Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

You are not alone Erick, we are all guilty of this to a greater of lesser degree. :(

Whichever thread this discussion takes place in, it is healthy that it is taking place at all.

How we 'the citizens' of the free world conduct ourselves and 'our' armies in the various 'flashpoints' around the world, will determine the shape of things to come for the foreseeable future.

Aikido provides the principles for effective engagement in conflict. It is what we do in the dojo - practice the principles over and over until they become embodied.

As I mentioned in an earlier post I may just be a wishful thinking old hippy, but when face with a problem I tend to look for a solution. Aikido philosophy provides 'a' solution, a way to deal with conflict. But to transfer that philosophy to the wider world, well alot of work has to be done. It seems that we are along way off from that yet. So we need to do what we can to spread the word and 'be the change we want to see'.

I'm sure there are many soldiers serving right now that are just as disgusted as the civilians at some of the blatant disregard for the 'accepted' rules of engagement. They have to accept it or take the consequenses ( A Royal Airforce Doctor recently refused to return to Iraq recently on the grounds that it was an illegal war and that his conscience would not allow him to go back - A Court Marshall found against him ). We the citizens do not have to accept things in the same way. We must do what we can to ensure that the 'soldiers/warriors acting on our behalf, do so with dignity. Otherwise we must step down from the position of having any moral superiority over our enemies.

Good discussion chaps, keep it respectful and real. Too much defference, results in unpalatable truths sometimes not being brought to light.

regards

Mark

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Well said!

I hope no soldiers or civilians or enemy combatants died due to this doctor (who probably didn't pay for his schooling) refusal to go back.

I've never liked the whole legal illegal war argument myself. Who makes a war legal, the UN? Thats hardly reassuring.

People simply need to accept responsibility for their actions (ie voters or soldiers refusing their marching orders)
Accepting responsibility for the protection of human life is a big Aikido principal in my (thin) book.

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

I had a squad leader, who was the best squad leader I every had, the epitome of a soldier, refuse to deploy. (he wasn't in my chain of command when this happened). He mobilized and deployed to the training site, but refused to go when it came time to cross the pond.

He felt that his platoon leader and company commander were idiots and were going to get people killed. Several people I know tried to talk to him about the issue to get him to reconsider. They needed him more than ever if that were the case and he should stay to protect the men that he said were at risk.

He did not feel in his good conscience that he could be apart of it.

Everyone makes his decisions. I respected his decision, albeit I was sorely disappointed that he did not go, as I agree his men needed him.

He was reduced to E-1 and given a dishonorable discharge. It was too bad as he was one of the guys that were needed to lead us in making good decsions.

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

The Doctor can't be held resposible for any death that occurs due to his acting in accord with his own conscience, he is paying the price by being 'detained at Her Majesty's pleasure'. There would be alot less death if all men acted in a similar way instead of blindly following either 'orders' or 'god's will' or any other 'external pressure'.
Good men can end up doing awful things, they need to give themselves a reason for doing so.. :(

regards,

Mark

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Oh I agree, too many people jump on the following orders bandwagon, on the flip side of the coin though can you imagine what would happen if every soldier could pick and choose what order he followed?

While I wouldn't hold this doctor responsible for any deaths (thats being a little ridiculous of course) I do feel he has a duty to his high station. Same with Kevin's example. I would bread bread with these guys any day, it takes a serious dose of courage to do what you feel is right and accept harsh consequences. However I think that sometimes whats good for the individual needs to take a back seat to whats good for group. In the two examples of the doctor and squad leader, good on them for doing what they felt is right but I can't help but wonder how many other people (who don't want to be there either) would have benefited from having them around both medically and leadership wise.
It can almsot become an argument of putting the needs of others above your own, depending on perspective. (And easily argued :) )

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Kevin,

Effectively, you answer your own question...

So how are values and morals different from "spiritual functions?" I challenge you to come up with a spiritual discipline, devoid of values or morality (even Hedonism has its moral tenets).

