US Army combatives and aikido

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[willy_lee]

Hello all,

Being new to this forum, I've been reading the recent threads with great interest. Here is an interesting perspective that speaks to the recent threads on "combat effectiveness of aikido" and "pressure points".

In case you didn't know, the US Army has many manuals and other publications available on the web. One of them (FM 21-150, "Combatives", http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/21-150/toc.htm) describes a basic course in hand-to-hand combat.

I was very interested to see described in the wrist-lock section, a clear (to my 3 months of aikido eyes) kote-gaishi and a nikkyo! Further, the manual emphasizes as basic principles that, in defense, one first moves offline of an attack, then takes the opponents balance, from which position many techniques are possible. I'm sure I've heard almost the exact words from my sensei :).

I'm certain that more experienced aikidoka than I would be able to see other parallels. So next time someone says aikido isn't combat effective, you can say that the US Army uses some of its techniques, they must be pretty effective! :)

The manual also provides a list, with illustrations and descriptions of possible effects and anatomical reasons for their vulnerability, of vital points/nerve points. It would be interesting, I think, to see a comparison between these points and pressure point charts as seen in traditional Asian cultures.

In case this isn't strange enough, apparently the US Army also believes in ki, or at least a "sixth sense" :) You can read about it in the "Sentry Removal" chapter.

My first post!
willy lee

[Nick]

Welcome to the forum, hope you enjoy your tenure here.

BTW, the US army is behind the Tokyo Riot Police- they've used Aikido for years now... ask one of them if it's "combat effective".

Nick

[Matt Banks]

Thats correct Nick and this June 2001 Im signed up do to the Yoshinkan Tokoyo riot police course for 9 months its gonna be great! Im training hard towards it!



Matt Banks

[Erik]

Richard Heckler (Aikikai) has recently been a part of some military training programs. It was written up in the Wall Street Journal. They ran some 15,000 soldiers through the program. Heckler taught them meditation and flowing love stuff (couldn't resist) and the other guy taught people how to kill and mutilate. :)

[lt-rentaroo]

Hello,

I've also read the posts on combat effectiveness and "real life" situations and have been waiting for someone to use the US Army and the Tokyo riot police as examples for Aikido being effective. I would also like to add that the US Navy Seals also utilize techniques which are very similar (if not identical) to some very common Aikido techniques (Kotegaeshi, Ikkyo, Nikyo). The Royal Canadian Mounted Police are taught the basic principles of Yoshinkan Aikido as well. I believe that the combat effectiveness of Aikido has been proven in many instances and those who feel otherwise are basing their judgements on silly competitions that are in no way similar to a "real life" encounter or a combat environment.

[AikiCop]

Sorry but I guess I am lost. Why in the years that Aikido has been around is the question being raised that Aikido is not combat/street effective? The information in the above post is only a small part of the proof that Aikido is at lest effective enough for military and law enforcement. So why should it be questioned? Being a Police Officer I looked for Aikido for years before I was able to start. I started Aikido because I knew that was an effective form of martial art and it was what I wanted to assist me in my carrier in Law Enforcement. I knew this because of the same information that is listed in the above post and this was before I found Aikido. I now teach Aikido to area Law Enforcement Officers and they are always returning to tell me how well it worked to subdue a violent suspect. The Officers that return to inform me of the success they have had are Officers with no more than a 16 hour, two-day training course. I can and the Officers I have trained can tell you Aikido is combat/street effective.
And I would love to attend the Yoshinkan Tokoyo Riot Police course that Matt Banks mentioned. That would be the ultimate for me.
Thanks

[ian]

Very interesting as an overview of potential attack types as well.

Ian

[Edited by ian on December 14, 2000 at 05:13am]

[Aikilove]

Hi Willy Lee!
Thank you for the link. I'm surprised that US Army let us in in there secrets.
I found some jo-dori-like techniques against bayonett and weapon attacks! It's all the same principles, only you can decide your endings yourself. Hard or soft, leathal or non leathal and everything in between.
I'm not even responding any more, to people with other MA-experience who are sceptical and asks question if Aikido is a good MA for self-defense. I say:
-Train it and see for yourself! :D

[ian]

I don't think most of them are that secret - also I'm not sure if they are aikido or ju jitsu techniques; but I'm sure we don't want to get into that argument!

