Military Hand to Hand Fighting.

10-23-2002, 09:18 AM

I'm noticing the odd thread where people are trying to credibility to an art by stating that some Special Forces use it. People like the US Marines, Recon, Seals etc. etc. But this is a misnomer.

The vast majority of hand to hand (H2H) combat taught to the military is not only very scarce, it is also bollocks. The Marines "LINE" system is like 3rd rate Jiu Jitsu, where your partner has to allow you to perform the move, and even then it may not work (in fairness, even the Marines now realise this). And Brazillian Jiu Jitsu? The Marines are taught this quite alot. Don't get me wrong, it is a fine system for one on one unarmed self defence. But are allied soldiers ever really going to fight under these circumstances? NO! The are going to be carrying body armour, loads of equipment, and be in a battlefield with loads of enemy soldiers about, all armed to the teeth. Taking someone to the floor in these circumstances is the LAST thing you want to do.

All kinds of people claim to have trained specialist units, and even those who have often merely reflect the Military upper ranks lack of knowledge of real H2H. My own preferred art was recently rejected by the USMC. Why? BECAUSE THEY SAID IT WAS TOO NASTY!

Now why would the military hierarchy act like this? Well, it is all politically dominated. 99.9% of soldiers fighting involves using their weapons. Why train their men to frightening levels of "nasty" skills when they may never need them and, even worse, may use them on the general public in bar fights etc? Most people respect their armed forces, particularly specialist units, but you have to admit that the have their fair share of macho arse holes. The political fall out of some expert soldier killing a civillian would be massive.

In short, in the eyes of the upper ehelons of the military, the risk of training their men to kill without weapons is higher than not training them to kill. I don't necessarily agree with this, but there you go.

Now everyone knows that a BJJ strangle can kill, or that a Thai Boxer could beat someone to death. But both these methods take a small amount of time, thinking time where you can realise what you are doing and then hold back. A true old style World War 2 H2H strike could kill in an instant, so there is no time to correct any over reaction of the part of the soldier.

So I would argue that saying "this system is good because the Recon use it" (or whoever) is not a valid argument.

Brokenmace · 10-23-2002, 09:48 AM

Your argument is correct in every way.

But I would argue that the consverse isn't true either. You can't say that if they use it, it won't work.

The SEALs, for instance, need a wide range of training in order to counter likely threats. Remember, of all the units, the SEALs and other specops are more likely to go h2h. The nature of their missions sometimes require the stealth of bare-handed assassinations. If they bungle this, then they have to deal with the problem swiftly and get out!

BTW, I wouldn't call what Paul Vunak teaches "sweet" or "innocent." His stuff is quite capable of killing on the instant

As for the Marines, I've read in a recent combat magazine (note, "combat" not martial arts), that the Marines have developed a new system based on the old WWII Applegate techniques mixed with some grappling and kickboxing. From what I saw (still shots) it looked pretty effective. They train in body armor too.

The Rangers train a clipped version of BJJ, what they claim are the 13 "core" techniques taught to them by the Machados. These are said to be the easiest techniques to employ and most deadly. In fairness, they never claimed they were teaching h2h; they say they are training the Rangers to think under physical pressure, which I think is one great plus for any martial arts training, as well as BJJ.

I'd like to know what those 13 techniques are.

So not all military martial arts are useless. You have to look at it from the point of view of a combatant. What are you training for? It isn't always to kill or maim. They have specific objectives, you know.

Anyway, that's my two cents

10-23-2002, 09:51 AM

"But I would argue that the consverse isn't true either. You can't say that if they use it, it won't work."

I didn't.

William · 10-23-2002, 10:08 AM

An interesting side note.

I have a brother-in law who is a Colonel in the Marine core. In the early
90's he and his wife were in town for my father-in law's funeral. We got to
talking one night when he asked how my training was going. "Hey Bill, how's
that TKD training going for you?" First I had to correct him that it was FMA
and then I started to explain the difference to him. He became very
intrigued when I explained the basic tenets of FMA:

The reason the Filipino Martial Arts start out with weaponry and
progresses into open hand skills is:

1.)The nature of warfare is the utilization of weaponry - not empty hands.

2.)Attribute Development - the use of weaponry and bladed weapons in
particular, develops and enhances combative attributes and application at a
more intensive level and faster rate then empty hands training. Bottom line,
the weapons force you to move correctly - to flow.

3.)The Filipino methods of empty hand combat are derived directly from the
application of weaponry verses having completely different styles of empty
hands skills and weaponry technique. Methods and skills transfer from
bladed, impact, and other edged weapons to empty hands combat and directly
back to weapons (including firearms).

