PDA

View Full Version : Marine Martial Arts....why not?


VaughnT
June 3, 2002, 08:47 AM
I caught a few minutes of a show the other day (the making of a marine) in which they showed recruits going through Parris Island.

One interesting part was where they were trained in the Marine Corp Martial Art style, which they said was a collection of moves from dozens of "traditional" styles.

This got me to wondering why we don't simply use the fighting techiques developed by our military instead of what some might consider the more esoteric stuff like Kung Fu. I mean to say, the MMA was developed to be taught fast to people with little or know previous experience, and to end a fight as quickly as possible.

Admittedly, I don't know anything more about it than what I saw on that program, but the principle is sound. All of our fighting forces have developed systems of hand combat that seem, to my untrained eye, very good and very simple to learn. What's wrong with studying SEAL H2H or Green Beret Empty Hand or Marine Corp Martial.... ? Is it just that there aren't any schools around to teach it like there are for the oriental arts? Are the military styles less than they seem?

I'm curious.

C.R.Sam
June 3, 2002, 10:26 AM
Finger thinkin.....

Some schools availabe.
Very difficult to sort out the real deal ones unless you know.

Probably tough to make a buck doin it.
Hard to train realistically, expensive protective gear or very high injury rate. Liability insurance probably pricey.

Hard to make money with it from spectators. Good confrontation should be over in the first move. (Musashi)

Some really nasty service schools geared toward very small groups of students. Far more intense than what recruits get.

Civillian counterparts quite doable if the students can afford it.

Sam

Skorzeny
June 3, 2002, 11:42 AM
Any kind of "hand-to-hand" combat training for regulary military forces is for morale value only at best.

Skorzeny

guncoach
June 3, 2002, 01:22 PM
they kept me at the mp school ft gordon in 58/59 3 or4 months
then transfered to deutschland as mp at 7th corp hq;; i promise you what we taught and learned worked in the street taking down a belligerant.... out of uniform it worked well in the street
no need of baton... it wasnt for morale as far as i saw it ..it was real

krept
June 3, 2002, 02:21 PM
I think I caught a part of that program and the female instructor said they are incorporating Muay Thai, submission fighting, etc. as part of the curriculum now. I heard one of them talking about thai kicks, but then on the demo move that the recruits were doing was a basic foot sweep, then double stomp to head of downed opponent.

Looked like the same ol' old school to me, but what do I know about HTH in war? I know that in MMA I'd tend to go for mount and make faceburgers or go for a sub, but in war that same move might get me shot in the back from the enemy's buds from 200 yards away. Stable base = easy target?

Suffice to say I'd rather learn HTH techniques from those who actively compete in MMA than those who claim to have taught for military. Even then, who is to say that someone with mondo skills or experience is a good teacher?

Others like Kung-Fu because of appearance? Philosophy? Social acceptance? Leaning another culture? Tradition (dad took it)?Who knows. Even some decent KF guys that compete in MMA (crosstrained of course). Some traditional Karate guys are wreckers as we have seen. Soccermoms might not like the look of some MMA instructors or students and not let their kids go. Billion reasons why traditional MA are here to stay, they will just integrate MMA into the weak point of their system and probably emphasize common techniques.

madgrad
June 3, 2002, 10:31 PM
In todays battlefields soldiers are not expected to use Hand to Hand combat. So it's considered an afterthought. Thus all your hand to hand in the military is pretty much rendered into a confidence building exercise, with no one getting hurt.

The Marine Corps Martials Arts programs has just basically been desighed as a way to appeal to todays recruits who took Karate, Kempo, Judo, Tae Kwon Do, etc. as kids or wanted too. And, give them a confidance boost.

The Army does this a little differently by jumping on the BJJ Bandwagon since it's the new popular thing. If you look at the Armys new hand to hand combat manuals it is now a Watered down version of Brazillian Ju Jitsu. The Army also jumped on the Tae Kwon Do, band wagon in the past too (if this is any indicator of a future behavior to come)

If you look at both services they've gotten ridden of Boxing completely (One, of the easiest, and most practical self defense systems to learn )due to people getting killed or getting hurt.

