Army holds Sniper competition...Marines win

[kansaswhig]

Well, this is a little embarrassing.

Where Snipers Meet To Compete

By Mark Yost

Fort Benning, Ga. -- On a warm day in mid-October, two Army snipers crept into an abandoned building in a deserted urban landscape. Their mission? To find an enemy sniper team operating in the area and eliminate it.

While these countersniper missions take place almost daily in Iraq and Afghanistan, this particular one was part of the ninth annual U.S. Army International Sniper Competition. This year's event featured 31 two-man teams made up of Rangers, Marines and National Guardsmen, as well as sharpshooters from the U.K. Sniper Wing, the Connecticut State Police and the FBI's Los Angeles SWAT team.

According to the Army Sniper Association, the official purpose of the competition is "to bring teams together to share battlefield lessons learned, provide training initiatives and ideas, and to compete tactically and technically."

But it's also about bragging rights. Or, as Sgt. Mike Snyder, head of the Army Sniper School, said, "It's to identify the best two-man sniper team in the world."

A couple of sharpshooters from the Marine Corps finished first, followed by the snipers from Fort Knox, two Army Special Forces snipers and a team from the 82nd Airborne.

 

[Polynikes]

In all fairness, and I am a former Marine, the Army won the competition the 2 years prior.


None the less, an interesting read and something I try to keep up with but have been slacking in.

Thanks for posting.

 

[Goshin]

I'll have to be sure to bring this up to my Marine Sniper buddy, when my Army Ranger buddy is present. :mrgreen:

Intra-service rivalry can be very amusing.

 

[Redress]

I'll have to be sure to bring this up to my Marine Sniper buddy, when my Army Ranger buddy is present. :mrgreen:

Intra-service rivalry can be very amusing.

They are one of the better parts of being in the service. Making fun of Marines and Air Force is part of what being in the Navy is about.

 

[Scorpion89]

So how do you shut up a USAF Fighter Jock when they keep going on how great there plane is.

Simple ask them how many Night Traps have they done :mrgreen::rofl

 

[MetalGear]

LOL we used to play who can throw the live grenade further with the Americans.

Unlike the yankee war of independance, we kicked their asses.

EDIT: We also blew a dog up to shreds doing it but dont tell the Left Wing Liberal BJ's who want to ban smoking in the army. ;O

 

[Redress]

So how do you shut up a USAF Fighter Jock when they keep going on how great there plane is.

Simple ask them how many Night Traps have they done :mrgreen::rofl

We had a Captain Smiley who was on a cross training deal with the Air Force. He was one of the top F-16 pilots of the time in the Air Force, who came to do 2 years with the Navy flying FA-18's. He showed up shortly before my first deployment, so did his CQs as we left on the deployment. After he finished his night CQ, he got parked, shut down, sat in the cockpit a few minutes, slowly climbed down, got his feet on deck, and grabbed and hugged the ladder. After a minute, he let go, bent down and kissed the deck, stood up, turned to us and said "good god that is the scariest thing I have ever done".

Great guy, great pilot.

 

[Polynikes]

I'll have to be sure to bring this up to my Marine Sniper buddy, when my Army Ranger buddy is present. :mrgreen:

Intra-service rivalry can be very amusing.

With out getting in to a cross service pissing match, I always found it hilarious how all the branches just classify the Marines as the 'dumb' branch. Even though it takes a high-school diploma enlist in the Marines, in the large majority of cases.

Also, when I look at different stereotypes associated with each branch in a non biased manner, the only one I never found applicable was the one associated with the Marines. I have met some of the smartest people in my life in the Marine Corps, and was actually surprised at the average level of intelligence, even in the infantry, where the stereotype is 'dumb meat shields'

I would be interested in seeing some sort of study or comparison to ASVAB scores of Marine enlistees compared to other branches.

The only stereotype I have found pretty applicable to the Marine Corps is the cold robot type personality when one gets out, or while they are in. You KNOW when someone was in the Marine Corps just by the manner in which they carry themselves, their eyes etc. Not necessarily a bad thing though.