Then he started asking a lot of questions.
When we were able to get together again in 2000, when he had a lay-over in
Portland, he asked how the FMA training was going and proceeded to talk to
me at length about different systems, methods and tactics. He obviously had
done his home work. Now, he tends to be very hush hush on exactly what he is
involved in but I know it involves special units. Is he involved in getting
FMA training for special units? I don't know. But, it's interesting to note
that the marines who were recently sent to the Philippines are spending time training
with GT Leo Gaje of the Pekiti-Tirsia Kali system.

(But of course, that's not classified as a stricktly open hand system)

William

Ice Phoenix · 10-23-2002, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Brokenmace
The Rangers train a clipped version of BJJ, what they claim are the 13 "core" techniques taught to them by the Machados. These are said to be the easiest techniques to employ and most deadly. In fairness, they never claimed they were teaching h2h; they say they are training the Rangers to think under physical pressure, which I think is one great plus for any martial arts training, as well as BJJ.

I'd like to know what those 13 techniques are.

Damn I wish I knew too! Bet I could guess most of them though!

Even though I agree with what's been said, I would still like to know what units train what martial arts. Other than the Rangers (Rangers of what?), what other units learn BJJ???

crazyjoe380 · 10-23-2002, 12:31 PM

YO ANYONE REMEMBER THAT HAND TO HAND INSTRUCTOR WITH THE STYLE

R.I.P.?

HE WENT IN THE UFC TALKIN BIG AND WENT UP AGAINST MARK KERR?

HE GOT KNOCKED OUT IN THE FIRST 20 SEC OF THE FIRST WITH A KNEE..

LOL THAT WAS FUNNY!

Brokenmace · 10-23-2002, 01:36 PM

Bri Thai,

I know you didn't. I just wanted to shine a light on the flip side of the topic.

Ice Phoenix,

Post a guess at what you think those 13 techniques are. I don't know BJJ, I just know some techniques from it and some other grappling stuff. Gound work is my weakest area, but I'm getting better. So I'd be interested.

Crazyjoe,

What the hell is R.I.P.? I'm interested.

Respect.

crazyjoe380 · 10-23-2002, 01:53 PM

rip is that style he had

he was an airborne ranger.. lol

RIP TO RIP...LOL

William · 10-23-2002, 02:04 PM

Quote:

YO ANYONE REMEMBER THAT HAND TO HAND INSTRUCTOR WITH THE STYLE ...

If I'm not mistaken, He claimed to be a Wing Chun fighter. The fight lasted all of 3-4 seconds. I think he tried to straight blast and Kerr reached through, grabbed his head and pulled down to meet an up knee...out cold. UFC 8, 9, or 10? Not sure, that was a while ago.

William

crazyjoe380 · 10-23-2002, 02:10 PM

Name Greg Stott
Nick Name The Ranger
Record 0 - 1 - 0

style : rip..

William · 10-23-2002, 02:16 PM

He or they (the UFC folks) called it Wing Chun then but R.I.P pretty much sums it up.

William

Ice Phoenix · 10-23-2002, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Brokenmace
Ice Phoenix,

Post a guess at what you think those 13 techniques are. I don't know BJJ, I just know some techniques from it and some other grappling stuff. Gound work is my weakest area, but I'm getting better. So I'd be interested.

Ok Brokenmace, I'll make a list when I've got the time. To make it easier though, were those 13 techniques submissions only? Escapes and reversals are of course terribly life-saving, but aren't "deadly" themselves, so I'm a little confused?

crazyjoe380 · 10-23-2002, 03:27 PM

miltary combat is good for combat..

quick deaths.. in the battle field you will hardly have time to fight one on one.. you will have weapons and all that..

they will teach you a few locks.. a few kicks.. a few strikes..
death strangles.. like naked rear chokes..

knive fighting.. few techniques..

i just asked my homie.. he was in the marine corp for 8 years. he said that someone that takes mma can probably win a soldier one on one..

They Learn to KILL quick and fast.. with the guns and knives bayanets... quick and fast.. and leave..

i dont blame them.. shoot to kill !!

Brokenmace · 10-23-2002, 03:50 PM

crazyjoe380,

I have a friend who just retired from the Rangers, and he told me that in the Army, only Specops (including Rangers, Airborne, Delta, and Green Berets) get intense h2h training. For others it is more of an option, and most get all they'll get in basic training. It is more mental than physical in basic, where they train a killer instinct through h2h, I'm told.

This makes sense, since specops are the only ones likely to need to dust off some dude without a weapon, and only rarely then. H2H doesn't make much sense on an open battlefield, unless you are reduced to sticks and stones.