The training these recruits receive today is not to desighned to make them into unstoppable fighters or killers. It's just to give them the confidence, to make them more aggressive on the battlefield, and lessen the the chance that if they're caught in a H2H situatioun they'll try something, and not freeze up.

To truly condition someone to be a fighter it takes consistant training, time, and money. As well as the desire of the recruit to train. These are things that all branches of the Military do not have a surplus of.

That is why in todays military there is no Hand to Hand training for virtually any recruit after basic training except for SF,and Ranger types etc. Even then it's just a cursory grab bag to train from. I.E. "Here it is guy's take what you like"

The reason I know this is most of the guys who've been in these units, or have been in the military. Have told me what actually goes on today, when I train with them. Thier experiances are pretty much mimmic mine when it comes to this subject.

Enough said for now, but this my humble honest opinion.

Powderman
June 3, 2002, 10:54 PM
That is why in todays military there is no Hand to Hand training for virtually any recruit after basic training except for SF,and Ranger types etc. Even then it's just a cursory grab bag to train from. I.E. "Here it is guy's take what you like"

Sorry, but I beg to differ.

My son is a Marine stationed in Hawaii. He says that they go through MCMAP (Marine Corps Martial Arts Program) training on a regular basis.

As for being just for morale purposes, while he was home on leave, my son showed me rather painfully how to trap, takedown, and kill an opponent who is trying to disarm you.

Skorzeny
June 4, 2002, 12:09 AM
guncoach:
i promise you what we taught and learned worked in the street taking down a belligerant.... out of uniform it worked well in the street
no need of baton... it wasnt for morale as far as i saw it ..it was real Trusting that you are telling the truth, please read your own writing - "out of uniform it worked well in the street" (emphases mine) and contrast it with what I wrote: "Any kind of "hand-to-hand" combat training for regulary military forces is for morale value only at best." See anything there?

Powderman:
As for being just for morale purposes, while he was home on leave, my son showed me rather painfully how to trap, takedown, and kill an opponent who is trying to disarm you. (emphasis mine) And because your son showed you so painfully he must be able to do it to the crew of the next T-72 that rolls through Kuwait, right?

BTW, I know lots of cool, flashy Aikido locks and throws that work amazingly well during demonstrations to impress my friends and family. It doesn't mean I'm going to Kote Gaeshi my way out of a firefight let alone an artillery duel.

Skorzeny

Powderman
June 4, 2002, 02:14 AM
Of course not!

Only a fool would bring empty hand techniques to a knife fight, let alone a gunfight. The only sane and sensible thing to do is to engage at the maximum distance possible. Seeing as how my son is in Artillery, that's quite a long range--of course, not taking into account such unfair tactics as counterbattery fire, triangulation, recon aircraft, or chemical or nuclear attack.

But, if you are engaged or employed in a profession that might bring you into close quarters with someone who has the intent of causing you extreme pain and discomfort, it helps to have an edge. No, empty hand techniques seldom play out as well as they are demonstrated. I know from first hand experience that any physical altercation can (and most likely will) turn into a ground fight. From what I've seen so far, the Marines spend a good amount of time training for just that--close in, dirty, savage ground fighting, with no quarter asked or given. Like I said, it's just an edge that might make the difference.

I still take comfort in that takedown, though. Why? Because he's 5'11" and 170, and I'm 6'2" and 305--with a 52 inch chest and a 42 inch waist. (Got to lose weight!!) I was NOT being gentle with him when I tried to take the rifle away, either.

Still, I agree with you.

madgrad
June 4, 2002, 03:09 AM
Well, I'm glad to see there is an exception to the rule Powderman.

fix
June 4, 2002, 08:49 AM
madgrad, last time I checked, the Corps still does boxing in Recruit Training. This does not continue in the Fleet, but impromptu boxing matches are arranged occasionally as a morale booster. The old LINE training was a Fleet requirement much like the new MCMAP. I've heard plenty of folks knocking LINE and MCMAP on internet boards, and I suspect that they have no experience with either. I seriously doubt that any of these "internet tough guys" would volunteer to be on the receiving end of either technique.

Skorzeny
June 4, 2002, 03:20 PM
Frankly, I'd rather that the military spent more time for rifle, pistol and bayonet (used as a knife) training than H2H training.