Every single experience I have had with the Army has fit their stereotypes of a bunch of undisciplined guys playing soldier. See the other posts for a more detailed example, like when we relieved them at a couple places in Iraq.

The Navy...heh...They do their job well, and it is a very specialized one in most cases, but for the most part they are a bunch of whiney fat slobs. I've spent months at sea with them and knew some of them very well and they would attest to my observations with a certain degree of pride, almost because it sets them apart from the Marine Corps.

The Air Force....civilians in uniforms, I wouldn't even classify the large portion of them as military.

To top all this off, and I’m not implying any branch is better than the others, but the Marine Corps is the smallest of the 4 (Coast Guard is under Homeland Security now right?) but how many Marine Corps stickers, flags etc do you see on cars or on flying from flag poles, compared to the other branches? My guess is a lot more, all across the United States, with the exception of outside of major bases such as Edwards, Norfolk, etc.


Don't get me wrong, it is a brotherly love for all services. And having served in the military I feel I have the right to criticize all the branches. I have the utmost respect for anyone who serves their country

Well, maybe except for the Air Force. =)

 

[Polynikes]

Redress;1058388922]We had a Captain Smiley who was on a cross training deal with the Air Force. He was one of the top F-16 pilots of the time in the Air Force, who came to do 2 years with the Navy flying FA-18's. He showed up shortly before my first deployment, so did his CQs as we left on the deployment. After he finished his night CQ, he got parked, shut down, sat in the cockpit a few minutes, slowly climbed down, got his feet on deck, and grabbed and hugged the ladder. After a minute, he let go, bent down and kissed the deck, stood up, turned to us and said "good god that is the scariest thing I have ever done".

I saw a documentary and have seen the studies of the measured stress levels in pilots attempting to land on a moving carrier at night, and it is enough to make one impotent. Comparable to the stress levels of being tortured at a POW camp.

I used to hate landing in a helicopter on a carrier at night as a passenger, or landing anywhere at night on a helicopter for that matter. Feel so powerless over your fate, but I suppose it is no different than any other time.

Plus videos like this don't help. Gives me chills every time I see it


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxfrXDVIZJ0"]YouTube- U.S. Helicopter Crashes Off Aircraft Carrier[/ame]

 

[kansaswhig]

With out getting in to a cross service pissing match, I always found it hilarious how all the branches just classify the Marines as the 'dumb' branch. Even though it takes a high-school diploma enlist in the Marines, in the large majority of cases.

Also, when I look at different stereotypes associated with each branch in a non biased manner, the only one I never found applicable was the one associated with the Marines. I have met some of the smartest people in my life in the Marine Corps, and was actually surprised at the average level of intelligence, even in the infantry, where the stereotype is 'dumb meat shields'

I would be interested in seeing some sort of study or comparison to ASVAB scores of Marine enlistees compared to other branches.

The only stereotype I have found pretty applicable to the Marine Corps is the cold robot type personality when one gets out, or while they are in. You KNOW when someone was in the Marine Corps just by the manner in which they carry themselves, their eyes etc. Not necessarily a bad thing though.

Every single experience I have had with the Army has fit their stereotypes of a bunch of undisciplined guys playing soldier. See the other posts for a more detailed example, like when we relieved them at a couple places in Iraq.

Here's my 2 cents, if you care.

Truth: I am an Army officer. I have served with Marines in the past.

I believe as a whole, the Marine Corps is more disciplined than the Army. I believe they do get better recruits...however, they have that luxury of being "picky" because they aren't as big. I only wish the Army had the esprit de corps and pride that the Marines do. I have found all of their enlisted and officers to be highly competent, physically fit, motivated and very smart. I love Marines.

Marine Corps performance in Iraq is a different story. Overall, they did not perform well in the counterinsurgency part of the war. There are several reasons for this.

