FightingArts Estore
Pressure Points
From a medical professional, straight facts on where and how to hit that can save your life.
Stretching
Limber or not, anyone can add height and speed to their kicks with this method.
Calligraphy
For yourself or as a gift, calligraphy is special, unique and lasting.
Karate Uniforms
Look your best. Max snap. low cost & superior crafted: “Peak Performance Gold” 16 oz uniforms.

MOTOBU
Classic book translation. Hard to find. Not in stores.
Who's Online
0 registered (), 154 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Shanktotheright, royal, bobgalle100011, agenonline, TooNice
22862 Registered Users
Top Posters (30 Days)
Dobbersky 3
THEFOREVERMAN 3
MattJ 2
royal 2
Marcus Charles 1
April
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30
New Topics
Judo Olympic Games 1964 Tokyo, The Video Gallery
by ergees
04/01/14 05:26 AM
Muay Thai Seminar with Greg Nelson - Marcus Charle
by Marcus Charles
03/24/14 04:39 PM
Fighting On Saturday!!!
by Dobbersky
03/20/14 05:45 AM
Where Are They Now?
by Dobbersky
05/30/13 08:08 AM
AKK kata question
by
09/04/05 01:27 PM
Recent Posts
Fighting On Saturday!!!
by THEFOREVERMAN
Yesterday at 08:22 AM
Muay Thai Seminar with Greg Nelson - Marcus Charle
by THEFOREVERMAN
Yesterday at 08:20 AM
AKK kata question
by MattJ
04/04/14 05:45 PM
Judo Olympic Games 1964 Tokyo, The Video Gallery
by ergees
04/01/14 05:26 AM
Forum Stats
22862 Members
36 Forums
35546 Topics
432378 Posts

Max Online: 424 @ 09/24/13 10:38 PM
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 >
Topic Options
#382215 - 02/07/08 12:42 PM Martial Arts in the Military?
fileboy2002 Offline
Enthusiast

Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 999
Loc: Chicago, IL
I am not sure where to post this so please feel free to move it if you know a better place.

Reading through some threads, I noticed how many people joined the military expecting extensive training in hand-to-hand combat. Several are disappointed they did not get it.

I imagine most military recruits do get some HTH training, but I would not expect it to be very extensive. I cannot imagine that, in our high-tech, high-firepower age, training expert HTH fighters would be a major military priority. Where did people ever get the idea the military produced great martial artists?

Top
#382216 - 02/07/08 12:49 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: fileboy2002]
hunterkell Offline
Member

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 435
Loc: fl usa
"Delta Force"

Starring Chuck Norris
_________________________
Remembering 3655K

Nothing is impossible for the person that doesn't have to do it.

Top
#382217 - 02/07/08 12:49 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: hunterkell]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#382218 - 02/07/08 12:52 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: MattJ]
Bushi_no_ki Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/03/05
Posts: 1667
Loc: POM, Monterey CA
Actually, fileboy, when conduting MOUT operations, H2H is a major priority. Most of it has to do with keeping your weapon when the enemy tries to grab it. CQC will always have a place in military doctrine.

Top
#382219 - 02/07/08 01:34 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: fileboy2002]
laf7773 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 05/05/04
Posts: 4064
Loc: Limbo
The Marine Corp is the only branch with a solid H2H system in place. The Army touches on it in various stages of your training but unless you go into an MOS that it will actively be useful youíre not going to see it often. The Navy on the other hand, we it sucks. There is NO H2H in boot camp any more; there were several years ago but no more. When i went through Master at Arms "A" school we had about a week were we covered 5 control techniques and a couple of weapon retention techniques....it was a complete joke and the instructor hated me. Special forces and our new Individual Augmentation forces among a select few others get some training but it's not as in depth as it could be. Most are encouraged to seek out side sources for training. The personal protective services school i'm trying to get mostly deals with evasive tactics, removing the target from the threat. They are basically the military version of the Secret Service. Bushi it's open to all branches too so it's something you might want to look at in the future if thatís something your interested in, i believe the E-5 and above requirement is military wide not just Navy. As for the Air Force...couldn't tell you. With the exception of Para Rescue i think they are pretty much in the same boat as the Navy. I don't recall seeing any of their MPs going through much H2H during their training and our schools are in the same building.

Today it is more practical to focus on building clearings, convoys and other weapons tactics vise H2H as youíre not going to use it that often. You are rarely ever close enough to lay hands on someone. I do feel that all military police should receive more training due to the fact that i've seen several situations were we have had to physically take people down and found many of the people who work with and for me who were less than able to handle the situation.

I think most get the idea that the military produces good martial artists because of movies for one and the perceived notion that they are interested in developing a well rounded "fighting machine". Most see the military as an area of strict discipline where people learn to do as they are told without question and youíre the consummate professional trained to excel in all aspects of your job, including H2H. The problem is, at least in the Navy, those days are over. The Navy these days is more of a job corp than a military in most aspects.
_________________________
Enjoy life while you can, you never know when things will change.

Top
#382220 - 02/07/08 10:58 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: laf7773]
Fletch1 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 06/21/04
Posts: 2218
Loc: Florida
While the H2H is a great deal more accessable than it used to be, the very philosophy of training a large group of people in a very short amount of time will yieled predictable if not disappointing results.

The soldiers or marines who are exceptionally proficient in H2H are that way due to their own individual work ethic and focus way more than the magic of their system. Those guys would be formidable no matter what they trained in. Same goes for pretty much every mainstream military program out there (including KM).
_________________________
www.brazilianjiujitsunaples.com

Top
#382221 - 02/08/08 12:01 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: Fletch1]
JasonM Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 03/17/05
Posts: 2502
I think the army should do what the marines have done.

when i went to Army basic back in 1997, there was a tragedy during hand to hand...They put all of us in the field, aboupt 200 people and were teaching a hip throw. Well, i told my buddy this is so unsafe because we have 200 some guys and like 6-7 drills..sure enough a guy got thrown on his head and was parallized.
_________________________
90 percent of good abs is your nutrition

Top
#382222 - 02/08/08 02:22 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: JasonM]
laf7773 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 05/05/04
Posts: 4064
Loc: Limbo
All branches should implement a similar plan as the Marine Corp. We all have troops on the ground now, some obviously more than others though.
_________________________
Enjoy life while you can, you never know when things will change.

Top
#382223 - 02/08/08 12:44 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: laf7773]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
it seems to me that this discussion has come up a dozen times in the past 5 years. very few military people really need hand to hand. basically, if you are in a situation where you need hand to hand in the military, somebody has [censored] up.

its always a good thing to giver people some h2h, and it helps drive the warrior spirit, was well as preparing them for the very possible potential situation of a [censored] up, but the people how need it in depth are a very small group - basically special forces/recon/anti-terror, protective services and military police. given the nature of finite training resources and time, focus should be on what individual military personel need.

Top
#382224 - 02/08/08 06:13 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
Bushi_no_ki Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/03/05
Posts: 1667
Loc: POM, Monterey CA
I've stated in past threads that I have issues with the way MAC is taught, and I still do to some extent. But, the system has been evolving, specifically to focus on the needs of different units. A light unit, or SF Team will need a different focus than a Mech Unit, which has different needs than a support unit. So, as MAC evolves it is being geared toward having a different curriculum for different units.

Top
#382225 - 02/09/08 08:53 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
laf7773 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 05/05/04
Posts: 4064
Loc: Limbo
Quote:

basically, if you are in a situation where you need hand to hand in the military, somebody has [censored] up.




Not really. Military police should definitely get extensive training in control techniques and weapons retention at the least. It's not always policy of the military to shoot first nor is it practical.
_________________________
Enjoy life while you can, you never know when things will change.

Top
#382226 - 02/09/08 11:05 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: laf7773]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
actaully, I'd agree - the military police and protective services really being the only exceptions that I can think of, though. even then, I am guessing that if a military policeman has to hit somebody with his hand, then it isn't exactly a successful mission - I would guess that various non lethal weapons and or restraints would be prefered.

