From: D. Fortier
A few days ago I sent a email out concerning a US Army sniper in Iraq who was denied the standard M118LR sniper load when requesting ammunition.  When asking why he couldn't have it he was told it was "illegal for combat use" due to it being a "Hollow Point" and the JAG had ordered it pulled from all the units.  Snipers were being issued delinked M80 ball ammunition or some old M118 Special Ball in its place.  Cases of 5.56 MK 262 ammunition were also warehoused, but not being issued as well.  This sniper knew it was wrong, and went to a well respected web forum for help.  Populated by the military, they quickly got him information showing the ammunition, of course, had been deemed suitable for combat use years ago.  When he presented it to the JAG, she simply chewed him out.  Work was done behind the scenes by people like Doctor Gary Roberts to quickly get this matter taken care of.  It seems it has, now, but it also appears the sniper lost his job over it.  The below is an article on this matter which just appeared in the Washington Times.  I contacted certain people to try to help get this matter taken care of when it first happened, and now I'm sending this out simply to let people know about it.  The JAG put US soldiers, as well as Iraqi civilians at risk, by doing this.  Pulling their dedicated sniper load and issuing them ball pulled from M240 belts is at the very least negligent.  From a sniper's point of view, its criminal.  Getting away with it while the sniper who put his butt on the line  to rectify this matter lost his job over it, is just wrong.

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20060119-112132-3551r.htm

bottom of page 1

Sniper rounds
   An Army judge advocate general (JAG) temporarily banned Army and Marine Corps snipers from using a highly accurate open-tip bullet. The JAG, we are told, mistakenly thought the open-tip round was the same as hollow-point ammunition, which is banned. The original open-tip was known as Sierra MatchKing and broke all records for accuracy in the past 30 years.
   The difference between the open-tip and the hollow point is that the open tip is a design feature that improves accuracy while the hollow point is designed for increasing damage when it hits a target.
   About 10 days ago, the Army JAG in Iraq ordered all snipers to stop using the open-tip 175-grain M118LR bullet, claiming, falsely, it was prohibited. Instead of the open-tip, snipers were forced to take M-60 machine gun rounds out of belts and use them instead.
   The order upset quite a few people here and in Iraq who said the JAG ignored the basic principle of every military lawyer that there is a presumption of legality for all issued weapons or ammunition that are made at the military service level at the time they are acquired.
   "She forced snipers to use less accurate ammunition, thereby placing U.S. forces and Iraqi civilians at greater risk," a Pentagon official said of the JAG, who was not identified by name. "And she incorrectly issued an order. JAGs may advise a commander, but they cannot issue orders."
   After Army lawyers were finally alerted to the JAG's action, the order was lifted and the JAG was notified that the open tip was perfectly legal for use by snipers. However, the reversal was followed by the Army officials' taking retaliation against a sniper who blew the whistle on the bogus order. The sniper lost his job over a security infraction in reporting the JAG.

JBTHP ammo is NOT designed for expansion, it's just a by product of the way it's manufactured.

She simply learned the lesson of civilian judges : legislate from the bench!

Yea i'd hate to have additional damage done to the enemy

God, how are we ever going to defeat the insurgents with people making decisions like?  

What a crock!!!

I have copies of letters DETAILING how and why and whatever that HPBT ammo is LEGAL!!

I even met and shot with the guy who helped formulate the decision that it is LEGAL!!

WTF is JAG doing by re-visiting an opinion that was handed down YEARS AGO??????

The Jag lawyer who formulated the official opinion is named Col. W. Hays Parks and he received multiple commendations for his work.

This is insanity!!


Dram out

Maybe we should abide by the Geneva Convention only if our adversaries do.  I dont see the terrorists wearing any uniforms, do you?

They need to name names. Her career as a lawyer should be over. She should be given a General Discharge or lower.

Jeebus....

..of course it was a SHE...
(Members of Women's Shooters Forum, ignore that, we know y'all cool)

Sounds like someone wanting to make a career, or the premise for her post deployment book deal, etc...

I dare say, we ought to just say FUCK OFF to the prohibition on various types of ammo.  Like that will ever happen....

Quoted: God, how are we ever going to defeat the insurgents with people making decisions like?

We are not.