1. Marine Corps promotions are so competetive that a severe "zero defect" mentality exists; meaning that if someone makes one mistake, then they will not get promoted. This causes leaders to be reluctant to take tactical risk or make decisions "out of the box" to be successful. They are trained SO WELL that when they are confronted with non-standard conditions, their decision-making ability suffers. The Army has many zero-defect guys to...but our problem isn't so bad anymore that leaders feel comfortable taking risks in war.

2. 7 month tours are a big problem. Do the year like the Army...get over it. It's hard to build rapport with local leaders and HNF being there such a short time. It's like basically accomplishing nothing.

I would lend that the Marines really screwed up Anbar. It took an Army BDE (out of 1st Armored) to get the ball rolling there with the "Awakening". Don't let anyone tell you different. We took the lead on it. The Marines followed.

There are bad army units and bad Soldiers out there. I'm sure you met some clowns in Iraq. I'd like to hear about it. Maybe I know them. But for the most part, you can thank the Army for the success in Iraq. Not the Marine Corps. I imagine AFG will be the same.

You think any of our battalions are floating around the ocean having fun? Hell no.

You think any of our divisions are partying in Okinawa? Nope.

We've taken the lead on the COIN fight. We will continue to bear the brunt. But we appreciate the help from the USMC when they can.

 

[Redress]

I am not sure on this, but I understood the marine deployment schedule to be based around the navy deployment schedule(which is theoretically 6 months, but ends up always being 7) and is based around required maintenance needs of ships. Since the navy owns the marines, it only makes sense the deployment schedules match.

As far as observations of other services(not the big two, navy and marines): The army is good for what it is. If you are building a highway, you need people who are good with a shovel. They don't need to be anything but good with a shovel. The army is the equivalent of those shovel guys.

The air force though...any job done in naval aviation by two guys takes 6 in the Air Force. I remember watching a rapid turnaround drill during desert storm on an TV, where they hotseated a F-16 and got it off in something like record time, and laughed. We did faster turnarounds, with more aircraft, less equipment, fewer people per aircraft, and uner worse conditions every single day, several times a day.

And as far as the top dogs, the navy. It's easy to dismiss us as out of shape...till you spend a couple days on the flight deck. We used to talk marines into coming up with us, and could have them running back down below deck in fear within 5 minutes every time.

 

[kansaswhig]

I am not sure on this, but I understood the marine deployment schedule to be based around the navy deployment schedule(which is theoretically 6 months, but ends up always being 7) and is based around required maintenance needs of ships. Since the navy owns the marines, it only makes sense the deployment schedules match.

Nope. The USMC is it's own indepedent branch now.

Well, then if that deployment schedule is true, then the Marines should not be involved in prolonged COIN wars if they can't effectively participate. I guess the big guys need to decide what's more important: floating around the ocean with the Navy waiting on a pretend war or going to the real one.

As far as observations of other services(not the big two, navy and marines): The army is good for what it is. If you are building a highway, you need people who are good with a shovel. They don't need to be anything but good with a shovel. The army is the equivalent of those shovel guys.

No. The Army would be the lead on the highway project. We are the biggest. We own all of the commands. We do almost all of the work. Aside from some of the Marine Corps, the Army carries the load for the nation.

The air force though...any job done in naval aviation by two guys takes 6 in the Air Force. I remember watching a rapid turnaround drill during desert storm on an TV, where they hotseated a F-16 and got it off in something like record time, and laughed. We did faster turnarounds, with more aircraft, less equipment, fewer people per aircraft, and uner worse conditions every single day, several times a day.

For the most part, civilians in uniform. Not to disparage service...but it is what it is.

And as far as the top dogs, the navy. It's easy to dismiss us as out of shape...till you spend a couple days on the flight deck. We used to talk marines into coming up with us, and could have them running back down below deck in fear within 5 minutes every time.

The Navy (outside from a few of specialties) is out of a job. They are essentially in the ride-giving business. They don't even haul our supplies...civilian ships do. What does the Navy do? Sit around and wait for the next big war against another nation with a Navy? And in the meantime? At this point, I would see it pretty hard to justify their existence. They are downsizing, because all these former Navy guys keep joining the Army.