Ian

[Nick]

In my experience, it's been the "tough" karateka and sometime jujutsuka that say Aikido is ineffective... My only guess is that they look, see someone attacking, see that same person flying, and don't understand why. If they don't understand why, it must be fake. The myths about Aikido being fake have been around since Americans saw the videos of O'sensei tossing people around a foot taller and a good bit heavier than he... "How he's doing that? He's just a feeble old man... it must be all show."

Etc. Etc... Come train with a few of my sensei, and tell me it doesn't work...

Heh heh.

Nick

[Wakasensei]

the army hasn't really used that TM for quite a while, we are moving to Gracie Jujutsu not becasue it is a better MA per se, but think of what is required on the battlefield for a combat soldier, Aikido is the wrong MA, for the task at hand, Personnally I think so is Gracie JJ. But, I have spoken at great length with the people who have made this policy and they made it for the following reasons, first they broke Gracie JJ down to 13 core moves
like the mount, the guard, passing the guard, some standard chokes, and and arm bars, second, using these core moves it is easier to teach a large group of people without having the personalized instruction of a dojo, which makes retention simpler and review simpler, as most infantry soldiers probably wrestled in High school vs. those that did TKD or Aikido, Im not saying this is the correct decision, Im saying this was the decision, Aikido while producing many agreat individual does not produce great fighters by army standards

[willy_lee]

Wakasensei wrote:
the army hasn't really used that TM for quite a while, we are moving to Gracie Jujutsu not becasue it is a better MA per se, but think of what is required on the battlefield for a combat soldier, Aikido is the wrong MA, for the task at hand, Personnally I think so is Gracie JJ. But, I have spoken at great length with the people who have made this policy and they made it for the following reasons, first they broke Gracie JJ down to 13 core moves...


Good to know, but I didn't mean to imply that the Army TM actually taught Aikido. I simply meant that you could find some of the same techniques there, with somewhat different emphasis.

I wonder how much of the policy move to Gracie JJ had to do with humongous amounts of recent publicity in the wake of UFC?

The reasons you've given for the policy change, as you imply, seem a little weak. The existing TM seems to do pretty well. Can't really say without seeing what they replace it with (doubt I'll be able to see it until they're ready to replace it with another again).

=willy

[andrew]

Wakasensei wrote:
the army hasn't really used that TM for quite a while, we are moving to Gracie Jujutsu

Why not Krav Maga? I've seen people train in it, it looked excellent, and the main focus in it's formulation was speed of learning. I read on some KM site that they just took the most effective, quick to learn techniques from Judo, Karate, Aikido etc and made KM out of it.
andrew

[Aikilove]

Wakasensei wrote:
...think of what is required on the battlefield for a combat soldier, Aikido is the wrong MA, for the task at hand

Your right, Aikido, is probably the wrong MA for a battlefield, since O-sensei evolved it to be an art of love not of war, but the precursor of Aikido is Daito Ryu Aikijutsu and that MA is indeed developed on the battlefield for the battlefield, and remember, the men in Japan 400 years ago were far more often, than modern armies, fighting close quarters. So D.R aikijutju workes, and that's why the techniqes you see e.i in US-army are similar to them, I mean they all want thiere troops to have the best chance of surviving and win a man to man encounter.

On the other hand, to use e.i D.R aikijutsu in the battlefield takes several years of practice, since you have to integrate the techniqes as second nature in your body and that includes the Aiki-techniqes (the ones O-sensei evolved to Aikido). And soldiers today don't have enough time to learn the hole system, only as you say the core of it, and then they might loose parts that actually makes the rest work. As Bruce Klickstein wrote - If you cut a coin into half it will no longer be worth half of the original coins value, and the same goes for Aiki in Aikijutju(do). (Or something like that!):confused:
Anyway I hope that made sense.

