- Thread starter USMCSGT0331
- Start date
Let's see what happens....
www.foxnews.com
Marine Corps under fire for eliminating elite scout sniper platoons from infantry battalions: 'Misguided'
A decision by the Marine Corps to get rid of its scout sniper program as part of a restructuring of its infantry battalions is drawing criticism.
www.foxnews.com 
The Navy or USNI?
most of the actual info comes from CSIS which is think tank full of pentagon, x-mil, war college professors etc
i read a bunch of that info and then poked around for comments about the war games done in house at the pentagon
the stuff that seemed to point in the same direction i put more weight on
Mike’s or someone else’s?
I've been delving all day today into source materials for Force 2030 trying to understand it.
I think you come close but I would disagree on your assessment that it will mostly be tiny groups of Marines. I don't know that enough has been said in publications about the composition of SIF other than it will vary and depend on a large number of factors.
I actually think the concept is far more relevant than I see former Marines here give it credit for. SIF has some very relevant precedents in many smaller scale (smaller than all out CV battles) ww2 so pac engagements.
Lots of details still left to be hashed out. But I agree with you that it's very weird that the sniper portion of SS platoons are deemed irrelevant.
Question for the former Marines here, how many of you have dug into the publicly available documentation on this doctrine?
Bro, just ask the wife where it is
paybacks ha!
I mean I guess the Marines just need to finally come to terms with the fact that eventually, the plan is just be aborsorbed into the Army.....
I'll show myself out now @M8541Reaper
I'll show myself out now @M8541Reaper
Just goes to show the pussification of men is a real thing...I mean I guess the Marines just need to finally come to terms with the fact that eventually, the plan is just be aborsorbed into the Army.....
I'll show myself out now @M8541Reaper
^^^ The army has been trying to absorb or make-redundant the Marines since Tun Tavern. The Navy has been trying to get their budget forever… and do black-show Navy stuff with it.
The Marines, being smarter than your average bears… have spent 200 years reinventing themselves in order to not just stay relevant, but to lead this services in everything from Jungle warfare (Smedley) to “Tentative Landing Manuals” (Pete Ellis) to Para Marines and Raiders (Holcomb) to Scout Snipers (Vandegrift) to cyber war and non-lethal (Gray.)
They are always at the leading edge.
Sadly, the list of innovators above (and there are more) were patriotic America-loving hard-core Marines. Not woke, weak socialists bent on destroying the Corps and America along with it. I’ll let you guys name names…
So what is happening today? Well, may not be innovating and using brainpower to stay relevant and lethal as a service branch. It may be about destroying the Corps. In an effort led by senior ‘officers’ who are in their positions due to litmus tests and political views that would make the above Commandants spin in their graves. Albeit with great precision.
I have a hard time believing that anyone in a senior role right now has America or their service’s best interest in mind. Though they are well-versed on global climate change and promoting homos. while calling their efforts “preparedness.”
So take current “2030” doctrines with a grain of salt. I still have nightmares about JV2020 and LandWarrior. And how Stryker Brigades were game-changing. La plus que ca change, la plus que c’est la meme chose.
Sirhr
The Marines, being smarter than your average bears… have spent 200 years reinventing themselves in order to not just stay relevant, but to lead this services in everything from Jungle warfare (Smedley) to “Tentative Landing Manuals” (Pete Ellis) to Para Marines and Raiders (Holcomb) to Scout Snipers (Vandegrift) to cyber war and non-lethal (Gray.)
They are always at the leading edge.
Sadly, the list of innovators above (and there are more) were patriotic America-loving hard-core Marines. Not woke, weak socialists bent on destroying the Corps and America along with it. I’ll let you guys name names…
So what is happening today? Well, may not be innovating and using brainpower to stay relevant and lethal as a service branch. It may be about destroying the Corps. In an effort led by senior ‘officers’ who are in their positions due to litmus tests and political views that would make the above Commandants spin in their graves. Albeit with great precision.
I have a hard time believing that anyone in a senior role right now has America or their service’s best interest in mind. Though they are well-versed on global climate change and promoting homos. while calling their efforts “preparedness.”
So take current “2030” doctrines with a grain of salt. I still have nightmares about JV2020 and LandWarrior. And how Stryker Brigades were game-changing. La plus que ca change, la plus que c’est la meme chose.
Sirhr
One other thing that I'd add... one of the first things Vandegrift did when he was promoted to Commandant...
He disbanded the Raider Battalions and the ParaMarines. Scattered these Marines into other units to 'leaven' the raw recruits flooding in daily.
It was controversial. And one of Vandegrift's friends was Merritt Edson who commanded the Raiders on Guadalcanal. Edson and his raiders on "Edson's Ridge" were a major factor in saving the U.S. perimeter around Henderson field. Vandegrift's logic was that "Marines are an Elite Unit. There should not be elite units inside an elite unit." That said, the creme de la creme of Marines DID do an amazing job as experienced combat veterans when it came to taking the Marine corps from 19,000 (reserve and active in 1939) to 500,000... in 3 years. Without those tier one marines, casualties would arguably have been far higher among the WW2 recruits.
There is another thing that Vandegrift did... months after eliminating the Paramarines and Raiders. That was to create the Scout Sniper concept. And begin in-theater selection and training of Scout snipers. An interesting aside... historian Ed Bearss (you probably remember him from Ken Burns Civil War) was in the first class of Marine Scout Snipers. He landed on New Britain at Christmas 1942 and before firing a shot was shot in the arm by a Japanese sniper and that was the end of his war. He used his GI Bill to get a PhD in history and became one of America's great scholars on the Civil War.
So things do come and go. And since the beginning, The Marine Corps has proved itself adapable and cerebral, in addition to being lethal.
Sirhr
PS. For two outstanding books on the subject: "Preparing for Victory" by Dr. David Ulbrich is outstanding. Naval Institute Press Award winning book. And "Once a Marine" by Vandegrift himself. Give a lot of insight into his political background and how he was "groomed" from the earliest days to be Commandant. Both totally worthy books in understanding the real history of the Marines.
He disbanded the Raider Battalions and the ParaMarines. Scattered these Marines into other units to 'leaven' the raw recruits flooding in daily.
It was controversial. And one of Vandegrift's friends was Merritt Edson who commanded the Raiders on Guadalcanal. Edson and his raiders on "Edson's Ridge" were a major factor in saving the U.S. perimeter around Henderson field. Vandegrift's logic was that "Marines are an Elite Unit. There should not be elite units inside an elite unit." That said, the creme de la creme of Marines DID do an amazing job as experienced combat veterans when it came to taking the Marine corps from 19,000 (reserve and active in 1939) to 500,000... in 3 years. Without those tier one marines, casualties would arguably have been far higher among the WW2 recruits.
There is another thing that Vandegrift did... months after eliminating the Paramarines and Raiders. That was to create the Scout Sniper concept. And begin in-theater selection and training of Scout snipers. An interesting aside... historian Ed Bearss (you probably remember him from Ken Burns Civil War) was in the first class of Marine Scout Snipers. He landed on New Britain at Christmas 1942 and before firing a shot was shot in the arm by a Japanese sniper and that was the end of his war. He used his GI Bill to get a PhD in history and became one of America's great scholars on the Civil War.
So things do come and go. And since the beginning, The Marine Corps has proved itself adapable and cerebral, in addition to being lethal.
Sirhr
PS. For two outstanding books on the subject: "Preparing for Victory" by Dr. David Ulbrich is outstanding. Naval Institute Press Award winning book. And "Once a Marine" by Vandegrift himself. Give a lot of insight into his political background and how he was "groomed" from the earliest days to be Commandant. Both totally worthy books in understanding the real history of the Marines.
Last edited:
I mean I guess the Marines just need to finally come to terms with the fact that eventually, the plan is just be aborsorbed into the Army.....
I'll show myself out now @M8541Reaper
You haven’t heard? This is the first step to becoming absorbed by Space Force.
…
That isn’t going to work.
Because the first instinct when Marines find some new kind of alien life will be… “can I fuck it?”
And that won’t end well for humanity.
Sirhr
Well said.
China is building shit ton fuck of these. We deliberately did not build a lot of C17s OR F22s because both were rightly seen as offensive weapons if built in large numbers. China will have 5x the numbers of ours by the end of the decade. A large troop transport capability only means one thing.
Xi'an Y-20 - Wikipedia
The changes in the Scout Sniper don't make sense unless they have a primary MOS around recon. And actively recruit into it. Otherwise they just won't have the numbers. And issue true precision rifles all the way down to the platoon level in the infantry units AND teach the guys how to shoot. A couple per squad.
The US Army of the 80s and 90s had entire recon companies at the Brigade level in both the infantry outfits and in the MI Brigades. We also had light infantry units who were basically recon with firepower. All modeled after lessons learned in Vietnam.
My guess is that non of this will happen and the removal of the tank and tubes will hollow out the Marine commanders ability to gain fire superiority in a ground fight.