 

[Redress]

The Navy (outside from a few of specialties) is out of a job. They are essentially in the ride-giving business. They don't even haul our supplies...civilian ships do. What does the Navy do? Sit around and wait for the next big war against another nation with a Navy? And in the meantime? At this point, I would see it pretty hard to justify their existence. They are downsizing, because all these former Navy guys keep joining the Army.

This is entirely untrue. The Navy's job is exactly what it is, to be forward deployed where no other branch(except the marines to a much more limited extent) can be. Who was first on station(and by a fair margin) for Desert Shield? Eisenhower battle group. We were there with close to 100 combat ready aircraft(plus one from our sister squadron where they forgot to put back a stress panel on top and it was missed a few days...that plane ended up having to be craned off, never flew again) and a rather large amount of firepower, long before any other US force was in the area. Iraq invaded Quwait on August 2nd. By the 8th, there was two carriers(the Independence was the second to arrive) on station, around 15k sailors and marines all told between the two battle groups.

The problem with the Navy's job is that it is rarely needed, but when it is, no one else can do it, and this holds true today. The idea that the navy is out ofa job would only be true if you expect that never again would you need to rapidly get a force into place on no notice, and that is obviously not the case.

 

[American]

I saw a documentary and have seen the studies of the measured stress levels in pilots attempting to land on a moving carrier at night, and it is enough to make one impotent. Comparable to the stress levels of being tortured at a POW camp.

I used to hate landing in a helicopter on a carrier at night as a passenger, or landing anywhere at night on a helicopter for that matter. Feel so powerless over your fate, but I suppose it is no different than any other time.

Plus videos like this don't help. Gives me chills every time I see it


YouTube- U.S. Helicopter Crashes Off Aircraft Carrier

Probably a gust of wind came across the deck.

 

[Redress]

Probably a gust of wind came across the deck.

He came in too low.

 

[MetalGear]

Probably a gust of wind came across the deck.

A woman just pwned you when it comes to bad boy machines. Call yourself a man? :lol:

 

[Redress]

A woman just pwned you when it comes to bad boy machines. Call yourself a man? :lol:

Moreso than you?

 

[MetalGear]

Moreso than you?

Hey, i didnt say nuthin about the helicopter :shrug: :mrgreen:

 

[Ethereal]

Here's my 2 cents, if you care.

Truth: I am an Army officer. I have served with Marines in the past.

I believe as a whole, the Marine Corps is more disciplined than the Army. I believe they do get better recruits...however, they have that luxury of being "picky" because they aren't as big. I only wish the Army had the esprit de corps and pride that the Marines do. I have found all of their enlisted and officers to be highly competent, physically fit, motivated and very smart. I love Marines.

Marine Corps performance in Iraq is a different story. Overall, they did not perform well in the counterinsurgency part of the war. There are several reasons for this.

1. Marine Corps promotions are so competetive that a severe "zero defect" mentality exists; meaning that if someone makes one mistake, then they will not get promoted. This causes leaders to be reluctant to take tactical risk or make decisions "out of the box" to be successful. They are trained SO WELL that when they are confronted with non-standard conditions, their decision-making ability suffers. The Army has many zero-defect guys to...but our problem isn't so bad anymore that leaders feel comfortable taking risks in war.

2. 7 month tours are a big problem. Do the year like the Army...get over it. It's hard to build rapport with local leaders and HNF being there such a short time. It's like basically accomplishing nothing.

I would lend that the Marines really screwed up Anbar. It took an Army BDE (out of 1st Armored) to get the ball rolling there with the "Awakening". Don't let anyone tell you different. We took the lead on it. The Marines followed.

There are bad army units and bad Soldiers out there. I'm sure you met some clowns in Iraq. I'd like to hear about it. Maybe I know them. But for the most part, you can thank the Army for the success in Iraq. Not the Marine Corps. I imagine AFG will be the same.

You think any of our battalions are floating around the ocean having fun? Hell no.

