Combat Hapkido + US Army

[Thomas]

Here's a neat article:

On Thursday, January 27th, 2005 at Fort Drum, NY, Grandmaster Pellegrini conducted an intensive Combatives seminar for 150 members of the 3rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team of the Army 10th Mountain Division. The Brigade is scheduled to be deployed in Afghanistan in early 2006. Grandmaster Pellegrini was assisted by ICHF Instructors Robert Gray and Scott Nicholson.
http://www.ichf.com/Ipdti/IPDTI.htm#012705

GM P was asked to conduct training for some Fort Drum soldiers and help provide some good self defence skills. My instructor Robert Gray was honored to be able to provide a warm body for beating and assistance!

It seems that many of the soldier had been learning elements of BJJ but found it difficult to apply some of those skills when fully armed and equipped. They like the entries and technqiues of Combat Hapkido for a good blend of striking, locking, throwing, and dealing with modern combat issues.

[JimH]

GMP will be back there in November teaching again.

[Korpy]

And regular Hapkido gets the shaft again.

[mixmastersenior]

Not at all. There are many Traditional HKD Masters who could successfully teach various HKD techniques to military personnel if they so desired. I think it would be a great service to our fighting men and women. No one is prohibiting them from it. Of course, given the time constraints, only basic techniques could be taught. But I believe that once these military personnel see how effective HKD is, there will be a great deal of interest generated for the art.

[HapkidoScott]

thats really great. Its really go for HapKiDo as a whole and obviously they picked the right man for the job. Wish I could've picked up some cool self defense when I was in the military but I guess being on a big ship doesn't put in harms way, other than missiles and what not! GM Myung was given a similar oppurtunity many years ago so it just goes to show ya that HapKiDo has been used by people that rely on it successfully.

[Legless_Marine]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Here's a neat article:


GM P was asked to conduct training for some Fort Drum soldiers and help provide some good self defence skills. My instructor Robert Gray was honored to be able to provide a warm body for beating and assistance!

Interesting. I'm pleased to see HKD getting some positive exposure.

I don't really get why soldiers need to learn hand-to-hand, though.

[MaxG]

Well, I think the governing thought behind them learning hand to hand is "I would rather know it and not need it then need it an not know it. "

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by DanielSwan

Interesting. I'm pleased to see HKD getting some positive exposure.

I don't really get why soldiers need to learn hand-to-hand, though.

I think part of the idea was also in dealing with close quarters enemies (insurgents and such) as well as dealing with prisoners... it's a bit nicer (per Geneva Conventions) to control the prisoners than just butt-stroke them.

[Legless_Marine]

Originally Posted by Thomas

I think part of the idea was also in dealing with close quarters enemies (insurgents and such) as well as dealing with prisoners... it's a bit nicer (per Geneva Conventions) to control the prisoners than just butt-stroke them.

Prisoner-control is a very plausible explanation.

Ideally, the average soldier should never engage in close-quarters...

Particularly these days, when combat is taking place at ever-increasing distances.

Close-quarters is more consistent with policing than soldiering.

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by DanielSwan

Prisoner-control is a very plausible explanation.

Ideally, the average soldier should never engage in close-quarters...

Particularly these days, when combat is taking place at ever-increasing distances.

Close-quarters is more consistent with policing than soldiering.

Yes, I agree. The real problem is that over the past 10 years, the US military missions have included a lot more "urban warfare" and policing situations (I was involved in some of the early unit training in Germany in 90-91). The units that believed their job was to find, fix, and flatten the enemy using all of their firepower and support usually had huge suprises (and casulaties) in dealing in urban settings.

I think sometimes the military misuses its troops without considering their training, e.g. using Airborne infantry for police forces... they should be used as shock troopops and then pulled out. For units like Mountain infantry at Fort Drum, having a background in unarmed technqiues may pay off on their next police mission.

[slipthejab]

Ideally, the average soldier should never engage in close-quarters...

Someone forgot to tell any war or combatants of the past 100 years that.

Particularly these days, when combat is taking place at ever-increasing distances.

Close-quarters is more consistent with policing than soldiering.

err.. I dunno if you've been following the little quagmire in Iraq... but there's plenty of close quarters involved. And it looks like for the forseeable future that it'll remain this way.

America's 'combat' role is consistantly more about policing than anything else.

What do they teach the guys loading bodybags I wonder?!

[mixmastersenior]

After Vietnam, the US Army started looking at a specialized warfare. M.O.U.T. (Military Operations in Urban Terrain). It is a whole new way of looking at combat from the methods used in the 1st half of the 20th century. The emphasis is on combat with an enemy less than 50 meters in distance with variable concealment and cover. And yes, CQC and hand to hand is empahsised more than it used to be. But hand to hand is looked upon as the very last resort. If it gets to that, then somebody usually screwed up.

[Legless_Marine]

Originally Posted by mixmastersenior

..If it gets to that, then somebody usually screwed up.

Mucho agreed.