I disagree. The spiritual function of a tool is...a tool: a concrete means of manifesting your intangible goals. Think about all the symbolic underpinnings of a "tool," and you might see what I mean.

How you came to own the tool (did you steal them? Make them? Buy them at Safeway?) plays a role in the spiritual function, of these tool, as well: including what you plan to do with them (build a piece of art? A bridge? A tank? Break into a home?)

Come on...soldiers in years' past of all nations put great stock and symbolism into their weapons of war...their tools. I certainly don't need to go into the symbolism of the sword, to the Samurai. I'm betting that today's US soldier's also place spiritual values on their tanks, rifles, planes, etc, as well...even tho it isn't expressed that way.

No, it doesn't: I agree. But that does not mean that the spiritual function of the Army isn't there.

And how is this not a spiritual calling? I could use this sentence to describe the Roman Catholic Church, substituting "soldiers" for "clergy," and "state" for "God."

IMO, this IS a spiritual calling. Anytime you swear an oath to anything: you better believe that there is a spiritual function apparent.

Again, we can agree to disagree: but I think that at this point, some of our differences are semantical.

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Grant,

I could go on about the illegality of this war: but you've probably heard it all already.

But I will comment on the "spiritual," or "great cause" that this war is being fought over.

If there really IS such a great cause to this war: then why is it so hard for the White House to articulate what it is? Cindy Sheehan hounds Bush for an answer: and he cannot give her one.

If the leaders are unable to clarify what our "great cause" is; if they are unable to coherently detail what are the legal rules of engagement--then how are the soldiers on the ground supposed to parse all this out?

And, how does Aikido philosophy fit into fighting a war with a vague "cause?" (the closest I can figure what this "cause" is, is some sort of "crusade." But it would be a bad political move for W to articulate this out loud, considering where we are, in the world).

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Aikido stance/posture is one of being upright, prepared, relaxed, open, focused and centered. The hands are open offering a non confrontational image ( as opposed to the closed fist ). The being in this stance must embody the principles of aikido otherwise it is just an outward show.

It is easy to see where the protagonists in the latest round of hostilities are not being 'aiki'. From a 'muscle' point of view the US is the largest most powerful military force on the planet, but unfortunately the 'mind' moving the muscle is not enlightened or developed enough to consider aiki principles.

An example of an aikido principle is "know your partners mind". When Mr Bush used the term 'Crusade' early on in the post 9/11 tub thumping. He did not consider how much of a provocation that would be in the world outside, his sense of history only seems to go as far back as his being 're-born'. Offering to crush or annihilate, does nothing to calm the situation. Admittedly it must be hard for someone brought up in such great privilege to "know the mind" of the 'terrorists' but unless the attempt is made, the same problems will just be repeated ad infinitum.

In the same way that a smaller more skillfull aikidoka can handle a larger more powerfull opponent, the smaller enemy can negate the muscle of one with the largest 'firepower' by not fighting on the same terms. The re-emergence of the Taliban is a case in point, these people have a nearly a 1000 years of fighting history to draw on. And you can't bomb an 'ideology into extinction.

The vested interests in maintaining conflict and war, may be far too widespread and powerfull to consider that the ideals of the 'art of peace' have a chance of being employed. There is great profit to be had in 'fighting'. It is obvious and well documented. The US military is already talking in terms of the 'Long War' being fought for 20 years or so. Those who profit from conflict must be rubbing their grubby little hands together in glee. :disgust:

When you see a war to be fought and won whether it be against terror, drugs or poverty etc. you are not approaching the problem with an aikido mindset. We have to look at these issues and apply intelligence, cooperation, and a sense of compassion to the proceedings. Given the current state of play, we have got enough to keep us busy for many years to come.

We live in an interesting time in history chaps. We communicate with each other on this forum, one to one, from all around the globe. The internet has changed how we communicate for ever. We must use this tool for good. The greater the information passed amongs all of us at the ground level the less chance that we can be miss-led by propaganda from our 'leaders'.

