Close Combat Article--by Robert Bolt.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 13, 2003
Messages
1,263
Location
NYC
You can't always use--or even get to--your gun.
This gives some great advice for that situation:
(And it has NOTHING to do with point shooting.)


Close Combat
by Robert Bolt


To be effective, close-quarters combat must be simple, straightforward and brutal. It must work under battlefield conditions in which you are tired and frightened and gross-motor skills may be all you’re capable of. It must be easy to learn and easy to use without warning in any environment.

One of the figures who shaped that notion of close-quarters combat was Lt.

Col. William E. Fairbairn, an Englishman who worked his way up from conand stable to assistant commissioner of the Shanghai Municipal Police prior to World War II. Along the way, he developed a system of armed and unarmed combat that enabled his officers to survive some of the toughest streets on earth.

BACK IN TIME

In the early 1900s, Shanghai was the most violent city in China, if not the entire world. Muggings, armed robberies and kidnappings plagued its population, while gangs ran amok and opium dealers did whatever was necessary to ply their trade. One night in 1908, Fairbairn was patrolling the brothel district when he was nearly beaten to death by a gang of criminals.

He awoke in a hospital and fortuitously noticed a placard near his bed that read, “Professor Okada, jujutsu and bonesetting.” Upon checking out, Fairbairn embarked on a course of study that would include jujutsu, judo and various Chinese arts. He eventually earned a black belt in judo and jujutsu, and in 1910 he was promoted to sergeant of musketry and drill, which meant he was now responsible for training recruits in the techniques they would rely on to save their own lives. Fairbairn decided to seek out further instruction in a variety of fighting systems, especially ones that dealt with the situations his trainees might face on the street.

In his 30-plus years with the Shanghai Police, Fairbairn was involved in or personally observed more than 200 violent encounters involving weapons and an even greater number that saw the use of only fists and feet. From his studies, observations and experiences, he developed a system of selfdefense and arrest-and-control techniques which he named defendu. Its arsenal was composed of moves borrowed from various martial arts and then simplified so the average person could readily learn them. Fairbairn also took a keen interest in knife combat and gunfighting; he subsequently developed a realistic system of firearms training, which was adopted by the Shanghai Police.

Fairbairn retired in 1940 at age 55. He then returned to England, where he was charged with training commandos and elite members of the home guard. His curriculum was designed to provide soldiers and operatives with the skill and confidence needed to defeat an enemy in close combat. He also instructed various American and Allied commando units, including the Office of Strategic Services, the precursor of the CIA.

Although the system Fairbairn originally taught to the police contained a variety of restraining holds, the skills he passed to the military focused on strikes. Police officers were supposed to arrest suspects, he reasoned, while soldiers and agents were required to dispatch their enemies as quickly and ruthlessly as possible.

Hand-to-hand combat was extremely important to OSS agents because they frequently had to operate in occupied areas while masquerading as foreign nationals. Because they often encountered German checkpoints, they could not carry firearms and thus had to rely on the empty-hand training provided by Fairbairn and his instructors.

LINEAGE

These days, it is virtually impossible to find an instructor who trained directly under Fairbairn. One man who can trace his lineage straight back to him is a World War II veteran and former Marine hand-to-hand combat instructor named Charles Nelson.

Nelson trained under Sgt. Kelly, a Marine who served in Shanghai in the 1930s and was one of Fairbairn’s followers. Kelly also studied under Detective Dermot “Pat” O’Neil of the Shanghai Police, another of Fairbairn’s top students and the one who would later become the close-quarters combat instructor for the famed Devil’s Brigade.

Nelson also studied under the late Col. Anthony Drexel Biddle, another Marine unarmed-combat instructor who was mentored by Fairbairn. Nelson bunked with John Styers, yet another Marine hand-to-hand combat guru who trained with Biddle and penned a classic titled Cold Steel.

