Saying that as a critiscism of our Army is like the US Army is **** because they have no skills with a sword.
Originally Posted by Ace of Clubs
some people believe you don't need hand to hand training in the military or that its for bar fights. An analogy from my teaching days was when my students would ask why they needed to know something or how to multiply etc when we have calculators, What happens when you don't have a Ti-81 or your classmates don't have a Ti-81(because your a prick of a teacher and threw them away, royally pissing of the dept head at the end of the year when you said they were stolen from your desk a day you had a sub). I Told them, you need the knowledge to recognize if your answer on the calculator follow's logic, and that you may not have any electronic help. tools make it faster and easier. if you dont have access you need your brain and pen and paper and those skills have to really sharp to have any hope of competing with having a calculator.
Basically Guns and knives are great and you need to train there use inside and out and back again. but your h2h has to be trained even more so to allow you to survive on the rare chance that H2H are you only hope.
5 senerios right off the top of my head and im sure pp can list more.
1. an attack in a civillion setting (leaving out a bar fight which i call an ego fight, which you need to man up and leave the situation.).
2. off duty attack.
3. escape with no weapons.
4. non functioning weapon.
sorry couldnt resist
1. The bar fight is a much used example. It covers all civilian settings. You cannot exactly leave after someone swings a cue at you and his mate blocks the door.
Originally Posted by bill_nye68
2. Dunno what you mean
3. Escape with no weapons. Apart from taking out one guard or whatever it is probably best to not draw attention with bodies, or risk discovery.
4. What about your 9 mates? Are all there various weapons broken? Your knife
5. WTF do you mean profit.
it was a south park reference
Originally Posted by RealManOfSteel
Bro, it's not a Stephen Seagal Movie.
Originally Posted by RealManOfSteel
True story, I saw Taken (great fucking movie) Right after, I saw Stephen Seagal's "Shadow Man"
Same premise, only it was like getting a nice, deep tissue massage, followed immediately by a round of body shots from mike tyson.
Is that a compliment to Taken or not? I thought the fight scenes in Taken were alright. Taken was a mad movie, but there is no twists in the plot at all? Am I the only one who noticed that he spent a lot of the time being a badass (not complaining) and that there was not a single time in the movie that anything made finding his daughter not happen?
Originally Posted by 3moose1
**** Stephen Seagal. In 40 mins of fights, 3 and a half mins were legitimate Aikido techniques. It does not have to be realistic (like, it could work) but stay true to the style/character you are attempting to potray.
I.e. Modern movies use Kali (or similiar) to make their characters look gritty and realistic. (Bourne trilogy, Taken) Probably to blame for the RBSD fad.
Kali is not even an RBSD, and nor is MCMAP, and nor was LINE. Shows how dumb the average member of the population is in relation to MA.
And am I the only one who thinks the abbreviations make the MA sound cool? Like secretive. It is even better when you can make into a word, like LINE, or a deadly word, like SCARS.
Where did that come from. We at Bullshido know that there are situations when confrontations are unavoidable. That is why we train. (apart from for sport, but I am making a point)
Originally Posted by 100xobm
No ones saying that there is never a way out, and that you should not look for one.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO