PokeVideoPlayer v23.9-app.js-020924_
0143ab93_videojs8_1563605_YT_2d24ba15 licensed under gpl3-or-later
ImmersiveAmbientModecolor: #be9f8e (color 2)
Video Format : (720p) openh264 ( https://github.com/cisco/openh264) mp4a.40.2 | 44100Hz
Audio Format: 140 ( High )
PokeEncryptID: 6557a96b9910639a5abe7817691674f0c252173a9ed0fa6854681e9988100c0c1ebbe4b2032c55e352e29ac7813645ed
Proxy : eu-proxy.poketube.fun - refresh the page to change the proxy location
Date : 1732486965492 - unknown on Apple WebKit
Mystery text : YzllZWVfVnRHMTAgaSAgbG92ICB1IGV1LXByb3h5LnBva2V0dWJlLmZ1bg==
143 : true
3,724 Views • Aug 15, 2023 • Click to toggle off description
Views : 3,724
Genre: People & Blogs
License: Standard YouTube License
Uploaded At Aug 15, 2023 ^^
warning: returnyoutubedislikes may not be accurate, this is just an estiment ehe :3
Rating : 4.917 (4/189 LTDR)
97.93% of the users lieked the video!!
2.07% of the users dislieked the video!!
User score: 96.90- Overwhelmingly Positive
RYD date created : 2023-08-19T21:14:31.657377Z
See in json
8 Comments
Top Comments of this video!! :3
OK, let's examine that 2500 yard head shot with the M2 .50 cal machine gun.
Hathcock claimed the enemy just happened to stop exactly where he had zeroed the scope/gun a couple of days earlier. He zeroed it at a range of 2500 yards? Really?
The M2 had a max effective range against point targets (more on that in a bit) of 1620 yards. So he's claiming to have zeroed the weapon at 900 yards beyond it's max effective range for that kind of target? That's 55% longer than the max effective range? Someone doesn't understand how zeroing works . . .
Oh, and remember that point target thing? For M2s, point targets are not the X ring of a standard rifle target. No, it is defined as groups of soldiers, vehicles, helicopters, etc. Big targets. Why? Because there are limits to even the M2's accuracy. At 2000 yards the shot group for an M2 is in excess of 5 1/2 feet. And we're supposed to believe he got a first round head shot at 25% greater range than that? And at a range 55% farther than the max effective range?
Keep in mind there was no match ammo for the gun; he was just using mass-produced WWII era rounds. And the barrel wear was probably typical of a hard-used Marine machine gun (i.e., not the best).
So we have a miraculous shot with no proof that it happened at all. None, except Hathcock's own account, and you can believe as much of that as your critical faculty will let you.
Interestingly, there was a surviving witness, SSGT Charles Roberts, who Hathcock described as his spotter. But then he goes on to trash Roberts and he avoided working with him again. Hmmm. Attack the credibility of the only man who could verify - or dispute - the extraordinary claims. Suspicious.
Think that's too cynical? Consider this. Roberts wasn't just a spotter/sidekick. At the time he outranked Hathcock in sniping kills. When the division's weekly newspaper profiled the command's snipers, the leading two snipers were identified as Master Sergeant Reinke and SSGT Roberts. Hathcock came in with an honorable mention with just 5 kills with less than two month left in that tour. So Hathcock had double the reasons to resent Roberts.
No reason to believe any of Hathcock's stories. There simply is no proof except his own 'war stories', and we know how reliable war stories are.
|
At best, Hathcock only had 63 kills, and I can prove it.
In 'Marine Sniper, 93 Confirmed kills' by Henderson, a conversation was cited between CPT Land (the head of the sniper school) and Hathcock in which Land stated Hathcock had racked up 30 kills over the last 30 days, and the school's students had racked up another 30. This conversation took place on 21 Nov 1966.
Fact: The sniper school wasn't created until 7 Nov. So it had been in existence for just 14 days - not 30.
Fact: The sniper school's first class only reported for training on 20 Nov, one day before the conversation. So the school's students had no kills to their credit on 21 Nov when Land claimed they had 30.
Fact: Hathcock was assigned from the MPs to the sniper school on 24 Nov, three days after that conversation (Henderson claimed the assignment was made on 3 Oct, but Hathcock's personnel files put the lie to that). So Hathcock hadn't even begun his sniping career, yet he supposedly had already amassed 30 kills. Really?
Fact: For all of Oct and Nov 1966, the entire 1st MarDiv sniper teams had only 4 confirmed EKIA, and one 'probable', but that 'probable' was just a wounded, not a kill. So Land's conversation (if he even made these remarks!) gave a kill count 15 times higher than the division had shown as confirmed. That totally destroys his credibility.
Fact: Only one sniper-related incident was listed by division during this period, after Hathcock was assigned to the sniper school on 24 Nov. It took place between 26 and 30 Nov. The problem was that the report didn't come from Hathcock's unit. 3/1 Marines' snipers reported it. And the casualty was attributed to 90mm fire, not sniper fire. Oh, and it was only reported as an EWIA. Not a kill.
That right there eliminates 30 so-called 'confirmed kills' from Hathcock's legendary total of 93. Yeah, almost one third of his claims disproven in a stroke by some very basic research.
Given the scale of this deceit, what's that say about the remaining 63 claims? Can we believe any of them. No wonder his end of tour award only mentioned that he had 7 confirmed kills, not the 80 or so the book claims.
And for the sniper fanboys who are outrages that Hathcock didn't received the Congressional Medal of Honor, maybe this will do for an answer.
|
@conan6869
1 year ago
no disrespect to Mr. Hathcock but if you check the records another name may come up .....Chuck Mawhinney...people may want to check him out as well
1 |