After the war, Nelson returned to New York City, where he taught self-defense for more than 45 years. When he retired, the direct link to World War II close combat would have been severed were it not for the existence of a student named Carl Cestari. Having conducted more research on the close-combat methods of World War II than anyone else alive, he has established himself as the premier purveyor of the timeless teachings of Fairbairn and Nelson.

UNSUNG HERO

Although not widely known in the martial arts community, Cestari is arguably the most significant person today in the field of authentic World War II combatives because of the key role he has played in preserving and disseminating those concepts and techniques.

He was instrumental in training noted knife expert and hand-tohand specialist Bob Kasper, as well as in introducing John Kary, the founder of American combatives, to World War II-style close combat.

After studying with Nelson for several years, Cestari temporarily slaked his thirst for knowledge by embarking on a mission to locate and interview surviving members of World War II units that had trained in the Fairbairn methods. They included men from Darby’s Rangers, the OSS and the First Special Service Force, also known as the Devil’s Brigade. In addition, he began a long association with Col. Rex Applegate, who had studied under Fairbairn longer than any other American.

Applegate died in 1998, but he is remembered as the most influential American hand-to-hand combat instructor of the second World War. Cestari also investigated a wide variety of other sources, including rare hand-to-hand combat books written by early 20th century experts and old films of close-combat training taken from the Library of Congress. His goal was twofold: to trace the roots of the fighting style and to formulate questions to ask the veterans he interviewed. After nearly two decades of research, Cestari succeeded in using the knowledge he had acquired and the judo, jujutsu and karate training he had undergone to reconstruct the world’s most formidable fighting art.

BEST TECHNIQUES

While Fairbairn originally drew a great deal from jujutsu and judo, the brand of close combat he taught during World War II emphasized the atemi, or striking aspects, of the martial arts because they are easier to apply and have a more lethal effect than do throws and locks. Many of those blows are similar to traditional martial arts techniques, but Cestari claims subtle differences exist. The most important characteristic of World War II close-combat strikes, he says, is that they are composed of simple gross-motor movements.

They are also non-telegraphic because they originate from wherever the striking limb is. No chambering or cocking is involved. In each strike, the weapon takes the most direct route to the target. “Any time you bring your hand away from an attacker, you are alerting him,” Cestari insists.

Above all, World War II close combat stresses the need to pre-emptively attack as soon as a threat becomes apparent, Cestari says. In his Notes for Instructors on Close Combat, Fairbairn stressed the importance of hitting first, and Cestari adheres to that philosophy 100 percent.

Cestari also highlights the need to be alert and stay away from potential threats. But once you determine an attack is imminent, you should explode into the assailant, thus augmenting the power of your strike with the momentum of your body. Your energy will drive him backward and keep him offbalance, making it difficult for him to deliver an effective counter.

EDGE-OF-THE HAND BLOW

An essential component of World War II close combat is the edge-of-thehand blow, alter- natively known as the ax hand, the chop or the hack. The strike is similar to the shuto (knifehand) of karate and the tegatana-ate of jujutsu. To execute it, open your hand and tighten its muscles, Cestari says. Your thumb should point up as you strike with the fleshy part between the knuckle of your little finger and the base of your palm.

The blow is most effective when delivered in a backhanded hacking manner from wherever your hand happens to be. It derives its power from your forward momentum, torso torque and body weight. The technique is generally delivered horizontally with your palm facing downward, but it can be applied from other angles as well. The most vulnerable targets are the throat, side and back of the neck, philtrum and nose.

The biggest difference between Fairbairn’s strike and the traditional martial arts version is the perpendicular orientation of the thumb. Holding it that way increases tension in your hand and firms up the striking surface.

It also prevents your hand from cupping on impact, which merely dissipates your force.

TIGER’S CLAW

Fairbairn taught that when you’re facing a frontal attack, your best option is usually the tiger’s claw blow. To execute it, Cestari says, you should curl your fingers and spread them as though you are trying to grip a shot-put. Deliver the strike into the attacker’s face using a piston-like motion.

