BTW... here is what I "think" that blurry low res image is... For those that do not know what this is...

http://www.inert-ord.net/russ02i/rkg3_upg8/


If its an RKG-3 it is a fully ready to throw anti armor weapon. Meaning you get in throwing range EEEK!


An RPG round without a launcher or rigged into some sort IED thing is not really a threat at all.


And RSColonel_131st, Oh I am not trying to bust your balls. you are looking for way that everyone walks away more or less OK. That is a legit moral human response. Its just it does not work like that real world unfortunately.

Warning shots were authorized as tools for ROE escalations both when I was in Bosnia and when I was in Afghanistan. As long as you were accountable for your shots, you could use bullets as a communication tool when necessary. And rightly so. You'd be surprised how often people just don't understand the situation and proceed blindly (yet innocently) down a path towards a deadly situation, and need someone to shoot at their feet before they wake the f**k up and realize they're doing something dangerous.

People in those countries are no less distracted, ignorant and naive than they are here in the west. Sometimes they're just not paying attention or not thinking about what they're doing. In those cases, warning shots are an infinitely preferable alternative to someone being shot because they were being absent minded.

Oh, I thought it was an RPG. That does change things somewhat.

But I'd still wait for some indication of hostile intent. If you've got a bead on him, you can at least wait until he pulls it out and preps it before firing. And I still think a warning shot would send a child running in the other direction in any case.

True. I was coming at it from my old office. An m2HB. which they really frowned upon warning shots with that. And I know first hand how wacky things can get first hand. At least in Iraq generally after the 1st years everyone was more or less on the same page. But just the same..... And tcp's are different from unit to unit. Let alone National Army to Army. With dismounted soldiers a warning shot makes alot of sense when seconds count. In vehicles its a tad more complex as the weapons are quite a bit bigger. On the flip side you have spot lights and maybe pin flares for night and silly flags or hand singles to try and get the point across. But pointing a .50 MG at people generally got some questionable activity to knock it off.


LOL... I wrote TCP and no one called that out. TCP traffic control point. FOOKING anachronism soap. TTP is what that was suppose to be.

I agree. So long as the kid is out side throwing range there is some wiggle room. Just hope folks are listening in on the same push. At the same time, ROE and an RKG-3 a soldier *should* be free and clear of prosecution should he feel the need to fire. But it is a fuzzy on intent. I lean towards hostile. But its not QUITE there. But that would vary from person to person.

When the dutch took over command of our multinational brigade in Kandahar, it quickly became clear they were gun-shy when it came to ROEs. They implemented this silly pen-flare step into the ROE process. Instead of using a warning shot against vehicles when we were mounted on the road, we were to shoot this pen flare in the air (as if the afghans would have any idea what it means, or who the message was intended for), and the dutch thought that would solve the situation without live rounds needing to be fired.

It was pretty silly, but I'll give them one thing - when we started shooting them directly at the windshields of approaching cars, they worked like gangbusters!

Ya... those flares to at night to windshields always did the trick. A person did not know exactly wtf that was. Is it a tracer flying at my face? Shooting those in the air? That would not do anything..... OOOOH look, pretty.

Ok, watching it again, I realize that what gave me the impression that there wasn't hostile intent was the way the kid was carrying the grenade. His body language said to me that he was bringing it the US troops, not trying to kill them. There's plenty of room for me to be wrong in this impression mind you.

The body language of the mom on the other hand tells the opposite story. Not to mention the guy on the roof (who I would have shot based on his actions and his demeanor).

I'm guessing that scene was specifically scripted to be as ambiguous as possible - probably to illustrate just how hard that guy's job was.

Yes.. true. I keyed into the women more than the kid. but he is carrying it out in the open. Oh cell phone guy? Ya , most likely up to no good. Would not have shot him simply because in Iraq you would have depopulated half the country. But again we don't know the back story. Why are these guys in the town? Now video cameras in weird places..... Always up to no good. Or something is about to blow up.

I like them in the direct fire role because they are aggressive enough to get someone's attention and tell them you're upset with them, and it leaves no question as to who you're addressing (unless you miss of course).