Jakob B

[Wakasensei]

Why not Krav Maga? I don't know, originally what had happened was that one of the combatives instructors for the Rangers was big into Russian Sambo, and Jujutsu, hence the Gracie connection. He managed to convince the battalion commander of the 2/75 rangers to make it battalion policy which in turn when he became Regimental Commander it became Regimental policy, slowly but surely it is becoming Army Policy. The army is also a little hesitant to teach really deadly skills to the majority of its soldiers, for the fear of "bar room brawlers" and civilian reprecussions. Gracie JJ also helps teach aggresiveness and teaches a lot of soldiers who have spent years on the sega and playstation what it is to be in a violent confrontation. And can show everyone else who is going to give up and who will fight. Personnally I think Gracie JJ is as worthless on the battle field as Aikido, wrong art for the circumstances. I hope this clarifies things a little, also the army has a lot of TM's that aren't current as the technology and army changes pace quite quickly

[Matt]

I was watching something on tv a couple of months back about MA. They did an interview with the guy that teaches Gracie-JJ in the army. The jist of his comments were that no martial art is really usefull since wars are fought with guns and bombs and whatnot, they teach them for the qualities that they(MA) develop. I think their choice of art is greatly influenced by popular opinion and simplicity of the art.
Matt Chavez

[Matt Banks]

I would say from a family of people in the forces. And I used to do GJJ that Aikido is far more suited to a battlefield. As Im sure you know GJJ and BJJ mainly deals with 1v1 which rarely happens in attack situations its usually 1v 2+. I would not like to me in a mount or guard position on a battlefield. I d rather be on my feet. And there is hardly any talk of defende against weapons in GJJ wearas there is lots in AIkido. In the yoshinkan as Im sure with any other style we deal with alsorts of dynamic multiple attacks physcological speaking body language etc for real life situations unlike GJJ.
It's the fake environment of the UFC which has caused organisations to adopt GJJ. Another thing ive noticed is how some styles of Aikido make this big distinction between Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu and Aikido. In the Yoshinkan it depends oon the format of the training. Aikido is just a name osensei gave the art towards the end of his life. We encompose everything from Daito Ryu into the yoshinkan including improving our spirit which I feel is left out in some Aikido which leads to the art being refered to a dance rather than an effective martial art. Insidently I know of many Yoshinkan instructors of Yoshinkan who have been awarded high dan grades in Aikijujutsu just through their study of ''Yoshinkan Aikido''. The only difference is in the name. Some schools of Daito Ryu are really flowwy. Osensei encompossed his spiritualaity with many many many other things to evolve Daito Ryu into Aikido. I like that because Aikido has a ''do'' on the end that outsiders think that Aikido has taken the same steps from Jujutsu to judo kenjutsu to kendo etc etc. It hasnt Aikidoo isnt a sport osensei never approved of tomiki aikido and he was thrown out. Daito to Aikido was an evolution not a sport induced dilution. Although im not saying sport martial arts dont have their place.



Matt Banks

[andrew]

Aikilove wrote:
[QUOTE][i], and remember, the men in Japan 400 years ago were far more often, than modern armies, fighting close quarters.

Wasn't the Daito-Ryu a family secret of Takedas that was thoguth to pretty much nobody?

andrew

[Dan Hover]

Matt wrote:
I was watching something on tv a couple of months back about MA. They did an interview with the guy that teaches Gracie-JJ in the army. The jist of his comments were that no martial art is really usefull since wars are fought with guns and bombs and whatnot, they teach them for the qualities that they(MA) develop. I think their choice of art is greatly influenced by popular opinion and simplicity of the art.
Matt Chavez

You basically hit the nail on the head, becasue One guy liked it he managed to convince the right people that this was the way to go. His Name is SSG Matt Larson. I know him and have talked with him about his decision and the various merits and demerits of the arts. And for what he was trying to accomplish GJJ seemed the appropriate fit.

[Aikilove]

andrew wrote:

Wasn't the Daito-Ryu a family secret of Takedas that was thoguth to pretty much nobody?

Your right about that the art was a secret in the sence that they didn't have big school were they learned every ronin that came over. But instead during the big battles from 1500 to 1600, in which the art came to big use, before it was named Daito Ryu, it was used by the clan Takeda and later incorporated at the son's of the 2:nd Tokugawa shogun palace as the lifeguards MA there. This becaus it had showd it's effiectivness on the battlefield. Check out http://www.daito-ryu.org/index.html

Jakob B

[Stu S]

I read a short item that said that the Marines evaluated aikido for use in combatives training in their last revision, but decided to adopt something else. Does anyone know more detail about why the Marines decided against aikido? The cover of the latest manual is visible on the Marines' doctrine site, but unlike the Army manual is not downloadable.

[michael t.]