The technique can be combined with a forward step (using the strikingside foot) to put your body weight into the technique, Cestari says. Your splayed fingers should be driven into the assailant’s eyes, while your palm and the base of your hand smash into his nose, mouth and chin.

CHIN JAB

At close range, the tiger’s claw can be transformed into the chin jab. Rather than coming straight into the assailant’s face, the strike travels upward from beneath his line of sight, slamming into the underside of his chin and jaw much like an uppercut, Cestari says. To execute it, angle your hand as far backward as possible and spread your fingers. Bend your arm slightly as you hit with the base of your palm. Your fingers can be used to inflict a followup eye gouge.

The blow must be thrown at close range without any cocking of the arm. The main target is your attacker’s chin, which when struck forcibly can induce a concussive knockout. However, the chin jab can also be used against the nose or cheekbones. It is particularly effective as a follow-up to a knee to the groin because the attacker may expose his chin as he doubles over, and striking someone who is bending forward amplifies the power of the blow.

KNEE THRUST

The next technique involves propelling your knee upward as though you are trying to lift your attacker off his feet, Cestari says. As soon as you make contact with the target, plant your raised foot where he was standing. The groin is the primary target, but the technique can also be used to impact the stomach or thigh. If your attacker is off-balance or leaning forward, you can use both hands to grab the back of his head and pull it down into your rising knee, but most of the time his head will be out of reach.

KICKS

Deliver a side kick World War IIstyle, IIstyle, draw your kicking leg up to knee height and drive it into your attacker’s leg in one swift motion. In general, strike with the leg that is closest to the attacker.

Fairbairn favored using the edge of his boot to blast the attacker’s shin, while Applegate preferred thrusting the bottom of his heel into the other man’s knee to dislocate or severely damage it.

The men also taught a non-telegraphic front kick to the groin and an inside-edge-of-the-boot kick to the lower shin or ankle. Launched with no visible chambering, the techniques have their roots in an old form of street savate.

DEFENSIVE MEASURES

The combat method Cestari teaches focuses on overwhelming the assailant before he can get off his first shot, rather than reacting to his attack and then countering. This strategy of “offensive defense” also works against common grabs and holds. Even though some systems teach drawn-out sequences for every potential grappling attack, you should avoid them, he says. “You will not have the time or the wherewithal to remember specific multi-step defenses.”

Instead, Cestari advocates concentrating on stopping the attacker using the most brutal and effective techniques you know. To that end, he teaches a variety of close-range offensive techniques—eye gouges, groin grabs, elbow smashes, foot stomps, biting and whatever else is available—for use when things get ugly.

Like Fairbairn before him, he emphasizes simplicity, directness and gross-motor movement. The complex responses that many of his contemporaries teach serve only to distance their systems from their roots and reduce their overall effectiveness.

World War II close combat has been criticized as overly simplistic or even outdated, but Carl Cestari has made it his mission to remind us that the simple, proven methods devised during the first half of the 20th century can be relied upon in any life-ordeath encounter that crops up in the 21st century.

Robert Bolt is a free-lance writer and practitioner of reality- based martial arts.
 
My first reaction (before reading the article) was: "I'm too old (and perhaps too lazy) to learn jujitsu or any other martial art."

But, after further reading, it sounds like the simplicity of a few gross motor moves as described could be employed by just about anyone with a little practice. Even without any practice at all, the idea of two or three surprisingly violent, potentially disabling moves is something to think about.

Thanks for the post.
 
Thanks guys.
I wrote an article about Charles Nelson back in 1983 for Black Belt magazine and I trained with Cestari from 1991-1996.
Great men teaching good, simple, effective stuff.
 
Fairbairn originally drew a great deal from jujutsu and judo, the brand of close combat he taught during World War II emphasized the atemi, or striking aspects, of the martial arts because they are easier to apply and have a more lethal effect than do throws and locks.