Ice Phoenix,

Unfortunately, this wasn't made clear from my source. I imagine they concentrated mostly only reversals and submission, though. That's just a feeling. I saw them rolling, and it was more slow and methodical. Not a lot of escaping and fleeing tactics or anything. They were using it as a tool to teach tactical thought under pressure.

crazyjoe380 · 10-23-2002, 04:06 PM

well i did see the new manual for the army and they teach bjj principles..

10-23-2002, 09:18 AM	#1 (permalink)
Bri Thai Guest Posts: n/a	Military Hand to Hand Fighting. I'm noticing the odd thread where people are trying to credibility to an art by stating that some Special Forces use it. People like the US Marines, Recon, Seals etc. etc. But this is a misnomer. The vast majority of hand to hand (H2H) combat taught to the military is not only very scarce, it is also bollocks. The Marines "LINE" system is like 3rd rate Jiu Jitsu, where your partner has to allow you to perform the move, and even then it may not work (in fairness, even the Marines now realise this). And Brazillian Jiu Jitsu? The Marines are taught this quite alot. Don't get me wrong, it is a fine system for one on one unarmed self defence. But are allied soldiers ever really going to fight under these circumstances? NO! The are going to be carrying body armour, loads of equipment, and be in a battlefield with loads of enemy soldiers about, all armed to the teeth. Taking someone to the floor in these circumstances is the LAST thing you want to do. All kinds of people claim to have trained specialist units, and even those who have often merely reflect the Military upper ranks lack of knowledge of real H2H. My own preferred art was recently rejected by the USMC. Why? BECAUSE THEY SAID IT WAS TOO NASTY! Now why would the military hierarchy act like this? Well, it is all politically dominated. 99.9% of soldiers fighting involves using their weapons. Why train their men to frightening levels of "nasty" skills when they may never need them and, even worse, may use them on the general public in bar fights etc? Most people respect their armed forces, particularly specialist units, but you have to admit that the have their fair share of macho arse holes. The political fall out of some expert soldier killing a civillian would be massive. In short, in the eyes of the upper ehelons of the military, the risk of training their men to kill without weapons is higher than not training them to kill. I don't necessarily agree with this, but there you go. Now everyone knows that a BJJ strangle can kill, or that a Thai Boxer could beat someone to death. But both these methods take a small amount of time, thinking time where you can realise what you are doing and then hold back. A true old style World War 2 H2H strike could kill in an instant, so there is no time to correct any over reaction of the part of the soldier. So I would argue that saying "this system is good because the Recon use it" (or whoever) is not a valid argument.

10-23-2002, 09:48 AM	#2 (permalink)
Brokenmace Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Florida Posts: 259	Your argument is correct in every way. But I would argue that the consverse isn't true either. You can't say that if they use it, it won't work. The SEALs, for instance, need a wide range of training in order to counter likely threats. Remember, of all the units, the SEALs and other specops are more likely to go h2h. The nature of their missions sometimes require the stealth of bare-handed assassinations. If they bungle this, then they have to deal with the problem swiftly and get out! BTW, I wouldn't call what Paul Vunak teaches "sweet" or "innocent." His stuff is quite capable of killing on the instant As for the Marines, I've read in a recent combat magazine (note, "combat" not martial arts), that the Marines have developed a new system based on the old WWII Applegate techniques mixed with some grappling and kickboxing. From what I saw (still shots) it looked pretty effective. They train in body armor too. The Rangers train a clipped version of BJJ, what they claim are the 13 "core" techniques taught to them by the Machados. These are said to be the easiest techniques to employ and most deadly. In fairness, they never claimed they were teaching h2h; they say they are training the Rangers to think under physical pressure, which I think is one great plus for any martial arts training, as well as BJJ. I'd like to know what those 13 techniques are. So not all military martial arts are useless. You have to look at it from the point of view of a combatant. What are you training for? It isn't always to kill or maim. They have specific objectives, you know. Anyway, that's my two cents __________________ A broken mace is still a weapon. Last edited by Brokenmace; 10-23-2002 at 09:50 AM.

10-23-2002, 12:31 PM	#6 (permalink)
crazyjoe380 Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 1,368	YO ANYONE REMEMBER THAT HAND TO HAND INSTRUCTOR WITH THE STYLE R.I.P.? HE WENT IN THE UFC TALKIN BIG AND WENT UP AGAINST MARK KERR? HE GOT KNOCKED OUT IN THE FIRST 20 SEC OF THE FIRST WITH A KNEE.. LOL THAT WAS FUNNY! __________________

10-23-2002, 01:36 PM	#7 (permalink)
Brokenmace Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Florida Posts: 259	Bri Thai, I know you didn't. I just wanted to shine a light on the flip side of the topic. Ice Phoenix, Post a guess at what you think those 13 techniques are. I don't know BJJ, I just know some techniques from it and some other grappling stuff. Gound work is my weakest area, but I'm getting better. So I'd be interested. Crazyjoe, What the hell is R.I.P.? I'm interested. Respect. __________________ A broken mace is still a weapon.