Having said that, I don't necessarily have problems with the military doing H2H training - I merely object and disagree when some people elevate it to mystical levels of super fighting godhood (TM). This is laughable since even trained martial artists who spend countless hours training often cannot "pull off" techniques in "street" encounters. Somehow when you slap a few of these technques together and train raw recruits (barely beyond teenage years) for limited duration, it gets billed as a super fighting system because, golly, it is given by the Corps!

I say again, H2H training is more appropriate for police officers, who may have to restrain suspects, and for civilians who may be unarmed or underarmed because of legal restrictions.

For the vast majority of military officers (aside from those with special civilian-like roles like the MPs or those who may have close quarters contact with enemy like special forces or downed pilots), it is for morale value only - it serves no or little purpose.

Skorzeny

fix
June 4, 2002, 03:55 PM
Somehow when you slap a few of these technques together and train raw recruits (barely beyond teenage years) for limited duration, it gets billed as a super fighting system because, golly, it is given by the Corps!

Maybe you didn't bother to read my earlier post. MCMAP and LINE training are not exclusive to Recruit Training. It continues in the Fleet.

The MCMAP program also includes knife fighting, both offensive and defensive. LINE does not. I don't recall anyone billing it as a "super figting system", because it simply is not. I do seem to recall seeing you step in and start trashing it the last few times it has been mentioned. What it is, is a very simple, effective program that can be mastered quickly and used with great success. As I said earlier, I don't know of many folks who would want to be on the receiving end.

Skorzeny
June 4, 2002, 05:53 PM
I do seem to recall seeing you step in and start trashing it the last few times it has been mentioned.I don't recall what I wrote about it - can you provide some details?

I trash pretty much every "martial art" including every system I studied. They are often blown up to be what they are not, LINE included. Heck, I love practicing Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. That doesn't mean I think that the Rangers should be training in it as a part of military training curriculum, other than for "morale value" or this "warrior spirit."
What it is, is a very simple, effective program that can be mastered quickly and used with great success."Effective" for what? "Used with great success" in what situations or context?
As I said earlier, I don't know of many folks who would want to be on the receiving end.But then again, would anyone like to be on the receiving end of any kind of pain (except masochists)? I mean, I don't like to be "on the receiving end" of a .22LR round either, but few argue that this is a "manstopper."

I don't like to me on the receiving end of Wing Chun trapping techniques either, but even many Wing Chun technicians say that many such techniques have limited effectiveness in "street fights" whatever those may be.

Skorzeny

Double Eagle
June 4, 2002, 07:35 PM
The poster who responded with the fact that any unnarmed combat for todays armed forces is primarily for morale (and fitness) reasons is right on the money.

The fact that so many people today believe the MMA phenomenon and Brazillian Jiu-jitsu to be the pinnacle of MA development thus explains why the armed forces are capitalising on this enthusiasm and integrating it.

Just don't get confused. MMA is about as far from the reality of armed combat a soldier will ever experience. Groundfighting and going for juji gatame becomes laughable when soldiers are armed with knives and entrenching tools at worst, sidearms and rifles at best. It's a sport, and it's hardly full of the best ways to end a fight quickly because of the very fact that it is a sport.

Personally, I think there was nothing wrong with the old OSS Fairbairn and Sykes training. It didn't pretend to be anything it wasn't.

fix
June 5, 2002, 08:47 AM
"Effective" for what? "Used with great success" in what situations or context?

Effective on the battlefield when loaded down with equipment that restricts your movement. Effective in typical self defense situations against the typical attacker on the street. The typical attacker being the loud drunk at the local pub, the shifty eyed mugger, or the occasional fellow serviceman who has taken a wrong turn. Nobody is suggesting that Marines leave boot camp ready to take on Jackie Chan. What I am suggesting is that the training is meeting the requirements laid out by the Marine Corps. Is it a morale booster? Maybe for some. I never particularly enjoyed it. Is it good for physical fitness? It certainly can't hurt, but Marines as a group tend to be in pretty good shape anyway. Is it effective in it's intended role? Absolutely.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. It's obvious that you know better, and I am just an uninformed nitwit.:rolleyes:

Gomez
June 5, 2002, 10:22 AM
Interesting thread.