I suppose that depends on the particular lock or strike. Certain neck cranks for example are much more devastating than a jab.. Then again the things I am familiar with come from jujitsu

They are also non-telegraphic because they originate from wherever the striking limb is. No chambering or cocking is involved. In each strike, the weapon takes the most direct route to the target. “Any time you bring your hand away from an attacker, you are alerting him,” Cestari insists.

boxing 101. Go to a boxing gym and this is one of the first thing you will learn about punching

KNEE THRUST

Muay thai 101 although there is nothing in this section about how to throw a knee correctly, simply bringing your leg up is not the correct way and produces a fraction of the power that doing it correctly does.

EDGE-OF-THE HAND BLOW

This is a great way to break the metacarpal of your hand. I've seen a lot of people break it even when their hands are tapped and they are wearing 4 oz gloves.

[the chin jab]It is particularly effective as a follow-up to a knee to the groin because the attacker may expose his chin as he doubles over, and striking someone who is bending forward amplifies the power of the blow.

If I knee someone in the groin I'm going to be fairly close to them the speed with which they are likely to double over and their proximity to me makes looking for a palm strike to the underside of the chin seem a bit silly. I they double over I'd knee them in the face, the range, and location of their head is perfect. Or a down elbow on the back of the head/ neck area. Both are much easier and more natural than trying to get in a strike with your hand. They are both more effective as well. Look at a boxing match guys bob low to avoid strikes from the other persons hands. Watch a MT match, no one bobs low (i.e. the same height as one would be at if they bent over from a strike to the groin) because knees and elbows are legal. Where as having your head low can make it harder from some one to hit you with their hand it makes it very easy to get kneed in the face.

As an aside much of what is truly practical for fighting has been around more a long long time. I've seen greek tapestries and paintings of guys performing crucifix neck cranks, heal hooks,etc.

Being able to really fight takes effort and training. It is a physical activity and thus physical attributes while not forcedly dispossitive are big factors. Fighting is also highly dynamic and fluid, knowing one or tree or 20 good moves is simply an insufficient approach. IMHO (based on about 15 years of being in wrestling rooms, BJJ schools, muay thai camps, boxing gyms, training fighters and seeing or being involved in a fair number of fights, and working with so called "reality based" trainers) you need to have some basic understanding and base skill sets. You do not need to be able to box like Mayweather but you should be able to throw punches correctly. You should understand movement and basic defenses. More than once I have had people take a swing at me. That sudden unpredictable strike isn't much good if you don't avoid that eating one to the chin. You need to understand basics about the clinch. You need to understand basics about wrestling, take downs, take down defense, control. I also believe you need to know some basic ground skills, basic positions, control, some sweeps. Further if you are not practicing actually fighting you aren't learning how to fight.

Sport fighting is sport and their are moves and tactics that belong only in the ring or on the mat. That said having the foundation of fighting skills lets you understand what will work for practical fighting, lest you better implement even those tactics that are not legal in sport fighting and it lets you control distance and positioning which is of great importance. Footwork and controlling positions goes a very very long ways in a fight.
 
Last edited:
Cestari also highlights the need to be alert and stay away from potential threats. But once you determine an attack is imminent, you should explode into the assailant, thus augmenting the power of your strike with the momentum of your body.
This is 50% of it...the other 50% is accurately hitting a vulnerable area of the body so that explosive, weighted strike actually causes an injury.

Body weight in motion, plus vulnerable anatomy=injury. Anything else= "fighting" with mixed results.

Girodin,

You are correct in that ruptured testicles from a knee strike will double him over. However, you are incorrect that the doubling over will preclude a "chin-jab" follow up. The answer is "timing." The 2 strikes are linked into one motion with the chin jab a split second after the groin. So, explode forward knee to groin, as the knee is making contact the hand is already coming up in front of your body under his chin. His chin will slam down into your palm adding more force.

