British Royal Marine is world's deadliest sniper

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
a reply to: ketsuko

Some would say that those 'bad guys' are in fact fighting invaders in their country.

This sniper is no hero to me. He went into their country and kills a ton of their people.

Bad guys? Dont make me laugh

Anyone who supports, or is actively engaged with, the Taliban or Al Qaeda is - by any rational definition - a bad guy.

The Taliban terrorized their own population for years, and gave safe haven to Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda came to America and killed over 3,000 people in one stroke (citizens of 155 different Countries in fact!). The Taliban refused to give up Al Qaeda after the attack...so, we went there and took them out.

So...yeah, they were - and still are - the enemy. They are the bad guys...inside of Afghanistan, or anywhere else they walk, creep, crawl or slither.

This sniper, and all other Allied soldiers (past or present) in Afghanistan like him, is a hero to me.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

the canadian guy that made the longest shot ever in afghanistan

The Canadian guy has been surpassed by British Corporal Craig Harrison who now holds the record.

en.wikipedia.org...

There is a difference between support and encourage. You should support them in that they are being misguided and lied to by their government and putting their lives at risk by being ordered to fight an non-existent enemy.

Not encourage them to take pride in sniping innocents and civilians and a 'supposed enemy' that has not touched the UK or instagated a war in any way.

What have the taliban done to you? And how have they affected your life or security personaly.

In this day and age I don't think a movie really commemorates a sniper. Why not make this person a player to be used on COD? They everyone can run around the internet one shot one killing just like him!

Any time a soldier or cop or a civilian protecting their home takes a life a little bit of your sole is chipped away. Bragging rights about who is the top sniper is absolutely BS! Please understand that these soldiers are put in the position of having to kill is the responsibility of the government who deploys them. If you think that you individually can choose not to shoot, then you are deluded. There are people on the battleground that have you in their sights as well. They are out to kill you too. Rationalize all you want but that's the God's honest truth. In a war you are the victor or the victim...no middle ground.

the worlds deadliest sniper, with more kills, 173.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
I hope I get to come back to this world at a time where everyone cooperates with one another in a utopian existence. LOVE.

a reply to: SecretKnowledge

So the coalition forces... Made up of 50 or so nations.... Are just rampaging killing every living person they find?!?!?!

In the beginning of the Iraq invasion in 2003 yes there was some serious bad moves made with artillery and air strikes.. Those were learned from and now we can't even use air strikes against targets unless theirs actively engaged bad guys in the compound.. There could be 100 Taliban with ak47's and rpg's but if they aren't firing we can't return fire.... We don't just run around killing women and kids.

Many women and kids have been killed tho.. Mostly in the act of running out and grabbing rpg tubes and machine guns to give to the fighting age males in cover. The Taliban are the biiggest pieces of excrement on this planet.

You know we' aren't even fighting people from these areas too right? In 1996 THE TALIBAN INVADED Afghanistan and split the country in 2. id be willing to wager that 75%+ of the casualties in Afghanistan have been of foreign fighters. Chechnya. Syria. Pakistan. There's all kinds of places these asshats come from to jihad.

DO NOT make out the Coalition forces out to be darth vaders storm troopers sanitizing the Middle East... I can assure its far from that. Any freedom our troops had to possibly get away with something like that has been comepletely removed. It even takes 20+ minutes JUST TO GET PERMISSION to drop a bomb on someone who's shooting at you.... Air support is on scene... Ready and aiming on target.... "NOPE WAIT FOR 20 MINUTES K THNX BYE" it's a total clustefuk and coalition soldiers lives ARE NOT OF THE UTMOST CONCERN to the major decision makers. They care more for th enemy soldiers and civilians then our own men for th most part... Not exactly care for them but they care that things go right regarding our enemies and the civilians more then if things go wrong for our guys... That's not this evil war your trying to sell sorry...

To keep on topic, a new one that's came to light seems to be getting over looked. Nick Irving aka "the reaper" is a ranger sniper with 3/75 (I think it's 3) who's just recently released a book. Probably my next read but I haven't got to it yet.

I have however listened to a bunch of podcasts and interviews with him and his kill Number.. Just like Chris Kyles... Is classified. The books give an unclassified Number of kills. From what I've read too those numbers don't include any kills that were made on a classified mission. There's exemptions of course but for the most part these numbers might be much lower then the actual numbers.

Anyone who's actually expiernced there kill numbers being publicly lower due to classified reasons?? Obviously don't talk about it or get yourself in trouble but is this fact that I've heard more then a few times accurate or is it a sneaky way to flex muscles?

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

The British wouldn't make a movie of the guy, which he deserves, due to a back-lash from those that disagree with the war, not to mention the British Muslims.

