tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post4434238463809619060..comments2024-03-29T03:57:26.974-04:00Comments on Grim's Hall: An Interview with Women in the All-Army Military Combatives TournamentGrimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-35846899467700832782012-07-30T11:47:45.346-04:002012-07-30T11:47:45.346-04:00I had an interesting experience with combatives in...I had an interesting experience with combatives in Basic at Ft. Jackson in 92'. Before we began, my Drill SGT had us all list the various equipment we carried that could be used as a weapon. He then said, "so if you ever find yourself in combat with no ammunition, no bayonet, and no other options, use ANY of that before you use your hands. Now, let's get on with what I'm required to teach you."MikeDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-79065778088343759822012-07-29T16:27:26.722-04:002012-07-29T16:27:26.722-04:00On reading my comment above I find the need to cla...On reading my comment above I find the need to clarify a few points for the non-military amoung us:<br />1) Due to size a focus there is no accurate direct comparison between The Army and The Marine Corps. A more fair comparison could be made between the Ranger Battalions and The Corps but even that has it's limitations.<br />2) The culture of each organization is vastly different and has a huge impact on what I wrote above. (Very loosely it's Management v Leadership)<br />3) The 1 week timeline that the Army allows for Level 1 Combatives training would be sufficient if everyone showed up already in shape, trained to be aware of their body, it's limitations, and how to be aware if your opponent during the fight. They don't, accidents ensue. <br />4) If a service member in almost any Occupational Specialty gets out for any reason before their initial commitment the Nation looses money ($$ to train/work actually done). Some Occupations take even longer to recoup investment.<br /><br /> I'm typing tired so please forgive any typos. If there is confusion on what I have said please let me know.<br /><br /> William sends.Williamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-21123521792423822122012-07-29T16:10:13.166-04:002012-07-29T16:10:13.166-04:00What I find the most interesting, from my vantage,...What I find the most interesting, from my vantage, is the difference in actual injuries between MCMAP (Marines) and ACP (Army) from introductory training on. ACP is good for regularly injuring people, shoulders and elbows mostly in my experience, to the point of surgery, long term medical profile, and/or discharge. Given that Marines train to kill and Soldiers train to delay or tie up an opponent I would expect the results to be reversed. I can understand the "why" of it in that in many parts of the Army, Combatives training is voluntary, not mandatory, and that quality control is difficult if not impossible to maintain with the large numbers of both instructors and students. Add to this that the Level 1 (1st course) is one week long with many young headstrong men not used to real leadership many of whom have something to prove and injuries follow naturally. <br />What amazes me the most is that no one higher up the food chain has run the $$ on exactly what these injuries are costing the service in terms of disability, lost productivity, cost of medical care/surgery, and loss of functional service time when a soldier has to be dismissed from service before his/her obligation is up. I would think that someone would have noticed. But then again, the Army is a big place and ACP is just one of many programs...<br /><br /><br /> William sends.Williamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-23601430194500101572012-07-28T20:08:24.785-04:002012-07-28T20:08:24.785-04:00My own personal philosophy is closest to that of t...My own personal philosophy is closest to that of the Marine Corps, as you can probably tell. I want women to learn to fight, although I certainly don't intend to insist that they must fight, or must have natures that are readily capable of violence, in order to be good people who are worthy of respect. (I am far readier to insist that men fight to be good people, although I gladly except those with sincere religious objections: if you would rather give your life by dying for your right to be nonviolent, as the Quakers, I find that a courageous and respectable position.)<br /><br />But if a woman does wish to learn, I want to help her learn. Even if she cannot outright defeat a man in a fair fight, she can learn to escape from his grasp. She can also learn how to un-level the playing field in her favor through the use of weapons and tactics designed to give the smaller an advantage. <br /><br />If you want her to learn to do that, you've got to give her -- as the original post says -- all she can handle and a little more. Learning where the breaking point is marks an important part of the lesson; then, learning how to structure the battle so as not to get to that point if at all possible. <br /><br />That's the introduction to the military science, really: everything follows from it. Maneuver, commitment, concentration of force, cover and concealment, proficiency with your weapons, all of it arises from that principle. It is why the smaller can sometimes beat the stronger, and why defeat in detail is possible even for the largest force.Grimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-21254272128792644802012-07-28T19:37:50.223-04:002012-07-28T19:37:50.223-04:00The difference is largely the one sketched. The M...The difference is largely the one sketched. The Marine Corps intentionally puts smaller Marines up against larger ones in pugil stick matches, and larger ones up against more than one opponent. The intention is to force you to overcome unfair odds, and push you to the point of failure so you have a sense of where that point happens to be.<br /><br />The Army... does not, at least, not for the majority of the force. Certainly some of the combat arms have much more punishing standards, as do the special operations forces. The Army is concerned with maintaining a much larger force, which means that they cannot require the same standards, but must take steps to ensure that the only-slightly-above average person can succeed.<br /><br />The Air Force and the Navy aren't concerned with hand-to-hand combat as such (excepting special operators again). They tend to treat these things as sports; boxing is big in the Navy, or used to be (and also segregates by weight class).Grimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-62888186422436045172012-07-28T19:29:12.472-04:002012-07-28T19:29:12.472-04:00The Army wants to build MY confidence? I doubt it...The Army wants to build MY confidence? I doubt it. When it comes to combat eligibility, I'm an un-person -- no relevant capabilities or attitudes.<br /><br />My question is more theoretical. I wondered how the armed services dealt with the question of disparity in size in combat when the complicating factor of sex was not at issue.Texan99https://www.blogger.com/profile/10479561573903660086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-78000844567587166212012-07-28T18:43:00.897-04:002012-07-28T18:43:00.897-04:00A knife in the hands of a skilled opponent....
