Evaluating a System Based on Its Outliers

Training
21

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Alex Good wrote:
The “Scottish and Irish armies” clearly refers to the armies of those countries, in ancient times for Scotland and both ancient and modern times for Ireland. The armies in Scotland are technically British now, and thus I had no need to date the Scottish army.

I could have said “the old kingdoms which now make up the nation know as Germany”, but then again I’m quite sure that’s a bit pointless.
And being a few centuries off (2) means I don’t know what I’m talking about? Go back to school.[/quote]

So an ancient army wouldn’t use bayonets? That’s your point huh? You’re some kinda fuckin genius I guess.[/quote]

Only compared to you.

22

[quote]Alex Good wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I hear that they no longer teach how to use the bayonet. What army since the dawn of time hasn’t at least taught that!?
[/quote]
List of armies that did not teach the use of the bayonet…
All Roman armies
All Greek armies (before the 19th century)
All Persian armies
All Egyptian armies (before the 19th century)
All Scandinavian armies (before the 19th century)
All English armies (before the 19th century)
All Scottish armies
All Irish armies (before the 19th century)
All French armies (before the 19th century)
All German armies (before the 19th century)
All Spanish armies (before the 19th century)
All other European armies (before the 19th century)

I left out most of them.[/quote]

I think it’s reasonable to say that a fixed bayonet effectively converts a rifle into a short spear. Spears do date back to pretty much the dawn of time. I believe that most of those armies employed some variation of the spear, pike, lance or whatever. I am surprised to hear that today’s tacticians don’t believe that this tool has a place in modern warfare.

23

Yeah. Maybe not urban ops, since you want your gun and body to keep a low profile on corners and such, but outfield?
Say your enemy has a hill dugout, firetrenches, shellscrapes, and your coy engages them. I can see a bayonet being useful when engaging a position, especially since most armies use 5.56 NATO rounds with crappy stopping power (or so I’ve heard, I’ve never seen combat obviously).

I could be a profile thing (bayonet getting stuck in cover, bushes etc. during fire and movement). It could be a practicality thing (unless your rifle jams, it’s easier to squeeze a trigger a couple of times at close range and take a guy out of commission, instead of sticking him a few times, making yourself less able to react to a new threat). But the question remains, what if your rifle does jam? Would you rather bail back into cover, or, if at close range, run into your enemy and stick him before he swings his muzzle your way?

Just thinking out loud. I’ve only had two years of Service in infantry, and was wondering if any long(er) timers had the answer.

24

[quote]Beast27195 wrote:
Devil,

I get the same thing with Modern Army Combatives. I was an instructor out of Fort Carson, and after the Level 1 course, you would literally have idiots show up to the clubs for the sole purpose of fighting someone. This is why I always closed out my classes by telling them all, “you now know enough to get your ass whooped.” The higher-ups seem to be very supportive of our combatives program. It’s the idiot kids that come in that speak otherwise.

Like MCMAP, the combatives program is about a lot more than just the basic ground technique and punches. And even after you go thru level 3, it’s always preached that you need to supplement your new skills with more training, ie-seek out places and people to enhance your skill set. Jokers just don’t seem to understand that concept. Just as they don’t understand that MMA, in relation to the UFC and such, is a fucking sport. Not meant to kill, as we are training to do.

I am curious about the offer of the Quantico folks, however. I had to cock my head at that. Would they be offended if an Army dude, such as myself, showed up to train? [/quote]

i think one of the problems i’ve seen with a lot of people who get certified as instrucots, is that they don’t do this. when i identify someone to be a trainer, they give me the blank stare and say “well, i haven’t done it for a while.” then i just do it, even though i’m not “certified”…

btw, are you level 3 or 4?

25

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]devildog_jim wrote:
The grappling is the pretty part that they like to show, but the reality of the training is that it’s a lot more complete than that. There’s a lot of training in flaks, with weapons, 2 (or more) on 1, and at least with the instructors I had, an emphasis on not willingly taking the fight to the ground but being able to respond well once it gets there.

The ground fighting also takes up more than its fair share of technique instruction time, because it is more technical than teaching a jab-jab-cross combo or a head grab and knee.

I have some thoughts on the less-lethal and use of force continuum aspects, and personally I think they over-emphasize some of that. Yes, it’s nice to be the “good guys,” and there are certainly times when someone is standing a post in an otherwise peaceful country where he has to fight but not kill a drunk or belligerent civilian at the gate. At the same time, I think that maybe the Marine Corps needs to make a point: “These are killers. They a are trained to kill people and break things. That is their purpose and reason for being. If you attack them, take a wild guess what is going to happen.” Of course, that would require them going in front of Congress and the President and telling them the same thing, so that Marine grunts aren’t used as the world’s police officers.[/quote]

Exactly. As America’s mission has changed from killing and winning to “peacekeeping,” its CQC tactics have changed with it, and THAT is a crime.