If you knee...chin jab...no dice.

You could also launch an uppercut (to his exposed, falling throat would be nice). Pause deliberately, then the other knee to his throat as you suggested.

When fighting for your life...the main idea is not to "fight" at all. Just injure them repeatedly, technique doesn't matter, just results. Also, have to match tools to targets, I doubt I'll fracture the blade edge of my hand on his throat, groin or under his nose. On his skull? Sure...I tend to use my boot heel or a club (or the planet ala a throw) to attack that area.
 
However, you are incorrect that the doubling over will preclude a "chin-jab" follow up.

I never said it was precluded per se, but rather that there are much simpler and more effective strikes to follow a knee with, particularly a properly thrown knee. A proper knee greatly exceeds the power of most peoples punches so I'd rather throw a second knee, particularly when the distance and timing are more conducive to it that a strike, particularly a palm strike. I've broken three peoples ribs with knees, none (at least that I am aware) of with punches (I have dropped a bunch of people with body shots though). I have also seen a great many people KOed via a knee, even some pretty poorly thrown knees.

I'll fracture the blade edge of my hand on his throat, groin or under his nose. On his skull?

People don't tend to hold real still during fights. When the shot lands his forehead might be where those other things where when you committed to throwing the strike.
 
People don't tend to hold real still during fights. When the shot lands his forehead might be where those other things where when you committed to throwing the strike.
True, but the blade edge is much more forgiving than the 26 bones in the hand when used as a fist...

I actually prefer the bottom of the forearm for most applications where the blade edge would be used (and more). The ulna is very tough, close to the surface, and very gross-motor skill to slam a forearm into something. Also has a large forgiving strike surface (from just behind the wrist, to just in front of the elbow).
 
True, but the blade edge is much more forgiving than the 26 bones in the hand when used as a fist...

It is just one of those bones. If you were going to break a stick would you hit on the top the bottom or on the side right in the middle?

xray_normal_hand_pa_1_.jpg


At any rate, I've seen a lot of broken hands from both but it is often the metacarpal of the little finger that breaks. Isolating it as the point of impact makes hurting it fairly probable, particularly from the side based on what I've seen.

Yes, elbows, and knees leave you less prone to breaking your hands.
 
If the article is true then the facts are that the system as taught was simple, repeatable AND effective. Developed for the Streets of Shanghai and then used by the elite units of our WWII forces 30+ years later in the throws of war would generally give the technique some cred. I don't know the specifics of their technique nor claim to be an expert but attempting to debunk the "art" using this article is hilarious.

If only the mall cops on the internet had been around to train them in the correct way to use their limbs. Maybe Shanghai would have been tamed decades earlier and the war won in 44. :D

Matthew thanks for sharing the article.
 
Last edited:
Fairbairn is a revolutionary figure in the history of unarmed combat. He shattered a lot myths (and bones) and deserves full credit for his many accomplishments.

It is worth reflecting on some of his ideas, particularly the idea that unarmed combat can be reduced to a set of simple movements and techniques that, together with the proper strategy and mindset, can be extremely effective. Today, with WFC and MMA and the advent of Brazilian Gracie Jiu Jitsu, we know a lot more than was known in Fairbairn's era.

Also, as an early pioneer, Fairbairn was bringing back knowledge mostly unknown in the western world. Today, thousands of skilled teachers from all over the world have added to the science and practice of combat skills, and what were once carefully guarded family and village secrets are now taught in schools around the world. So we can update Fairbairn to a great extent, and also add some important criticisms.

To begin with, Fairbairn was teaching explosive, crushing techniques, which are not always appropriate to modern-day life. The drunk hassling you at the bar has not earned a broken windpipe or shattered jaw. Your friend who won't stop pestering that girl at a party needs to be escorted out, not crippled for life. Good martial technique will allow for a greater range of outcomes and it is a truism that a karate white belt can be more dangerous than a high-level master.