The MCMA was conceived as more akin to a traditional martial art rather than close combat. It has colored T-shirts awarded rather than belts. To progress, the marine must complete X hours in certain specified areas. Must have attained certain rank before being allowed to attain a certain color T-shirt, etc. Combatives is not what is was designed for.

The current version of the US Army Combatives focuses entirely on BJJ. It is the worst FM the Army has fielded in years. The demonstrators aren't even wearing combat boots in the pics. They are wearing grappling shoes! No webgear, no combat boots, just BDUs and grappling/wrestling footwear. Yeah, OK.

Combatives training in the Army has never been high priority. The units who train in Combatives do so, because their Commander or NCOs realize the validity of unarmed skills, not because the Army has a clue. I'm not certain who had the greatest influence on the current Army manual, but I'd be willing to guess it was the Ranger Bats, particularly the one based out of Fort Lewis, WA. I know that they it was two Ranger NCOs who were committed martial artists who spearheaded the last revamp of FM 21-150 and it was pretty well done, with a definite FMA influence. But this new one has gone off the deep end.

So anyway, the Ranger Bats and the SF Teams that are doing high-speed unarmed skills development are doing it in spite of the Army doctrine, not because of it. A great example of this is that when John Holschen [now of Insights Training Center] was assigned to 1st SFGroup at Ft. Lewis, he was put in charge of developing a simple, easy to learn, easy to retain combatives program for 1st group. He did. They had a simple, rock solid program for a good little while. He left, Commanders changed, priorities shifted, program goes bye-bye.

When I was stationed at 25th ID(Light), some companies did combatives on a weekly basis, some NEVER trained combatives.

Skorzeny
June 5, 2002, 04:59 PM
fix:
We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. It's obvious that you know better, and I am just an uninformed nitwit.I will defer to YOUR superior knowledge of the centrality of unarmed combat in today's battlefield if you would kindly point out some examples of the following:Effective on the battlefield when loaded down with equipment that restricts your movement. Fair?

Skorzeny

SGTC
June 5, 2002, 11:00 PM
I'm not sure how many of you posting are active duty Marines. I am, and I will try to add some facts to this discussion. Feel free to argue with opinions, but these ARE the facts.
First, let me tell you what the Commandant had in mind when he conceived MCMAP. As a Vietnam vet he knew that the Vietnamese almost never assaulted ROK Marine positions. The reason is that the ROK Marines were, justifiably, feared for their hand to hand abilities. He envisions the same thing for the future of the Corps. So, yes in that sense it is psyops or a morale booster or whatever phrase you want to use. It could get inside the head of the enemy just like the white sleeves and black boots in Beirut, or the name Devil Dog in WWI. Unlike other HTH styles or those of other services, MCMAP has the full backing and funding from the highest authority in the Corps. Hell, there is even a new school house dedicated to training the trainers.
Second, all who say modern war is fought with guns and missiles are technically correct. However, how often are we found in police actions instead of war. The correct term is Military operations other than war (MOOTW), but the result is the same. We find ourselves in situations where it is not politically feasible to shoot everything in sight. We all have had to stand guard duties and we have to be trained to deal with aggressive behavior without our rifles. Every Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) trains for things like riot control and use of less lethal force. Some people may not like the global police force we have become, but it is reality. It is how we fight, so it is how we must train.
Third, MCMAP is an ongoing process. Recently orders have been distributed that state Marines are required to do 5 hours of PT every week. Two of those hours must be dedicated to MCMAP and combat conditioning. There is a belt progression that will carry a Marine through their career. Starting with the basically qualified recruit who wears a tan riggers belt and going up through the black belt instructor trainers.
Do I think MCMAP is the ultimate art? No, of course not, there is no such thing. It, and the combat conditioning that goes along with it, is designed to teach Marines to operate effectively in close combat when they are dog tired and physically exhausted. It is good at that.
I hope I shed some light on the subject. For further info you can check the Marine Corps' Martial Arts Center of Excellence at https://www.tbs.usmc.mil/Pages/Martial_Arts/Default.htm

ATeaM
June 5, 2002, 11:41 PM
"it is for morale value only - it serves no or little purpose."