Restraining a hostile enemy combatant so you can interrogate him later- yea, you’ll use grappling for that.

Killing two charging Japanese soldiers who are charging at you on Iwo Jima- your grappling is worthless, and the combatives that are no longer stressed become essential.

I do not like the emphasis on MMA skills that they have begun to implement. I’m glad you guys are training realistically of course, i.e. multiple attackers and defending while having flak jackets and the appropriate armaments adorning you, but still, I hear that they no longer teach how to use the bayonet. What army since the dawn of time hasn’t at least taught that!?

But I understand that changing battlefield landscape, of course, and there’s only so much time to train, but I would honestly think drilling soldiers on something like Kelly McCann’s combatives would be FAR more effective and time-efficient than teaching them how to armbar some a-rab in the desert, assuming that they’ve dropped their rifle, pistol, and can’t reach any one of their knives.

Like you said though… it’s them moving the tactics away from kill techniques… and I just hope that Marines don’t find out too late when they’re going house to house in some Saharan shithole that although they could hold their own against an amateur fighter, they can’t deliver the chin jab that will kill a man.

This is the same old story of people saying, “Well if it doesn’t work in the UFC it’s garbage” or saying “Well, in ‘The Streetz’ that shit’a get you killlled.'”

None of it really makes sense because a punch is a punch and a kick is a kick, but it’s the situation you’re training for that will make the difference. In this case, I think they’re pushing to hard towards worrying about what they can teach marines so they don’t kill each other in a barfight as opposed to what’s TRULY appropriate for them.

Once again… just my opinion. [/quote]

once again, i disagree with ya on this subject…

here’s my thoughts (take em with a grain of salt-i’m all hopped up on cold medicine today):

-it’s hard to realistically train with a system that’s designed to kill people. training in a more normal style means that people will actually get trained. and it takes a really, really long time to break people’s habits, and they’re going to revert to what they know best, or are most comfortable with.

-killing people hand to hand is actually pretty hard…realistically, a car accident at moderate speeds is far harder on the brain and spine, and people don’t get hurt all that often.

-techniques are trained on thier own, and then implemented into the scenarios…basic tactics, marksmanship, first aid as well (and radios, calling in Medevac/fire, land nav/GPS etc, etc.)… again, it takes a long time to break people’s instincts. transitioning from lethal to non-lethal does occur in most pre-MOB training, from what i’ve seen…

-weapons are so much better at killing, they need to remain the primary (and secondary, etc)…hence maintenance of weapons/gear, fire control measures (conserve ammo), load plans/SOP/PCI’s (knowing where spare ammo/weapons are on vehicles, fellow soldiers)

i’m gonna get on my soapbox here, but one thing i see a lot of cops screw up with, is trying to fight a suspect instead of taking them into custody. very rarely do i use many strikes, and if i do, i hit them to get them to do something specific. generally, i take somebody down with a hip-toss style takedown, get the dominant position, and go about handcuffing… i see a lot of guys (and girls) swinging wildly, trying to handcuff people standing, or trying to take someone down with 4 cops hanging on.

anyway, just my thoughts…

26

[quote]cycobushmaster wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]devildog_jim wrote:
The grappling is the pretty part that they like to show, but the reality of the training is that it’s a lot more complete than that. There’s a lot of training in flaks, with weapons, 2 (or more) on 1, and at least with the instructors I had, an emphasis on not willingly taking the fight to the ground but being able to respond well once it gets there.

The ground fighting also takes up more than its fair share of technique instruction time, because it is more technical than teaching a jab-jab-cross combo or a head grab and knee.

I have some thoughts on the less-lethal and use of force continuum aspects, and personally I think they over-emphasize some of that. Yes, it’s nice to be the “good guys,” and there are certainly times when someone is standing a post in an otherwise peaceful country where he has to fight but not kill a drunk or belligerent civilian at the gate. At the same time, I think that maybe the Marine Corps needs to make a point: “These are killers. They a are trained to kill people and break things. That is their purpose and reason for being. If you attack them, take a wild guess what is going to happen.” Of course, that would require them going in front of Congress and the President and telling them the same thing, so that Marine grunts aren’t used as the world’s police officers.[/quote]

Exactly. As America’s mission has changed from killing and winning to “peacekeeping,” its CQC tactics have changed with it, and THAT is a crime.

Restraining a hostile enemy combatant so you can interrogate him later- yea, you’ll use grappling for that.

Killing two charging Japanese soldiers who are charging at you on Iwo Jima- your grappling is worthless, and the combatives that are no longer stressed become essential.