At least, the U.S, still has enough people who support their troops and supported the movie. The largest grossing film of the year in the U.S..

U.S. snipers have generally out-shot the Brits right back to the revolutionary war and through the 'Sharps' era.

Still, the Brit deserves kudos...not "sorry, you can't wear your uniform in public, it might offend".....

a reply to: CaptainTwig

That was my first thought...

I don't care for the mosin personally, so inferior gun, brutal conditions.. Single handily terrified Russia.. And got shot in the head with an explosive round and lived.

originally posted by: mindseye1609
To keep on topic, a new one that's came to light seems to be getting over looked. Nick Irving aka "the reaper" is a ranger sniper with 3/75 (I think it's 3) who's just recently released a book. Probably my next read but I haven't got to it yet.

I have however listened to a bunch of podcasts and interviews with him and his kill Number.. Just like Chris Kyles... Is classified. The books give an unclassified Number of kills. From what I've read too those numbers don't include any kills that were made on a classified mission. There's exemptions of course but for the most part these numbers might be much lower then the actual numbers.

Anyone who's actually expiernced there kill numbers being publicly lower due to classified reasons?? Obviously don't talk about it or get yourself in trouble but is this fact that I've heard more then a few times accurate or is it a sneaky way to flex muscles?

Generally speaking a 'kill' is only classed as a confirmed kill if a third party witnessed it or confirmed it. Anything from his spotter, a hovering ISTAR asset or troops finding the body can be used to confirm this. The man on the weapon will always be on the net to his chain of command and telling them where he is, what he can see and who he has dropped. That's one way it is logged. Another way it is logged is in reports written out after the job. In the same way a patrol commander will fill out a patrol report a sniper team will write up reports and sketches detailing where they were when they fired, what they fired at, distance to target, weather conditions, calibre of the weapon etc. They will fill in here whether they dropped someone or not. That's another way it is logged. When a sniper drops a target and a third party can't verify it then it's unconfirmed. Some may try to claim a kill here and there but for the most part it's not the done thing. It's unprofessional and can be dangerous for your mates. Anybody caught doing it would just be labeled a knobhead.

Strictly speaking most kills not recorded are because the job the man was on isn't exactly open for discussion. If the mission is classified then by its nature anything that goes on during it is too. That's probably why the ranger has classified kills because some of his work is classified. It's not the kill that is a big secret it's what was going on for him to have to kill someone that nobody wants discussed. If it was in controversial circumstances then you can bet it's swept under the rug. That's not normally the case for regular infantry snipers because the majority of the work they do isn't sneaky beaky stuff. That doesn't mean to say some of their work doesn't get passed up the chain and buried because it certainly does, if you get what I mean.

For the most part a snipers claimed kills are most likely to be pretty close to his actual number regardless of what is written down on paper. That's because he is a professional man who takes pride in his work. If he is adding numbers to fill his ego the chances are he's a knob and not very good at what he does.

a reply to: mindseye1609

So the coalition forces... Made up of 50 or so nations.... Are just rampaging killing every living person they find?!?!?!

What?
Thats your statement not mine.

We don't just run around killing women and kids.

Thats your statement not mine

It even takes 20+ minutes JUST TO GET PERMISSION to drop a bomb on someone who's shooting at you.

How about just shooting back?

Not exactly care for them but they care that things go right regarding our enemies and the civilians more then if things go wrong for our guys

So your basically saying f*** the civillians lets just bomb their asses, right?

Who was that group that America supported with money and arms in the mid to late 80's in Afghanistan?

The taliban.

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
a reply to: mindseye1609

So the coalition forces... Made up of 50 or so nations.... Are just rampaging killing every living person they find?!?!?!

What?
Thats your statement not mine.

We don't just run around killing women and kids.

Thats your statement not mine

It even takes 20+ minutes JUST TO GET PERMISSION to drop a bomb on someone who's shooting at you.

How about just shooting back?

Not exactly care for them but they care that things go right regarding our enemies and the civilians more then if things go wrong for our guys

So your basically saying f*** the civillians lets just bomb their asses, right?

Who was that group that America supported with money and arms in the mid to late 80's in Afghanistan?

The taliban.

Strictly speaking it wasn't the Taliban. Many of them would eventually form the taliban but they were formed in the early 90s.

a reply to: SecretKnowledge

No, not YOUR troops but fighting to keep YOUR country safe like it or not! And he was killing Taliban, anyone killing the Taliban is a hero!

But be honest your real problem here is that the guy is British isn't it?

a reply to: SecretKnowledge

Wrong it was not the taliban, the taliban assassinated the last of the big players from the mujahedeen a year or so after we invaded.

a reply to: SecretKnowledge

"Bad guys? Don't make me laugh" is what you said implying that less then asshatish people have been purposely killed.