I wouldn't call boosting morale serving little or no purpose. More boxing/Muay Thai/Submission should be encouraged over that padded jousting with football helmets crap. I think a "ToughMan" type competition can tell you alot about a guys character when faced with a "fight or flight" adrenal response situation.

fix
June 6, 2002, 08:47 AM
Skorzeny,

Examples of what? Equipment that restricts your movement? Lets see...

LBV, Rucksack, Flak Vest, LPU, SV2, G-Suit, MOPP Suit, wet suit, dry suit, cold weather gear, etc.

Need more? What's the point in it? I know what I know about H2H training in the Marine Corps, because I've been there and done it. I get the distinct impression that your knowledge (or lack thereof) comes from books and TV. I have no desire to debate the issue with you any further. Unless you are the CMC's drinking buddy, your opinion on the matter is of no consequence.

Powderman
June 6, 2002, 02:40 PM
I think that there is one thing all of the "experts" posting here do not realize...........

To use an example, a police department/academy has the same problem, although to a much smaller scale. The task? Take a group of people who may or may not have ever fired a firearm in their lives, and somehow get them proficient enough within the small time available in the academy to not only carry their sidearm with confidence, but also proficient enough to use it to save their lives, or the lives of others.

Likewise, the defensive tactics that are taught are of the same variety--simple, easy to learn techniques that will allow the individual officer a fighting chance when they get into a hands-on situation.

The US Armed Forces, in teaching hand to hand combat, has the same problem, in spades. They have even LESS time allotted to teach than many police academies. This is balanced by the fact that police departments teach to SUBDUE, using the minimum force necessary; the Armed Forces teaches how to incapacitate or kill, going balls to the wall as needed.

Now, for those bashing MCMAP, there are a few things that you don't seem to understand. This was also stated, however in a different way, by SGTC, above.

First, unless you have experienced it or are REALLY close to someone who has, there are few things in life that are as terrifying as rolling around on the ground with someone who really, REALLY wants to HURT you. Badly. To the point of death.

How many of you folks out there have experienced the feeling of utter fear and helplessness that occurs in the first moments of an all-out attack? It literally can rob the strength from your body; this is what puts a person at extreme risk. If you do NOT overcome this terror within a second or two, your chances of surviving the attack are slim and none. I don't care what black belt you hold, or how many years of dojo experience you have.

When you experience your first real world attack, you WILL turn into a jellyfish, even if it is only for a second. You can put it in the bank, sportsfans.

Thus, the Armed Forces has a double barrier to overcome. First, the gentility that is bred into us as civilians must be eliminated. You must lose all hesitance about hurting another human being. Second, you must be taught to inflict grave bodily injury QUICKLY, with maximum effect, while under great physical strain from other sources, such as field gear, individual weapon, etc.

The ONLY branch of Service that does that well is the US Marine Corps. This sounds funny coming from a career Army NCO. But, here are the facts:

The other branches will take you and fit you in somewhere, if you have the desire to enlist.

To get into the Corps, YOU have to prove that you are worthy of training. The USMC has an entry level standard of fitness higher than any other branch of service. No exaggeration here, folks!

You must be physically able to pass the Advanced PFT in the Army BEFORE you even enlist in the Marine Corps! And believe me, waivers are few and far between.

When you go through boot, guess what? Take the normal boot camp curriculum, add parachuting, and what do you have? The US Army Ranger school. And these are everyday Marines, folks! Both men AND women. Unlike any other branch, you get absolutely NO slack for being a female.

MCMAP is an ongoing process. You learn the basics in boot camp. You continue through training, and at your duty assignment. 5 hours of PT per week? Believe me, most units in the Corps exceed that without even trying. And a LOT of it is down in the mud, face in the dirt ground fighting.

I say this without exaggeration: I was responsible for teaching soldiers how to stay alive. I trained lots of soldiers. I was very good at what I did.

I saw my son turn down $25,000 cash in bonuses from the Army to enlist in the Marine Corps.

The US Marine Corps turned a gentle 18 year old high school grad who weighed 220 lbs at entry into 170 pounds of rock hard combat steel.

