I'm no expert, but this sounds like another boneheaded idea. First tanks, now scout snipers.
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/marine-corps-scout-snipers-elimination/ (https://taskandpurpose.com/news/marine-corps-scout-snipers-elimination/)
Got to agree about the Tanks - They are not eliminating snipers per say but re-orging them into different org structure that will be equipped differently.
The marines are fascinating since they have to shift from paper fighting to what does it take to seize, deny and supply for war in the pacific. Its clear that if another conflict breaks out all the lessons they have learned from 30 years of insurgency fighting need to be tossed against a near peer like China.
Ukraine is showing itself as a battlelab and lots of bits of kit are proving to be more important or less important than what they were earlier thought to be.
Quote from: Con on March 07, 2023, 08:08:30 AMGot to agree about the Tanks - They are not eliminating snipers per se but re-orging them into different org structure that will be equipped differently.
They are eliminating the MOS and there will be no trained snipers in the reconnaissance platoons. Infantry battalions will no longer be able to call on scout snipers to conduct critical missions. Yes, there will still be trained snipers, but they will all be in MARSOC and not be available for direct use as part of infantry operations. It's a bad move.
The tanks was a bad move for sure. I could see down sizing, but removing heavy armor completely from the marine corps is a bad idea.
Remember, don't criticize a Marine sniper until you walk a mile in his shoes. Then you might be out of range, and he'll be barefoot.
It strikes me as trying to sound like you're keeping them while really getting rid of them. Why keep something that works great, toss it out try something different. :idiot2:
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on March 07, 2023, 08:51:30 AMQuote from: Con on March 07, 2023, 08:08:30 AMGot to agree about the Tanks - They are not eliminating snipers per se but re-orging them into different org structure that will be equipped differently.
They are eliminating the MOS and there will be no trained snipers in the reconnaissance platoons. Infantry battalions will no longer be able to call on scout snipers to conduct critical missions. Yes, there will still be trained snipers, but they will all be in MARSOC and not be available for direct use as part of infantry operations. It's a bad move.
The recent testimony from the USMC sniper at the Kabul airport during the Afghanistan evacuation is illustrative of the type of scenarios where a battalion commander wants to have a sniper capability. Leaving aside the fact that in Kabul the sniper team never was given the authorization to engage, the fact is that having a sniper capability available is important. Frequently, it may be a way to minimize friendly and civilian casualties, as it is usually a far more precise type kinetic engagement than other tools available to the commander. Not having it available as an organic part of the TO&E is a bad idea, especially for the Marines who are an expeditionary force and need to have a wide variety of force options available for their missions.
My Brother was a Capt. in the Florida Keys sheriff Dept. for many years. They had a dedicated sniper unit in their SWAT Team. Once in a hostage situation, the Sherriff asked for the sniper to be used if needed to take-out the gunman. He was then mortified that the sniper would be, according to protocol, able to take his shot when he thought it would be most optimal. Big Bro. explained to the Sherriff there simply wasn't time in those situations to allow him to make the call when he thought it was best. The sniper has only a fraction of a second to pick his time for the correct shot. Eventually the Sherriff let the sniper take his own shot and the Purp. was taken-out successfully. That should have been the case in Kabul.