Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I just read a few snippets from his book and its hard to believe that this guy was not a hardcore LIAR. He claims to have killed 30 looters in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, 2 Carjackers in Texas and he just recently lost a lawsuit to Governor Ventura, where he claims to have punched Ventura out for criticizing US troops in Iraq.
While deployed Chris Kyle had 160 confirmed kills out of 255 claimed kills (meaning that 95 weren't confirmed by his spotter)
The Criteria for confirming a kill in Iraq/Afghanistan was to have your spotter say that you killed someone, it worked basically on an honors system.

Personally I think of Carlos Hathcock as the true American Sniper. He basically invented the US Sniper school during the Vietnam war.

"During this time in order for one to get a “confirmed kill” you needed to be viewed by a third party who must be an officer. Mr. Hathcock ended his time in Vietnam with 93 confirmed kills. He estimates that he may have killed anywhere between 300-400 enemies during the Vietnam war."

He is also famous for mounting a Scope on a modified M2 .50 Cal Machine Gun and killing a target at over 2k Meters away. He also was the guy who shot the enemy sniper through the scope killing him. He was sent on 2 suicide missions, 1 to kill a french national who was acting as an interrogator for the NVA and the second mission was to assassinate a North Vietnamese General, both he accomplished and returned alive. While in Vietnam his primary mission was to hunt down enemy snipers, a job he became so skilled at that they nicknamed him "White Feather" for the feather he wore in his hat. he was sent home from Vietnam with a silver star and a Purple Heart when the Transport he was riding in struck a Anti-Tank mine and he jumped into the burning vehicle after being blown clear, to help evacuate the wounded. He eventually was retired from active service with 100% due to MS. Basically every sniper movie you have ever seen is based on this guy.


(SIDE NOTE: I put this in Off topic because I want a discussion about it not just a poll, and it is very clearly offtopic , if the mods feel like it needs to be in Polls so be it)

I guess we need to argue about...everything?

Anyway:

Hathcock is considered the best sniper in US history, even by Kyle, who once said “I had more kills, but that doesn’t mean I’m better than (Hathcock) is. I was just put into a position where I had more opportunities. I definitely cheated. I used a ballistic computer that tells me everything to do. So, I was just a monkey on a gun.”

/thread

[mic drop]

 Alpharius wrote:

Hathcock is considered the best sniper in US history, even by Kyle, who once said “I had more kills, but that doesn’t mean I’m better than (Hathcock) is. I was just put into a position where I had more opportunities. I definitely cheated. I used a ballistic computer that tells me everything to do. So, I was just a monkey on a gun.”

/thread

[mic drop]

That works for me. Add a vote for Hathcock.

One of the ultimate snipers has to be Simo Häyhä, AKA 'white death', killed over 500 in three months without even using telescopic sights. Had half his face blown off and still lived into his 90s.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
One of the ultimate snipers has to be Simo Häyhä, AKA 'white death', killed over 500 in three months without even using telescopic sights. Had half his face blown off and still lived into his 90s.

/thread

That's nice but the thread isn't about him.

Right - this thread is about the best American Sniper of two American Snipers.

So if for some reason you need to start another topic about a sniper which is about the Best Sniper in Finland, or the Best Sniper in the World - feel free to do that in another thread.

Thanks!

Chris Kyle even says there were plenty of SEALs that were better than him, but he always seemed to be the one in the right place at the right time.

In the book he also talks about how he and his buddies like pranking people with elaborate tall tales.

There seems unnecessary snark for the sake of me not realising that it was a strictly best American sniper thread and that it was straying off topic to suggest a 'best' from elsewhere.

So, we arguing over who is the best killer of people now?
Seems kinda morbid but ok.

They were both in different types of combat and had to use very different skill sets, so in my opinion it is about impossible to pick 'best'. There is no way of knowing how effective Hathcock would have been in a mostly urban environment and no way to know how well Kyle would have done in a jungle/forrest.


Kyle never had to do the types of infiltrations Hathcock had to do, Hathcock didn't have to deal with a battlefield littered with friendlies, neutrals and bad guys that mostly looked/dressed like the civilians the way Kyle did. Both really supported completely different forces and operated under different doctrines and had missions that differed quite a bit from the other's.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
There seems unnecessary snark for the sake of me not realising that it was a strictly best American sniper thread and that it was straying off topic to suggest a 'best' from elsewhere.

To be fair the focus of the thread is clearly spelled out in the title and in the polling options as well as in the OP's post.


To put it another way, if I ask you which is a better meat pizza topping: pepperoni or chicken? And you respond with "hey, check out how great pineapple is!" you aren't answering the question and you are dragging things off topic.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So, we arguing over who is the best killer of people now?
Seems kinda morbid but ok.

Why? Read Medal of Honor citations from WW2 and earlier. We used to hold killing the enemy in very high regards as a nation. Some folks (such as combat arms soldiers for example) still do so.

Two very different wars, tactics and training.

Kyle had advantages, better weaponry and spec ops budgets where lavish vs other times, modern special forces get very well trained and equipped.

Both operated in different circumstances and where experts in each owns area but may struggle in the others native environment.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
I just read a few snippets from his book and its hard to believe that this guy was not a hardcore LIAR. He claims to have killed 30 looters in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, 2 Carjackers in Texas and he just recently lost a lawsuit to Governor Ventura, where he claims to have punched Ventura out for criticizing US troops in Iraq.

Yeah, that's pretty much been my impression. If he did the stuff in New Orleans he claimed to have done, he'd likely be guilty of an array of felonies, and for a public figure like Ventura to *win* a suit like that is damn near impossible and is pretty stark supporting evidence that the tale of Kyle's life is far more fiction than fact, and not even good fiction.

Carlos Hathcock wins on that count alone to me, but also, as others have pointed out, his feats were accomplished with far more primitive means at his disposal.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So, we arguing over who is the best killer of people now?
Seems kinda morbid but ok.

Snipers save friendly lives. Period, full stop.

Stop stirring gak just for the sake of it.

 CptJake wrote:
They were both in different types of combat and had to use very different skill sets, so in my opinion it is about impossible to pick 'best'. There is no way of knowing how effective Hathcock would have been in a mostly urban environment and no way to know how well Kyle would have done in a jungle/forrest.


Kyle never had to do the types of infiltrations Hathcock had to do, Hathcock didn't have to deal with a battlefield littered with friendlies, neutrals and bad guys that mostly looked/dressed like the civilians the way Kyle did. Both really supported completely different forces and operated under different doctrines and had missions that differed quite a bit from the other's.

Yes - well said.

I voted for Hathcock just because Chris Kyle seemed like sort of a terrible person, but a lot of Americans came home who would not have if not for the both of them.

 Ouze wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So, we arguing over who is the best killer of people now?
Seems kinda morbid but ok.

Snipers save friendly lives. Period, full stop.

Stop stirring gak just for the sake of it.

 CptJake wrote:
They were both in different types of combat and had to use very different skill sets, so in my opinion it is about impossible to pick 'best'. There is no way of knowing how effective Hathcock would have been in a mostly urban environment and no way to know how well Kyle would have done in a jungle/forrest.


Kyle never had to do the types of infiltrations Hathcock had to do, Hathcock didn't have to deal with a battlefield littered with friendlies, neutrals and bad guys that mostly looked/dressed like the civilians the way Kyle did. Both really supported completely different forces and operated under different doctrines and had missions that differed quite a bit from the other's.

Yes - well said.

I voted for Hathcock just because Chris Kyle seemed like sort of a terrible person, but a lot of Americans came home who would not have if not for the both of them.

Kyle was very good at what he did, And somehow by luck, skill and sheer perseverance managed to live despite multiple tours in a rather dangerous country.
And alot of American and allied lives where saved due to his eyes and trigger finger.

Both where hardly men you'd want looking down there scope at you.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So, we arguing over who is the best killer of people now?
Seems kinda morbid but ok.

I think we are arguing over the skills needed to hit a target from a long distance. Even forgoing the deaths of others, being able to do so requires a great deal of skill, which is what the discussion is about, not the deaths.

They both had talent but if I had to pick I would go with Hathcock.

 Ahtman wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So, we arguing over who is the best killer of people now?
Seems kinda morbid but ok.

I think we are arguing over the skills needed to hit a target from a long distance. Even forgoing the deaths of others, being able to do so requires a great deal of skill, which is what the discussion is about, not the deaths.

They both had talent but if I had to pick I would go with Hathcock.

Don't forget, that Kyle also participated in the door-to-door searches with the Marines...

