Confirmed kills

[Mister Ridge]

This is probably a bit macabre, but I have a question. What made a "confirmed kill" historically? Whenever we talk about Carlos Hathcock, Simo Häyhä, Vasily Zaytsev, those Russian women in the motivational pic thread, having x number of confirmed kills, what did that mean at the time? How were they confirmed?

 

[canman]

The last two pages of Peter Senich's "The One Round War" ( The Epilogue )deals with just that. He say's most sniper's including Gunny Hathcock say they flat out don't know? He said it wasn't like a match where the winner got a medal. He did say he had more probable kills then confirmed though. In another Senich book" Vietnam The Long Range War " a former Army sniper said he was under the impression you had to step on or touch the body to confirm a kill. For that reason they called them step on's not kills. He also inferred that most guy's didn't bother doing that nobody was really keeping score anyway. It was probably like that in all conflicts. I'd be willing to bet the Russian numbers are the same, they don't know either.

 

[canman]

For practical reasons a hit whether it's a kill or not unless it's to cull leadership is just as good. It could even be better. Now they have to take care of a wounded guy and all the time worrying if they are next. Pretty much just being out there and they know it is a bad day for them.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

Historically, it usually meant a recovered body...

If a squad went out to pick up the carcass... then confirmed. If an enemy corpse was lying in plain sight and could be viewed... then it could be confirmed.

But it's a pretty fluid term. And in the military community, from what I understand, never meant much. Those in the field tended to think in terms of lives of their buddies saved... Because every opponent put down was someone not shooting at 'their side.' And the courses tended to weed out the 'wannabe Texas Tower types' pretty quick.

That's the real zeitgeist of the sniper (or the precision marksman) that folks outside the community don't understand. Noone is in the business of killing people. They are in the business of saving lives. Certainly that's what we trained for in the L.E. community. It was all about saving lives.

Cheers,

Sirhr

 

[sandwarrior]

The stupid thing is most of those guys do not know. It's someone that comes along after a battle and counts bodies, then goes back to Intel (S2/G2) and starts a scorecard like it's a game. The Russians did it in WWII, so did the Germans. Misguided fools started doing that after they found that Intel was keeping score because they wanted to get into the record books. Intel was only too happy to oblige, in the hopes somebody would recognize this as a Guinness record or something. Instead it puts a price on a snipers head as he gets identified to the enemy.

The "body count" in Viet Nam was a big boost to this stupidity as we didn't have a tangible way to measure the success or failure of a large conventional army in a guerilla type war.

As with most snipers, in the moment it's not about numbers, it's about saving your comrades under duress. Hits are an extremely effective way to slow an enemy onslaught down. It's only afterwards that intel comes back out with the intel that X-number of "confirmed kills" were attributed to the sniper.

IMO, "confirmed kills" is the stupidest thing we could ever do to snipers.

 

[DaleGribble82]

Yeah, it’s dumb none of us know, none of us care. It’s the most mythical statistic that comes with the job. You could ask anyone of us, and probably won’t find a clear book answer. It’s whatever, I personally don’t care and never did.

Good Snipers that truly love the job will care much more about how many lives we saved through observation/overwatch and how many successful call for fire missions or air strikes we coordinated to aid our buddies in a TIC. Very thankful to have earned the opportunity to serve as a U.S. Army Sniper.

 

[sandwarrior]

Yeah, it’s dumb none of us know, none of us care. It’s the most mythical statistic that comes with the job. You could ask anyone of us, and probably won’t find a clear book answer. It’s whatever, I personally don’t care and never did.

Good Snipers that truly love the job will care much more about how many lives we saved through observation/overwatch and how many successful call for fire missions or air strikes we coordinated to aid our buddies in a TIC. Very thankful to have earned the opportunity to serve as a U.S. Army Sniper.

DaleGribble82,

It's not dumb you know, or don't know what it is. It's dumb that that intel keeps the score. They never keep the score that had you NOT made the shot, any number of your buddies could have been killed. Knowing you made the shot, not just took it, is the foundation for continued success. Bragging on that success is what gets you in more trouble down the road. A guy who brags all the time then has to live up to those words. The guy who knows what he can do, knows he's an asset to his people in future missions.

 

[DaleGribble82]

DaleGribble82,

It's not dumb you know, or don't know what it is. It's dumb that that intel keeps the score. They never keep the score that had you NOT made the shot, any number of your buddies could have been killed. Knowing you made the shot, not just took it, is the foundation for continued success. Bragging on that success is what gets you in more trouble down the road. A guy who brags all the time then has to live up to those words. The guy who knows what he can do, knows he's an asset to his people in future missions.