Isn't that the point?

"She forced snipers to use less accurate ammunition, thereby placing U.S. forces and Iraqi civilians at greater risk,"

Without woman bashing I'd just like to point out what I consider the relevant part of this quote.

stupid question, but what can be done to get this sniper back behind his rifle???

Is there anything a lowly civilian can do to help him?  If so, this needs a fire mission.

EPOCH

The opinion of the JAG was handed down on 12 Oct 1990.  It is an 8 page typewritten document by W. Hays Parks, Chief International Law Branch, International Affairs Division. This memoradum was written for:

Commander, United States Army Special Operations Command

Simultaneous opinions were issued to:

The offices of the JAG of the Navy, Air Force, and the Marine Corps.


That is a politically motivated witch hunt, from enemies within the JAG office itself

Typical crap, this opinion was handed down 15 years ago !!

String that filthy lawyer b*tch up !!

Dram out

There is no help that you can provide for him.  The JAG feels he gave away critical info (That some silly bitch lawyer wouldn't let the snipers use their issued ammo) in an open forum to uncleared persons.  They (JAG) will now take a crack at his ass and see if they can make it stick.  He'll go back to his rifle when he finds a senoir officer in his COC that will man up and defend his actions and point out the JAG's efforts at CYA.

I call BS, at least on the guy loosing his job.

The Military would not kick someone out over that.. He might get an Article 15, but that would be about it...

Even if he lost his security clearence, the backlog on such things is so long that it can take more then a year for a solid decision to come down.... Even if they did pull it, as an infantry guy it would not really matter.... If he was in some special unit that required it, they would simply move him... If he was SF (only other guys that can go to Sniper school), they would reclass him into his old MOS.

Hmmmm


How did he "lose his job?"

You don't just get fired in the military.

Or did he lose it because someone stamped "secret" on the order and he went to civilian sources telling them?" That is the only way I see disclinary action beeing warranted.

I'm at a loss for words..WTF

DAJA-IO (27-1a)
14 May 1997
MEMORANDUM FOR CLOSE COMBAT ARMAMENTS CENTER (AMSTA-AR-CCL-BD), US ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND ENGINEERING CENTER, PICATINNY ARSENAL, NEW JERSEY 07806-5000

SUBJECT: 7.62 x 51 M118 Long Range Cartidge; Legal Review

(no i'm not copying the whole letter)

Conclusion. The 7.62 x 51 M118 Long Range Cartridge and its 175-grain, open-tip projectile are consistant with the international law obligations of the United States.

(signed) Hays Parks,

What sort of agenda does this JAG have??

I'm pissed

tag

Sounds to me like we might need a new jag...

"We'll call you a sniper but the ammo we are going to issue will only shoot 3 MOA on a good day."

What a load of crap, somebody needs to hand this person her hat.

Quoted: Maybe we should abide by the Geneva Convention only if our adversaries do.  I dont see the terrorists wearing any uniforms, do you?

What does the Geneva Convention have to do with this?

fucking lawyers

That's disgusting.  I couldn't imagine using something designed for a machine gun in a precision rifle...for anything other than plinking.  

Quoted: Quoted: Maybe we should abide by the Geneva Convention only if our adversaries do.  I dont see the terrorists wearing any uniforms, do you? What does the Geneva Convention have to do with this?

Not a thing, all the OTM "sniper" rounds conform to the letter of the law.

Troy will be around shortly...

Too many lawyers in the military!......actually too many lawyers period!

Gotta get the lawyers out of there.  Remember when a Hellfire equipped Predator had Mullah Omar (still at large BTW) in it's sights, and he was not killed because of JAG concerns?

Tag for more info.

Quoted: They need to name names. Her career as a lawyer should be over. She should be given a General Discharge or lower.

I agree with the first part of the original post.  If this is true criminal charges are in order here.

This is assinne! A bullet is banned in war? WTF? This guy is trained to pop people in the head. Does the guy on the receiving end care what blows up his mellon? What's next, prohibiting RPB's?
RPB's=Rag Piercing Bullets

Quoted: Quoted: Maybe we should abide by the Geneva Convention only if our adversaries do.  I dont see the terrorists wearing any uniforms, do you? What does the Geneva Convention have to do with this?