Top
#382227 - 02/09/08 02:56 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
Bushi_no_ki Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/03/05
Posts: 1667
Loc: POM, Monterey CA
globetrotter, what do I do, as a soldier, if someone runs up and grabs my weapon. They didn't present any lethal threat prior to grabbing my weapon, and I probably did try to shove him off, but the end result is he has hold of my weapon and is trying to take it from me.

Top
#382228 - 02/09/08 05:16 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: Bushi_no_ki]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
well, this is pretty much the definition of a [censored] up, isn't it? and what should happen is that the guy next to you in line should shoot him, to give you a clear cut answer, but of course these things are never so clear cut.

I'm not saying that these situations never happen, or can't happen, I am saying that they are a very small part of what soldiers do. and, while I don't know exactly how the US military works, if you are alone, with a rifle, and in a situation where somebody can grab your weapon, there was a [censored] up someplace in the situation.

like I said earlier, I think that all soldiers should get some basic self defense type of training, and this would fall into that sphrere, I would say - in the same way that a female transport clerk could be attacked and should have some skills at protecting herself.

but, let me put it this way - is it better to put in 8 hours of training in working on how to open a gap and shoot somebody who tries to grab your weapon, or 8 hours in learning h2h? honestly, I'm not sure.

a friend of mine, who was a platoon leader, had some idiot try to grab one of his guys weapons and run. the idiot wouldn't stop, so the other guys beat him to death with their rifles - nobody felt that they had a safe shot. he wouldn't let go before until they hit him fatally.

Top
#382229 - 02/10/08 01:23 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
Fletch1 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 06/21/04
Posts: 2218
Loc: Florida
Quote:

well, this is pretty much the definition of a [censored] up, isn't it? and what should happen is that the guy next to you in line should shoot him, to give you a clear cut answer, but of course these things are never so clear cut.

I'm not saying that these situations never happen, or can't happen, I am saying that they are a very small part of what soldiers do. and, while I don't know exactly how the US military works, if you are alone, with a rifle, and in a situation where somebody can grab your weapon, there was a [censored] up someplace in the situation.

like I said earlier, I think that all soldiers should get some basic self defense type of training, and this would fall into that sphrere, I would say - in the same way that a female transport clerk could be attacked and should have some skills at protecting herself.

but, let me put it this way - is it better to put in 8 hours of training in working on how to open a gap and shoot somebody who tries to grab your weapon, or 8 hours in learning h2h? honestly, I'm not sure.

a friend of mine, who was a platoon leader, had some idiot try to grab one of his guys weapons and run. the idiot wouldn't stop, so the other guys beat him to death with their rifles - nobody felt that they had a safe shot. he wouldn't let go before until they hit him fatally.




In this day and age of "Peace Keeping" missions, it should be noted that our soldiers and marines are being expected to work in close quarters, intermingling with an enemy who remains covert and indistinguishable from friendlies all the way up to the moment that they decide to attack.

With this in mind, we should see that H2H could be of critical importance.
_________________________
www.brazilianjiujitsunaples.com

Top
#382230 - 02/11/08 08:52 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: Fletch1]
hunterkell Offline
Member

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 435
Loc: fl usa
Bush,

I would kill him plain and simple.

If he is trying to steal your weapon then he is going to one day use that weapon against Americans or sell it to someone who is.

What do your rules of engagement say about this type of scenario?

K
_________________________
Remembering 3655K

Nothing is impossible for the person that doesn't have to do it.

Top
#382231 - 02/11/08 10:43 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: hunterkell]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
Quote:

Bush,

I would kill him plain and simple.

If he is trying to steal your weapon then he is going to one day use that weapon against Americans or sell it to someone who is.

What do your rules of engagement say about this type of scenario?

K





I'm guessing that the question wasn't whether or not to kill him - it is obvious that he should be killed. the question is how to go about it if he is holding your rifle, and very possibly controling you via the strap.

Top
#382232 - 02/11/08 10:47 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: Fletch1]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
Quote:

Quote:

well, this is pretty much the definition of a [censored] up, isn't it? and what should happen is that the guy next to you in line should shoot him, to give you a clear cut answer, but of course these things are never so clear cut.

I'm not saying that these situations never happen, or can't happen, I am saying that they are a very small part of what soldiers do. and, while I don't know exactly how the US military works, if you are alone, with a rifle, and in a situation where somebody can grab your weapon, there was a [censored] up someplace in the situation.

like I said earlier, I think that all soldiers should get some basic self defense type of training, and this would fall into that sphrere, I would say - in the same way that a female transport clerk could be attacked and should have some skills at protecting herself.

but, let me put it this way - is it better to put in 8 hours of training in working on how to open a gap and shoot somebody who tries to grab your weapon, or 8 hours in learning h2h? honestly, I'm not sure.

a friend of mine, who was a platoon leader, had some idiot try to grab one of his guys weapons and run. the idiot wouldn't stop, so the other guys beat him to death with their rifles - nobody felt that they had a safe shot. he wouldn't let go before until they hit him fatally.




In this day and age of "Peace Keeping" missions, it should be noted that our soldiers and marines are being expected to work in close quarters, intermingling with an enemy who remains covert and indistinguishable from friendlies all the way up to the moment that they decide to attack.

With this in mind, we should see that H2H could be of critical importance.





not to be argumentative, but I am not so sure it is clean cut. is the solution to arm soldiers with collapsable batons and train them in the use? is the soluttion to arm all soldiers on patrol with handguns and train them in the use? is the solution to work on better training for using a rifle in extremly close quarters? or is the solution to train more in h2h.

soldiers have a limited amount of time for training, any subject that you add to training, basically means removing a different subject. so you have to consider what is fundementally needed for their mission.

Top
#382233 - 02/11/08 01:47 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
hunterkell Offline
Member

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 435
Loc: fl usa
Globe,

In my mind there is no, "how do I do it"; it simply is done. A 1000 different scenarios can be discussed and what ifed....the point is it has to be in your mind and once it is; you do it.

Repetitive training of course gives one the tools; the training and the mindset is the weapon.

K

I've had exposure to this type of scenario...I was lucky I had one of those big mag lights in my other hand when it happened, or instead of getting struck on top of the noggin, the suspect would have been shot.

But it began with the mindset and the will to act; not with a specific plan.

To me it is not obvious to kill the assailant, that's why I asked what the rules of engagement were...

Soldiers and LEOs have different sets of R.O.E.s, a lot of it depends on what the situation is....

Kel
_________________________
Remembering 3655K

Nothing is impossible for the person that doesn't have to do it.

Top
#382234 - 02/11/08 08:28 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: hunterkell]
Bushi_no_ki Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/03/05
Posts: 1667
Loc: POM, Monterey CA
Actually Kel, our ROE are not so different anymore. That's why I brought up that point. A soldier that shoots someone who was just running up on them, with no other reason to expect violence, will end up in Ft. Leavenworth.

And someone else shooting him for me might not be the answer either. The struggle might not leave a clear shot for him. That's why H2H is becoming so important, and MAC is evolving.

Top
#382235 - 02/12/08 05:57 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
laf7773 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 05/05/04
Posts: 4064
Loc: Limbo
Quote:

soldiers have a limited amount of time for training, any subject that you add to training, basically means removing a different subject. so you have to consider what is fundementally needed for their mission.




Actually we have more time than you think for training, depending on your location. This sort of training doesn't all have to be done in basic or at a follow on school, although it should start there. Even those in theater have down time for training and while i don't feel H2H should take precedence over tac moves, range time or other combat essential training there should be a place for it. There are basic fundamentals to H2H that should be taught early on and revisited at least on a monthly basis. I think there should be more focus on control techniques and weapons retention for anyone who at one point or another in their service carries a weapon. This includes our pier sentries (not military police but usually ships company), auxiliary security forces (personnel assigned to temporary security duties) and our VBSS teams (usually made up of ships company other than MPs). There is time for this training, the problem is billeting qualified instructors for all the locations or qualifying individuals within those locations. Then there is the fact that the Navy doesn't even have a program in place.
_________________________
Enjoy life while you can, you never know when things will change.