And your wrong.. We didn't support the Taliban.. We supported the mujahideen...


This whole area is just insane to try to deal with. It's so Effin complicated it will make a most intelligent person go ""uhhhh duhhh wtf"

It's not just one party of bad guys we are fighting in Afghanistan. The Taliban for the most part then you got AQ and about 1000 little "gangs" that can be swayed anyway the wind blows. I'm not saying every move has been justified but I tell you what.. we didn't want Afghanistan to fall... Let's roll the clock back to right about post ww2
morrison knudsen in afganistan

The United states had big plans for A-Stan. I reckon Saudi Arabia and Israel probably have the most blame to bear for afganistan follies.



And of course I don't want them to bomb civilians. In situations where civilians could be present then obviously using restraint with air is a must. But the rules Of engagement have been swung so far to the other extreme it's not even cool. The only advantages we have is air support. You say "shoot back?" But that's not how it works. We would get slayed like the British vs the revolutionaries using gorilla tactics. The only advantage one has over guerrilla tactics is overwhelming force and power.

I honestly have no idea what to do about it. I've been designing a possible auto cannon in the sky which could possibly reduce collateral damage. Some one told me yesterday the new modern warfare has a drone that can shoot .50 cal silenced from it.. Pretty amazing considering we have guided .50 cal now. We could drop miniature Jdams on single targets. .50 cal and 20-30mm would be plenty strong to overwhelm guerrilla forces but hopefully exact enough and confined enough to just damage the intended targets.

My short term idea is to somehow mount an m242 bushmaster auto cannon on something like the rq180 or some other long loiter drone. You could have massive over watch for extended periods of time and it would really clean things up a bit I reckon... (Outsiders point of view) mind you we still have to aim these in right direction or they will be just as deadly to friendlies and civs but I think it's a lot safer while being overwhelmingly deadly at the same time.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
The British wouldn't make a movie of the guy, which he deserves, due to a back-lash from those that disagree with the war, not to mention the British Muslims.

Actually, support for the Armed Forces has always been high and not simply lately as a result of the recent campaigns. The only difference is we don't fawn all over our "veterans" and are a damned site more civilised about it, instead of whooping and cheering just because you met a soldier - for all you know, he could simply be a truck driver yet they get called "heroes".

As for the Muslims comment, you're over blowing it and I think you'll find most military events go off in the UK without so much as a whimper from the small minority of extremists.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
At least, the U.S, still has enough people who support their troops and supported the movie. The largest grossing film of the year in the U.S..

Oh give over... Like I said, support for the UK armed forces has always been high and not simply down to some dust up with RPG toting villagers on the other side of the world.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
U.S. snipers have generally out-shot the Brits right back to the revolutionary war and through the 'Sharps' era.

Righto - totally unsubstantiated and simply hyperbole to further the "USA! USA! Number 1!"

originally posted by: nwtrucker
Still, the Brit deserves kudos...not "sorry, you can't wear your uniform in public, it might offend".....

What are you smoking? They have been advised to wear "civvies" as it is a security risk, not because it will "offend anyone", although there are not (to my knowledge) any standing orders prohibiting the wearing of your uniform outside of barracks - unlike during the 1980's when Irish nutters were actively trying to kill squaddies. Back then, you couldn't leave Barracks in Ulster without a small arm and you had to stick your family in the back of an unmarked Van just to go to the shops.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

The British wouldn't make a movie of the guy, which he deserves, due to a back-lash from those that disagree with the war, not to mention the British Muslims.

At least, the U.S, still has enough people who support their troops and supported the movie. The largest grossing film of the year in the U.S..

U.S. snipers have generally out-shot the Brits right back to the revolutionary war and through the 'Sharps' era.

Still, the Brit deserves kudos...not "sorry, you can't wear your uniform in public, it might offend".....

Well it's more a culture difference than a lack of support for our troops. I'm sure if they asked the marine if he wanted a film made about him he'd be slightly embarrassed.

I don't know where you got the idea that British snipers have been generally out shot. In fact the term 'sniper' is British and originated from men who could shoot a remarkably agile bird, the snipe, out of the sky. Yes they were out shot in the revolutionary war but British tactics at that time wouldn't allow the proper use and development of snipers anyway.

Two words. Craig Harrison.

a reply to: stumason

Fair enough.

The unsubstantiated part is flat out wrong. Very substantiated, if one bothers to look.....

You ignore the responses that validate your sniper, including mine.

We'll validate our people as we see fit, airports, movies or, yes, flat out whooping for them.

Don't like it?

Tough....