It was the justification the JAG used to prohibit using the ammo.  Hollowpoints/soft tip rounds aren't allowed in warfare, according to the Geneva Convention.

I had been following this thread over at Lightfighter from the get go.  The only thing I can think of that could have gotten him in hot water was a couple of his comments regarding officers, IIRC he used the word stupid.  Thats all it takes when someone wants your ass to get a Relief for Cause NCOER.  

But the bottom line is that the connections the kid had thru LF lead all the way up to some very senior people in SOCOM who started asking questions and embarrassed folks in his chain of command.  

Its just another symptom of the "Went to War and a Garrison Broke out" way of doing things these days.  Hell you can now get your DCU's starched in the Green Zone for God's sake.  

We have learned nothing from our history, Ive read so many accounts both in Vietnam and now in the GWOT of soldiers just in from missions being denied chow because their uniforms were ripped and dirty or they were unshaven or their LBE didnt follow the standard of the unit running the chow hall.  

As far as Sniper school goes, they have begun sending the instructors out from Ft. Benning TDY to teach schools where units are training up to deploy.  Such as North Ft. Hood, where I work just three miles down the road from my house.  They held a Sniper school for 4ID and some NG's before their last deployment a couple of months ago.  

Security clearances are usually revoked just as soon as you are placed under investigation.  The paperwork takes forever and the computer backlog is terrible but it begins when JAG says it does and the unit usually sticks you in a BS position pending the outcome of the investigation.  Poor dumb bastard in my last unit had his revoked, spent a year and a half under investigation and was cleared, three months later he got his letter saying his clearance had been revoked due to him being under investigation!  

This guy didn't get discharged or anything.  They just told him something along the lines of "You no longer work with the Sniper section, go report to SFC Smith down at 2nd Platoon".  And he goes back to working with the line units.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Maybe we should abide by the Geneva Convention only if our adversaries do.  I dont see the terrorists wearing any uniforms, do you? What does the Geneva Convention have to do with this? It was the justification the JAG used to prohibit using the ammo.  Hollowpoints/soft tip rounds aren't allowed in warfare, according to the Geneva Convention.

bzzt

www.thegunzone.com/hague.html

FWIW I googled "M118 ammunition legal" and the second hit was all he needed to turn over to fight this without making an asshat of himself.

Quoted: FWIW I googled "M118 ammunition legal" and the second hit was all he needed to turn over to fight this without making an asshat of himself.

The only asshat I see is the cunt of a JAG liar that started this goat-fuck.




Oppsy, did I say liar?  I meant lawyer

Security clearances are usually revoked just as soon as you are placed under investigation.

THey are suspended until a final decision is made by CCF (Central clearence facilty)...

bitch lawyers..

Holy shit.  I saw this thread unfold over at LightFighter and was witness to DocGKR, rgrgordo, and basicload working their magic but now the thread is gone.  This is some weird shit...

Quoted: Quoted: FWIW I googled "M118 ammunition legal" and the second hit was all he needed to turn over to fight this without making an asshat of himself. The only asshat I see is the cunt of a JAG liar that started this goat-fuck. Oppsy, did I say liar?  I meant lawyer

Both are asshats.

Her for way exceedng her authority and failing to do any research, and as a result putting US troops at risk.

Him for going on a pubic forum and revealing the lowered effectivness to the whole word, including the enemy. I see stupid decisions and orders all the time here, some that place soldiers at risk. I don't deal with it by telling the whole world where we are weak, I find the facts and fight it the proper way.

There are ways to deal with asshats like her...... his was not the right one.

not sure whats up with this letter but at leaste 6 months ago this was not the case, had no problem getting 175s, also had 300 winmag availible with the same open tip round

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: FWIW I googled "M118 ammunition legal" and the second hit was all he needed to turn over to fight this without making an asshat of himself. The only asshat I see is the cunt of a JAG liar that started this goat-fuck. Oppsy, did I say liar?  I meant lawyer Both are asshats. Her for way exceedng her authority and failing to do any research, and as a result putting US troops at risk. Him for going on a pubic forum and revealing the lowered effectivness to the whole word, including the enemy. I see stupid decisions and orders all the time here, some that place soldiers at risk. I don't deal with it by telling the whole world where we are weak, I find the facts and fight it the proper way. There are ways to deal with asshats like her...... his was not the right one.

With all due respect Sir, that is not what happened.  Get your facts straight Sir.

The sniper in question started a thread asking if M118LR was legal for land warfare use.  He stated that his supply SGT refused to issue the sinipers any of the M118LR ammunition, citing the aforementioned bitch "JAG officer."  At various points in the thread, basicload, rgrgordo, and DocGKR disproved the ignorant bitch "JAG officer" and even offered to set the record straight on his behalf.  

The sniper at first declined there offers and opted instead to show the bitch "JAG officer" the necessary documentation to indicate that M118LR was indeed landwarfare legal.  When he proceeded to produce the orders that demonstrated M118LR was legal for land warfare use, she only scolded him further and the sniper was left with no other choice but to enlist the help of the aforementioned individuals.

That is what happened, to the best of my recollection.  If you are suggesting that the sniper should have waited until this was sorted out through the slower, and already proven ineffective COC, and use the de-linked M240B ammo in the mean time, then we must agree to disagree.

Hope this helps.

Justin


ETA:

Quoted: FWIW I googled "M118 ammunition legal" and the second hit was all he needed to turn over to fight this without making an asshat of himself.

Did you not read the article Sir?  He already had produced the necessary documentation but she refused to believe it.  Allow me to repeat that, he already had produced the necessary documentation but she refused to believe it.

You also erroneously commented that  the sniper in question approached civilian sources (Or did he lose it because someone stamped "secret" on the order and he went to civilian sources telling them?").  Again, I respectfully submit that you get your facts straight Sir.  DocGKR (Dr. Gary K. Roberts) is not a civlian; he is a LCDR with the USNR and is one of the foremost experts on the study of wound ballistics science.  Basicload is an active duty Serviceman and rgrgordo has served a distinguished career with Army Special Operations and now works with the DOD.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: FWIW I googled "M118 ammunition legal" and the second hit was all he needed to turn over to fight this without making an asshat of himself. The only asshat I see is the cunt of a JAG liar that started this goat-fuck. Oppsy, did I say liar?  I meant lawyer Both are asshats. Her for way exceedng her authority and failing to do any research, and as a result putting US troops at risk. Him for going on a pubic forum and revealing the lowered effectivness to the whole word, including the enemy. I see stupid decisions and orders all the time here, some that place soldiers at risk. I don't deal with it by telling the whole world where we are weak, I find the facts and fight it the proper way. There are ways to deal with asshats like her...... his was not the right one. With all due respect Sir, that is not what happened.  Get your facts straight Sir. The sniper in question started a thread asking if M118LR was legal for land warfare use.  He stated that his supply SGT refused to issue the sinipers any of the M118LR ammunition, citing the aforementioned bitch "JAG officer."  At various points in the thread, basicload, rgrgordo, and DocGKR disproved the ignorant bitch "JAG officer" and even offered to set the record straight on his behalf.   The sniper at first declined there offers and opted instead to show the bitch "JAG officer" the necessary documentation to indicate that M118LR was indeed landwarfare legal.  When he proceeded to produce the orders that demonstrated M118LR was legal for land warfare use, she only scolded him further and the sniper was left with no other choice but to enlist the help of the aforementioned individuals. That is what happened, to the best of my recollection.  If you are suggesting that the sniper should have waited until this was sorted out through the slower, and already proven ineffective COC, and use the de-linked M240B ammo in the mean time, then we must agree to disagree. Hope this helps. Justin

At the point where he asked if it was legal, all was well.

When he said he was being denied it in country, he screwed up and released information that was of potential use to the enemy. In addition, if that memo or order was classified secret (we don't know but things like that often are, sometimes for no more of a reason that it makes the originator feel more important) he commited a double no-no.

After he had answers from people, it should have at least been taken to private emails, not hashed out in a public forum for all to see. It is not that he bypassed the normal COC, hell I do that all the time, it is that the way he did it allowed the release of details for anyone, including the enemy, to see. Refer back to the Secretary of the Army's recent OPSEC directives and message.... open source intel, in this day and age, is a cheap means for any enemy to gain a whole lot of information about us.

You can get the same results without revealing information to the enemy. The fact that you were able to give all those details proves my point.... he released info that he should not have to the world.

It's not about bypassing people or pissing them off to get results, it is about not compromising security any further while you do it.

So, has the dumbass JAGOff been canned yet?  Or has she been promoted by Bush to command the IG corps?

Quoted: You also erroneously commented that  the sniper in question approached civilian sources (Or did he lose it because someone stamped "secret" on the order and he went to civilian sources telling them?").  Again, I respectfully submit that you get your facts straight Sir.  DocGKR (Dr. Gary K. Roberts) is not a civlian; he is a LCDR with the USNR and is one of the foremost experts on the study of wound ballistics science.  Basicload is an active duty Serviceman and rgrgordo has served a distinguished career with Army Special Operations and now works with the DOD.

He posted the information in Lightfighter, a PUBLIC forum. For all to see. You saw it. Yes most of the posters and viewers there are military, but do you not think that somewhere by now a group of jihadists has figured out that places like that are great sources of information on what equipment, strengths and weaknesses we have? You better believe they look at it too.... and should assume they do.

He may have asked for help from the right people, but he did it in the wrong way... for all to see before the issue was resolved.

Tag

I'd like to know more...

sounds like lobbyists and politicians deciding how to fight a war again as in Vietnam...there has always been political BS designed to delay winnig, increase US casalties and eventually lose the war...what better way than to provide inadequate ammo...next the sniper will e given a .22 with rubber bullets...

This is an argument that has always chapped my ass:
--Military units engaged in war, are not allowed to use the most effective round available to them due to some Geneva Hague BS that we never even officially agreed to--

My opinion > allow US forces to use any cartridge setup that will make the enemy the deadest , the quickest.

Compare and Contrast:
TWRA expressly forbids deer hunting with FMJ rounds, and for good reason: 1) rounds will pass thru the carcass , causing undue suffering, prolonged and/or insufficient terminal wounding of the animal. 2) FMJ rounds are prone to ricochet, leading to potential collateral damage, human or property.

Geneva Hague rules forbid the use of hollowpoint, softpoint, exploding tip, ballistic tip, etc.....under the guise that it "causes more suffering"

Why is it that we must use a round to kill an animal quickly and efficiently....but we must use a round that is questionable or require multiple shots for a human--in WAR....?

Troops can't use HPBT bullets.....but its ok to use Sabot rounds from an M1A1Abrams tank to fill an enemy tank full of molten iron spall,, or to use a JDAM to drop a building on the enemy's head. What's wrong with this picture?

Wonder what the insurgent kill rate would be if US troops were issued Hornady V-Max's & A-Max's.
Faluja would have been engulfed in pink mist.

I suspect that stupid JAG bitch was looking for something to pad the resume and justify her next promotion with......since she probably missed the boat on all those prison pics. Maybe she could prosecute herself on charges of incompetence and interfering with a military operation.

Lose his job? He should get a fuckin medal!

And the lawyer - wtf  - how did some hippy chick infiltrate the JAGs?

forgive me but how is knowing what kind of ammo were allowed or not allowed to use gonna help a terrorist? perhaps you should take the tin foil hat off?

Quoted: forgive me but how is knowing what kind of ammo were allowed or not allowed to use gonna help a terrorist? perhaps you should take the tin foil hat off?

It has been published in many open sources that snipers watching the roads and MSR's are a very effective against ied placing insurgents  in Iraq. You watch them and shoot them in the act.... no secret revealed in that.

If the enemy knows that the snipers are using less accurate ammo, they know they have less to fear from one of our effective countermeasures. If they knew that from one FOB they were in danger out to 1000 meters from snipers, now they might move in closer with the knowledge that the snipers were now using de-linked machine gun ammo.

Small things like that can make a difference. I have seen it happen here with things just as small.... the enemy will find a weakness and exploit it.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Maybe we should abide by the Geneva Convention only if our adversaries do.  I dont see the terrorists wearing any uniforms, do you? What does the Geneva Convention have to do with this? Not a thing, all the OTM "sniper" rounds conform to the letter of the law. Troy will be around shortly...

His point is that the Hague Accords, not Geneva, cover this issue.

Larry