Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 35 of 35

Thread: Is this a violation of ROE or not?

  1. #21
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    57

    Default Precision Strike vs. Force Protection Concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by SWJED View Post
    ... what goes around does not come around again. I think, slowly but surely, commanders and operational staffs are learning what a sniper can do and how best to utilize this "precision strike" and surveillance / reconnaissance capability.

    We learned volumes about snipers in Vietnam. Yet, just several years later as a Scout Sniper Platoon commander (then called STA) I had to fight with company commanders that, when I sent them a scout / sniper team, preferred to utilize the team walking point or otherwise manning an OP or LP that had nothing to gain substituting this capability with a job that our well trained grunts can do.

    My point is – we are learning the same lessons in Iraq and when this thing is done I sincerely wish that we don’t go back to “old school” utilization of scout / snipers as extra warm bodies to fill gaps in regular infantry skill sets.

    You want to believe that we are learning, and in some places we are but there is also a price to pay for putting two to three men out in the middle of a potentially dangerous place. An example that I will share is a situation alongside the Afghan-Pakistan border in southern Khowst Province. It is 2004 and a lot of our troops are taking harassing rocket and mortar from POO's just across the border. Like any good analyst I sit down with the Recce Platoon Sgt and go over the terrain on both CIB1 and overhead imagery, long story short we plot three to four good positions with clear LOS into the POO's that we have good grids on from the Q-36 or 37 radar (I don't recall which one) and present this to the commander with the recommendation of putting two, three-man sniper teams on good high ground with clear LOS into the POO's. They have the ability to sustain themselves for about 72 hours max, so we do all the load planning and everything else. Bottom line, we were talking about six shooters (2 x 3 man teams) with .50 and .300 rifles and I think we included thermals and long range finders, so these guys were going to be effective at 500 meters and would still be well inside the Afghan border to get the job done. Well the commander wouldn't have it and started to complain that we would need 24 hr. PRED coverage to provide ISR "overwatch", and that would mean a platoon of riflemen on stand-by as QRF in case they were compromised to include a/c to lift them, so on and so on... Mission never happpened and we stopped planning them. My point? Sure we know how to employ snipers but we don't because we are too focused on Force Protection. The Recce Plt Sgt in this example was adamant that all he needed was a radio if he came into contact so he could call in CAS to cover his exfil and make to the LZ.... Anyone else out there ever run into this type of risk aversion when planning an op using snipers in either IZ or AF?

    We talk about all these cool capabilities but in the end the bad guys tie us up worrying about Force Protection and we are too risk averse to put guys out there in a risky situation...

    PT

  2. #22
    Council Member Culpeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Roswell, USA
    Posts
    540

    Default

    As long as one side uses snipers so will the other. Regardless of the type of war being fought. Also, sniping is just too valuable an asset in urban fighting. Keep in mind that with the ability and skill comes a sense of power. Power that can easily transcend into a war crime or at least an investigation. Snipers are only human and can make mistakes. Mistakes they are trained and advised that if they abuse they can personally be held accountable. A few snipers being under investigation comes with the territory no different than ROEs for the average rifleman. The UCMJ isn't like you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. It is a little tougher than that. Our guys aren't working in an office environment.
    Last edited by Culpeper; 09-25-2007 at 11:56 PM.
    "But suppose everybody on our side felt that way?"
    "Then I'd certainly be a damned fool to feel any other way. Wouldn't I?"


  3. #23
    Council Member Culpeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Roswell, USA
    Posts
    540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Blair View Post
    There's usually a couple of things to keep in mind when discussing sniper operations: historically the US military has taken a dim view of snipers in general; and the myths that the media has spun up by attaching the tag "sniper" to any whackjob who uses something larger than a Glock when committing crimes.

    Looking back at Vietnam and the diversity of sniping operations there is an interesting exercise in this case (and I'm also going there to avoid drawing conclusions on recent events). In some regions they were used in a counter-sniper or precision shooting role; coming into play when fire was being received (a defensive role in many ways), while in others they were used to watch trails and engage insurgents (an offensive role). The roles themselves are generally neutral - it's command emphasis that has a major impact. Look at the 9th ID under Ewell to see some possibly major abuses of snipers, ROE, and metrics in general.

    Another area that can come into question is selection and training, especially if there's a big push to increase sniper numbers. Most people really don't know or understand how much screening comes into play when selecting snipers...and I suspect some just don't want to know.

    I'm sure folks like slapout might have some input as well, especially regarding LE snipers and considerations from their realm that might prove useful for COIN.
    Also, it is a tactic to win the hearts and minds of the population. We often sniped such targets in Vietnam as tax collectors and auditors. If some sniper took me out I don't think too many people are going to be very upset.
    "But suppose everybody on our side felt that way?"
    "Then I'd certainly be a damned fool to feel any other way. Wouldn't I?"


  4. #24
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Blair View Post
    I'm sure folks like slapout might have some input as well, especially regarding LE snipers and considerations from their realm that might prove useful for COIN.

    Hi Steve, I never did the sniper thing personally but they are heavily used in the ISR role often connected with counter-drug ops (especially in rural areas) usually with ROE of self defense only. When they are used with SWAT teams during hostage rescue is where you see them in the precision strike mode as Dave says.

    Despite the TV Bulls.... about them being a bunch of wackos, my experience has been these guys are more like engineers up to and including doing some of their machine shop type stuff. These guys would measure and weigh everything Any symptom that you are somehow unstable and you would be off the team.

  5. #25
    Council Member Uboat509's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Big Army absoutley has a problem with snipers but it is not a moral compunction but rather as Pragmatic Thinker notes an issue of force protection. Most of the big Army commanders that I have dealt with tend to think that performing combat operations with anything less than a platoon with up armored trucks armed with .50 cals and MK19s is just crazy talk. The thought sniper ops with a handfull of shooters/spotters and maybe a small security detail tends to cause them to develop a nervous tick. Snipers have a great utility and big Army will continue to use them but the inherrant risk in those types of operations will always limit their employment more than any moral issues.

    SFC W

  6. #26
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Speculation, allegation, 'court documents'...

    Slow news day is right.

  7. #27
    Council Member Mark O'Neill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    307

    Default

    I would not let any troops under my command do this.

    By the way, I think snipers are excellent tool in small wars .

  8. #28
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Hi Steve, I never did the sniper thing personally but they are heavily used in the ISR role often connected with counter-drug ops (especially in rural areas) usually with ROE of self defense only. When they are used with SWAT teams during hostage rescue is where you see them in the precision strike mode as Dave says.

    Despite the TV Bulls.... about them being a bunch of wackos, my experience has been these guys are more like engineers up to and including doing some of their machine shop type stuff. These guys would measure and weigh everything Any symptom that you are somehow unstable and you would be off the team.
    Yeah...the mechanics of sniping are fascinating. The amount of math that goes into some of it sends my ol' history mind reeling off in search of a few good beers....

    I knew LE used them quite a bit in an intel/surveillance mode for counter-drug ops, pointing out the great utility of a trained sniper in an intel role.

    The force protection argument is interesting, but I also think it goes back to too many commanders not being fully aware of what a sniper can add to their unit aside from another warm body. Seems this is yet another of those small lessons that the institution condemns itself to relearn every time the shooting starts.
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  9. #29
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Heh. I suspect that many share your sentiments,

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark O'Neill View Post
    I would not let any troops under my command do this.

    By the way, I think snipers are excellent tool in small wars .
    Both; the former is evidenced by charges and a court martial and the latter by the large number we have.

  10. #30
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    169

    Default

    MNF press release

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    RELEASE No. 20070929-06
    September 29, 2007

    Court-martial results
    Multi-National Division – Center PAO

    BAGHDAD — A military panel found Sgt. Jorge Sandoval from Laredo, Texas, not guilty of murder Sept. 28.

    Sandoval was found not guilty of murdering an unknown male April 27. He was also found not guilty of murdering an unknown male May 11; placing an AK-47 rifle on the body and failing to ensure humane treatment of the victim while he was being detained.

    Sandoval was found guilty of placing command wire on the body of the male victim on April 27.

    The military panel will reconvene Sept. 29 for Sandoval’s sentencing. He can face between six months to five years in prison.

  11. #31
    Council Member Culpeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Roswell, USA
    Posts
    540

    Default

    Spc. **************, 22, was acquitted of murder charges in the April and May deaths of two unidentified men. The panel decided he was guilty of a lesser charges of placing detonation wire on one of the bodies to make it look as if the man was an insurgent.

    "I feel fortunate that I have been served this sentence," ******** said. "I'm grateful that I'm able to continue to be in the Army."
    He got five months in jail. The press needs to realize that they should be more careful about printing the names of our snipers. That pisses me off more than what the young man apparently didn't need to do in the first place.

    http://apnews.myway.com//article/200...D8RV6ILG0.html
    "But suppose everybody on our side felt that way?"
    "Then I'd certainly be a damned fool to feel any other way. Wouldn't I?"


  12. #32
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    11

    Default

    An FYI for Army leaders:

    Sniper Employment Leaders Course (SELC)

    Purpose: The Sniper Employment Leaders Course is designed to target senior NCOs and Officers who are responsible for selecting, training, planning, and employing snipers in a combat environment. This course is designed for leaders to develop a better understanding for one of their Unit’s most effective combat support assets – the Sniper. This course is available for ranks from E-5 to O-5.

    Soldiers can either attend this course in 1 or 2 methods. 1st option is here at Fort Benning, GA. 2nd option is it can executed as a MTT at the host unit station. The MTT MOI is attached to the Ft. Benning web site. The POC for this is the OIC for the USASS. This is not a ATRRS course so it is first come first serve basis and there are no prerequisites for this course.

  13. #33
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Possible to tack the critical elements into

    the ANCOC and OAC courses???

  14. #34
    Council Member SGTMILLS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Posts
    33

    Default On the contrary...

    Quote Originally Posted by Uboat509 View Post
    I don't really see the value in this. I doubt that you are going to get in leaders or any IED builders with this. That means you are either killing low level (expendable) nugs or guys who think that they can sell this stuff to the bad guys. I doubt that it is making a hell of a lot of difference.

    SFC W
    Since this tactic has been implemented, there has been a reduction in the number of IED's placed. You are on point with one statement, though... We are definately NOT going to get the IED builders with this approach. We will, however, psychologically affect all the emplacers and the collectors out there. Even IF we DIDN'T employ this tactic, just SAYING we use it causes a great psychological rift within the insurgency.
    SGT Mills

  15. #35
    Council Member Uboat509's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SGTMILLS View Post
    Since this tactic has been implemented, there has been a reduction in the number of IED's placed. You are on point with one statement, though... We are definately NOT going to get the IED builders with this approach. We will, however, psychologically affect all the emplacers and the collectors out there. Even IF we DIDN'T employ this tactic, just SAYING we use it causes a great psychological rift within the insurgency.
    SGT Mills
    To my knowledge, THIS technique has not been implimented anywhere in a large scale. This technique does not target the emplacers. That is a different TTP which I agree can result in a temporary reduction in IED emplacement in a specific area but it needs to be coupled with agressive targeting of the builders and facilitators. I won't say that going after the nugs is a waist of time, it isn't, but it should never be anywhere near the main focus. Believe me, we will run out of will to fight this thing long before they run out of guys to dig holes and put IEDs in them. Builders and facilitators are another story.

    SFC W

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •