Two British Snipers Kill 75 Taliban in 40 days

Good to see some real harm being done to these stone age women-beating murdering swine.

Within 40 days, the two marksmen from 4 Rifles, part of the Welsh Guards Battle group, had achieved 75 confirmed kills with 31 attributed to Potter and 44 to Osmond. [..] Most of the kills were at a range of 1,200 metres using the 7.62 mm L96 sniper rifle. The snipers used suppressors, reducing the sound of the muzzle blast. Although a ballistic crack could be heard, it was almost impossible to work out where the shot was coming from. Up to about 900 metres, they would aim at an insurgent’s head, beyond that at the chest. With the bullet travelling at three times the speed of sound, a victim was unlikely to hear anything before he died.

Walkie-talkie messages revealed that the Taliban thought they were being hit from helicopters. The longest-range shot taken was when Potter killed an insurgent at 1,430 metres away. Potter and Osmond’s working day would begin around 7 am and end a dozen or so hours later at last light.

One shot, two Taliban.

On September 12th, a known Taliban commander appeared on the back of a motorcycle with a passenger riding pillion. Taking deliberate aim, he [Osman] fired a single shot. The bike tumbled and both men fell onto the road and lay there motionless. ..The 7.62 mm bullet Osmond had fired had passed through the heads of both men. He had achieved the rare feat of ‘one shot, two kills’ known in the sniping business as ‘a Quigley’. The term comes from the 1990 film Quigley Down Under in which the hero, played by Tom Selleck, uses an old Sharps rifle to devastating effect.


9 thoughts on “Two British Snipers Kill 75 Taliban in 40 days

  1. 7.62mm @ 1430 metres? Doesn’t sound at all like the bog-standard L96. Perhaps the .338 Lapua variant at anything further out than 800m.


  2. Whats the bet the MSM will downplay that feat for fear of rousing the usual suspects.
    Free beer forever for those two at the local RSA- RSL – British equivalent 🙂


  3. Exactly what I was thinking KG. Maybe the reporter got it wrong. There’s very little visual difference between the L115A3 and the L96A1.


  4. I read the other story about the Para Lt.being a deliberate target so they could smoke out a taliban sniper who’s been doing alot of evil there. Also on the Telegraph.

    Why oh why do we keep advertising out tactics and responses for the enemy to read and respond to?
    I’ve seen 6o Minutes show telling how the USA finally defeated insurgents in Baghdad with drones etc.Lots of detail.
    I’ve seen news stories about how international police manhunts have tracked terrorists across Europe by tracking their cell phones etc.

    So what do our politicians and security experts think is the advantage in giving the enemy all the details through the bloody MSM.?
    I love to read about our successses and I think the snipers are bloody marvellous but do we need to know?
    The enemy are not just thickos living in the hills,they are university graduates who are watching closely . Many are citizens of our countries and will pass info and money to their cousins and brothers in the hills.
    The British Army did not identify special forces men in court in the UK ( Northern Ireland) why are they putting these 2 men in the firing line for when they go home to a Britain brimming with Islamic hatred for our heroes in uniform?

    I wonder if this is a dictate from Whitehall to get some good news out at a time when the UK govt is doing so much damage to military morale with the crazy cuts going through. Bastards.


  5. Yeah, you make some good points Kowtow. I’d like to see the owners and managers of the New York Times brought up on treason charges for some of the stuff they have put out there. (The names of the snipers in this story are not their real names)


  6. I’ll have a couple for them to night – that’s Potter and Osmond of course.

    A Quigley, that’s good.

    There is a place in South Africa called Tweebuffelsmeteenskootmorsdoodgeskietfontein which literally means that two buffalo next to a stream were shot and killed with one bullet. I doubt if the shooter knew about a Quigley, but the Brits certainly knew about the Boer’s Mausers.


  7. “but the Brits certainly knew about the Boer’s Mausers.”

    Yes, I read about the history of the Boer war, and that the vastly outnumbered Boers killed (IIRC) 7 times as many British as the British killed Boers, and this success was put down partly to the innate fighting skills of the Boers, but also to Louis Botha’s/ General Joubert’s foresight in buying thousands of those bolt action Mauser rifles from Germany before the war began.


  8. Knowledge of the terrain, mobility, and accuracy were the Boer’s assets…and red coats, close formation and a failure to adapt cost the Brits dearly. The Germans kept on supplying the Boers through out the war hence the support for Nazi Germany during WW2.


Comments are closed.