10-23-2002, 01:53 PM	#8 (permalink)
crazyjoe380 Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 1,368	rip is that style he had he was an airborne ranger.. lol RIP TO RIP...LOL __________________

10-23-2002, 09:51 AM	#3 (permalink)
Bri Thai Guest Posts: n/a	"But I would argue that the consverse isn't true either. You can't say that if they use it, it won't work." I didn't.

10-23-2002, 10:08 AM	#4 (permalink)
William Registered User Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: R.I. Posts: 560	An interesting side note. I have a brother-in law who is a Colonel in the Marine core. In the early 90's he and his wife were in town for my father-in law's funeral. We got to talking one night when he asked how my training was going. "Hey Bill, how's that TKD training going for you?" First I had to correct him that it was FMA and then I started to explain the difference to him. He became very intrigued when I explained the basic tenets of FMA: The reason the Filipino Martial Arts start out with weaponry and progresses into open hand skills is: 1.)The nature of warfare is the utilization of weaponry - not empty hands. 2.)Attribute Development - the use of weaponry and bladed weapons in particular, develops and enhances combative attributes and application at a more intensive level and faster rate then empty hands training. Bottom line, the weapons force you to move correctly - to flow. 3.)The Filipino methods of empty hand combat are derived directly from the application of weaponry verses having completely different styles of empty hands skills and weaponry technique. Methods and skills transfer from bladed, impact, and other edged weapons to empty hands combat and directly back to weapons (including firearms). Then he started asking a lot of questions. When we were able to get together again in 2000, when he had a lay-over in Portland, he asked how the FMA training was going and proceeded to talk to me at length about different systems, methods and tactics. He obviously had done his home work. Now, he tends to be very hush hush on exactly what he is involved in but I know it involves special units. Is he involved in getting FMA training for special units? I don't know. But, it's interesting to note that the marines who were recently sent to the Philippines are spending time training with GT Leo Gaje of the Pekiti-Tirsia Kali system. (But of course, that's not classified as a stricktly open hand system) William

10-23-2002, 02:10 PM	#10 (permalink)
crazyjoe380 Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 1,368	Name Greg Stott Nick Name The Ranger Record 0 - 1 - 0 style : rip.. __________________

10-23-2002, 02:16 PM	#11 (permalink)
William Registered User Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: R.I. Posts: 560	He or they (the UFC folks) called it Wing Chun then but R.I.P pretty much sums it up. William

10-23-2002, 03:27 PM	#13 (permalink)
crazyjoe380 Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 1,368	miltary combat is good for combat.. quick deaths.. in the battle field you will hardly have time to fight one on one.. you will have weapons and all that.. they will teach you a few locks.. a few kicks.. a few strikes.. death strangles.. like naked rear chokes.. knive fighting.. few techniques.. i just asked my homie.. he was in the marine corp for 8 years. he said that someone that takes mma can probably win a soldier one on one.. They Learn to KILL quick and fast.. with the guns and knives bayanets... quick and fast.. and leave.. i dont blame them.. shoot to kill !! __________________

10-23-2002, 03:50 PM	#14 (permalink)
Brokenmace Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Florida Posts: 259	crazyjoe380, I have a friend who just retired from the Rangers, and he told me that in the Army, only Specops (including Rangers, Airborne, Delta, and Green Berets) get intense h2h training. For others it is more of an option, and most get all they'll get in basic training. It is more mental than physical in basic, where they train a killer instinct through h2h, I'm told. This makes sense, since specops are the only ones likely to need to dust off some dude without a weapon, and only rarely then. H2H doesn't make much sense on an open battlefield, unless you are reduced to sticks and stones. Ice Phoenix, Unfortunately, this wasn't made clear from my source. I imagine they concentrated mostly only reversals and submission, though. That's just a feeling. I saw them rolling, and it was more slow and methodical. Not a lot of escaping and fleeing tactics or anything. They were using it as a tool to teach tactical thought under pressure. __________________ A broken mace is still a weapon.

10-23-2002, 04:06 PM	#15 (permalink)
crazyjoe380 Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 1,368	well i did see the new manual for the army and they teach bjj principles.. __________________

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread: