SNIPER ELITE

Main article: Counter-sniper tactics

The occurrence of sniper warfare has led to the evolution of many counter-sniper tactics in modern military strategies. These aim to reduce the damage caused by a sniper to an army, which can often be harmful to both fighting capabilities and morale.

The risk of damage to a chain of command can be reduced by removing/concealing features which would otherwise indicate an officer's rank. Armies nowadays tend to avoid saluting officers in the field and eliminate rank insignia on BDUs. Officers can seek maximum cover before revealing themselves as good candidates for sniping through actions like reading maps and using radios.

Friendly snipers can be used to hunt the enemy sniper. Besides direct observation, defending forces can use other techniques. These include calculating the trajectory of a bullet by triangulation. Traditionally, triangulation of a sniper's position was done manually, though radar-based technology has recently become available. Once located, the defenders can try to approach the sniper from cover and overwhelm him. The United States military is funding a project known as RedOwl, which uses laser and acoustic sensors to determine the exact direction from which a sniper round has been fired. ^[35]

The more shots a sniper fires, the more chances the defenders have to locate him, so they often try to draw fire, sometimes by offering a helmet slightly out of concealment. A tactic successfully employed in the Winter War by the Finns is known as "Kylmä-Kalle" (Cold Charlie). ^[36] They used a shop mannequin or other doll dressed as a tempting target, like an officer. The doll was then presented as if it were a real man sloppily covering himself. Usually, Soviet snipers were unable to resist the temptation of an apparently easy kill. Once the angle where the bullet came from was determined, a shot of a large calibre gun such as a Lahti L-39 "Norsupyssy" ("Elephant rifle") anti-tank rifle was shot at the sniper's direction to eliminate him.

Other tactics include directing artillery or mortar fire onto suspected sniper positions, the use of smoke screens, and placing tripwire-operated munitions, mines, or other booby-traps near suspected sniper positions. Even dummy trip-wires can be placed to inconvenience sniper movement. Where anti-personnel mines are unavailable, it is possible to improvise booby-traps by connecting trip-wires to hand grenades, smoke grenades or flares. Even though these may not kill the sniper, they will reveal his location. Booby-trap devices should be placed close to likely sniper hides or along the probable routes used into and out of the sniper's work area. Knowledge of sniper field-craft will assist in this task.

One very old counter-sniper tactic is to tie rags onto bushes or similar items in a danger area. The rags flutter in the breeze creating random movements in the corner of the sniper's eye, which they find distracting. The main virtue of this tactic is that it is easy to use; however, it is unlikely to prevent a skilled sniper from selecting targets, and may in fact provide a sniper with additional information about the wind near the target.

The use of canine units was also very successful, especially during the Vietnam War. A trained dog can easily determine the direction of the sniper from the sound of the bullet and will lie down with his head aiming at the sniper to give his handler the direction of the firing.

Main article: Asymmetric warfare

The use of sniping (in the sense of shooting at relatively long range from a concealed position) to murder came to public attention in a number of sensational U.S. cases, including the Austin sniper incident of 1966, the John F. Kennedy assassination, and the Beltway sniper attacks of late 2002. However, these incidents usually do not involve the range or skill of military snipers; in all three cases the perpetrators had U.S. military training, but in other specialties. News reports will often (inaccurately) use the term sniper to describe anyone shooting with a rifle at another person.^{[citation needed]}

Sniping has also been used in asymmetric warfare situations, for example in the Northern Ireland Troubles, where in 1972, the bloodiest year of the conflict, the majority of the soldiers killed were shot by concealed IRA riflemen. ^[37] There were also some instances in the early 1990s of British soldiers and RUC personnel being shot with .50 caliber Barrett rifles by sniper teams collectively known as the South Armagh sniper. ^[38] In Northern Ireland, in addition to the uses listed above, a sniper was quite often a form of bait called a "come-on", whereby the sniper's position would be made obvious to a British patrol so as to draw them into an ambush in their attempt to close with the sniper.^{[citation needed]}

The sniper is particularly suited to combat environments where one side is at a disadvantage.^{[citation needed]} A careful sniping strategy can use a few individuals and resources to thwart the movement or other progress of a much better equipped or larger force. Because of this perceived difference in force size, the sniping attacks may be viewed as the act of a few persons to terrorize (earning the moniker 'terrorists') a much larger, regular force — regardless of the size of the force the snipers are attached to. These perceptions stem from the precept that sniping, while effective in specific instances, is much more effective as a broadly deployed psychological attack (see elsewhere in article).

In the war between Bosnian Muslim, Croatian forces, and Bosnian Serbs in the early 1990s, Croatian and Serbs used sniping as a terror tool by shooting at any person, whether military or civilian, adult or child. These snipers would be classified as war criminals for deliberately targeting non-combatants.

Snipers are less likely to be treated mercifully if captured by the enemy. ^[33] The rationale for this is that ordinary soldiers shoot at each other at 'equal opportunity' whilst snipers take their time in tracking and killing individual targets in a methodical fashion with a relatively low risk of retaliation.

Main article: Iraq War

In 2003, the U.S.-led multinational coalition composed of primarily U.S. and U.K. troops occupied Iraq and attempted to establish a new government in the country. However, shortly after the initial invasion, violence against coalition forces and among various sectarian groups led to asymmetric warfare with the Iraqi insurgency and civil war between many Sunni and Shia Iraqis.

Through November 2005, when the Pentagon had last reported a sniper fatality, the Army had attributed 28 of 2,100 U.S. deaths to enemy snipers. ^[39] More recently, since 2006, insurgent snipers such as "Juba" have caused problems for American troops. Claims have been made that Juba have shot up to 37 American soldiers in Iraq as of October 2006. ^[40]

In 2006, training materials obtained by U.S. intelligence showed that snipers fighting in Iraq were urged to single out and attack engineers, medics, and chaplains on the theory that those casualties would demoralize entire enemy units. ^[41] Among the training materials, there included an insurgent sniper training manual that was posted on the Internet. Among its tips for shooting U.S. troops, there read: "Killing doctors and chaplains is suggested as a means of psychological warfare." ^[39]