It's Monday morning and I got out of bed on the wrong side! :(

regards,

Mark

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Acceptance of those results that tend toward harmony and reduce total discord are true Aiki. The overall judgment of the case cannot be made with either an overly narrow or an overall generalized view. History will judge us all, for good or ill, both those who support and those who oppose the current conflict. Be not quick to judge, therefore ....

The moral case is made out in the larger picture as well as in the immediate circumstance. Willy-nilly acceptance of the intended results of others does not result in harmony, but merely forestalls and deepens eventual conflict. Complex and subtle motivations are often lost or overcome in simple deeds, for good or ill. The best of intentions is the often the preface to disaster.

This is one reason why Aiki is such an effective response to violence, despite its antihetical position in comparison to the modern expecation of predictive, testable, repeatable results. Its predictive horizons are exceedingly short, precisely because it does not need them. Battle is still ruled by contingency and caprice. The effort in Iraq, with Iran, and with jihadism generally, is bound to such contingencies. It is the criticism of many that the inital reason for action may have changed, and the present stance seems ill-poised for predicitable victory timetable. Sorry, that is war.

We do not complain when the threatened shomneuchi morphs into a munetsuki. We simply abandon the shomenuchi in our response and address the mnunetsuki now presented. We aikidoka beat this out of ourselves the moment we quit asking "which foot should I have forward?" We should judge our war councils in no less favorable light, for they will answer to us eventually. The same is not true of the war councils of the enemy.

And we do not? My Celtic forebears have been fighting westward across the globe now for nigh on three thousand. We're getting pretty good at it, actually.

Been to Japan lately? That was mass exercise of Aiki of the first water. Yamato damashii, indeed. So far, a number of bombings have caused the surrender or near surrender of a great number of people and governments in the rightness of defending and promoting ordered liberty and popular government. Spain being a case in point.

Aiki is not submission, even though it is in a narrow, technical sense, non-resistance. Submission may be victory; resistance may be death. The converse can also be true. Submission can mean good things. As in the case of Japan. This can mean bad things. In the case of global jihadism, their aim is nothing less than the submission of all to their view of God, and for whom resistance to their particular direction means justifiable death. Not aiki in my book either.

When someone girds on a sword, it is not ill-considered to think it means war. When civilians are specifically targeted, it is not ill-considered to view the means of that war to be evil and dishonorable. To merely assume an enemy will not use his sword, is not aiki. To assume that an enemy will respond to reason and persuasion, is not aiki.

Aiki does not persuade, it does not chasten, it does not bully. Aiki comes into its own when the enemy strikes. Aiki waits for action and then does act, and with devastating effect to remove the foundational premises of the enemy's attack, using the enemy's own power against him.

The heart of the enemy's power lies in the oppression of the people, which has existed for centuries, and which they promise to relieve using the the same tools by which the people themselves have been exploited by tyrants -- terror. This is the strategic connection between Al-qaida, the Taliban, Iraq, Libya and yes, Iran. As ideology it is false; as method it is ugly, and would merely continue the opression of the people, were they to win. No person coming to power by such means has ever surrendered the use of them to maintain it. Never.

The foundational premise of Jihadism is not aiki. Its chief strategic criteria are two: compulsion of its opponents by means of fear and intimidation, and to inspire its supporters by spectacular acts of symbolic vengeance for past oppression. It cannot prevail by means of the first alone; it cannot survive at all without the second. By means of the action against Hussein and the Taliban we demonstrated that we would not tolerate regimes of terror. In Libya we demonstrated that our goal was not subjugation. This is the first delivery of a promise to the people at large. We can remove sources of oppression without becoming one.

How does one respond in aiki to the victims of this fear and terror who are in harm's way? The first answer is that you CANNOT lead them from harm's way. Budo should teach us by now, that there is almost no way by direct opposition in defense to stop anyone committed to killing from carrying out their objective if they disregard their own life. A walkking deadman will still kill you. Only irimi and aiki will save you from such attack.