Remember that this talk of "aikido techniques" is really quite arbitrary. It would be more accurate to speak of them as "martial techniques." The techniques themselves are based on study of the human body and its physiology. What each style brings to bear is a different philosophy on the application of these principles.

Just a tangent.

[darin]

Matt wrote:
I was watching something on tv a couple of months back about MA. They did an interview with the guy that teaches Gracie-JJ in the army. The jist of his comments were that no martial art is really usefull since wars are fought with guns and bombs and whatnot, they teach them for the qualities that they(MA) develop. I think their choice of art is greatly influenced by popular opinion and simplicity of the art.
Matt Chavez

BJJ is a total art. There is much more to it than just ground fighting. Obviously those who are writing negative things about it know very little about the art and are basing their oppinons on sport juijitsu.

Soldiers need to be tought techniques that are easy to use. They need to be able to fight in any environment, situation and range.

Most combat instructors have experience in several arts. Drawing techniques from aikido, karate, kung fu, JKD, kali, ecrima etc.

Interestingly, when Minoru Mochizuki went to France he was challenged by fencers, savate, wrestlers and boxers. He realized that Daito Ryu Aiki jujitsu was useless. So he changed to judo and kendo techniques and won easily. This is why he has added many judo and karate techniques to aikido. Upon returning to Japan he suggested to Ueshiba that he change aikido but he wasn't interested.

[Aikilove]

darin wrote:

Interestingly, when Minoru Mochizuki went to France he was challenged by fencers, savate, wrestlers and boxers. He realized that Daito Ryu Aiki jujitsu was useless. So he changed to judo and kendo techniques and won easily. This is why he has added many judo and karate techniques to aikido. Upon returning to Japan he suggested to Ueshiba that he change aikido but he wasn't interested.

Yes but remember that Ueshiba himself came in contact with Daito Ryu Aiki jiujiutsu, when he challenged Takeda and was totally dominated by him, by his Daito Ryu techniques. And before this event Ueshiba was renowned as highly skilled and unbeaten practiser of MA. I'm not sure how well Mochizuki mastered Daito Ryu compared to O-senseis Aikido, but Daito Ryu is a complete MA and probably takes even longer to master that Aikido (if that's possible).

[ian]

I really hate these divisions between different martial arts. To me you use what is appropriate. The ideal martial artist should be able to strike, throw, pin, grapple and also run away very fast ('cos no-one is unbeatable in all situations). I would agree with Jakob (above) in that Daito-ryu covers more stuff. However I feel Ueshiba took the best of daito-ryu and made it into a simple system, so that you could defend from various attacks with an appropriate technique but still had the opportunity to practise one technique enough that it became instinctive.

I think aikido is a good martial art to base everything else on i.e. learn aikido, then learn extra bits from other martial arts.

The extensive use of aikido/jitsu in the forces and services is probably for several reasons:
1. ability to brake limbs/kill people (rather than just trying to beat them to death with your fists)
2. ability to pin/control people (capture/arrest)
3. ability to fight armed people (inc. bayonets)

These are also reasons why there is a difference between a martial art and a sport.

Ian

[ian]

P.S. its funny how many martial arts have stories of how their originator decimated all the opponents in other martial arts.

To me success in real situations is far more dependent on your attitude and natural fighting ability, learning techniques is just a bonus and allows you to act instinctively instead of freezing - don't ever believe there is an ultimate martial art of ultimate martial artist! In fact every situation is different and I'm sure you could kill any martial artist given the right conditions (e.g. enough suprise).

[this may exclude Ueshiba if you believe he could actually see the spirit of the attack before it began - which I reserve judgement on]

Ian

[andrew]

Aikilove wrote:
him, by his Daito Ryu techniques. And before this event Ueshiba was renowned as highly skilled and unbeaten practiser of MA. I'm not sure how well Mochizuki mastered Daito Ryu compared to O-senseis Aikido, but Daito Ryu is a complete MA and probably takes even longer to master that Aikido (if that's possible).

I've never seen anything, ever, to suggest Ueshiba was a renowned martial artist at this point. He trained for 20(?) years in the Daito Ryu. When his Omoto-kyó mentor (Onaisaburo?) persuaded him to open a dojo and give classes he began to build a reputation. Many years after meeting Takeda.