But, as a "pure" sniper? Hathcock all the way dude... I mean... seriously, opting another sniper through his scope? Dude.

How hard is it to stay on topic?

OFF TOPIC POSTS DELETED.

Next one to go off topic...

Its legal to kill "looters"?

Interesting.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
Its legal to kill "looters"?

Interesting.

No which is another reason why Chris Kyle's credibility is called into question.

I pick Carlos Hathcock, primarily because of the influence he had on other snipers. Not that Chris Kyle hasn't inspired people, but Hathcock, like Ghazkuul said, had a huge impact on the development of the Marine Corps Scout-Sniper program.

The thing I love the most about Carlos Hathock's story though is the "White Feather" part. When the Marines found out that Hathcock had become known to the North Vietnamese and was being deliberately hunted by them, the other Marine snipers in the AO began wearing white feathers as well to stir confusion and make it more difficult for the enemy to positively ID Hathcock. I like that because it speaks to part of the core of what it means to be a Marine. The other Marines were willing to stick their necks out and make themselves more of a target in order to help protect Hathcock.

I went with kyle. Kyle had much better training. His background is irrelevant to the question being asked. Seals are widely considered the best snipers we got. Hell the book has pics of kyle training marine snipers.

And like was already mentioned the war he was in had more opportunities.

And the white feather action is just how marines roll.

yellowfever wrote:
I went with kyle. Kyle had much better training. His background is irrelevant to the question being asked. Seals are widely considered the best snipers we got. Hell the book has pics of kyle training marine snipers.

And like was already mentioned the war he was in had more opportunities.

Carlos Hathcock trained Marine snipers too. He helped establish the Scout-Sniper program.

I know he did. They told us that after our hell week. My point is kyle was training marine snipers that were already fully trained.

I voted Hathcock in part because of what he did in the field, but also the long term effect he had on the military.

In WW1, we had designated sharp shooters (aka, snipers), but a school for "snipers" wasn't set up until very late in our involvement, and made no real impact. The school was shut down shortly after WW1 was over.

In WW2, we quickly realized that snipers were a necessity, especially in various parts of Africa and Europe. So we set up another sniper school, this time with enough time left in the action, that these snipers did *some* measure of good for the allies. The school was shut down shortly after hostilities.

In Korea, IIRC, we never set up another sniper school. I'd be surprised if we didn't have some form of "sniper" or other.

It wasn't until Vietnam, and post-Vietnam that we FINALLY got a fething clue, and kept a "sniper school" open pretty much all the time. As Hordini mentions, it was Hathcock who was instrumental in it's establishment, and in its' remaining open long after open hostilities in any major sense were done.

But what they did for the school or whatever else wasn't the question. He asked who is the better sniper. No one can argue Hathcock did more to bring about dedicated schools etc etc. But I still believe in a shooting competition in most scenarios kyle would have won.

yellowfever wrote:
But what they did for the school or whatever else wasn't the question. He asked who is the better sniper. No one can argue Hathcock did more to bring about dedicated schools etc etc. But I still believe in a shooting competition in most scenarios kyle would have won.

You realize that shooting is just one aspect of being a sniper? Scouting, camo, land navigation and so on and so on. And as far as shooting, Hathcock put a bullet through an enemy sniper's scope, and this was actually confirmed. That and he used a M2 to shoot an enemy fighter over 2k Meters away.

 Ghazkuul wrote:

yellowfever wrote:
But what they did for the school or whatever else wasn't the question. He asked who is the better sniper. No one can argue Hathcock did more to bring about dedicated schools etc etc. But I still believe in a shooting competition in most scenarios kyle would have won.

You realize that shooting is just one aspect of being a sniper? Scouting, camo, land navigation and so on and so on. And as far as shooting, Hathcock put a bullet through an enemy sniper's scope, and this was actually confirmed. That and he used a M2 to shoot an enemy fighter over 2k Meters away.

Yellow is also failing to take into consideration that even by Kyle's admission.... he's just a "monkey behind a gun". He's got computers that do the majority of the work for him and all he's really gotta do is use his eye to confirm/execute what the computers say, and apply a proper trigger squeeze.

Carlos had absolutely NONE of that. I think if you were to somehow level the playing field with the two, Carlos would win every metric for shooting one could dream up.