I ...<i>A knife in the hands of a skilled opponent....</i><br /><br />I agree, but there is a distinct emphasis on that skilled part. For the civilian environment, where the skill generally is in the showy-flippy claptrap of a butterfly knife, I actually prefer an encounter with a knife-armed...person...to one with an unarmed person. The one with the knife both overestimates the value of his blade, and he actually thinks that's the only weapon he's got. Sure, I'm going to get cut, but he's going to get mauled. It's also pretty easy to tell whether the guy knows what he's doing with a knife.<br /><br /><i>...Army has abandoned bayonet training.... Marine Corps, on the other hand, has conducted several bayonet charges in recent years....</i><br /><br />The rap on the VC and the NVA--possibly apocryphal--was that they folded more readily against a bayonet charge than a rifle assault.<br /><br />Eric HinesE Hineshttp://aplebessite.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-58436436954198177712012-07-28T17:19:46.924-04:002012-07-28T17:19:46.924-04:00That's what guns are for.
It's also what ...<i>That's what guns are for.</i><br /><br />It's also what knives are for. A knife in the hands of a skilled opponent can obviate any weight or strength advantage, because it greatly elevates the severity of the strikes or stabs you do create. And you should <i>always</i> have a knife handy, unless you're actually in an airport or courthouse.<br /><br />Tex, Eric B. is right that the Army is chiefly thinking that you won't really be using this stuff in combat -- at most (as William says) you might try to hold them until your buddy gets there. As William says, the Army wants to build your confidence, but not get hurt. The Marine Corps wants to teach you to kill people close up.<br /><br />By the same token, the Army has abandoned bayonet training. The Marine Corps, on the other hand, has conducted several bayonet charges in recent years. Not only do they continue to train for it, they seem to look for excuses to actually do it. :)Grimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-7700324473242025672012-07-28T15:39:59.599-04:002012-07-28T15:39:59.599-04:00I noticed the shift from ACP to MCMAP and the inhe...I noticed the shift from ACP to MCMAP and the inherent conceptual differences therein. The ACP is a wonderful system for keeping the Bn Aid Station in business (my personal opinion). As for a combat effective martial art it's conceptual base is "They guy who wins is the guy who's buddy gets there first" and that's an inherently poor starting point. MCMAP on the other hand is rooted first and foremost in surviving the encounter (killing the bad guy) and then addresses the other less lethal options. <br /> As for women in infantry units... I don't know of any historical examples of it working for reasons covered above as well as the psychological impact of men dealing with women in line units.<br /> <br /> William sends.Williamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-2630448427410418542012-07-28T15:21:58.889-04:002012-07-28T15:21:58.889-04:00That's what guns are for.
Sometimes you don&#...<i>That's what guns are for.</i><br /><br />Sometimes you don't have a gun. It's why serious training in unarmed combat is necessary--for civilians as well as for soldiers: Krav Maga and haganah. <br /><br />These also let soldiers--or victims--fight above their weight class in a live situation with a chance of winning.<br /><br />Eric HinesE Hineshttp://aplebessite.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-75669427734778881252012-07-28T15:03:51.274-04:002012-07-28T15:03:51.274-04:00That's what guns are for.That's what guns are for.Eric Blairnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-47302995571213204752012-07-28T14:24:15.385-04:002012-07-28T14:24:15.385-04:00What I get from this is that people will come to m...What I get from this is that people will come to more sensible conclusions if you don't exclude them from competition, and they are forced to face the evidence of their own experience.<br /><br />Do the men all fight within their weight class? Do they also get some training in what to do if they're unlucky to come up in battle against a much bigger opponent?Texan99https://www.blogger.com/profile/10479561573903660086noreply@blogger.com