I am a police officer. I have had my share of physical differences with some pukes I have encountered on patrol. As an Army NCO, I was taught how to fight and survive. As a kid, I grew up on the south side of Chicago, and fought on a regular basis. As I mentioned before, I am 6'2" and weigh right at 300 lbs. I bench 200 lb for reps, and push 500 lb on the leg press.

I have been told that I would be REALLY good at football.

My son dealt with my attack like yesterday's garbage. And, like I said before, I was NOT gentle with him, either.

So, I'm here to tell you--MCMAP works. No, it ain't glamourous. It isn't flashy. And, you don't train in a dojo, either.

But it will save your life, and bring you home to your family. And in the end, that's what counts.

Skorzeny
June 7, 2002, 10:40 AM
fix:
LBV, Rucksack, Flak Vest, LPU, SV2, G-Suit, MOPP Suit, wet suit, dry suit, cold weather gear, etc.You keep avoiding my question. I would like you to find me some examples when any form of unarmed fighting training has been demonstrated to be...Effective on the battlefield when loaded down with equipment that restricts your movement.... to the extent that it should be taught to those other than "special" troops (MPs, Special Forces, etc.). Again, my argument isn't that these are completely useless - it is rather that since unarmed combat rarely if ever occurs for "normal" troops, the time is spent better otherwise - it's odd to me that troops nowadays get very little training time with pistols while spending time on H2H based on the claim that there might be CQBs.
I get the distinct impression that your knowledge (or lack thereof) comes from books and TV.And you'd be wrong.
I have no desire to debate the issue with you any further. Unless you are the CMC's drinking buddy, your opinion on the matter is of no consequence.Having failed to answer my question, dismiss me. That's fine - shows how lacking your arguments are (I suppose in YOUR OWN lack of knowledge, anyone who is not a drinking buddy of CMC would be "of no consequence" - shows how little you know of how programs and equipment are adopted).

Powderman:

Police and military have (or should have) different missions and different philosophies regards to use of deadly violence, which makes it more plausible for the former to spend their valuable, and limited, training time on unarmed fighting.

SGTC:
The reason is that the ROK Marines were, justifiably, feared for their hand to hand abilities.Having worked extensively with the ROK forces, I can tell you that such was NOT the reason why they were feared. They were feared during Vietnam due to their ability to retaliate against civilian population with measures that were, and are, unthinkable for the US forces. Where there were ambushes against ROK forces, there was not another later - because ROK pacified the villages and areas near which such ambushes occurred (and which presumably aided such ambushes).
However, how often are we found in police actions instead of war. The correct term is Military operations other than war (MOOTW), but the result is the same.So far, this is the most articulate, yet succinct defense I've seen of unarmed fighting training.

The issue of MOOTW is, though, a whole another bag of discussions, isn't it?

Skorzeny

fix
June 7, 2002, 12:09 PM
I can think of a dozen things that the military trains for that they've never encountered in combat to date. Does that mean we should wait until after it happens to prepare for it???

it's odd to me that troops nowadays get very little training time with pistols while spending time on H2H based on the claim that there might be CQBs.

Why is it so odd? 90% of todays troops are not going to be carrying a pistol. They have Rifles, bayonets, knives and then it's just the hands. Therefore, H2H takes precedence over pistol training. On the issue of the CMC's involvement...the Corps is very small. Very few things happen that the CMC and his immediate staff are not fully aware of.

I apologize for my tone earlier. We're just simply not going to see eye to eye on this issue.

krept
June 7, 2002, 12:15 PM
In defense of unarmed fighting training...

I'll try to keep it short and before anyone gets excited let me say that all of my older male relatives have served in the armed forces, father made full bird in USMC (infantry), so if any of the below comes off as anti Marine, lets pass on the flames.

In the late 80s and early 90s I did a lot of running around on the streets of Oceanside, CA at night. For those not familiar, Oceanside is the closest city south of Camp Pendleton. O'side is a notorious place (or was back then) for drugs, gangs, prostitution, etc. Also a place where Marines from Pendleton would go to have a good time on the weekends.