Aikido is, in part, a distillation of hundreds of Daito ryu techniques into a small number of principles. O Senseis mastery was in attaining the level of insight required to acheive this. He never recieved his Daito Ryu Menkyo kaiden. Don't confuse the written length of a cirriculum with the arts "completeness."
andrew

[darin]

Aikilove wrote:
darin wrote:

Interestingly, when Minoru Mochizuki went to France he was challenged by fencers, savate, wrestlers and boxers. He realized that Daito Ryu Aiki jujitsu was useless. So he changed to judo and kendo techniques and won easily. This is why he has added many judo and karate techniques to aikido. Upon returning to Japan he suggested to Ueshiba that he change aikido but he wasn't interested.

Yes but remember that Ueshiba himself came in contact with Daito Ryu Aiki jiujiutsu, when he challenged Takeda and was totally dominated by him, by his Daito Ryu techniques. And before this event Ueshiba was renowned as highly skilled and unbeaten practiser of MA. I'm not sure how well Mochizuki mastered Daito Ryu compared to O-senseis Aikido, but Daito Ryu is a complete MA and probably takes even longer to master that Aikido (if that's possible).

Mochizuki and Tomiki were the only ones who got Menkyo Kaidan from Ueshiba. At that time Ueshiba was teaching Daito Ryu.

As far as I know, none of Ueshiba's students reached his level of mastery. Its not surprising that Mochizuki as well as Gozo Shioda and Kenji Tomiki changed aikido to match their own ability.

[Jimro]

During this open conversation it has been established that Aikido is combat effective. Unfortunately not all encounters are the same. What works in the middle of a Middle East desert may not work at 2 a.m. in New York city.

Every soldier attending Basic Combat Training recieves two solid weeks of rifle marksmanship training. I saw few of my classmates go from no experience with weapons to consistantly knock down the 300 meter target. Accompanying the M16 was bayonnet, grenade, and machine gun training. So I'm pretty sure that the senior leadership isn't looking for another way to kill the enemy.

I know GJJ is easy to teach and is good physical conditioning. It may help sagging moral and bring back a warrior mentality. I do not believe that a hand to hand martial art will be a serious cause of enemy deaths in the next conflict. The battlefield has changed from when MA's were oftentimes the difference between life and death.

Martial arts are more beneficial to the regular military for the mindset they help produce than as a combative skill. The SpecOps community will probably continue with their own training programs.

I'd rather do Aikido but I wasn't consulted. Thanks for your time.

James

You are,
what you do,
when it counts.

[Aikilove]

andrew wrote:
I've never seen anything, ever, to suggest Ueshiba was a renowned martial artist at this point. He trained for 20(?) years in the Daito Ryu. When his Omoto-kyó mentor (Onaisaburo?) persuaded him to open a dojo and give classes he began to build a reputation. Many years after meeting Takeda.


He trained sumo and kenjutsu before even meeting Takeda.

[andrew]

Aikilove wrote:
andrew wrote:
I've never seen anything, ever, to suggest Ueshiba was a renowned martial artist at this point. He trained for 20(?) years in the Daito Ryu. When his Omoto-kyó mentor (Onaisaburo?) persuaded him to open a dojo and give classes he began to build a reputation. Many years after meeting Takeda.


He trained sumo and kenjutsu before even meeting Takeda.

I've trained aikido and kung fu. So what?
andrew

[Nick]

darin wrote:

Mochizuki and Tomiki were the only ones who got Menkyo Kaidan from Ueshiba. At that time Ueshiba was teaching Daito Ryu.


Roy Suenaka sensei was given a menkyo kaiden certificate by O'sensei prior to opening the Okinawa Aikikai, I belive in '63 or '64... not sure about the date, my books are at home.

Nick

[BC]

Aikilove wrote:
andrew wrote:
I've never seen anything, ever, to suggest Ueshiba was a renowned martial artist at this point. He trained for 20(?) years in the Daito Ryu. When his Omoto-kyó mentor (Onaisaburo?) persuaded him to open a dojo and give classes he began to build a reputation. Many years after meeting Takeda.


He trained sumo and kenjutsu before even meeting Takeda.

