 meters) normally associated with combat in urban areas.

(3) Many armies are now buying simple but effective devices to either silence or suppress the muzzle blast of sniper weapons. These devices inhibit the task of determining the location of a sniper. Although many of these devices significantly reduce the maximum effective range of the weapon, snipers can be very effective at less than 200 meters with these devices attached.

(4) The employment of heavy sniper rifles, such as the .50 caliber, has increased.

(5) The use of laser detection devices to detect, damage, degrade, or prevent the use of snipers has increased.
fm/3-06-11
 
Having been aquainted with quite a few military (Marine) snipers (and some police snipers as well), I think you'll find they rarely shoot over 600-700 yards, as the wind starts to play havoc (we're talking .308 or 30-06, etc. NOT a .50) the farther out you get. A 1000 yard shot would be exceptional.
And military snipers rarely try for headshots, torso is a bigger target and allows for errors in range estimation. The average shot by a police sniper is less than 100 yards, so they may make head shots, in hostage situations.
 
Well, folks, I had no idea this would get that heated so quickly. Um, by the way, with a scope, and a decent rifle, yes, I can hit body shots @ 500, and head shots @ 200. With a scope! Thing is, I think just about everybody should be able to.

I agree....but you should see what passes at a public range for average shooting....
 
Doing a 200 yard head shot and hitting a torso at 500, is something that every rifleman should be able to do, yea, I can do it, know many that can.

Popping paper "heads" at 200 meters is rather undemanding compared to doing the same to living, breathing (and, most importantly, mobile) people. It's not an especially low percentage shot with a sniper rifle, but acting like it's something that should just be boringly everyday is kind of armchair commando-ish. Especially for folks with nothing but iron sights to work with.

Unforturnately, the military does not teach soldiers how to do it, nor do they give them the tools to do it, nor do they want them to do it. Those ranges are for weapons other than rifles, in the mind of the US military.

However, there is NO REASON that every able bodied American, with a rack grade rifle, with iron sights and surplus ammo can not hit a 20" torso out to 500 yards, NONE.

Seems like this claim has been made in another thread recently.

To reiterate points I made there:

  • The USMC trains everyone to shoot out to 500 meters on paper targets.
  • Marines in combat engage at an average range of 30 or so meters, almost all engagements occur inside 100 meters, 99% occur inside 300 meters. Keep in mind this is with guys who train to shoot out to 500 and have to do so regularly to remain in the USMC.
  • There have been almost no 500 meter shots made in combat by Marines who are trained to engage at 500 meters with iron sights on a KD range. Again, these are guys who have to pop paper targets at 500 to be Marines. Those that have been made have mostly involved ACOGs.
  • Those who think or claim that slow aimed fire on 500 meter targets on a well-manicured and mowed grass KD range translate to 500 meter engagements in combat are being extremely unrealistic.

(Granted, as I say this, a rifleman is nothing to snort at), just saying, to me, you ain't a sniper unless you are making hits @ a 1,000 with a .300 WinMag.

A bit overstated and armchair commando-ish, again. Most military sniper engagements aren't taking place at that kind of range. Most law enforcement snipers will never be asked to make a 1000 foot shot. Even highly trained snipers would be the first to tell you that a 1000 meter shot on the battlefield is low percentage and likely to be a "3-4 shots, one kill" piece of work.

Most insurgent snipers are poorly trained, at best. There have been a few who are credibly skilled. At least one that I'm aware of was identified more or less forensically by US forces and actively hunted (successfully).
 
How do you know they have not recieved professional training at any point in their life, do they need to carry a club card that says they passed sniping 101. Remember , quite a few of these guys are the old regimes intel and military forces. Not to mention ones we have probably trained at some point during the cold war. I am sure some of them are qualified snipers. Besides in the US Military history, did we not take any farm boy who could shoot, issue him a scoped 03 and say you are now a Sniper, go find the enemy? I think you have way too much time on your hands if this is what bothers you:p
 
I wouldn't think anyone would take a 500y+ shot if they knew they could get closer and still maintain concealment and the ability to evade when they got the job done.

Would a hunter try to bag an elk at 200y if he knew he could sneak up to 100y undetected and have a higher probability of a clean, humane kill?
 
This is an argument between a "sniper" (lowercase) and a "Sniper" (uppercase). Any skilled marksman with a high powered rifle can be a sniper, by successfully engaging targets out past firefight ranges, typically 200+ yards. This does not make them a purpose-trained Sniper; it just means that they're doing a specific task on the battlefield.


Think of it this way. Just because you change your oil and repair your own car in your garage, doesn't make you a Mechanic. It means you're doing mechanic work (and possibly with a high degree of success/proficiency), but a Mechanic you are not. Conversely, the guy who is certified and owns his own inspection station, is a Mechanic (capital M). He does the same stuff you do in your garage on weekends, just on a more professional level, typically with better tools than are available to you, and (usually) with a higher degree of skill and training.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top