It suffices to say that I was witness to no less than 8 fights between the Marines and locals in the area, most of whom were hobos that claimed to be Crips, probably so they wouldn't get messed with. Anyhow, all but one of those fights the local ended up giving the Marine the beat down. The one Marine that one the fight that I saw had a black silk jacket with an embroidered dragon with the big OKINAWA letters on it.

He actually stepped in on a fight because the local "gang" guy had outjabbed a Marine, tripped him and was starting to put some serious hurt on him (repeated punches from a halfmount, both were clueless about groundfighting and it showed). Everyone got ****** (5 or so marines, only 1 local guy) and said for the guy to stop but he didn't, so the Okinawa guy shoved him off. Local guy was like 6'3" and probably 175 or so. Marine took off jacket, got into deep karate stance. Local guy came in jabbing and Marine did a spinning heel kick to local's grill. KO on the spot.

All the other fights the Marines were pretty much fighting just like you see in high school or hockey fights. Left hand clinching, right hand doing the pounding. They all ended up getting out pounded.

Now keep in mind that some hard core training goes on at Pendleton. Sniper school, maybe some BUDs stuff? Mom's boyfriend was enlisted in 1st MEU (was IMAF back then) and did some dummy ordinance stuff in the harbor at Del MAr so I know there was BUD stuff going on. I digress. Suffice to say that they had to have HTH training.

Flash forward to Arizona, last three or so years. Two of my buddies have never trained in MMA, but I have showed them a thing or two and yes they have seen those "unrealistic" UFCs, etc.

Well, one of them was in two fights and the other in one fight, all separate incidents against gangmembers. Not the hobo type but the hardcore tattooed "whassap ese?" type. All three fights ended up in the clinch, buddies got the mount and then made hamburger out of their opponents (all of whom instigated the fight, one even suckerpunched a friend out of the blue, grabbed his girlfriends er... rear).

Sorry for the long post. My points:

- MMA works on the street. Nothing can be effective 100% of the time, but it won the fights for my buds.

- Marines, I haven't heard of CQC in "war" that involved HTH or knife fighting. Ever. BUT, Marines are people that go out into the world also and can get into fights when not at "war." They can get beaten up stabbed shot mugged, whatever. I would say that in the best interest of the Corps that they should be incorporating MMA style techniques, to save their troops cans on the street, if anything. Very lucky that the fights I witnessed in Oside didn't end up worse.

D.W. Drang
June 7, 2002, 02:48 PM
I don't understand why anyone would think that training soldiers and Marines to fight would be a problem. Maybe you think they should attend LTG Claudia "Hillary Clone" Kennedy's "Consideration For Others" training instead? Would that be a better use of their time?
Even if they never actually use the hand to hand training, it still can serve as physical and mental conditioning, it will still build a person's confidence in their ability to cope, there will still be esprit and morale advantages, and only a Clintonite would think that putting military personnel through aggresiveness training was a bad idea!
In 20 years, 3 months, and 3 days of Army service the most fun training I went through was the 7th Infantry Division (Light)'s Rites of Passage--hand to hand--I felt the other guy's garrotte for 2 weeks, but he told ne the same--bayonet, demo... It was GREAT!!!

Gomez
June 7, 2002, 03:41 PM
Reading D. W.'s post, I realized that no one has mentioned it yet, but the "Consideration For Others" training is built INTO the MCMA program. Take a look at the training hours breakdown, it should be on the website that SGT C provided. Remember one of the design goals for the MCMA program is to inculcate certain warrior values into our young marines, values that they are not bringing with them from life experience. [If we don't train our children, the government will do it for us. Any bets on who can do a better job of it?]

D.W. Drang
June 7, 2002, 06:04 PM
Quoth Gomez: ...the "Consideration For Others" training is built INTO the MCMA program PLEASE tell me you're kidding!
Or at least that the Marines hae something called the same but that isn't so Mr Rogers Touchy-Feely "First Sergeant's gonna puke" as the Army's COOT!

madgrad
June 7, 2002, 10:21 PM
I've just seen the Marine Corp Martial Arts Site. I haven't seen any of the tecnniques yet to be sure of it. But, the " Character Development" list reeks suspiciously of your niehborhood Mc Dojo meddleing as well as the inclusiuon of your of all the politically correct programs in this training to get budget $$$ from Congress for it exist.