Top
#382236 - 02/12/08 09:55 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: laf7773]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
Quote:

Quote:

soldiers have a limited amount of time for training, any subject that you add to training, basically means removing a different subject. so you have to consider what is fundementally needed for their mission.




Actually we have more time than you think for training, depending on your location. This sort of training doesn't all have to be done in basic or at a follow on school, although it should start there. Even those in theater have down time for training and while i don't feel H2H should take precedence over tac moves, range time or other combat essential training there should be a place for it. There are basic fundamentals to H2H that should be taught early on and revisited at least on a monthly basis. I think there should be more focus on control techniques and weapons retention for anyone who at one point or another in their service carries a weapon. This includes our pier sentries (not military police but usually ships company), auxiliary security forces (personnel assigned to temporary security duties) and our VBSS teams (usually made up of ships company other than MPs). There is time for this training, the problem is billeting qualified instructors for all the locations or qualifying individuals within those locations. Then there is the fact that the Navy doesn't even have a program in place.




you are right, military personnel have time on their hands, I meant all of the various resources that are involved in training are limited - I think that pretty much every military has trouble training forces once they have been deployed. getting trainers to them, getting the right facilities, etc is the limiting factor.


there is a fundemental question in whether or not you want soldiers in "sentry" type positions to use less than lethal force. it makes ever encounter a judgment call - is the "enemy" a threat or not, is he to big to physically over power, or not. when I was a sentry, and when I was in charge of sentries, it was pretty simple - if you saw somebody, you told them to stop, if they didn't, you shot in the air, then you shot them. that was that. if it was night, you just shot. simple. I don't know if you want to have a situation where you say "well, if he looks like he isn't a threat, tackle him, if he is over 200 pounds, shoot him"


the IDF - the israeli army, has had serious damage to their warfighting abilities, becuase they have focused too much on non lethal issues over the past 20 years. I really belive that their is a fundemental difference between warfighing and non-lethal capacities, including in the very attitude of the soldiers. the vast majoirty of the military should be invovled in killing people, or in support of those who kill people, in my opinion.

Top
#382237 - 02/12/08 10:10 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
hunterkell Offline
Member

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 435
Loc: fl usa
Bush,

the scenario you presented (the first time) was not, "someone runs up to you" it was, "someone runs up to you and grabs your weapon"...there is a difference...

semantics, maybe....

which is why I asked what the ROE would be

Kel
_________________________
Remembering 3655K

Nothing is impossible for the person that doesn't have to do it.

Top
#382238 - 02/12/08 12:21 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: hunterkell]
Bushi_no_ki Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/03/05
Posts: 1667
Loc: POM, Monterey CA
Kel, it is something of a semantics issue. There is always the path of travel to consider. Is it a clear path? If so, there's a chance I did shoot him, unless he was shouting for help in a recognizable way, or obviously distressed about something. If he worked his way through a crowd, however, there is the good chance he has my weapon before I know he's up to something. There are thousands of possibilities leading up to me trying to retain my weapon, or restrain someone on the ground.

Top
#382239 - 02/12/08 01:03 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: Bushi_no_ki]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
Quote:

Kel, it is something of a semantics issue. There is always the path of travel to consider. Is it a clear path? If so, there's a chance I did shoot him, unless he was shouting for help in a recognizable way, or obviously distressed about something. If he worked his way through a crowd, however, there is the good chance he has my weapon before I know he's up to something. There are thousands of possibilities leading up to me trying to retain my weapon, or restrain someone on the ground.





bushi,

how do you carry your weapon? the way I was tought was with the strap around my neck and strong shoulder - effectly if somebody took my weapon and ran, they would be dragging me behind. which doens't mean that it isn't a problem - it means that I am essentially in a weak position if somebody gets ahold of my weapon, they can leverage it against me.

Top
#382240 - 02/13/08 05:46 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
laf7773 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 05/05/04
Posts: 4064
Loc: Limbo
Quote:

there is a fundemental question in whether or not you want soldiers in "sentry" type positions to use less than lethal force.




It all depends on what theater they are acting in; do they fall under ROE or law enforcement justifications and escalation of force? For the law enforcement types we are required to use the least amount of force needed to resolve the situation.

Quote:

it makes ever encounter a judgment call - is the "enemy" a threat or not, is he to big to physically over power, or not.




Again different theaters different needs. All sentries not falling under ROE are expected to make that judgment call.

Quote:

when I was a sentry, and when I was in charge of sentries, it was pretty simple - if you saw somebody, you told them to stop, if they didn't, you shot in the air, then you shot them. that was that. if it was night, you just shot. simple.




Biggest problem here is the Navy doesn't issue warning shots unless it's over water, pier side or from a ship, and even then it's only with a crew serve weapon. If the facility you are protecting falls under an ROE that requires you to shoot individuals who fail to identify themselves or slow/stop their approach when directed then by all means shoot. In these situations and locations you are less likely to need H2H training.

Quote:

I don't know if you want to have a situation where you say "well, if he looks like he isn't a threat, tackle him, if he is over 200 pounds, shoot him"




Again not all situations are the same. We double up everything now. All entry control points have two sentries, patrolman have a partner or another patrolman in close proximity to their zone if they need back up. Some one being able to over power you is an issue we always face but we take steps to mitigate that threat. If the subject is hostile and too big to handle alone and your back up isn't on scene you escalate your level of force from restraint techniques to control agents or baton if your area doesn't allow O.C. There are very few places where we are allowed to go straight from "stop and ID yourself" to shooting them and those areas are generally covered by ROE and not a LEOs escalation of force and justifications for deadly force.

Quote:

the IDF - the israeli army, has had serious damage to their warfighting abilities, becuase they have focused too much on non lethal issues over the past 20 years. I really belive that their is a fundemental difference between warfighing and non-lethal capacities, including in the very attitude of the soldiers. the vast majoirty of the military should be invovled in killing people, or in support of those who kill people, in my opinion.




As i said before H2H shouldn't take the place of or restrict the amount of training for tac movement, weapons training or combat training. It should be part of it. Here is the major issue with saying only certain groups of people within the military should get H2H training; regardless of what you are doing today it can change tomorrow. A good example is the Navy's auxiliary security force and individual augmentees, they are members who have been taken from their normal duties and jobs and sent to perform sentry, basic law enforcement and combat duties. These people normally do things like store keeper, barber, radar operator, admin or any of the "non-combat" jobs in the Navy. Yes technically they are all combatants but their specific job function doesn't have them directly involved, that are support for the missions. Normally they would have no need what so ever for H2H and when i first came in it was unheard of to see sailors in the desert unless they were members of security, seabees or spec ops. Today anyone can be called up and sent in. In San Diego the auxiliary security force was activated 100% meaning that for these guys instead of working their normal job every day they were part of security standing sentry duties for a duration of 6 - 18 months, in some cases longer. For those who are doing security or law enforcement state side or in a majority of the over seas commands H2H is vital since restraint techniques are number 2 on our escalation of force. The government tells us we have to attempt to physically subdue someone before we can move on to chemical agents or batons. It's always a judgment call even for the sentries. For those following ROE their response is more cut and dry because they are dealing with a more hostile environment. The reason they should still receive H2H is because eventually they are going to rotate out of the desert eventually and ROE will no longer apply.
_________________________
Enjoy life while you can, you never know when things will change.