We've all seen those websites where some guy is hawking his training course that teaches the "essential deadly moves that work." On study, these are generally found to be utterly worthless. If there were totally devastating moves that could drop a foe and only required weeks to learn, they would be widely known. As gun enthusiasts, we know that a bullet may not stop an attack - that timing and placement trump all. Same with unarmed combat.

In some areas, Fairbairn was mistaken. For instance, the palm strike is not always delivered with the tiger claw fist (which is used for other applications), and the classic "karate chop" or shuto, is not delivered with the blade of the hand - instead, it is about half blade and half palm. To test this, right now bring the edge of your hand down as Fairbairn taught, hand vertical, thumb flush along the index finger. Now, try again, but this time tilt the hand palmward about 45 degrees and angle it back just a bit so that you're hitting with the meaty part of the edge. You should discover that you can hit a LOT harder this way.

And, whereas many good techniques can be learned in a fairly brief (if intensive) period, skills practiced over decades, internal arts, and joint manipulations (shin na) offer increased application, and some techniques like Iron Palm require slow, long-term development so that the bones and skin can condition for them.

For CCW people, this means that it may be useful to know how to stun and dispatch an attacker, buying enough time to bring a gun into play, or simply eliminate the threat without recourse to firearms (and the concomitant legal problems that may follow). All respect to Fairbairn, yet I think he'd be amazed and impressed with how much we have learned since his day.
 
My comment was tongue in cheek but really lets at least read the article before we start dissing the old masters. The article stands in stark contrast to 2 of your main points (restraint v. crushing blows and the chop strike area) in particular.


1. The first part deals with police actions and even makes a point to say the chops were emphasized by the trainers only with the military.

"Although the system Fairbairn originally taught to the police contained a variety of restraining holds, the skills he passed to the military focused on strikes. Police officers were supposed to arrest suspects, he reasoned, while soldiers and agents were required to dispatch their enemies as quickly and ruthlessly as possible."

2. The edge of hand technique described is a) emphasized as a military training maneuver and b) differentiated from a shuto strike.

"Your thumb should point up as you strike with the fleshy part between the knuckle of your little finger and the base of your palm. ... The biggest difference between Fairbairn’s strike and the traditional martial arts version is the perpendicular orientation of the thumb. Holding it that way increases tension in your hand and firms up the striking surface."

If we're going to argue with the articles subject or attempt to correct it I don't think it's too much to ask that we at least attempt to understand it first.
 
Critics of the "edge-of-the-hand" blow should keep in mind that this strike is almost always directed at soft targets such the throat, neck or nose area etc which greatly reduces the chances of injury to the hand.
 
^^

Yep. One concept that's pretty old school kung fu but still holds true is: soft on hard, hard on soft.

Palm strikes to the face & head are less risky to the striker than punches
Punches to the belly, flanks, kidneys, liver, etc. are probably going to hurt more than palm strikes to those same areas
 
We've all seen those websites where some guy is hawking his training course that teaches the "essential deadly moves that work." On study, these are generally found to be utterly worthless.
The most violent people in our society don't even train for a week. They just do it. They are usually found in the prison system after a short period of time.

How long does it take to learn how to use a brick to the head or to knock someone down and stomp them until they stop twitching?
 
I'm not sure what you're point is strambo?

The acts of violence you refer to usually is the product of rage, desperation, crimes of opportunity or happens as a result of improvisation on the part of someone with some sort of training or keen observation in a sticky situation.

Fact is, if you're neither of those (either trained or just an enraged criminal) you are an easy target and victim and in serious need of the type of training described in the article Matthew posted .
 
My point is...if you find yourself in a violent situation you need to be the one doing the violence. Training is not a prerequisite to violence...a desire to actually do what it takes to injure another human being until they stop functioning is.