Actually, according to most well researched historians (Stanley Pranin), O Sensei only dabbled in one or two other jujutsu (Tenshin Shinyo ryu and Yagyu ryu) styles and a little judo before beginning his study of daito ryu. This has been confirmed in interviews with the late Doshu Kisshomaru Ueshiba. See the interview with Stanley Pranin at this thread:

http://www.aikiweb.com/interviews/pranin0800.html

Regards,

[Jim23]

A: When did you begin the study of martial arts?

O-Sensei: At about the age of 14 or 15. First I learned Tenshinyo-ryu Jiujitsu from Tokusaburo Tozawa Sensei, then Kito-ryu, Yagyu-ryu, Aioi-ryu, Shinkage-ryu, all of them jujutsu forms. However, I thought there might be a true form of budo elsewhere. I tried Hozoin-ryu sojitsu and kendo. But all of these arts are concerned with one-to-one combat forms and they could not satisfy me. So I visited many parts of the country seeking the Way and training, but all in vain.


A: Then you did not learn aikido from the beginning. When did aikido come into being?

O-Sensei: As I said before, I went to many places seeking the true budo..Then, when I was about 30 years old, I settled in Hokkaido. On one occasion, while staying at Hisada Inn in Engaru, Kitami Province, I met a certain Sokaku Takeda Sensei of the Aizu clan. He taught Daito-ryu jujutsu. During the 30 days in which I leamed from him I felt something like an inspiration. Later, I invited this teacher to my home and together with 15 or 16 of my employees became a student seeking the essence of budo.

Jim23

[BC]

Interesting. It seems there is some inconsistent information between Mr. Pranin's interview with O Sensei and his interview last year by Jun (just an observation and no offense or criticism intended). I wonder if it had to do with how substantial O Sensei's studies of these arts were?

[Jim23]

The following is from two interviews with Katsuyuki Kondo conducted in 1988 and 1992.

How do you view the relationship between Sokaku Takeda Sensei and Morihei Ueshiba Sensei?

Katsuyuki Kondo: This is just my personal opinion, but Morihei Sensei studied Daito-ryu for over twenty years and served Sokaku Takeda Sensei as his master. Sokaku Sensei looked after Morihei Sensei as his student in various ways. There are many stories about this aspect of their relationship, illustrating the courtesy of a student towards his master and the affection of a master towards his student. This relationship continued for a period of time, and at a certain point Morihei Sensei began to seek his own path and eventually created modern aikido. Morihei Sensei was a great person, and I believe that anybody who can be called great always exceeds his master. I do not know that Morihei Ueshiba Sensei exceeded his master, Sokaku Takeda Sensei, in terms of technical ability, but I think that realistically speaking, Morihei Sensei far exceeded Sokaku Sensei in terms of number of students and also the extent of his reputation.


Sensei, you mentioned the designations kyoju dairi and soke dairi. Historically, what do the kyoju dairi and menkyo kaiden qualifications mean and who has been awarded these certifications thus far?

Katsuyuki Kondo: There are quite a few people who received the kyoju dairi during Sokaku Takeda's time. Morihei Ueshiba Sensei was one of them. Also, there were Kotaro Yoshida Sensei, Kodo Horikawa Sensei, Toshimi Matsuda Sensei, Yukiyoshi Sagawa Sensei; all together I know of eighteen people who received the kyoju dairi from Sokaku Sensei.

---

From an interview with Kenji Tomiki.


It was in 1926 that Kenji Tomiki first met Morihei Ueshiba in Tokyo and was highly impressed by the latter's mastery of jujutsu techniques. After graduation from Waseda in 1927 with a degree in political science, Tomiki entered graduate school majoring in economics. During the summer of that year he spent a month of intensive training in Daito-ryu aikijujutsu under Ueshiba Sensei at the Omoto headquarters in Ayabe, near Kyoto. For Tomiki, Ueshiba Sensei's art included a huge body of essential jujutsu techniques which served as a vital complement to his judo training.


Jim23

[BC]

What do those have to do with determining what martial arts O Sensei studied?

More relevant is how does any of this relate to the original topic of this thread - army combatives and aikido? My apologies to the starter of this thread.

[Jim23]

... that this doesn't prove anything, and my other post was correct that you missed a few.

My personal feeling was that O-Sensi was probably playing down Daito-ryu by mentioning so many styles (I didn't just play baseball at college, I also played badminton, chess and table tennis).

But you're right, this is off topic. Apologies accepted on behalf of all.

Jim23

[Aikilove]

andrew wrote:

[QUOTE]Aikilove wrote:
He trained sumo and kenjutsu before even meeting Takeda.

andrew wrote:
I've trained aikido and kung fu. So what?
andrew [/B]

Andrew, In my statement I just replied your statement of you don't finding any record of O-senseis previous skilles of budo. And I believe Jim23 made it even clearer that O-sensei studied a bunch of jiujutsu and kenjutsu styles before Daitoryu.

[andrew]

Aikilove wrote:
andrew wrote:

[QUOTE]Aikilove wrote:
He trained sumo and kenjutsu before even meeting Takeda.

andrew wrote:
I've trained aikido and kung fu. So what?
andrew

Andrew, In my statement I just replied your statement of you don't finding any record of O-senseis previous skilles of budo. And I believe Jim23 made it even clearer that O-sensei studied a bunch of jiujutsu and kenjutsu styles before Daitoryu. [/B]

Here, look, there's a difference between being skilled and being renowned as such. Ueshiba was known for his physical strength at that time, but not as a master of the martial arts. That is my point. My own sensei is quite skilled, but he's known as a guy who does aikido to other martial artists, not as a renowned undefeatable master of budo to the general populace.

For the sake of topic, he _was_ supposed to be very skilled with bayonet while in the army.. (Are those still used?)
andrew

[boyerc]

Coming from someone who writes doctrine (not that particular one however) for the US Army, if the Army thought there was one thing in that manual it thought was a secret, the public would not have access to it.

When you write doctrine, you have to select whether or not you want to restrict access before it gets published to the web.

[Jimro]

Bayonets are still in use.

James

[Chuck.Gordon]

ian wrote:
I don't think most of them are that secret - also I'm not sure if they are aikido or ju jitsu techniques; but I'm sure we don't want to get into that argument!

Ian

Army combatives owe more to the influence of jujutsu and judo teachers than to aikido folks (Heckler et al included). However, the technique similarities are such that it doesn't much matter.

The Army FM covering combatives was originally, IIRC, written in the late 1930s or early 1940s and has been modified over the years since.

I hadn't seen a copy of it for several years and got my hands on a recent version earlier this month, as a matter of fact. Not a whole lot had really changed sine I last read it.

Nothing secret there, BTW.

And BESIDES, aikido IS jujutsu, anyhow, making it all pretty moot.

I think the underlying theme here is that 'if the military uses aikido, it must make aikido a pretty kick-ass martial art.'

If I missed the point, there, I apologize in advance.

Here's my take on the sunject.

It's not important. Really. Do you enjoy aikido? Does it offer something that enhances your life? Then aikido is the 'right' martial art for you.

If not, go find something that does. Combat effectiveness? Geez, go buy an axe handle or a handgun.

Budo (and yes, Virginia, aikido IS budo) is a great way to learn a lot about yourself, learn some _principles_ of unarmed/lightly-armed combat, leanr something about a unique and fascinating culture ...

It's NOT about being the best fighter on the block. Not today, anyhow.

cg aka LOEP

[Dan Hover]

[/B][/QUOTE]
LOEP said
And BESIDES, aikido IS jujutsu, anyhow, making it all pretty moot.



Budo (and yes, Virginia, aikido IS budo) is a great way to learn a lot about yourself, learn some _principles_ of unarmed/lightly-armed combat, leanr something about a unique and fascinating culture ...


cg aka LOEP [/B][/QUOTE]

So which is it a Jujutsu? which it clearly is not or a budo? Which it clearly is. Budo is not jujutsu and
vice versa. Army combatives are not in any way shape or form a "do" form.

you are mixing definitions in your post. And I am not quite sure what you were trying to say by the mixed defintions either.

[Chuck.Gordon]

[/B]
So which is it a Jujutsu? which it clearly is not or a budo? Which it clearly is. Budo is not jujutsu and
vice versa. Army combatives are not in any way shape or form a "do" form.[/QUOTE]

Wow. This is reaching back. I hadn't realized that I hand't answered this.

Budo is martial ways and arts, bujutsu is a different way to express it. The terms jutsu and do are pretty much interchangeable (despite the misunderstanding fostered by a few writers' attempts to interpret and catalog something that simply doesn't translate well into English), and though they carry somewhat different 'flavors', they both connote a systematic, internalized study of a particular discipline.