I do not like the emphasis on MMA skills that they have begun to implement. I’m glad you guys are training realistically of course, i.e. multiple attackers and defending while having flak jackets and the appropriate armaments adorning you, but still, I hear that they no longer teach how to use the bayonet. What army since the dawn of time hasn’t at least taught that!?

But I understand that changing battlefield landscape, of course, and there’s only so much time to train, but I would honestly think drilling soldiers on something like Kelly McCann’s combatives would be FAR more effective and time-efficient than teaching them how to armbar some a-rab in the desert, assuming that they’ve dropped their rifle, pistol, and can’t reach any one of their knives.

Like you said though… it’s them moving the tactics away from kill techniques… and I just hope that Marines don’t find out too late when they’re going house to house in some Saharan shithole that although they could hold their own against an amateur fighter, they can’t deliver the chin jab that will kill a man.

This is the same old story of people saying, “Well if it doesn’t work in the UFC it’s garbage” or saying “Well, in ‘The Streetz’ that shit’a get you killlled.'”

None of it really makes sense because a punch is a punch and a kick is a kick, but it’s the situation you’re training for that will make the difference. In this case, I think they’re pushing to hard towards worrying about what they can teach marines so they don’t kill each other in a barfight as opposed to what’s TRULY appropriate for them.

Once again… just my opinion. [/quote]

once again, i disagree with ya on this subject…

here’s my thoughts (take em with a grain of salt-i’m all hopped up on cold medicine today):

-it’s hard to realistically train with a system that’s designed to kill people. training in a more normal style means that people will actually get trained. and it takes a really, really long time to break people’s habits, and they’re going to revert to what they know best, or are most comfortable with.

-killing people hand to hand is actually pretty hard…realistically, a car accident at moderate speeds is far harder on the brain and spine, and people don’t get hurt all that often.

-techniques are trained on thier own, and then implemented into the scenarios…basic tactics, marksmanship, first aid as well (and radios, calling in Medevac/fire, land nav/GPS etc, etc.)… again, it takes a long time to break people’s instincts. transitioning from lethal to non-lethal does occur in most pre-MOB training, from what i’ve seen…

-weapons are so much better at killing, they need to remain the primary (and secondary, etc)…hence maintenance of weapons/gear, fire control measures (conserve ammo), load plans/SOP/PCI’s (knowing where spare ammo/weapons are on vehicles, fellow soldiers)

anyway, just my thoughts…[/quote]

27

A good discussion. I am currently in Baghdad and i am very familar with the current training for the Marine Security Guards, certain PSD Units and RSO personnel. I have been fortunate to train with some very good units(SAS,GSG9)and the one thing that is common(in my humble opinion) with all, is the mental strength to kill. We can debate which system is best, what is best, but, it is the individual mental strength( combat mindset) that i want by my side. we used to have saying “are you a show team or are you a go team?”

train hard mentally and physically because that is what defines what and who you are.

BTW: the Embassy MSG take their system seriously, under SUPERVISED CONDITIONS, open sparring is held about twice a month between the various students/instructors in JITIS/MT/Boxing/Wrestling/etc…lots of good training and the Marines hold their own…

28

A good discussion. I am currently in Baghdad and i am very familar with the current training for the Marine Security Guards, certain PSD Units and RSO personnel. I have been fortunate to train with some very good units(SAS,GSG9)and the one thing that is common(in my humble opinion) with all, is the mental strength to kill. We can debate which system is best, what is best, but, it is the individual mental strength( combat mindset) that i want by my side. we used to have saying “are you a show team or are you a go team?”

train hard mentally and physically because that is what defines what and who you are.

BTW: the Embassy MSG take their system seriously, under SUPERVISED CONDITIONS, open sparring is held about twice a month between the various students/instructors in JITIS/MT/Boxing/Wrestling/etc…lots of good training and the Marines hold their own…

29

[quote]idaho wrote:
A good discussion. I am currently in Baghdad and i am very familar with the current training for the Marine Security Guards, certain PSD Units and RSO personnel. I have been fortunate to train with some very good units(SAS,GSG9)and the one thing that is common(in my humble opinion) with all, is the mental strength to kill. We can debate which system is best, what is best, but, it is the individual mental strength( combat mindset) that i want by my side. we used to have saying “are you a show team or are you a go team?”

train hard mentally and physically because that is what defines what and who you are.

BTW: the Embassy MSG take their system seriously, under SUPERVISED CONDITIONS, open sparring is held about twice a month between the various students/instructors in JITIS/MT/Boxing/Wrestling/etc…lots of good training and the Marines hold their own… [/quote]

This is a great point. In the end it’s mindset and will rather than mechanics and skill that gets you through when it counts. I hear this echoed again and again by combat writers and instructors yet it still gets overlooked all too often.