You think any of our divisions are partying in Okinawa? Nope.

We've taken the lead on the COIN fight. We will continue to bear the brunt. But we appreciate the help from the USMC when they can.

Good evening, sir.

*Salutes sharply*

The Gunny will be along to see you shortly.

 

[Scorpion89]

Nope. The USMC is it's own indepedent branch now.

Really when did that happen the last time I look they are still part of the USN hence why they isn't a USMC Acad.

Well, then if that deployment schedule is true, then the Marines should not be involved in prolonged COIN wars if they can't effectively participate. I guess the big guys need to decide what's more important: floating around the ocean with the Navy waiting on a pretend war or going to the real one.

You way off base on this statement not only do the USMC excel in COIN but it was the USMC who made it actually work. The problem with ongoing COIN in Iraq is no one really wants to get the job done the correct way.

No. The Army would be the lead on the highway project. We are the biggest. We own all of the commands. We do almost all of the work. Aside from some of the Marine Corps, the Army carries the load for the nation.

Wrong your very wrong on that Sir way before any of the US Army Building Units showed up in Iraq it was the US Navy Seebee's who build the first major camps in Iraq. They also were the one's who design and build the Green Zone. While it is true that the Army has allot of Constrution Units it's far from the only one who does all of the work.

For the most part, civilians in uniform. Not to disparage service...but it is what it is.

Wow you really don't know much about the USAF now do you, So the next time you need to do a Parachute Jump out of who are you going to call. Or the next time you need fast close air support are you going to call up and ask Looking Glass or Top Cover (USAF Assest) to send in Army A-10s oh wait thats right the Army doesn't have Fast Close Air Support Assest.

The Navy (outside from a few of specialties) is out of a job. They are essentially in the ride-giving business. They don't even haul our supplies...civilian ships do. What does the Navy do? Sit around and wait for the next big war against another nation with a Navy? And in the meantime? At this point, I would see it pretty hard to justify their existence. They are downsizing, because all these former Navy guys keep joining the Army.

Really so the USN doesn't haul Army or the USAF supplies care to make a wager on that. If you like when I get home I can go over to Norfolk and take all sort of photo's of USN Supply ships loading up Army Hummer and Supply for you. Or better yet how about the Rapid Support Fleet that is sitting in Baltimore and NYC harbor full of Army Supplies.

You really don't know much about what the USN does now do you??? As Redress has stated who do you think is first on Station in any International Crisis the Army yea if they happen to be on a Navy ship it's always has been the USN First in and Last Out.

And before you start question my background let' say this I'm one of the few folks in this forum who has work with all Service Branh and each of them have certain type jobs that they only do but when it come's down to it they all support each other. The Army can't go anywhere unless the USAF and USN transports there arse, the USN can't unload their transport unless the Army is their to help. The USAF can't set up fowrad base unless the Army or SeaBee's build the base for them.

 

[kansaswhig]

Good evening, sir.

*Salutes sharply*

The Gunny will be along to see you shortly.

*Returns Salute*

Semper Fi!

I am hoping he shows up.

 

[kansaswhig]

This is entirely untrue. The Navy's job is exactly what it is, to be forward deployed where no other branch(except the marines to a much more limited extent) can be. Who was first on station(and by a fair margin) for Desert Shield? Eisenhower battle group.

Did anyone from the battle group set foot in Iraq? Did they drive their boats into Iraq or Kuwait? Because that's where the war was.

We were there with close to 100 combat ready aircraft(plus one from our sister squadron where they forgot to put back a stress panel on top and it was missed a few days...that plane ended up having to be craned off, never flew again) and a rather large amount of firepower, long before any other US force was in the area. Iraq invaded Quwait on August 2nd. By the 8th, there was two carriers(the Independence was the second to arrive) on station, around 15k sailors and marines all told between the two battle groups.

I am not trying to disparage service or have an interservice pissing match with you. I think my definition of "deployed" and yours are very different.

The problem with the Navy's job is that it is rarely needed, but when it is, no one else can do it, and this holds true today.