I always found that to be one major obstacle to communication - making sure the person you're engaging knew it was them who was being engaged. Honking horns, waving, looking at them with sunglasses on your face always left people wondering who you were talking to.

I spent half of my tour in the crew commander's hatch of a 25mm LAV turret. And you'd think that pointing the turret at someone would send a message, but it almost never did. The reason being that looking down a barrel does not have the same effect as eye contact. More often than not, pointing a huge turret mounted cannon at a person did nothing, and I'd have to point the pintle mounted MG or my rifle at the person from my hatch to get the message across. Pretty funny when you think about it.

Probably should say WHY cell phones are bad in these wonderful places for those not in the know... It one of the primary ways to set off IED's.


Yes with vehicle turrets you never know the reason it is pointing this way or that. Since a good crew is scanning always a vehicle will not really know why it stopped on their car. Unless you unbutton and start "communicating". Easier if its a multi person sort. If its a one man deal...UGH a pain. Assuming a real AFV turret. The open topped things where easy enough.



OPPS about the movie. Ya probably should go see that. Good ole Clint there should do an interesting job.

Good debate guys. The analysis from both sides (shoot or not shoot) have some merit and I agree that the trailer was made to be as ambiguous as possible to ramp up the dramatic tension.

OH the trailer did exactly what it was suppose to do. This kind of situation was an everyday event. Maybe not quite as clear cut. But soldiers only have seconds to make these crazy life and death decisions. And amazingly get it more or less right most of the time. The US military really REALLY stressed the intent aspect. You know lots of folks have this impression of a bunch of cowboy yanks running around shooting everything. While, ya sometimes I guess. But usually was something totally other than that. I hope this film, like this trailer shows these crazy situations that young soldiers had and have to deal with. Perhaps it helps the understanding.

There shouldn't be any debate about what the kid is carrying. The sniper clearly says, into his radio, "She has an RKG. And RKG Russian grenade."
Wow. Rough call. The kid is running straight toward a squad of soldiers carrying a grenade. I don't think anyone would fault you if you took that shot. You'd have to live with it, though, and just try and convince yourself that you did the right thing. From experience, you'd know already that these people are not above using children for such things.
There's also that option of calling the squad, of course. Then firing right at the kid's feet. He'd probably stop, for a second. But then, if he kept running the squad would now know he's coming. They could deal with it. Of course, someone would probably want to know why you didn't shoot when you knew he was carrying a grenade. Could be a no-win situation.

A less ambiguous take:



Snipers, whether police or army, are trained to do one thing really well: take out, 'neutralize', a human subject. I have no idea, but am curious to know, what percentage of their training is devoted to assessing the threat level of such subjects. Can anyone enlighten me?

Were are missing THE in house expert's opinion. I'd imagine he's staying out for a reason.

Also, gotta laugh about the "body language" stuff. You wanna turn in an explosive device? Well just sneak it to your kid in the middle of the street and let him take it to the kafirs.

If you want to get rid of your kid....

Good clip.

Clint, Cooper and Sienna Miller (Liked her since factory girl) ..definitely a goer, maybe not big screen..dunno yet.

When I served in the German Bundeswehr in 1993/94 I was trained as a sniper/sharpshooter. We were among the first to undergo a dedicated sniper training since until that time the German army didn't actually have a sniper doctrine but merely used dedicated marksmen (with scoped G3s) in their infantry squads. The transformation from a cold-war defence force to an "expeditionary force" capable of peace-keeping and peace-enforcing missions changed that.

We sometimes trained in a "shooting cinema" where we would fire with subcalibre ammo at a screen showing various scenes that required quick situational judgement. Sometimes this was done after very exhausting training and with the instructors doing their best to put you under extreme stress.

I am very glad I never had to make such judgements in real life.

I suspect the trailer is a mashup of this ...



I read somewhere (can't find it anymore) that Chris also said he'd rather wait and kill the savage that put the kid up to it.

Hell of a trailer though! Can't wait to see what happens!

Oh ya, have you guys read about Chris Kyle killing two armed robbers in 2009? It�s like a scene right out of a Dirty Harry movie (or even one of his hold Westerns)! ...

http://frontburner.dmagazine.com/2013/02...tation-in-2009/