I think you misunderstood my statement. My statement “none of us know none of us care” was referring to the methodology of which our S2 determines confirmed kills. I’m in agreeance with you 100%. Think you just misunderstood my statement is all. We are on the same page brother trust me.

 

[Carlos Danger]

This is probably a bit macabre, but I have a question. What made a "confirmed kill" historically? Whenever we talk about Carlos Hathcock, Simo Häyhä, Vasily Zaytsev, those Russian women in the motivational pic thread, having x number of confirmed kills, what did that mean at the time? How were they confirmed?

I'm not allowed to post in this thread.

 

[Huskydriver]

Arcom with v devices are handed out left and right for "confirmed kills"... Just like bronze stars handed out like candy to every officer and plt sgt just for deploying...they may or may not be really confirmed. I have seen a bunch of people awarded decorations for "confirmed" kills when no bodies we're verified for tics I was involved in...I take the whole confirmed kill saying with a grain of salt. Did they take a shot? Probably...did they see guy go down? Possibly...verified? Very unlikely

 

[DaleGribble82]

Arcom with v devices are handed out left and right for "confirmed kills"... Just like bronze stars handed out like candy to every officer and plt sgt just for deploying...they may or may not be really confirmed. I have seen a bunch of people awarded decorations for "confirmed" kills when no bodies we're verified for tics I was involved in...I take the whole confirmed kill saying with a grain of salt. Did they take a shot? Probably...did they see guy go down? Possibly...verified? Very unlikely

Couldn’t have said it better brother.

 

[Rudy Gonsior]

“Confirmed Kill” is most certainly an ambiguous term that as a professional sniper makes me cringe.

Straight of the bat, let’s be clear (as far as I’m aware): No body or any organization is/has officially been keeping scores, as in there isn’t some sort of official record now nor is there any sort of historical precedent for methods to document an individuals kill count. If anyone suggests so, they are likely full of shit.

Nowadays (much like the old days) EKIAs are reported and tracked in an official manner through SITREPs and battle trackers, etc. but again it’s not an individual tally barring some sort of abnormal incidence. Typically it’s kinda vague and the methods and techniques vary from BDAs to HUMIT to SIGNIT. There are frankly a lot of different ways to figure who’s no longer in the game. The idea of going “boots to head” has long be touted as the gold standard but in practical terms it is operational unnecessary especially now more than ever. Fact is beyond propaganda for the most part “who done it” is irrelevant.

At a unofficial level there may vary well always be more detailed record keeping for the sake of inner unit rivalry. As a recent example our ODA use to work and share battle space with Aussy 2nd Commandos a bit and we had a friendly running score of longest “confirmed” in our AO. It was a fun, good hearted professional rivalry between guys who love the craft.

But you can bet your bottom dollar just as we’ve seen in the past, nowadays when some limp-dick up the flagpole hears about it that shit gets turned and twisted to straight propaganda. For most of us on the line it’s just an acknowledgement of skill and friendly competition, kill counts are never really meant to grade performance.

The fact is you can place a pretty mediocre sniper in target rich environment and they will rack up big numbers but big numbers doesn’t necessarily mean you’re doing the best work could/should be doing. I’ve worked AOs where you can and naturally do play wack a mole for a period of time with seemingly little effect. Then all of a sudden you swack the right guy and operational shaping takes place. It’s complicated for sure, and I guess what I’m saying is number rarely tell the whole story.

On the personal level, I’ve come to the conclusion that counting kills is an unproductive practice for several reasons.

1.) After my first few kills I realized if you’ve killed one, you’ve (philosophically speaking) killed them all. I mean yes there are always kills that strike me as memorable, interesting and of note but as whole numbers means little to me now.

2.) As I said recording kill counts has a tendency to place an valued to the numbers and this in turn rewards the idea that upping your kill counts equals success. Tactically there may be an immediate advantage to reducing but often that’s a short sighted allocation of a sniper(s) skill when considering operational and strategic level objectives. In layman terms counting kills is like playing checkers when you ought to be playing chess.

 

[sandwarrior]

“Confirmed Kill” is most certainly an ambiguous term that as a professional sniper makes me cringe.

Straight of the bat, let’s be clear (as far as I’m aware): No body or any organization is/has officially been keeping scores, as in there isn’t some sort of official record now nor is there any sort of historical precedent for methods to document an individuals kill count. If anyone suggests so, they are likely full of shit.

