.50 Caliber Marine Sniper Kills in Afghanistan - Graphic

I'm not sure where the myth of the .50 BMG came from, but John Kerry went a long way toward perpetuating it, if he didn't dream it up himself. Now, mind you that Kerry is a very smart man. While he does admit to committing atrocities in this quote, he was smart enough not to actually name an actual criminal act in this quote, that has been aired countless times.

Anybody catch Mythbusters on Discovery? They were doing the myth about if you dive into water it will protect you from being hit by a bullet. One of the guns they used was the Barret.

wow, i've seen these thing tested on plywood and steel but they didn't have that effect. those weapons are truly amazing.

wow, i've seen these thing tested on plywood and steel but they didn't have that effect. those weapons are truly amazing.

Greetings,

I think I can clear up the comments about the .50 being illegal in terms of the Geneva Convention.

It isn't... persay

There is a paragraph in the convention, that when bringing weapons to bear on the enemy, it should be appropriate in terms of how they can reply in fire. I know that sounds rather odd, but I will try and explain with this example:

2 Nasties parked on a corner with a Pistol, pinging away at a Challenger 2, they are in clear sight and the Challenger 2 rotates the turret and fires one sabot round into the ugly one. Both are dead, along with the building. [ End ]

Its a case where the Challenger 2 employs a weapon system, that it was neither designed for, nor "fair" to employ on hostile infantry, when the enemy could not return, in terms of the same volume of fire to challenge the Tank in any "fair" means. The view of the Convention on this would be that, the Tank should have called in Infantry support to attack the 2 Nasties, in which case it would be "fair" in that the Enemy could in some terms have a chance of survial if the Infantry attacked with light Infantry Weapons, not to mention having a crack at the other guys.

Fair doesn't exist when your dealing with Terrorists and Extremists.

- Phil

[edit on 23-7-2005 by gooseuk]

I have never seen any proof of that, they might just as well have been farmers, as they do drive a tractor. You have no proof whatsoever they are terrorists other than your belief somehow the US is infallible and couldn't possibly miss.

[edit on 23-7-2005 by Simon666]

I did not look it up, but i am almost positive that you can use a .50 against any person, or vehicle.

As for the post about the example for Geneva...I sure as hell would turn that turret and blow those terrorists away. Better have them shoot rounds at the tank than rounds at our soldiers.

In the British army if you find an insurgent lying on the floor playing dead, you have to kick them in the bollocks or head, if they move you simply blow their head off, at the end of the day insurgents are sneaky #ers who would shoot you in the back while playing dead.
There was a big stink up in the British media about this when footage was shown on the news. The idiot PC brigade civvie scum do gooders bassicly got the back hand though. No British soldier will risk his life for some idiot playing dead.

You probably never watched the full length video of the engagement because the beginning of it shows one guy dropping an RPG tube in a field for another guy to pickup. The video most people have watched is a shortened version that just shows the apache killing guys for what appears like no reason and I think that the edit was designed that way as propaganda.

YouTube Link

I cant see that link for the 1st vid mentioned here,but there was a vid going around on Ogrish years ago that had the usual pond life gloating about pesky arabs, sorry terrorists being shot-and by your coments here it sounds like the same vid considering how old this thread is!

At least you lot lot can imagine there arabs,even when they are not

That 2nd vid is interesting and has done the rounds on loads of sites,a lot of people like to see a skipping person blown to chunks and then his friend taking out an rpg by the left of the tractor pulverized and a wounded person hiding under a truck being decimated.

What I find amusing is these brave*cough*pilots couldnt hit a barn door from across the street with out auto range turned on!The 1st barrage of hot lead failed to hit the target,as they forgot to put autorange on!

Hopefully no one else out there was walking around when that 1st salvo missed its target!

reply to post by Thomas Crowne

---

"I wasn't shooting at him. I was shooting at the ammunition bandolier across his chest."

"I was aiming for the body armor."

"I was aiming for the rifle he was holding."

See? I'm shooting at equipment, not the guy.

As for that idiot kerry.
I was on the same river he was on in vietnam and yes we used 50 bmgs (12.7 × 99 mm NATO)from the boats and the VC used DShK 1938 (Heavy machine gun - 12.7x107mm) from bunkers along the shore. They also used RPGs

At night you could not tell the caliber of the bullets being fired at you.
you just pounded the shooter with everything you had
by the way a bunker is military equipment/fortification so using a 50 bmg would be legal.

Also firing at a enemy carrying a heavy weapon would be legal.
so if he is carrying a RPG its legal to shoot him with a 50bmg

I know of one case where a navy destroyer used a 5 inch gun to tale out a guard on the beach in North Vietnam before he spotted a seal team that was up the beach.

getting hit by a fifty is a nightmare, it blows you into pieces, I might add that road side bombs do the same.

Food for thought...