I still don't understand the littoral concept. It basically sounds like Wake Island rinse and repeat.
China will just send in four C17s or four fishing boats and dump 300 soldiers plus a couple off tubes on the island and the Marine company will get one human wave attack and be done.
The recon battle lost is an uphill climb for the ground commander. When we stripped the recon and jammed the net and then had snipers in good overwatch, the opposing force commander was fucked. When we put artillery fire on his assembly areas or the planned avenues of approach, he lost. Just one recon team near an LZ with stingers and some long range fire would strip half the combat power in seconds.
On the other hand, one m1 tank pushed us off bridges and crossings all day long no matter what we did. The optics were so good and the fire very precise. He could sit off a mile and find us all in an hour. Then game on. Ditto with good overwatch on the other side.
Thanks 308. This is pretty good stuff. I read through all of it. It's interesting to see the give and take in the document.
The key graph is the direct fire smart munitions or drones that they are talking about. Logistics and hit % is the key to an efficient kill chain. That stuff works and a log train full of smart killer drones beats one full of artillery shells. I can see a squad with several of these to use. That squad needs a precision rifle that works out to 1000 yards too.
They will retain the tubes at 7 battteries and every platoon will have its mortars.
I saw this as something they have not figured out yet. The solution would be recon companies at the Regiment level with fully manned platoons handed out the the BNs as needed.
I was never in the Marines. I was a Coastie, showing Marines how it's done. So, my opinion probably doesn't carry any weight with it. With that being said...
IMHO, the only reason for ridding the Marines of their renowned S/S program is to (treasonously) reduce the Marines fighting capability/battlefield effectiveness BEFORE a war is about to begin. In other words: The elect know a war is about to begin and "they" are doing everything "they" can to reduce the capabilities of our defense in order to further weaken our nation. As has been the case since Biden was selected to run this ship aground.
IMHO, the only reason for ridding the Marines of their renowned S/S program is to (treasonously) reduce the Marines fighting capability/battlefield effectiveness BEFORE a war is about to begin. In other words: The elect know a war is about to begin and "they" are doing everything "they" can to reduce the capabilities of our defense in order to further weaken our nation. As has been the case since Biden was selected to run this ship aground.
Last edited:
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/NTD5NNQH3BEWPCMEVOPOFMPH6Q.jpg)
Marine Corps launches shortened recon sniper course
The new course cuts out three weeks from the regular scout sniper course.
www.marinecorpstimes.com US Marines Move Snipers from Infantry Battalions to Recon & MARSOC - Soldier Systems Daily
There's been quite a bit of grump king recently over USMC plans to move their Snipers from Infantry Battalions where they are organized in Scout Sniper Platoons to Reconnaissance Bns and Marine Corps Special Operations Command. The move was made official late last week with release of a message...
soldiersystems.net
Depends. They could make new branch separate from the Marine Corp and call it the Maroon Queer.
Old school Marines can't get with the he/she program,they must have a bug up their ass.Interesting. This article has more backstory on the politics of it all. (Dated April, 2022).
How two dozen retired generals are trying to stop an overhaul of the Marines
Current plans call for shedding troops and equipment in preparation to take on China.www.politico.com
i am wondering about all this,and confused as usual,if our "leaders" are aware of what a future world war will be. we fought ww2,korea was similar,then vietnam which was a failure using WW2 thinking. iraq invasion more conventional. afganistan somewhat mixed counter insurgency like vietnam. have any of these people looked at ukraine and now israel? if you believe scources,ukraine has lost more KIA than we did in WW2 (4-500,000). russia has lost more than we did in vietnam (70,000). no one knows potential losses in a WW3 that does not go nuclear. it will as soon as one side in a conventional feels it's going to lose. but,the point is that the US will not tolerate 1-2 million KIA. ie more than enough to run us out of troops-like ukraine now. btw russia is said to have lost 8 mil and germany 3 mil in WW2. WTF are these "leaders" thinking? prob why we are sending $ to ukraine and not troops. they seem to know that the modern military they are destroying would crash and burn in a month. USA now wouldn't tolerate 10k dead in a year. took 20yr to reach that # in middle east wars with a volunteer mil,not a draft. i just wonder if the elites are using all this for their 86% pop reduction goal. they seem to think that they will be immune. do they believe that something like secret service (SS) will protect them? how,why,what for? they think maybe AI will protect them? maybe skynet? insanity all around!
