Rich Posted April 7, 2003 Posted April 7, 2003 Warmaster- I don't believe you need a more comprehensive system but a simple, fairly easily learnable one that covers as many situations as possible with the simplest of training. As you will know in a real fight when there is no-one to stop it from going to a nasty conclusion you lose fine motor co-ordination along with an adrenalin dump and here the old KISS maxim is applicable. In terms of CQB fashions can't you soldiers feedback up the line that you need something different and point out that the manual makers seem to be more academic than pragmatic- point out too that they seem to follow the art of the moment as much as the MA publications do. Regards Rich
Martial_Artist Posted April 7, 2003 Posted April 7, 2003 CIA in the DI no. In the DO not very much. The CIA isn't as heavily involved in clandestine operations like it used to be. Most case officers receive special survival skills, but those revolve around getting caught, not fighting it out with the enemy. "I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination.Imagination is more important than knowledge.Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." Einstein
Kyle-san Posted April 7, 2003 Posted April 7, 2003 very true, But Krav Maga does have groundfighting incase it ends up there..it's more of how to either hurt them or get up as quickly as possible though instead of working for a submission. And that's exactly how groundfighting should be approached. I've got respect for BJJ, but I don't think going for a submission in a combat situation is very useful. Yes, you can just use the proper force for a break, but what happens if you get caught in a stand-up fight?
JerryLove Posted April 7, 2003 Posted April 7, 2003 Primarily, soldiers do not enter unarmed combat. They deploy in groups, and with weapons, and the time away from learning to fight with a rifle, or with a tank in order to improve unarmed skills is time misspent. To quote one Army seargents "I'm gonna teach you enough to get you killed". That said, it would be wrong to think that the millitary trains and-to-hand in order to teach specific skills... they don't. What the millitary sees value in is training discipline and aggression... and they see the CQB program as a way to make more aggressive soldiers. That said, they pretty much all encourage personell to spend time and effor into learning martial-arts... but from a trainign perspective.. it's just not important. https://www.clearsilat.com
TJS Posted April 7, 2003 Posted April 7, 2003 Primarily, soldiers do not enter unarmed combat. They deploy in groups, and with weapons, and the time away from learning to fight with a rifle, or with a tank in order to improve unarmed skills is time misspent. To quote one Army seargents "I'm gonna teach you enough to get you killed". That said, it would be wrong to think that the millitary trains and-to-hand in order to teach specific skills... they don't. What the millitary sees value in is training discipline and aggression... and they see the CQB program as a way to make more aggressive soldiers. That said, they pretty much all encourage personell to spend time and effor into learning martial-arts... but from a trainign perspective.. it's just not important. yep, Hand to hand combat Instills the "warrior spirit" in them...so they know they can fight no matter what..even if they are unarmed. like you said H2H plays alot smaller role these days but it's still important..I was just reading 2 diffrent storied about army rangers in AFganistan who got into h2h combat when going door to door..one war confronted with an AK-47 and proceeded to knock him out with an elbow.
Martial_Artist Posted April 7, 2003 Posted April 7, 2003 You forget about the role of M.A.P.S. MA. Edit: Added the .'s in MAPS. "I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination.Imagination is more important than knowledge.Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." Einstein
BKJ1216 Posted April 7, 2003 Posted April 7, 2003 I wonder how many soldiers actually have to use hand to hand combat in a combat situation. White Belt- Shudokan Karate
Treebranch Posted April 11, 2003 Posted April 11, 2003 Kung Fu Sansoo is Chinese Combat Fighting, it is very effective and in a short time a soldier can kick some serious, well you know. It is a very quick and hard hitting Art and very, very brutal. Are their any other Sansoo practitioners on this site? I feel like I'm the only one talking about it. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
JerryLove Posted April 11, 2003 Posted April 11, 2003 And yet the Chinese millitary, even in weapon work, does not allow the groin as a target because it's "dishonorable". I think that illustrates their priorities. https://www.clearsilat.com
Treebranch Posted April 11, 2003 Posted April 11, 2003 JerryLove said "That said, it would be wrong to think that the millitary trains hand-to-hand in order to teach specific skills... they don't. What about Navy Seals?, Army Rangers?, Green Berets?, Special Ops?, Etc.... JerryLove said "And yet the Chinese millitary, even in weapon work, does not allow the groin as a target because it's "dishonorable". Are you kidding with us, where did you get this info from? Also if we are talking about the Military in General than you would have to research all Military training from around the world to make your huge generalizations be true. Many career soldiers in the US armed forces train in martial arts, and probably have more time to do so than you or I, think about it. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
Recommended Posts