Top
#382241 - 02/13/08 09:58 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: laf7773]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
again, and not to get polical, but I would suggest that having sailors doing infantry work in the dessert is a sign that somebody [censored] up.

this is a little philosophical, but the way a military stays great is to use its forces the right way, for the right job, for what they are trained for.

and you might very well be right - it may be that cooks and drivers should be trained in h2h on the chance that they will have to do guard duty in a civillian enviroment, but I am honestly not sure that that is a good use of resources.

as to actual combatants - I am convinced that it is very difficult to have a soldier be at the top of his game in both a warmaking enviroment, and a peacekeeping enviroment. I served in both a "hot" war and a "cold" war - with very different rules of engangment. with all due modesty, I am very well discipled and intellegent, and it was diffcult for me. for many of my collegues and men under me, it was basically impossible. I would not suggest that that is the correct course of action for the US.

Top
#382242 - 02/13/08 12:42 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
Fletch1 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 06/21/04
Posts: 2218
Loc: Florida
globe,

Good points made. It is difficult if not impossible to be at the absolute top of your game in killing people if you have to learn how to handle them without killing them.

All things being equal however, a bad guy disarming you of your weapon is very reasonably considered a deadly force threat and should be treated as such. Thinking that he is just trying to get it away from you and run away to sell it at the local market is not a rational perspective for a soldier (although I have met many tree huggers who think otherwise ).
_________________________
www.brazilianjiujitsunaples.com

Top
#382243 - 02/13/08 01:13 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: Fletch1]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
agreed, it wasn't I who argued differntly. as far as I am concerned, if a person touches a soldier on patrol (or basically, on duty) he is dead meat. it comes down to how to kill him, without hurting anybody who you don't intent to hurt.

Top
#382244 - 02/13/08 07:44 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
laf7773 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 05/05/04
Posts: 4064
Loc: Limbo
It's dependant on where you are and what "rules" you fall under. If youíre on foot patrol in the desert and someone tries to take your weapon then your course of action based on your ROE may be to take them out. State side on the other hand if someone tries to take your weapon although it may be obvious what his intention is but in many cases you are still expected to handle the situation without deadly force. For example if i'm in San Diego on a call and an individual manages to get his hand on my side arm and tries to remove it but i am able to prevent him from getting it, under your logic he should be shot. Now regardless of his intent i have just shot an unarmed man. My partner couldn't shoot him while he was trying to get it because i'm too close.

Quote:

again, and not to get polical, but I would suggest that having sailors doing infantry work in the dessert is a sign that somebody [censored] up.




How is that? Would you rather have sailors continue to be under utilized on ships and shore stations while the Marines and Army have to double up on deployments? This isn't a matter of "should" they be there, they are there and doing a good job. It's not because someone "f"ed up, it's because someone on the top end wanted to "equal out" the services a bit. There is very little going on these days at sea. It's not like the old days when we were at war with countries that actually had a navy they could speak of. Todayís military is being trained to be more versatile and they are. It is difficult for people to go from an combative mind set to a peace keeping mind set but the simple fact is it's happening and the majority of the people i see are handling it good. I personally would prefer to see my rate split into two branches, a LEO side and an infantry side but that's not looking like it's going to happen.

Quote:

and you might very well be right - it may be that cooks and drivers should be trained in h2h on the chance that they will have to do guard duty in a civillian enviroment, but I am honestly not sure that that is a good use of resources.




There is no "chance" about it, The IA program has been in place for about 2-3 years and the ASF program (formerly 9545) has been in place much longer. I didn't mention it because i thought it was a good idea, i mentioned it because these people ARE being put in these situations so it's justifiable that everyone in the military should receive this sort of training. No matter what theater you are operating in there are going to come a time when you are in the position that you will need to put someone down without the use of a weapon, it's a simple fact and it's not because someone screwed up. This war isn't being fought in a place where you know who your enemy is and even though we are in a hostile environment we can't point a gun at everyone we come in contact with while on patrol and maintaining a reactionary gap in a city full of people isn't always going to happen.

Regardless of what people think about who should be doing what job and where the simple fact is regardless of what your job is in the military you can find yourself in these situations and they should be trained to handle it. An hour or two of basic control and manipulation techniques every 2 - 4 weeks isn't going to detract from anyoneís training or proficiency in other aspects of their job.
_________________________
Enjoy life while you can, you never know when things will change.

Top
#382245 - 02/13/08 08:22 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: laf7773]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
Quote:

It's dependant on where you are and what "rules" you fall under. If youíre on foot patrol in the desert and someone tries to take your weapon then your course of action based on your ROE may be to take them out. State side on the other hand if someone tries to take your weapon although it may be obvious what his intention is but in many cases you are still expected to handle the situation without deadly force. For example if i'm in San Diego on a call and an individual manages to get his hand on my side arm and tries to remove it but i am able to prevent him from getting it, under your logic he should be shot. Now regardless of his intent i have just shot an unarmed man. My partner couldn't shoot him while he was trying to get it because i'm too close.





well, this gets back to what I said at the begining about military police - I am guessing that you are shore patrol or something similar. myself, an ex infantryman, would catagorize that whole side of the business as something entirely different - no less important, but military policing is fundementally a different animal than the rest of the military, and, as I said in my first or second post one of the areas where people should in fact have h2h training, in my opinion.


Quote:

again, and not to get polical, but I would suggest that having sailors doing infantry work in the dessert is a sign that somebody [censored] up.



Quote:


How is that? Would you rather have sailors continue to be under utilized on ships and shore stations while the Marines and Army have to double up on deployments? This isn't a matter of "should" they be there, they are there and doing a good job. It's not because someone "f"ed up, it's because someone on the top end wanted to "equal out" the services a bit. There is very little going on these days at sea. It's not like the old days when we were at war with countries that actually had a navy they could speak of.






sorry, I disagree. I do not believe that one can be the best possible ships cook and the best possible perimeter guard, they are fundementally differnt jobs. basically, the navy should be in the business of being the best possible navy and being prepared to meet the naval needs of the US, and not filling in for the army/marines.

Quote:



Todayís military is being trained to be more versatile and they are. It is difficult for people to go from an combative mind set to a peace keeping mind set but the simple fact is it's happening and the majority of the people i see are handling it good.






sorry - niether you nor I know that. first, we don't know how well these forces are doing at their jobs. I am guessing that several years after this present conflict is over things will be analyzed and there will be a good indication of how well these forces did their job. I am betting that they will not have done a good job. you are betting that they will. one of us will turn out to be wrong.

secondly, the effects will be seen in the long term - how will it effect recruiting? how will it effect the mental health of the individuals? these things will come up in 10-20 years. again, I am betting that it will not be favorable.

thirdly - how is this effecting the US's ability to wage the next war? this is a relavant point.

Quote:



Quote:

and you might very well be right - it may be that cooks and drivers should be trained in h2h on the chance that they will have to do guard duty in a civillian enviroment, but I am honestly not sure that that is a good use of resources.




There is no "chance" about it, The IA program has been in place for about 2-3 years and the ASF program (formerly 9545) has been in place much longer. I didn't mention it because i thought it was a good idea, i mentioned it because these people ARE being put in these situations so it's justifiable that everyone in the military should receive this sort of training. No matter what theater you are operating in there are going to come a time when you are in the position that you will need to put someone down without the use of a weapon, it's a simple fact and it's not because someone screwed up. This war isn't being fought in a place where you know who your enemy is and even though we are in a hostile environment we can't point a gun at everyone we come in contact with while on patrol and maintaining a reactionary gap in a city full of people isn't always going to happen.






I would like very much to see the statistics for how well cooks and drivers are doing with h2h against intruders.

it looks like we have had very differnt experiences in terms of this kind of thing. I don't mean to be offensinve in any way - but have you personally been involved in patroling hostile civillian population in this conflict (or others?) I wouldn't want to train somebody for a few hours and then have them be protecting my rear from a knifeweilding terrorist or even a serious theif.