If I find myself (heaven forbid) in a violent situation...I will look just like prison riot footage because that is what I'm willing to do to protect myself and family. If it isn't life and death, I'll use my well developed social, verbal and/or running skills to handle that.

I think many would be "victims in waiting" let themselves off the hook for being responsible for their own (and families) protection with the notion that it takes a lot of training to "defend" yourself from a violent predator, but they don't have the time etc. It doesn't (predators by and large don't have it), all it takes is an unshakable will to survive and will to injure them.

Punk in the street decides to walk up, punch you in the face, kick you in the gut and take your wallet. He didn't throw 10,000 sucker punches in a dojo...he just got a thought in his head and executed. Do the same without hesitation when confronted with violence and at least you'll be on an even footing with them. Training improves the odds from there by making you more efficient at injuring the human body than an un-trained person (or it better or why bother?).

Sociopaths aren't enraged, and they are the most dangerous predators of all. Just a single minded determination to end you. In that moment you better be the same way or you won't stand a chance.

Thankfully, these sharks are very rare (violent ones truly rare). You may run across a non-violent sociopath, they are the pathological liars with no conscience who will do anything in their own self-interest.

I train for the violent sociopath (with friends). A lesser motivated criminal quitting after I just break his rib is a bonus (he could still fight, but chooses to disengage). I assume I have to take any violent threat all the way until their body won't work. I don't necessarily mean death, just that they are clearly no longer a physical threat (even if they still want to be). Situation dependent. All legalities still apply, if I am in fear for my life/serious bodily harm, I will respond with force (up to/including deadly) until there is no longer a threat.
 
I train for the one per center.
The guy who is 6'4, 250 pounds of solid muscle, who thinks that I just killed his mother and does not mind dying as long as he takes me with him.
Train for him and the rest will come easy.
Train for him and 99% of all martial arts/self defense techniques will fly out the window of ineffectiveness.
Train for him and your mindset will suddenly change for the better.
Why?
Because training to be a good Fighter is pointless.
Since we must assume that our attacker will be bigger, stronger, faster and better than us, then to "train to be more skilled" is a waste of time.
We need a shortcut, and the OP article is an excellent shortcut to follow.
 
Last edited:
Very interesting post and following replies. It's been a great read and I'll bookmark it.

Thanks for the post
 
I may have misunderstood his last post, but it seems to criticise training even though he is a trained individual himself (I'm guessing).
 
Interesting post.

As Fairbairn explains, there are two levels or classes of fighting/combat. Police, who act to constrain and control, and only use as much force as necessary to control their target. Can it raise to a death match, yes of course, but rarely begins that way, and very rarely ends that way. Your job is to stop it as soon as possible so as there is no risk of it getting worse.

The military which has one principal goal in combat, to kill. Killing takes a lot less finesse than constraint and control.

I Also agree strongly with Fairbairn's point of preemptive explosive offensive action, violent and continuous until you either win, and the other guy dies, or you die or are disabled. Not injured, not hurt, no yelling " I give" or "uncle". In combat, hand to hand fighting is most often to the death. Best stay very offensive and aggressive.

I think his primary points are well taken.

My background is the military model, which I was first trained in/with in the mid nineteen sixties, honed in Vietnam with the 3rd Marine Division for two tours. I was involved in about 97 fire fights, but only 6 cases of "Hand to Hand" combat and in each case I used a non firearm weapon.

I didn't consider my M14 a firearm when I was employing the stock as a baseball bat. Vertical and horizontal butt strokes were devastating and very effective. Particularly when you are motivated, trained, experienced, and want to live. I also used my E-Tool. The E-Tool, folded, makes a fine trench mace/axe. And once I used my K-Bar.

Since Vietnam, I have not been very good at moderating any cases of fighting. I sort of lose it. All or nothing. So I work very hard at avoiding those fights.

Get the much more useful martial arts and police type training. Much more applicable to real life.

Go figure.

Fred
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top