Therefore, bujutsu is budo and vice versa.

Now then, jujutsu is a generic label that describes almost any unarmed or lightly armed Japanese combat discipline. Under the umbrella of jujutsu, we find things ranging from the very esoteric to the very mundane and systems ranging from joint manipulations to systems utilizing strikes and kicks.

Jujutsu is 'bread' and aikido is 'Poppa Ueshiba's homemade rasin nut bread.

What I was trying to say was that folks who say: Jujutsu is barbaric and aikido is sublime are contradicting themselves.

Chuck

[Amassus]

Remember that this talk of "aikido techniques" is really quite arbitrary. It would be more accurate to speak of them as "martial techniques." The techniques themselves are based on study of the human body and its physiology. What each style brings to bear is a different philosophy on the application of these principles

My thoughts exactly.
The wrists/limbs whatever, only move so many ways. I've seen kote gaeshi in many other forms of martial art, how and when you apply them makes all the difference.

Does the army teach ukemi? ;)

Btw, Merry Christmas everyone :)

[Rupert Atkinson]

Hello all,
In case you didn't know, the US Army has many manuals and other publications available on the web. One of them (FM 21-150, "Combatives", http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/21-150/toc.htm describes a basic course in hand-to-hand combat.
willy lee

Hey, that link doesn't work for me - what gives?


Oh - and a pretty old thread is it not?

[Adramalek]

Just trying to help you guys US. ARMY uses a system based upon B Jujitsu,... as it was developed by the Gracies . The truth is,.. that the system was gonna be... RIP but the guy,... got his posterior,... ungracefully wup,... on a UFC match by a guy called (The Specimen)..... the problem started when the announcer introduced him.. as.. a... US ARMY AIRBORNE RANGER in UFC 4 or 5,... and the Match doesn't last more than 35 seconds ... basically... he went for a shoot to the leg and didn't saw the knee coming in .....and..... poooof...... that was it..... of course this was seen as a discualifier of the system........ and then someone asked well,..... who the hell won the first 3 or 4?..... the answer was.......... a Brazilian named Gracie Sir and that was it I hope, I could tell you it was more complicated than that,... but no... that was it......... NOW......... not all soldiers fall under this rule of B Jujitsu based combatives specialized units S. Ops have the ability and budget to get specialized training from other sources,... this include G.Barrettes and Delta..... If you search the manuals for example, NAVY S.W. T you'll see portions made by Shidoshi Frank W. Dux formerly DUX RYU now F.A.S.S.T....... If you look at seminars for ST 1 or 2 on the Atlantic region, you'll see Paul Vunak as one of their favorite instructors..... if you go to the west side you'll see Frank Gucci, Rorion Gracie among others, this one type fits all is only for main force units, it doesn't apply to U.W. guys..... hope you have a better perspective evileyes

[eyrie]

Hello,

I've also read the posts on combat effectiveness and "real life" situations and have been waiting for someone to use the US Army and the Tokyo riot police as examples for Aikido being effective. I would also like to add that the US Navy Seals also utilize techniques which are very similar (if not identical) to some very common Aikido techniques (Kotegaeshi, Ikkyo, Nikyo). The Royal Canadian Mounted Police are taught the basic principles of Yoshinkan Aikido as well. I believe that the combat effectiveness of Aikido has been proven in many instances and those who feel otherwise are basing their judgements on silly competitions that are in no way similar to a "real life" encounter or a combat environment.

Actually these are "generic" techniques are found in many styles of jujitsu and aiki-jitsu. They come from a group of waza known as "ude osae" and are not specific to aikido.

[Kevin Leavitt]

The old "21 Series" FM for combatives was supersceded a while back. the new one is FM 3-25.150. You can find more information about the Army Combatives Program at http://www.infantry.army.mil/combatives/

I am working extensively with the program in my unit and have also studied aikido for about 10 years now. If you have questions concerning the program I'd be happy to answer them or point you to a competent source.

The only thing I can say is that the program is currently being used by the Army. It is proving to be successful in it's goals, which is BTW, NOT to produce lethal budoka. While some of the applications may be useful to those outside of the Army, I would be hesitant to compare it to budo.

In fact, I think it is not possible to compare arts and kinda silly anyway as each has a different perspective, goals, and philosphy behind it. If it works for you...do it.