Quote:



Regardless of what people think about who should be doing what job and where the simple fact is regardless of what your job is in the military you can find yourself in these situations and they should be trained to handle it. An hour or two of basic control and manipulation techniques every 2 - 4 weeks isn't going to detract from anyoneís training or proficiency in other aspects of their job.




again, I would suggest that an hour or two of training every few weeks isn't going to do a hell of a lot more than getting some cooks and drivers killed.


true story - once I took in a new group of recruits, when I was a platoon training sargent. their was this one really big young guy, who was first to guard our ammo dump. I took him to the position and started explaining to him the rules of engagement - you see somebody yell "stop" then you fire in the air, then you shoot him"....etc. anyway, he was pretty scared at being left out alone, on the first day of training, and I had no faith in him what so ever. so I ended up saying - "if you see anythign, or get scared at all, just shoot in the air, and I'll come running and deal with the situation".

honestly, trying to have cooks and drivers get themselves into things that they won't be able to handle isn't going to help anybody.

Top
#382246 - 02/13/08 09:11 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
let me add something - when I talk about hand to hand combat, I am taking out of the picture using non-lethal weapons. yes, if a soldier on a patrol gets into a fistfight/wrestling match with an enemy, somebody has [censored] up, no matter how you want to slice it. if you have contact and that contact is dealt with with a night stick for instance, then that is a perfectly acceptable (in my opinion) outcome.

when I was in the army, I was 65 kilos. which meant that most bad guys were bigger than me. if I was planning on boxing them, I would have had to spend a lot of my time training. give me a 22 inch hardwood stick, and a few hours of training, and you have a stack of broken bones that you could build a house out of.

this was my meaning - what you don't want is to depend on training people so that they can outfight the enemy in what is more or less a fair fight. the basic concept of the military is to prepare people to fight in a way that will allow them to win in a substantial way.

Top
#382247 - 02/14/08 06:21 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
laf7773 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 05/05/04
Posts: 4064
Loc: Limbo
Quote:

well, this gets back to what I said at the begining about military police - I am guessing that you are shore patrol or something similar. myself, an ex infantryman, would catagorize that whole side of the business as something entirely different - no less important, but military policing is fundementally a different animal than the rest of the military, and, as I said in my first or second post one of the areas where people should in fact have h2h training, in my opinion.



Quote:

I don't mean to be offensinve in any way - but have you personally been involved in patroling hostile civillian population in this conflict (or others?)




I'm military police but what you don't seem to get is these days we do both. I have done both, i've spent my time in the desert and have seen both sides. I've also done hostile vessel boarding.

Quote:

I wouldn't want to train somebody for a few hours and then have them be protecting my rear from a knifeweilding terrorist or even a serious theif.




Either i'm not explaining this part well or youíre not getting it. I'm not saying to give someone a few hours of training and expect the to perform. This should be an ongoing training where they receive basic fundamentals in boot and follow on schools then continue training throughout their career BUT the "continuing education" doesn't have to be more than a couple of hours every 2-4 months. I'm not talking about teaching people a bunch of fancy moves, i'm talking about basic control techniques that can and will save their lives if something were to happen.

Quote:

sorry, I disagree. I do not believe that one can be the best possible ships cook and the best possible perimeter guard, they are fundementally differnt jobs. basically, the navy should be in the business of being the best possible navy and being prepared to meet the naval needs of the US, and not filling in for the army/marines.




I'm not talking about hypothetical situations here or what i THINK should be done, i'm telling you what IS happening. I'll tell you a little secret; i'm one of those ship guys who converted. I was a radar operator and i was very good at my job, i was qualified as Surface Watch Officer and held the position for 3 years as a junior E-5, the position was normally filled by E-7 through O-3. I also trained all the junior officers as they came in. I did VBSS where we conducted hostile boarding on ships in the gulf. I was sent TAD to security as ASF and was one of two ASF members to get patrolman qualified when all the other ASF members were standing posts and doing bag checks. I enjoyed it so much i converted to military police (officially) a little over a year ago and immediately qualified as Watch Commander only 3 weeks after graduation from our academy and prior to being promoted to E-6 where i became the physical security manager for all military personnel and installations in Greece. I did a tour in the desert and will most likely be going back as protective services next year. So yes i was blue water Navy and now i'm a dirt sailor and i excelled at both as have many of the people i know. There is nothing special about me, i consider myself quite average.

Until the year 2000 you couldn't even join the Navy as military police, you had to wait till you were an E-5 to convert. Now we take them straight out of boot camp. By your assertion anyone who converted to military police was either not good at their previous job or isn't good at their new job.

Quote:

secondly, the effects will be seen in the long term - how will it effect recruiting? how will it effect the mental health of the individuals? these things will come up in 10-20 years. again, I am betting that it will not be favorable.




I'm by no means saying that there aren't going to be side affects to the war, there always are. What does that have to do with a personís ability to go from one job to another? How does that affect the job that is being done now?

Quote:

thirdly - how is this effecting the US's ability to wage the next war? this is a relavant point.




What does this have to do with military personnel learning H2H? I referenced the FACT that all members of the armed forces today and expect to be in a combat situation and therefore should receive what ever training is useful in helping them survive. What is your point? I could care less about the debate on what is right or wrong with how the military is conducting it troop placement as i stated before. What i'm talking about is the training of the troops, not why they should or shouldn't be there.

Quote:

I would like very much to see the statistics for how well cooks and drivers are doing with h2h against intruders.




Statistics? I'm referring to things i've SEEN, not what i've read about or seen on the news. It seems like you have an issue with persons outside the Army or Marines doing the same job. I hate to tell you this but while infantry is difficult, it's not brain surgery. As i stated before it's happening and it's not going away regardless of how you feel. Again i'm not trying to debate who should be there or why, only that they are there and should receive sufficient training.

Quote:

honestly, trying to have cooks and drivers get themselves into things that they won't be able to handle isn't going to help anybody.




Which is why EVERYONE should get this training so we don't have people in these situations that can't handle it.

Quote:

this was my meaning - what you don't want is to depend on training people so that they can outfight the enemy in what is more or less a fair fight. the basic concept of the military is to prepare people to fight in a way that will allow them to win in a substantial way.




Let's say for the sake of argument that you are 100% correct in the fact that if someone finds themselves in a situation where they need to use H2H techniques that someone screwed up. Why wouldn't we want them to be able to handle the situation as best they can?

I'm not sure if you just have an issue with Navy personnel being in Iraq or where it is your coming from but you need to face facts, its happening. In 2005 - 2006 we had roughly 4000 sailors on IA in Iraq alone. The Army numbers were much higher obviously though. This isn't a concept, it's a reality and it's going to continue. They are doing no better or worse than the Army and Marines there. How long has it been since you were in the Army? Things have changed quite a bit in the last few years. All branches are cross training these days.
_________________________
Enjoy life while you can, you never know when things will change.

Top
#382248 - 02/14/08 10:19 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: laf7773]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
first, let me say that I am enjoying this discussion - it isn't very often that I can discuss this type of thing with somebody who is qualified, and has a background, to discuss it.

before I get into the academic side of the discusion again, let me ask you a clear and direct question - how many physical contacts have you been part of, witnessed or have personal knowledge of between an on duty military person and a non-american military person/citizen where firearms weren't part of the equation? to restate that - physical contacts between on duty military and either terrorist, enemies or foreign national criminals where the violence was carried out with h2h or shock weapons?


I think that we are looking at things from a totally different perspective - I was a light infantryman, then trained infantry, then did some work in protection, and now I am a father and tax payer and general old fart. I am not disputing what the situation is, I am concerned with what should be.

the military is an organization that gets a certain number of people of various abilities, and a certain amount of money, and needs to be prepared to meet all of the security missions of the US for the foreseeable future. that is the perspective that I am looking at here. I have no argument with the facts on the ground, but I would suggest that the fact that blue water sailors are being used for infantry roles in the dessert is not good for the warmaking capacity of the military as a whole. what happens if we are faced with a naval crisis with china or india in 3 years, as an example?


Quote:


Either i'm not explaining this part well or youíre not getting it. I'm not saying to give someone a few hours of training and expect the to perform. This should be an ongoing training where they receive basic fundamentals in boot and follow on schools then continue training throughout their career BUT the "continuing education" doesn't have to be more than a couple of hours every 2-4 months. I'm not talking about teaching people a bunch of fancy moves, i'm talking about basic control techniques that can and will save their lives if something were to happen.






this comes back to my question above - as far as I am concerned, if you can say "I have seen 15 encounters where a cook with 6 hours training kicked the ass of a terrorist who jumped him on the way to the shower" then I have no more argument, and I am wrong. I was invovled with hundreds of contacts with enemy that involved shock weapons - mostly sticks, bottles, knives and rocks, and I would say that the amount of training it would take to make somebody proffetient in h2h to deal with these type of encounters is a lot more than what you are talking about. so I am guenuenlly curious if you have seen people use the training, or just feel that the training has been good enough, even though it hasn't been tried.


and, going back to my very first post - if you are saying "what we need is to train these guys well enough so that nobody can kidnap them" I agree that a few hours training is enough, but I would again say that if all that is keeping your soldiers from being kidnapped is a little h2h training, then the system is fundementally flawed.


Quote:

sorry, I disagree. I do not believe that one can be the best possible ships cook and the best possible perimeter guard, they are fundementally differnt jobs. basically, the navy should be in the business of being the best possible navy and being prepared to meet the naval needs of the US, and not filling in for the army/marines.




I'm not talking about hypothetical situations here or what i THINK should be done, i'm telling you what IS happening. I'll tell you a little secret; i'm one of those ship guys who converted. I was a radar operator and i was very good at my job, i was qualified as Surface Watch Officer and held the position for 3 years as a junior E-5, the position was normally filled by E-7 through O-3. I also trained all the junior officers as they came in. I did VBSS where we conducted hostile boarding on ships in the gulf. I was sent TAD to security as ASF and was one of two ASF members to get patrolman qualified when all the other ASF members were standing posts and doing bag checks. I enjoyed it so much i converted to military police (officially) a little over a year ago and immediately qualified as Watch Commander only 3 weeks after graduation from our academy and prior to being promoted to E-6 where i became the physical security manager for all military personnel and installations in Greece. I did a tour in the desert and will most likely be going back as protective services next year. So yes i was blue water Navy and now i'm a dirt sailor and i excelled at both as have many of the people i know. There is nothing special about me, i consider myself quite average.

Until the year 2000 you couldn't even join the Navy as military police, you had to wait till you were an E-5 to convert. Now we take them straight out of boot camp. By your assertion anyone who converted to military police was either not good at their previous job or isn't good at their new job.






very possibly - I won't dispute how good you are at your job. my personal experience is such that, if I had to chose a squad to ride with, I wouldn't go with somebody with your background, probrably. infantry isn't brain surgury- but I spent months doing things like changing magazines, clearing jammed ammo, falling on my face in the dirt, running uphill carrying weight, etc. 20 years later it is ingrained in my muscle memory. I find it very difficult to believe that that can be achieved in a few weeks.

Quote:

secondly, the effects will be seen in the long term - how will it effect recruiting? how will it effect the mental health of the individuals? these things will come up in 10-20 years. again, I am betting that it will not be favorable.




I'm by no means saying that there aren't going to be side affects to the war, there always are. What does that have to do with a personís ability to go from one job to another? How does that affect the job that is being done now?






and here is a main difference in how we are viewing it - I am saying "should we be in a situation where we need to teach sailors h2h? is this in the long term best interests of the US?" not, well, these guys need it, so lets teach it to them. by all means, if people need it, teach them, but the bigger question is do we need to have people in a situation where this is going to be the difference between successfuly doing their mission and not doing their mission?


Quote:

thirdly - how is this effecting the US's ability to wage the next war? this is a relavant point.




What does this have to do with military personnel learning H2H? I referenced the FACT that all members of the armed forces today and expect to be in a combat situation and therefore should receive what ever training is useful in helping them survive. What is your point? I could care less about the debate on what is right or wrong with how the military is conducting it troop placement as i stated before. What i'm talking about is the training of the troops, not why they should or shouldn't be there.






sorry - this is fundemental to the discussion. and, looking at how you phrase the question, I think that I might understand part of our disagreement. you say "what does that have to do with military personnel learning h2h?" - I have no problem with people learning h2h, it is good excersize, it is good for the warrior spirit. I have a problem with people using it - if a military person needs to hit an enemy with his hand (or foot, or elbow, etc) there was a [censored] up someplace.

as to the question of how it effects the war making ability of the military - that is a fundemental question. you are saying "me and my friends have been on patrols in the dessert, have worked in technical blue sea positions, and have been shore patrol (or what ever the correct terminology is) and it hasn't adversly effected us" - great. talk to me in 20 years, and we'll have a beer and discuss it. I think that we will see that it adversly effects the ability of combat units to wage war, it will adversly effect the ability of the support units to support war making, and it is probrably causing an encrease in causulties as well as in post traumatic stress. that is what I am talking about, not if one particular radar operator can become a perimator guard or not.


Quote:

I would like very much to see the statistics for how well cooks and drivers are doing with h2h against intruders.




Statistics? I'm referring to things i've SEEN, not what i've read about or seen on the news. It seems like you have an issue with persons outside the Army or Marines doing the same job. I hate to tell you this but while infantry is difficult, it's not brain surgery. As i stated before it's happening and it's not going away regardless of how you feel. Again i'm not trying to debate who should be there or why, only that they are there and should receive sufficient training.






I have no trouble at all with it - except that I don't think it is the proper use of resources or manpower. and, yes, infrantry isn't brain surgery, but there are skills involved that you don't pick up in a few hours training.


Quote:

honestly, trying to have cooks and drivers get themselves into things that they won't be able to handle isn't going to help anybody.




Which is why EVERYONE should get this training so we don't have people in these situations that can't handle it.

Quote:

this was my meaning - what you don't want is to depend on training people so that they can outfight the enemy in what is more or less a fair fight. the basic concept of the military is to prepare people to fight in a way that will allow them to win in a substantial way.




Let's say for the sake of argument that you are 100% correct in the fact that if someone finds themselves in a situation where they need to use H2H techniques that someone screwed up. Why wouldn't we want them to be able to handle the situation as best they can?

I'm not sure if you just have an issue with Navy personnel being in Iraq or where it is your coming from but you need to face facts, its happening. In 2005 - 2006 we had roughly 4000 sailors on IA in Iraq alone. The Army numbers were much higher obviously though. This isn't a concept, it's a reality and it's going to continue. They are doing no better or worse than the Army and Marines there. How long has it been since you were in the Army? Things have changed quite a bit in the last few years. All branches are cross training these days.





[/quote/

I guess my main question is how to you know that they are doing no better or worse that the army and marines there?

when I was in the army - a long long time ago, we had a pretty good idea of the casulty rates of the differnt units - and there was a difference between diffent infantry battalians, let alone when some poor shmuck of a tanker had to do infantry work. I would be genuinly interested in seeing the differences in casulties and in missions between infantry and re-trained navy.


look, go back and read my first post on this subject - if you are saying "these guys could get kidnapped and a little training will keep them safe" then I am all for this level of training. if you are saying "on patrol we need h2h" then I would say "no, if you know how to operate you firearm well enough, and if your patrol leader knows what he is doing, you shouldn't ever need h2h"

Top
#382249 - 02/15/08 09:36 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
Bushi_no_ki Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/03/05
Posts: 1667
Loc: POM, Monterey CA
Globetrotter, one acronym. MOUT. Things can get very close in a MOUT situation, close enough that a rifle is a liability.

Top
#382250 - 02/15/08 10:16 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: Bushi_no_ki]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
sorry

what's mout?
but I agree that there are instances where a rifle is a liability, I am just disputing what the best solution is.

Top
#382251 - 02/16/08 09:52 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
Bushi_no_ki Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/03/05
Posts: 1667
Loc: POM, Monterey CA
Military Operations in Urbanized Terrain. It's very dangerous in a MOUT situation. Easy to have the enemy you didn't have time to see take your weapon.

We're trained to have the strap over one shoulder now, easier to raise in a hurry, but if an enemy gets that close to me, it's not safe for someone else to shoot him. A basic understanding of H2H and CQC is a necessity for combat arms.

Top
#382252 - 02/17/08 04:09 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: Bushi_no_ki]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
fair enough - but this comes down to the very core of the question - is it a better SOP to go to h2h, or to work out ways to shoot?

I was basically a light infantryman - part of my training and service was in "anti-terror" basically what you might call swat. in my day, there were a number of regular army companies that carried swat responsibilites, including the one I served with. as part of that training, we did extensive h2h training, because the idea was that we may be dealing with hostage situations, and fighting inside a bus or an airplane.

but the meat and potatos of my work was basic infantry work - and the vast majority of that was very similar to what is going on in iraq now, urban operations. the sop that we embraced was that closing to h2h in these situations was less preferable, and the best option was to train in always finding a solution at the end of the barrel.

to complicate things, I was also very active in the first palestinian intafadah, and spent months dealing with rioters that we not armed with firearms, and we dealt with them in a less than lethal manner, unless they drew a weapon. which meant a whole different set of SOPSs.

but I would say the very core of the question is - do you train you men to shoot at close range, or spend the same amount of time working on h2h, and what is going to get you better results.

Top
#382253 - 02/17/08 01:29 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
Bushi_no_ki Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/03/05
Posts: 1667
Loc: POM, Monterey CA
the best results are going to come from being prepared for either situation. Especially if you're going to be the first man in a room when clearing. When dealing with FMJ ammo, which is what the military uses, you have the problem of being too close to just start firing randomly. So, you are put in the position of retaining your weapon and subduing your attacker. Should you see him coming, there is probably a good chance of reacting, even if it's a butt-stroke to the head. But, if he was waiting behind a door, or came up through a crowd, you are basically forced into a H2H situation.

Top
#382254 - 02/17/08 06:29 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: Bushi_no_ki]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
again, I think that this, very specific, discussion has come up a half dozen times over the years. I think that you could say that equally good solutions could come up by either h2h or firearms for both solutions - with the proper training. the main difference, in my mind, is what your team mates are expecting - if your SOP is to go to h2h, then none of your team can help you. if your SOP is to open space and have a team mate respond with fire, then you are screwed if you don't have a funtioning team mate right there and then. I would hesitate to teach both, because then you have too much chance of one person closing to h2h and his friend shooting him in the back.

but that is just my opinion.

in any event - I am not sure, going back to the previous issue - that anybody should be putting navy cooks into a potition where they are clearing rooms.

Top
#382255 - 02/17/08 06:43 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: Bushi_no_ki]
karate_popo Offline
Member

Registered: 09/27/07
Posts: 154
Loc: NYC
one of the officers in my unit, said that he studied ninjistu in the military.. i think he was in the army, but not sure... anyone familiar with that?. i mean i know he is telling the truth, because he showed me some things.. then there is this guy in my martial arts class that was in the military as well and he is alot more advanced then i am and moved up quicker even though he had less time, so i assumed that was because of his military training.. not sure though..

Top
#382256 - 02/18/08 03:16 AM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: karate_popo]
Bushi_no_ki Offline
Veteran

Registered: 05/03/05
Posts: 1667
Loc: POM, Monterey CA
Karate, he's FOS. There is no Ninjutsu in the US military. Period. Unless he meant he studied it while he was in.

Globetrotter, if we have cooks clearing rooms then the $&*% has really hit the fan. That much is true.

Top
#382257 - 02/20/08 02:59 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: globetrotter]
laf7773 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 05/05/04
Posts: 4064
Loc: Limbo
Quote:

how many physical contacts have you been part of, witnessed or have personal knowledge of between an on duty military person and a non-american military person/citizen where firearms weren't part of the equation?




Personal experience...a few years ago, when i was a radar operator doing VBSS, i had a man try to take my holstered side arm. It was a compliant boarding and i was going over the ships paperwork when he tried to take my weapon, back then we all used thigh holsters. Fortunately i didn't have to rely on the training i received from the Navy. More recently my partner and i were attacked while on duty in town by males of "Middle Eastern decent" (later determined to be Syrian). This has happened 3 times in the last 9 months to me alone, there were about 4 or 5 other occasions where it happened to others from my department. Six months ago i was working event staff when one of our outside security patrols was attacked. The main issue here is in most situations off base we aren't allowed to be armed. We are only allowed to carry a concealed weapon for special events and the local authorities here severely limit the number of permits we are allowed to have. We currently only have 2 people allowed to carry in town for special events. In all of these cases the individuals didn't have any weapons and numbered typically 2-3 attackers but was for the most part a one-on-one situation. There were a couple of incidents where a glass bottle used and a "tire iron" although i think the last one was BS...long story. In all but two incidences the military involved were LEO, the other two were a personnel clerk and a yeoman (both paper pushers) but they all held their own and came away none the worse for wear mainly due to the training conducted as a group here. This isn't "Navy" H2H, just a small handful of us being allowed to give training about 3-4 times a month to those who happen to show up for PT that particular morning. As i said before the pitiful excuse for H2H our LEOs get is pointless, literally one week. They do one day of strikes/blocks, one day of weapon retention, one day of baton training and 2 days of control techniques where they only cover 5 arm locks...poorly.

Quote:

I think that we are looking at things from a totally different perspective




I agree completely. I'm just wondering if you have an issue with "cooks and drivers" being in the desert or the Navy in general being there (not saying you have anything against the Navy mind you). Here is my take on it. I don't see what it matters what their normal job is, they can and are still very capable of handling themselves in these situations. It's not like we are pulling some guy out of the galley, throwing him a gun and Kevlar and saying "here ya go, get to it". They are receiving training before going out. Currently IAs are going to Fort Jackson for what amounts to a mini boot camp. The training is only about 3 weeks long but it only focuses on the skills they need in combat. Personally i don't feel it's enough but at least it's something. They are being trained by the Army and in some cases sent to Army units.

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=35338&archive=true

At the time this article was published our guys were only getting 12 days of training but most were standing sentry duties. At first the program was terrible but they have done some to make it better.

Quote:

I have no argument with the facts on the ground, but I would suggest that the fact that blue water sailors are being used for infantry roles in the dessert is not good for the warmaking capacity of the military as a whole. what happens if we are faced with a naval crisis with china or india in 3 years, as an example?




It's actually going to have little impact actually. On average there are only a small handful of sailors being pulled from ships. The majority are coming from shore duty rotations. The logic behind it is this; we have several jobs in the Navy that are "over manned". This meaning we have some positions where when it's time to rotate to shore duty you either don't have a job on shore that translates to your job at sea or there are too many people already doing that job at shore. My old job was a prime example; once i left the ship i had a choice. i could either be an instructor and teach people to do my job or do something that had nothing what so ever to do with my job such as recruiting or taking a staff billet. The problem with that is taking something out of rate can pretty much kill your career so i took instructor duty. Unfortunately we were over staffed so i rarely got to see a class room which is why i volunteered for ASF and eventually converted. Any way the concept was to take these people who had basically nothing to do on shore duty and put them to use. There are some who are plucked from ships but far from enough to make an impact. Because of this our sea capabilities haven't suffered any.

