Is this a violation of ROE or not?

[Uboat509]

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

[Steve Blair]

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.

[Culpeper]

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.

[slapout9]

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.

[Uboat509]

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

[Steve Blair]

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.

[Pragmatic Thinker]

This incident smells like a dead cat. Everything from "rushing the proceedings" to the snipers own actions of checking the dead guy?!? Why did they come down to "check out" the dead guy? Was this sniper team in support of a mission? Were they simply camped out in their hide site and decided to shoot someone? Who really knows but I am miffed as to why they came down out of their perch to check on the dead fellow and then take the time to supposedly plant wire on him? Again, this really smells suspicious... If I had mistakenly shot someone, I would probably come up with a better lie or cover-up, something like, "...after I dropped him his buddies came out and hauled off the 20 lbs. of SEMTEX and the bag of nails he was carrying, swear on my mother First Sergeant..." but I am not sure I would come down to the corpse and plant something?!?

I am sure more details will follow in the coming days and weeks.

[Steve Blair]

Still....let's try to keep this one down to a discussion of the role of snipers in COIN/Small Wars and not engage in too much speculation. As mentioned before, sniping has come a long way in terms of acceptance and training, but there are still those who would prefer to see it go away.

Vietnam saw a great deal of experimentation in sniping; in areas ranging from equipment to tactics and training. What is the role of the sniper in Small Wars, and perhaps more to the point who should be establishing that role? If a small war is really an extension of law enforcement (or statecraft), does it rest with the military or elsewhere? And if the policy does go wrong or change, where does that dead cat land? In the lap of the shooter or in the office of those who make the policy?

Sniping by its nature can lend itself to abuse by those seeking metrics for things (like the body count). It is also by its nature easy to marginalize or discount by those who don't understand it or its application. It's the wider nature of the discussion that interests me...both on the military and LE sides of things.

[TROUFION]

Snipers in the defense are highly effective, especially for counter sniper and overwatch operations. Though perhaps it is not the way we would prefer to utilize them.

I would venture that most Commanders, not being snipers, have a hard time figuring how to fit snipers into their plans, they also have a tough time designing ROE for the snipers. In particular the foot mobile and independent operations that are often undertaken by snipers don't fit with the motor/mechanized environment often being used.

I do not want to speculate, this is a generic statement, Commanders who do not understand sniper employment, and who are unwilling to run the risk of a questionable shooting should not employ them.

[Steve Blair]

That's always been one of the big issues with sniping in general, and with the American experience in particular: educating commanders as to the proper use of snipers. Which of course leads to its own set of issues. Commanders who "get" sniper employment often find themselves with a very valuable force multiplier (both in intel and marksmanship terms), while as you suggest those who don't "get" sniper employment might be better off getting educated.

[Pragmatic Thinker]

Still....let's try to keep this one down to a discussion of the role of snipers in COIN/Small Wars and not engage in too much speculation. As mentioned before, sniping has come a long way in terms of acceptance and training, but there are still those who would prefer to see it go away.

Vietnam saw a great deal of experimentation in sniping; in areas ranging from equipment to tactics and training. What is the role of the sniper in Small Wars, and perhaps more to the point who should be establishing that role? If a small war is really an extension of law enforcement (or statecraft), does it rest with the military or elsewhere? And if the policy does go wrong or change, where does that dead cat land? In the lap of the shooter or in the office of those who make the policy?

Sniping by its nature can lend itself to abuse by those seeking metrics for things (like the body count). It is also by its nature easy to marginalize or discount by those who don't understand it or its application. It's the wider nature of the discussion that interests me...both on the military and LE sides of things.

Steve,

I think when we talk about sniper operations and their use on the battlefield there needs to be clear ROE, regardless of intensity of the combat. However, I think in this war much like in Vietnam there is a lot ambiguity to sift through at the SSG and below level. Not sure I buy into the account that this particular example was a "classified" operation to kill insurgents. Many times these programs remain inside SOF units and not the 25th ID, not too bag on my Tropic Lightning brothers since I am a former Golden Dragon but this sounds too "Apocalypse Now" to me.

Now ROE rests in the Commander's lane of responsibility, but each individual out there returning fire has the moral and legal obligation to be sure of their target before they squeeze the trigger. So it is two-fold, the Commander dictates the policy but the individual rifleman ensures he follows it.

More to your question of Small Wars/COIN, I think snipers have a vital role to play in this arena. Especially, when applied in the Scout Sniper role and doing RSTA as their primary mission and target interdiction as their supporting mission. In Iraq there have been numerous success stories of snipers interdicting IED emplacment teams along MSR's, and they routinely provide overwatch for the infantry maneuvering to and on the OBJ, so their roles are necessary and needed.

PT

[SWJED]

... 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.

[Pragmatic Thinker]

... 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

[RTK]

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

I agree. Use of snipers to overwatch NAIs identified in the IPB process tied to clearly defined PIRs is probably a better way.

This throwing stuff in the middle of the road trying to lure bad guys in seems like chumming when you're trolling for minnows.

[Culpeper]

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.

[Ken White]

Slow news day is right.

[Mark O'Neill]

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

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

[Ken White]

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.

[skiguy]

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.

[Culpeper]

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