Nowadays (much like the old days) EKIAs are reported and tracked in an official manner through SITREPs and battle trackers, etc. but again it’s not an individual tally barring some sort of abnormal incidence. Typically it’s kinda vague and the methods and techniques vary from BDAs to HUMIT to SIGNIT. There are frankly a lot of different ways to figure who’s no longer in the game. The idea of going “boots to head” has long be touted as the gold standard but in practical terms it is operational unnecessary especially now more than ever. Fact is beyond propaganda for the most part “who done it” is irrelevant.

At a unofficial level there may vary well always be more detailed record keeping for the sake of inner unit rivalry. As a recent example our ODA use to work and share battle space with Aussy 2nd Commandos a bit and we had a friendly running score of longest “confirmed” in our AO. It was a fun, good hearted professional rivalry between guys who love the craft.

But you can bet your bottom dollar just as we’ve seen in the past, nowadays when some limp-dick up the flagpole hears about it that shit gets turned and twisted to straight propaganda. For most of us on the line it’s just an acknowledgement of skill and friendly competition, kill counts are never really meant to grade performance.

The fact is you can place a pretty mediocre sniper in target rich environment and they will rack up big numbers but big numbers doesn’t necessarily mean you’re doing the best work could/should be doing. I’ve worked AOs where you can and naturally do play wack a mole for a period of time with seemingly little effect. Then all of a sudden you swack the right guy and operational shaping takes place. It’s complicated for sure, and I guess what I’m saying is number rarely tell the whole story.

On the personal level, I’ve come to the conclusion that counting kills is an unproductive practice for several reasons.

1.) After my first few kills I realized if you’ve killed one, you’ve (philosophically speaking) killed them all. I mean yes there are always kills that strike me as memorable, interesting and of note but as whole numbers means little to me now.

2.) As I said recording kill counts has a tendency to place an valued to the numbers and this in turn rewards the idea that upping your kill counts equals success. Tactically there may be an immediate advantage to reducing but often that’s a short sighted allocation of a sniper(s) skill when considering operational and strategic level objectives. In layman terms counting kills is like playing checkers when you ought to be playing chess.

I very much agree with what you are saying. I personally believe (from a professional standpoint) that what transpires out in the battlefield should not be released to the general military population, let alone the public. At least as far as I'm concerned about opsec, or, integrity of an operation.

The sad fact of the matter is that IT HAS. Example being the numbers behind and the stories told of Hathcock, Mawhinny, Waldron, England, and Kyle. Where the information could have been gotten, assessed and used to possibly bring old snipers 'back into the fold' so to speak, to glean information from them regarding current and future operations and tactics. It has instead been used as a propaganda tool.

The "kill count" makes me cringe as well. To me it was always about precision removal of the worst opposing factors on the battlefield. Not just, "I got X-many guys." That totally defeats the purpose of us being somewhere. Killing is not the main objective. Removing those who wantonly kill others, or us, is. To that end the sniping skill serves a very valuable purpose. I find that too much of "big green" wants to use it as a recruiting tool. With the wrong message being sent.

 

[DaleGribble82]

I very much agree with what you are saying. I personally believe (from a professional standpoint) that what transpires out in the battlefield should not be released to the general military population, let alone the public. At least as far as I'm concerned about opsec, or, integrity of an operation.

The sad fact of the matter is that IT HAS. Example being the numbers behind and the stories told of Hathcock, Mawhinny, Waldron, England, and Kyle. Where the information could have been gotten, assessed and used to possibly bring old snipers 'back into the fold' so to speak, to glean information from them regarding current and future operations and tactics. It has instead been used as a propaganda tool.

The "kill count" makes me cringe as well. To me it was always about precision removal of the worst opposing factors on the battlefield. Not just, "I got X-many guys." That totally defeats the purpose of us being somewhere. Killing is not the main objective. Removing those who wantonly kill others, or us, is. To that end the sniping skill serves a very valuable purpose. I find that too much of "big green" wants to use it as a recruiting tool. With the wrong message being sent.

Agree with you completely. They want to glorify it almost as it to use us as a propaganda or like you said as a recruiting tool to make every young American male want to do that someday. Like you said it’s not about a number it’s about who was taken down, why they were a chosen target, and what effect that EKIA had on the opposing force and the positivity gained from that precise threat removal.

 

[DTubb]

Eric was certainly a good shot with his “Old Yeller” .
Believe he had 2 different "Across the Course" aggregate scores of 998 back in the 70’s.
Never mention his other skills..

 

[Strykervet]

This was brought up on here about a year ago as I recall.

Technically there is no such thing in the US army.

In practice, there is. Typically if a second set of eyes "confirm" the kill or if the rest of the unit and/or lawyers move in when the shooting stops and start handing out cash, they'll take a count. In some cases, only the bad guys are counted, in others they count the total body count (like with the lawyers). All of this shit goes out on the net or is picked up on by that buddy you have in MI. These body counts are for more than just to confirm kills (and it doesn't necessarily say who killed 'em).

And like was mentioned, the orders for an award for action resulting in enumerated enemy deaths sort of serves as one. Arcom? Shit, I saw one handed out to a fat supply guy simply because he didn't fuck up his job at NTC. Jeezuspleezus.

When we got a new 1SG prior to unit deployment, he came from the ranger batt. down the street and they'd already deployed. More than once (but they have very short deployments comparatively). Anyway, he had a Q&A before we got down to business. He was short, so he allowed the height question, 4'11" (barely 100lbs, all gristle and bone, he was a tough SOB). And the confirmed kill question, to which he answered : forty (something). This was in the role of sniper as I understand it, but not limited to that. There were others.

The whole time I was in the army, it was never discussed. Not once. The only time it ever came up was when that kid asked the 1SG that. In SDM school, we didn't teach soldiers how to count kills, we taught 'em kinetic action, move through and take out the enemy, fuck counting 'em. They don't teach it in sniper school either.

That's why technically, it's not a thing.

Confirmed kills on war material, that's a different story. We do historically keep track of the number of planes or tanks or whatever that are taken out and display them in some fashion as bragging rights for the crew. This was done widely in WW2, I don't think it's as big of a deal but maybe it depends on the service and/or unit.

 

[DaleGribble82]

This was brought up on here about a year ago as I recall.

Technically there is no such thing in the US army.

In practice, there is. Typically if a second set of eyes "confirm" the kill or if the rest of the unit and/or lawyers move in when the shooting stops and start handing out cash, they'll take a count. In some cases, only the bad guys are counted, in others they count the total body count (like with the lawyers). All of this shit goes out on the net or is picked up on by that buddy you have in MI. These body counts are for more than just to confirm kills (and it doesn't necessarily say who killed 'em).

And like was mentioned, the orders for an award for action resulting in enumerated enemy deaths sort of serves as one. Arcom? Shit, I saw one handed out to a fat supply guy simply because he didn't fuck up his job at NTC. Jeezuspleezus.

When we got a new 1SG prior to unit deployment, he came from the ranger batt. down the street and they'd already deployed. More than once (but they have very short deployments comparatively). Anyway, he had a Q&A before we got down to business. He was short, so he allowed the height question, 4'11" (barely 100lbs, all gristle and bone, he was a tough SOB). And the confirmed kill question, to which he answered : forty (something). This was in the role of sniper as I understand it, but not limited to that. There were others.

The whole time I was in the army, it was never discussed. Not once. The only time it ever came up was when that kid asked the 1SG that. In SDM school, we didn't teach soldiers how to count kills, we taught 'em kinetic action, move through and take out the enemy, fuck counting 'em. They don't teach it in sniper school either.

That's why technically, it's not a thing.

Confirmed kills on war material, that's a different story. We do historically keep track of the number of planes or tanks or whatever that are taken out and display them in some fashion as bragging rights for the crew. This was done widely in WW2, I don't think it's as big of a deal but maybe it depends on the service and/or unit.

Yep wasn’t a topic of discussion or a block of instruction in Long Range Marksmanship, Sniper School, or German Sniper School.

 

[Foul Mike]

Nice posts on here.
NOT A SNIPER-- just a grunt and I know there were several but I really do not know how many. just dead people around.
Who the fuck was going to sort that shit out? 2nd. and 1st LT.s and every other REMF?
They haunt me to this day. FM E.Co. 5/7 Cav. 1st Cav. Div. 69/70

 

[Blue Sky Country]

I would take a guess that during World War II in the European / Soviet theater and the proxy wars leading up to it, a lot of 'confirmed kills' would have to be based on the assumptions of the sniper himself and his spotter. The battlefields of the Soviet front and that of the Russo-Finnish war were ringed with no-man's lands of MG nests, mines and armored vehicles by all participants. For a sniper to manage to get off a few shots and then successfully extricate his ass out of there would be a near superhuman feat, let alone retrieve the corpse of the dead enemy.

And in all modern wars after WWII, you just did not want to hang around or stay in the same spot for too long. Those who did so often died very quickly. And armies certainly would not have risked the lives of their scouts / SF units to cross the lines of death into enemy territory simply to confirm a successful hit on a body, unless it was a high ranking officer or a known and hated traitor, for morale purposes.

 

[Deleted member 10043]

There was a time it was a big deal. Russia/USSR would even put out postage stamps long after the great war. They are like celebrities.