Quote:

this comes back to my question above - as far as I am concerned, if you can say "I have seen 15 encounters where a cook with 6 hours training kicked the ass of a terrorist who jumped him on the way to the shower" then I have no more argument,




Well it wasn't 15 encounters it was two, it wasn't a cook but they were paper pushers and they didn't have 6 hours of training, it was more like 12-15 hours but they did handle themselves very well and neither had any previous training. They managed to come out of it unharmed minus a few scrapes and one was even able to hold one for the local police. It's not like they had one-on-one training or even a small group. There is generally about 20-30 people at these sessions and 4 or 5 of us working with them.

Quote:

very possibly - I won't dispute how good you are at your job. my personal experience is such that, if I had to chose a squad to ride with, I wouldn't go with somebody with your background, probrably. infantry isn't brain surgury- but I spent months doing things like changing magazines, clearing jammed ammo, falling on my face in the dirt, running uphill carrying weight, etc. 20 years later it is ingrained in my muscle memory. I find it very difficult to believe that that can be achieved in a few weeks.




What exactly is it you think we do? My rate is divided into 3 basic sections, law enforcement, mobile security and corrections. Our mobile security teams are nothing more than infantry. Thatís all they train during a 3 year tour. We deploy to Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Africa and we have teams that rotate through Bahrain to do ship security also. You seem to have this idea that the Army and Marines are the only ones able to do this type of work but your wrong. Our seabee battalions are nothing more than your 21 series MOS with a different name. I get the feeling that you feel the Army should stay in the dirt, the Navy should stay at sea and the Air Force should stick to fly byes. Unfortunately thatís not how it is and it hasn't been for a long time, all the services intermingle with is why we have pilots in all four services, we have ground troops in all four services, hell the Army had ships. At least one was still in Bahrain when i was first their in '98. There is nothing wrong with each service doing their part in other areas as long as they are properly trained. Unfortunately that doesn't always happen.

Quote:

I guess my main question is how to you know that they are doing no better or worse that the army and marines there?




The feed back i get from the Army and Marines there. We are one of the major support activities in the Med. and we get units from all services stopping through here both on their way in and out of the Gulf. Because of my position i'm responsible for giving the port brief to everyone who comes to this island that is in one way or another connected to the military so i get to talk to a lot of the people who are working with our sailors there. Obviously there are those who feel the same way, that we should stick to the ships but for the most part the responses have been positive.

Quote:

I would be genuinly interested in seeing the differences in casulties and in missions between infantry and re-trained navy.




So would i but unfortunately most of what i see these days comes from transient personnel. My job these days keeps me busy worrying about base integrity, threat assessments and stand off distances. The only thing keeping me off a desk for the next year is running event security and shore patrol. Hopefully in the next couple of months i'll get word back on protective services and where i'm going.

Quote:

look, go back and read my first post on this subject - if you are saying "these guys could get kidnapped and a little training will keep them safe" then I am all for this level of training. if you are saying "on patrol we need h2h" then I would say "no, if you know how to operate you firearm well enough, and if your patrol leader knows what he is doing, you shouldn't ever need h2h"




This goes back to what i said in a previous post. When on patrol, even in urban areas of Iraq, you can't just shoot someone who tries to grab your weapon anymore. There is one thing that has changed dramatically with this war compared to others. We are under the micro scope much more these days with the media coverage. Even if it was still SOP to shoot them the administration would soon cave to public out cry of excessive force, which is why some of the ROE have been modified to begin with. Yes there are still situations where there are no questions or gray areas and i agree fully that in those areas H2H should never come into play. Unfortunately though there are situations on patrol (not in a LEO status) where it is needed, because no one in the military does the same thing for their entire time in service it's reasonable to think everyone should receive the same H2H training so that when they rotate from their duty protecting the ammo dump or reactor where their ROE says they can simply shoot to a position where they have to have more justification than "they crossed that line i drew" to shoot someone they will have the basic ability to handle what ever situation is presented.

If it's ok for the Marines to train everyone in H2H regardless of their MOS why should it be different for everyone else? Isn't it true that regardless of your MOS in the Army you still have to know basic combat skills? I have a friend who was in the Army band but he was still required to know how to handle himself in a combat situation, how is this different?
_________________________
Enjoy life while you can, you never know when things will change.

Top
#382258 - 02/21/08 04:22 PM Re: Martial Arts in the Military? [Re: laf7773]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
Laf,

thanks for your reply


1. I understand pretty well where we are disagreeing - and it comes back to the idea of what the h2h is about. again, like I said before if we are talking about h2h for the self defence os military personal in the field, no matter who those people are, I agree that that is a good thing. you seem to be specifically talking about people defending themselves, almost exclusivly on an off duty basis - and yes, h2h is great to have for these people. but, in my opinion, that is almost like training people who work for a non-governmental org in the 3rd world, or an oil company - these are essentially people who have been put in a dangerous situation by their employer, not specifically military people in the course of their duties. does that make sense to you? and yes, I would agree that no matter what the person has inlisted as, and no matter what he has trained as, h2h training for self defense is a good thing.

when I think about the question of h2h for military, I am thinking about using h2h on duty, (non in a military police or personal protection ) enviroment. for instance, riot control, arresting enemies that are not armed with firearms, rescuing hostages, etc. and this is really a job for specialists.

2. I was on the ground during the first palestinian uprising (intafadah) which was, essentially, a situation where you faced huge numbers of rioters armed with sticks, rocks, the occasional knife and axe, and very rarely firearms. in was involved in hundreds of encounters that were, essentially, closed at touching range without the use of firearms. only in one case do I remember an actual martial art move being used - a guy who had studied thai boxing for 10 plus years kicked somebody who attacked his lt. with an axe, and killed the attacker with the kick. in all the other cases, the vast majority of the work was done with a 22 inch hardwood nighstick. also, only very rarly did we kill anybody with those sticks. so, if I were to decide whether to train infantry in h2h or in how to use a nightstick for patrolling, I would go with the stick.

2. again, as to whether or not non-combat personnel can handle themselves in these situations comes down to the differences in what we are talking about: if we are talking about them protecting themselves in off duty situations, then yes, they need to know how to protect themsevles, and you can train a cook, driver or radio operator to do so. one of the guys in my unit who ran the warehouse and distributed uniforms to new recruits was a champion martial artist and went on to run a martial arts school. he didn't want the army to get in the way of his training. if we are talking about the skill set needed to bust into a wanted mans house and arrest him in the middle of the night without having to fire shots, then I would suggest leaving that to the trained personnel.

3. I don't have anything against navy or airforce, but I do think that 3 weeks training is no where near enough to give to sombody who may be faced with an infantry firehight. I trained for something like 15 months, and then pretty much I did 3 months manuvers, 3 months tour for the rest of my service. so when I said that I wouldn't chose somebody with your profile to go on patrol with, it isn't something personal - I can't imagine that the basic operation of a firearm level is at what I would consider an acceptable level for a firefight.

4. I think that you are underestimating the impact of this on warfighting ability - in the same way I did when I was your age. it will affect how people inlist, what they expect from the army, the level of officers in 20 years, a lot of things.

5. I don't say "its ok for the marines to train h2h but not navy". lets break this down into 2 parts - everybody should be trained to defend themselves if the military is putting them into a situation where they are in harms way. but the job of the military isn't to defend itself, it defends itself so that it can carry out its mission.

I am not convinced that most combat soldiers, including marines, should be using h2h for their missions. that is what I am saying.

Top
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 >


Moderator:  Cord, Fletch1, MattJ, Reiki 




Action Ads
1.5 Million Plus Page Views
Monthly
Only $89
Details

Stun Guns
Variety of stun gun devices for your protection

Buy Pepper Spray
Worry about your family when you’re not around? Visit us today to protect everything you value.

Koryu.com
Accurate information on the ancient martial traditions of the Japanese samurai

C2 Taser
Protect yourself and loved ones from CRIME with the latest C2 Taser citizen model. Very effective.

 

 



Unbreakable Unbrella

krav maga