Isn't that exactly what I said?

The idea that the navy is out ofa job would only be true if you expect that never again would you need to rapidly get a force into place on no notice, and that is obviously not the case.

OK, so you can float your boat somewhere. Are the sailors getting off and fighting anyone? No. I know it's a strategic asset to be able to park a boat somewhere and sit there...but again, my definition of "deployed" and yours are very different.

 

[kansaswhig]

Really when did that happen the last time I look they are still part of the USN hence why they isn't a USMC Acad.

Well, that's about the least important reason. The Marines fall under the Dept. of the Navy, but have their own 4 star on the JCS and have their own budget. The only relationship is that they have no Marine Secretary.

You way off base on this statement not only do the USMC excel in COIN but it was the USMC who made it actually work. The problem with ongoing COIN in Iraq is no one really wants to get the job done the correct way.

I was being slightly facetious, but the seven month tours is a real killer. It is really not conducive to COIN ops. Anbar should have been very easy...they are all Sunnis, but the Marines didn't manage the fight to well there.

Wrong your very wrong on that Sir way before any of the US Army Building Units showed up in Iraq it was the US Navy Seebee's who build the first major camps in Iraq. They also were the one's who design and build the Green Zone. While it is true that the Army has allot of Constrution Units it's far from the only one who does all of the work.

Construction units are hardly the types of folks I am talking about. You took the analogy literally...yeah great seebee's are cool. I'm talking about fighting.

Wow you really don't know much about the USAF now do you, So the next time you need to do a Parachute Jump out of who are you going to call. Or the next time you need fast close air support are you going to call up and ask Looking Glass or Top Cover (USAF Assest) to send in Army A-10s oh wait thats right the Army doesn't have Fast Close Air Support Assest.

I appreciate the rides the AF gives me and the CAS that they provide. But 99% of the AF are not "warfighting". They just aren't.

Really so the USN doesn't haul Army or the USAF supplies care to make a wager on that. If you like when I get home I can go over to Norfolk and take all sort of photo's of USN Supply ships loading up Army Hummer and Supply for you. Or better yet how about the Rapid Support Fleet that is sitting in Baltimore and NYC harbor full of Army Supplies.

Both times I've went to Iraq, our stuff was loaded onto a civilian ship with a civilian crew. Sorry that's my experience. I didn't see Navy anywhere.

You really don't know much about what the USN does now do you??? As Redress has stated who do you think is first on Station in any International Crisis the Army yea if they happen to be on a Navy ship it's always has been the USN First in and Last Out.

Dude, I am sorry, but the Navy is NOT the "first in". Sitting miles and miles from the fight on a boat is not "first in". Tell you what, look up the KIA for Iraq and AFG and see how many are Navy vs. Army. That's your indication who does all the work.

And before you start question my background let' say this I'm one of the few folks in this forum who has work with all Service Branh and each of them have certain type jobs that they only do but when it come's down to it they all support each other.

Really? Interesting. You've been every branch? That's crazy! How did you pull that off?

The Army can't go anywhere unless the USAF and USN transports there arse, the USN can't unload their transport unless the Army is their to help. The USAF can't set up fowrad base unless the Army or SeaBee's build the base for them.

No...everyone supports the Army. We are always the main effort, in every war.

 

[Redress]

Did anyone from the battle group set foot in Iraq? Did they drive their boats into Iraq or Kuwait? Because that's where the war was.

We were within easy striking difference of both. You are aware that there is more to war than just taking and holding land, and you are further aware that taking and holding land without support is stupidly difficult? There are more missions in the military than just pounding sand, and the mission done by the navy is vital.

Was Iraq going to invade Saudi Arabia? Probably not, but we will never know, since the navy was there to deter it from happening. Not the army, not the air force, and not the marines as a real force, but the navy.

 

[braindrain]

Back to the original topic of this post congrats to the Marine team that won. As far as conventional forces go Marine snipers are some of the best out there. I would be willing to bet that the Armys best few teams didnt go to the competion.