WW2 killed about 3% of the world population, with many countries relying on imports to make up various deficits (food, medicine)and being susceptible to destabilisation, just equalling WW2 would wipe out 250 million odd people.
Regarding the work of snipers in modern conflicts.
The war in Ukraine showed that the work of a sniper can be effective only with the necessary equipment and experience.
We need thermal imaging sights and not pre-objective attachments, we need silent transport, camouflage from thermal imagers and radio jammers for drones.
If anyone is interested, I can talk more extensively about this.
And interestingly, your location shows Ukraine.
Man, believe me, the sniper is a very mobile combat unit.
In Ukraine there are sniper drones and FPV drones with artillery
Yes I am from Ukraine.
How do the bombs that fall on Ukrainian soil destroy the United States?
I understand that there are no identical wars.
In Ukraine, snipers are assigned to separate units that find work for themselves, and this is more effective than the decrees of a sniper commander who does not understand what sniping is at all.
I am not or never was a Sniper. Have worked with them, armoered for them and read up on various doctrine and experiences so this is just what I kind of learned along the way.
Outside of SOF, Military commanders are notorious for not using their sniper assets to their fullest potential. They do not understand the capabilities and the true value those eyes and ears provide on the battlespace. In orgs with organic recon, this is less the case, but most commanders do not know what they don't know. There is (or was) a Recon Leaders course put on that would help teach officers how better to use those assets, but most leaders do not go through it. So many times the sniper elements would get folded into line platoons or attached out, taking one of the most powerful pieces off the chess board.
SOF is a different animal. Most small units have at least one sniper qualified dude, sometimes more. The enlisted and NCO's play a much bigger role in training and mission planning, and can articulate the capabilities better to someone who was trained at a much high level and is a more well rounded commander from an education perspective.
Perhaps this one was of the reasons, The Marine Corps is also a very small component compared to the army. They have reduced the number of Infantry BNs. They have reduced the number of Marines in a BN. They appear to be positioning themselves away from inland warfar and back to an amphibious and intercoastal force after getting rid of tanks and a bunch of arty.
All this stuff you say you need, you can buy it. Make money, find a dealer, buy product. It's how the commerce world works.
No, the USA does not want to keep funding your war. It's your war, not our war. You pay for it.
America First, America First, America First.
DJT
I understand your idea, because I myself am a military personnel with 20 years of experience.
Yes, often commanders do not know how snipers work because they have never been one themselves.
Snipers are very important on the battlefield. Yes, there are drones they can see from the air, but soon all armies will have anti-drone installations operating regularly.
As an active sniper on the battlefield, I noticed the enemy where the drone did not see them. But the command did not take my intelligence into account and then the infantry paid for it unfortunately.
Regarding the abandonment of artillery in the USCM, this is of course complete bullshit, artillery still dominates the battlefield.
After the Cold War, all armies stopped believing in large infantry battles, and in vain such battles are going on in Ukraine.
Actually, this is not a political forum at all.
Fuck you.
Or as they say in Ukraine:
go fuck yourself with the Russian warship
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Actually, it is a political forum. This is the Bear Pit, and politics are very much discussed here. You've been here for a couple weeks, you have no idea what is what on Sniper's Hide, and you continue to prove that with every post.
We don't care what they say in Ukraine either.
Grow some wheat, mine some minerals, pump some oil, and fund your own war. When it becomes America's war, everyone will know it by the big bright light. You don't want us in your war.
TLDR: snipers attitude towards others, accountability in their MOS, and the mission, allowed themselves to talk themselves out of relevance, and a job. Commanders don't want people that provide problems when they are told how to be employed, instead they want solutions, and snipers were not giving this to their commanders enough
As far as snipers go:
1. Many snipers (while many will refute this in public spaces) do not engage at the distances that they claim to be proficient, and when they argue for mission X, then cannot be as effective as they claim to be, the faith in them drops. Most shots made (Most, not all) can be taught with relatively little added instruction (when taking a mature, high expert infantryman, which is usually who the SS platoons would target anyway), which leads to my next point,
2. SS school loved to brag about attrition rate from their school, and exclusivity. When you intentionally make your numbers small, and don't simultaneously ensure you never drop the ball, there are less advocates inside of your MOS, and there are few believers outside of your MOS (because you have shown you aren't up to the standards you claim or qualified at, or because you have made everyone mad with a prima donna approach at day-to-day duties.