IMHO

What has my Military come too. I harken back to the days when we just had the Russians, and North Koreans to worry about. And, your simple mission as a Soldier was to kill people, and break things without all the Politically Correct B.S. that comes with it nowadays.

fix
June 10, 2002, 08:35 AM
Erick,

Spot on. Core values are one of the most important parts of military service.

Matt Wallis
June 10, 2002, 09:28 AM
Marine took off jacket, got into deep karate stance. Local guy came in jabbing and Marine did a spinning heel kick to local's grill. KO on the spot.

Guess that guy never heard that kicks, especially high spinning kicks, don't work in street fights. What was he thinking!? :cool:

Matt

madgrad
June 10, 2002, 09:58 PM
I have always belived that CORE values were to be installed in Basic Training by a good DS.

INMHO

I think the Drill Seargents nowadays aren't allowed to break down, and get the "Society" out of recruits, like they used to. Hence, all the Scandals.

If we wanted to get good CORE values in our recruits, we should have Full Metal Jacket video tapes passed out enmasse to all Drill Seargants as a training manual for them on what a perfect DS looks like....

shy_man
June 11, 2002, 06:07 AM
When I was in the Marine Basic Class, I consider the Obstacles to be a part of body and mind building. I always remember my drill instructor of being keep telling us that your specialty is to kill.

My point here is, any school of martial arts condition your mind to be invulnerable, developed your morale and confidence if it comes to hand to hand combat. But in the real world it is too different. Take for instance a two boxer, the current champion seems invincible, but how come they were also beaten by a challenger. Which these two boxer came from different school with different trainer.
None is so called the best or effective kind of martial arts. The ruth to the matter is, mostly MA schools now are for commercial purposes. And also, there are martial arts for ring competition and the other is for street fight.

This is just my personal opinion. :)

fix
June 11, 2002, 08:52 AM
If we wanted to get good CORE values in our recruits, we should have Full Metal Jacket video tapes passed out enmasse to all Drill Seargants as a training manual for them on what a perfect DS looks like....

I love the movie, but I'm afraid you and I have different opinions of what a Marine DI should be. The movie is just that, a movie.

STLRN
June 11, 2004, 08:24 AM
Although I am not a big fan of MCMAT, I often see some of the training on the POI as a HazEx, it is better than nothing. The reason it is important to practice close combat in an age of precision weapons is that sometimes you still get that close. And in at least 1 case in OEF and several in OIF, American soldiers and Marines have had to resort to the use of a knife or unarmed combat to kill their enemy, it is all that common an occurrence? Hell no, but it happened and it is better to be trained for it and it not happening, than not to be trained and getting into the situation.

Striker1
June 12, 2004, 10:05 PM
Wonder how the military version of Krav Maga would stack up in the real world?

I have studied Kenpo and Chinese martial arts and I can say for a fact that the version you would see by a skilled practioner on the street would hardly look like the moves and forms practiced in class.

coogan
June 13, 2004, 05:18 AM
linear in-fighting neuro-overide engagement

i just wanted to post that line traing does(did) incorperate knife training in line4 and 5, and even today when i get into physical encounters it is very natural for me to begin the easy but effective movements that i learned about 7 years ago now.

Coogan~

STLRN
June 13, 2004, 12:40 PM
Coogan

You are correct the higher LINE numbers had knife fighting in them. Personal opinion as a former CCI in LINE and a current Green Belt (instructor) in MMA, was LINE was better and more practical technique than MMA. It does not take as long to train with and because of the simplicity of the movements was easier to retain. However it lacked the rheostat that MMA has, since there were only 2 submission techniques and about everything led to a lethal blow.

carebear
June 14, 2004, 02:17 AM
the good old "sweep and stomp" :D

Squid.HM2
June 21, 2004, 07:51 PM
posting so far down has a few draw backs, many points are made and i would sound redundent to restate them.So all i can say is what i was told when I did boot camp " the purpose of this (H2H) training is to close with and kill your opponate"

STLRN
June 21, 2004, 08:34 PM
Doc

Did you do MMA or LINE at FMS or when you got to the FMF?