i dont know if i heard it somewhere or read it but were snipers abhorred during the civil war for un-gentlemanly combat during the revolutionary or civil war?
2006-11-01 17:49:36 · 8 answers · asked by Jilm_Jones 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Snipers were hated from Napolen (They used air rifles with ranges up to 150 yards, without gunpowder to track them they were very successfull) and during the American Civil War, snipers successfully made shots up to 800 yards- indeed, one American General said "They couldn't hit an ele-! And died as a bullet tore through his throat, as a Southerner Sniper shot him at a measured 800 yards.
2006-11-01 19:58:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Civil War Snipers
2016-10-31 08:53:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The object of a war,any war, is to win.The only way you can win is by "eliminating"the opposition troops.Henceforth the sniper became an integral part of any Army.This tactic can be traced back to the days of the English bowmen.In particular,if you can break down the command structure of said opposition,usually this casuses confusion "in the ranks".So, the snipers went for Officers first.
2006-11-01 20:54:18 · answer #3 · answered by jb1 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Snipers were used in the Revolutuion and the CW. More or less they had basic infantry rifles in most cases but superior hiding skills and aim, in some cases in the CW they had very early scopes that were only 3 power at the greatest and long brass and tubular, like on the Outlaw Joise Wales. Go in Christ
2006-11-01 18:54:42 · answer #4 · answered by gook_mother 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you refering to the American Civil war, then you are correct. Snipers were hated by both sides for the reason you mentioned. There was no honor in this type of warfare
2006-11-01 17:53:29 · answer #5 · answered by mark g 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There were snipers on both sides shot many generals
2016-03-17 06:11:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
you heard it on the history channel it has a new mind set and is very much in the forefront of making changes in history that simply aren't true to the factual presentation. Earlier in the broadcasting of your history that every time they update they way we perceive something now seems to have a edge that wasn't there before. it simple went back in history far enough and you going to still find this same argument at the corner stone of all most all things of this nature. if we can get more viewer if we add more controversy to it and that what their doing it has nothing to do with good or evil it's just that so many people now in their leisure can assess a world they know nothing about....period
2006-11-01 18:25:54 · answer #7 · answered by bev 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
yes it was considered ungentelmanly because your victim didnt see you and it was sneaky to boot.
2006-11-01 17:54:01 · answer #8 · answered by glock509 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