3. Across several platoons, I've seen snipers argue (to the platoon cdr, company commander, etc) that they shouldn't patrol, that's not their role. OK, so they should go out on LP/OP right? Wrong, they need to sleep and be more alert to make do long gun work. OK, no patrol, no LP/OP, (don't even think about standing post)
4. Snipers as observers was one other argument that was present, but now with the observation tools we have, and the narrowing gap between well trained infantrymen and snipers, this is another way they made themselves less relevant. Even when they would call for fire, it was rare to get good IDF adjustments from snipers, and have seen first hand several instances where things have been held up because of failed adjustment for fire.
BTW, I don't have anything against snipers, I know some rockstars that felt very frustrated with this trend that was happening many years ago. Unfortunately, most of them got out, and those good ones left weren't enough to make a change. I do have good friends that are snipers, and I don't have anything against the people, but these factors are real, and it isn't something sort of treason. Most commanders would rather have scout platoon with 12-15 people that can make good shots at 80% success rate out to 800, instead of a platoon of snipers, that isn't at TO (filled up) with only some of those guys capable of a great degree of accuracy, and only some that won't fight them with employment, instead of provide solutions.
As far as snipers go:
1. Many snipers (while many will refute this in public spaces) do not engage at the distances that they claim to be proficient, and when they argue for mission X, then cannot be as effective as they claim to be, the faith in them drops. Most shots made (Most, not all) can be taught with relatively little added instruction (when taking a mature, high expert infantryman, which is usually who the SS platoons would target anyway), which leads to my next point,
2. SS school loved to brag about attrition rate from their school, and exclusivity. When you intentionally make your numbers small, and don't simultaneously ensure you never drop the ball, there are less advocates inside of your MOS, and there are few believers outside of your MOS (because you have shown you aren't up to the standards you claim or qualified at, or because you have made everyone mad with a prima donna approach at day-to-day duties.
3. Across several platoons, I've seen snipers argue (to the platoon cdr, company commander, etc) that they shouldn't patrol, that's not their role. OK, so they should go out on LP/OP right? Wrong, they need to sleep and be more alert to make do long gun work. OK, no patrol, no LP/OP, (don't even think about standing post)
4. Snipers as observers was one other argument that was present, but now with the observation tools we have, and the narrowing gap between well trained infantrymen and snipers, this is another way they made themselves less relevant. Even when they would call for fire, it was rare to get good IDF adjustments from snipers, and have seen first hand several instances where things have been held up because of failed adjustment for fire.
BTW, I don't have anything against snipers, I know some rockstars that felt very frustrated with this trend that was happening many years ago. Unfortunately, most of them got out, and those good ones left weren't enough to make a change. I do have good friends that are snipers, and I don't have anything against the people, but these factors are real, and it isn't something sort of treason. Most commanders would rather have scout platoon with 12-15 people that can make good shots at 80% success rate out to 800, instead of a platoon of snipers, that isn't at TO (filled up) with only some of those guys capable of a great degree of accuracy, and only some that won't fight them with employment, instead of provide solutions.
According to your reasoning, how much money did you personally give for this war?
Maybe you are not aware but your homo dick sucking cross dressing comedian leader, has been taking billions and routing to the political connected in Ukraine (not to mention back to US politicians) . No idea how much actual money is making it to the battlefield, but it can't be much.
You should turn your guns on your own leaders, they are watching you dumb fucks and the Russian dumb fucks slaughter each other so your rich leaders can grow wealthier on each side. In fact, the soldiers on both sides should kill their leaders for putting them into this mess.
Any of us that pay US taxes, more than we want to.
Man, at the end of the last century, we gave up all our nuclear warheads in exchange for a guarantee of our security.
Then everyone was happy about it.
In fact, the UN and NATO should have been present on the border of Ukraine and Russia back in 2014. But everyone gave up on that.
If there had not been a US initiative to disarm us, perhaps Russia would not have attacked us.
This will be the stupidest question I get asked today.
How the fuck should I know?
According to the numbers per every household our debt is around 240,000.
I'm sure that isn't just tax paying households.
They'll not produce those numbers.
An ass load of that debt is/was generated in fighting wars for/in other countries for THEIR benefit.
All we have to show for it is dead American men and ungrateful pricks such as yourself.
Where are the countries that are sending armed forces/military monies and equipment to protect our borders?
R
I was not given a choice to fight or not. I was presented with a fait accompli because my hometown was under Russian occupation.
My father, I and my brother are fighting the Russians despite our stupid politicians.
I came to this forum to talk about combat tactics and what I personally encountered in this war.
I understand that we live thanks to your taxes.
But you also understand that if Russia wins this war, the next step will be Europe.
Similar threads