The nature of the enemy's weapons does not allow us victory in terms of their first criterion. The only option is to establish a situation in which fear and terror are progressively de-legitimized in the eyes of its victims, and therefore do not inspire support. Then the enemy will be defeated because people themselves hound it out, not before.

The people must first feel the exercise of their own power, which they have been prevented from for centuries. This cannot happen without help. The enemy will not abandon his first criterion, and he must be engaged to minimize his impact there, but we cannot win on that ground alone. This cannot happen unless governments responsible to the people they govern exist in the region exploited by jihadism. It is a precondition to victory.

It still may not work. This is the point of the propaganda war against the U.S. by means of our failures at Abu Ghraib and in other, less graphic incidents -- to rebut this case. Those are failures without doubt. It is the reason three jihadists just commited coordinated suicide at Guantanamo top further their own cause. They understand the calculus of terror and oppression, and they have demonstrated an committed ability to exercise both its affirmative and negative modes.

But everything we are doing is done with that end in mind despite the failures. We are doing aiki there, albeit by fits and starts.

Cordially,
Erick Mead

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Respectfuly disagree.

We didn't surrender to the jihadism, we defeated a government who was opposing the sovereign spanish people's will and manipulating/hiding info about the bombings.

Regards,
Demetrio

Jun,
Sorry for cooperating to the thread hijack, but i felt the need of pointing that as a spanish citizen (with celtic ancestors, btw).

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Grant,

It warms my heart to hear someone who is putting himself in harm's way so that I can be safe - ask the questions you are asking. I think you need no training from me, sir.

In extreme situations, the entire universe becomes our foe; at such critical times, unity of mind and technique is essential - do not let your heart waver!"- OSensei.

To me this means - get up when you fall down. If your heart despairs from what you see or do, remember who you are.

david

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Neil wrote:

No they don't. My M4 carbine that is loaded with all the latest technology, lasers, and night vision sites etc is a tool that I use to do my job. My job is based on the missions that my "higher" command issues to me to do. I would make decisions based on that mission about the proper way to employ that weapon. I have a great deal of training that allows me to make decisions about what constitutes a lawful and ethical order.

My orders from the military come from civilians that are placed in there position by the President of the United States, who is in all effect (debatable I know), elected by the people of the United States.

Not sure where spirituality fits in to that equation.

I certainly have my own beliefs (spiritual, ethics, and values), that I must reconcile with the above. No doubt that in order to maintain good order and discipline we must appeal to these things as both a military and a society.

However, that is a distinct difference from the Military serving a spiritual function.

Now the leaders and popular opinion that may send us to war may be based on a underlying belief system or "religion", (I'd argue that capitalism to a degree is a spiritual value actually Neil), or something along those lines.

So, if you want to affect change, it should not be directed at the military, but at society at large as that is the driving force behind the "tool" of the military. We really don't make our own decisions on a Macro level.

(this is why I said I tend not to focus on the whole Gestalt of the thing).

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

I really don't think this is a hijack. How can aiki be relevant outside the dojo unless we think practically about how it may be used, or perhaps has been used, to reach happier reults from very bad beginnings?

All due respect to Demetrio, my Celtic and Iberian cousin could not be worthy of the name, without defending his own. Gonzalez and Moreno on my mother's side. We've been in Florida since before it was ceded by the Spanish Crown.

Was the Spanish election an exercise of aiki, though, or not? It may be as you say, and the adjustment needed to be made. But it did not play that way outside of Spain. Certainly, it was not perceived as you say in the Souq. The Moorish conflict with Christian Spain is not an idle cultural memory any more than mention of the Crusades (which made me just cringe in my seat.) Such references where they are made available to the enemy will be and have been exploited. Very poor aiki on both points, in my view, like sticking your elbow up in ikkyo, you might as well shout, "Come and get it!".

I despise politics. But then maybe I have never yet seen politics practiced with aiki, at least, not outside of a setting of war. There, I can think of a few examples.

The collective acceptance of occupation by the Japanese people at the end of WWII was preeminently aiki. The model of approach used by McArthur was aiki too. He made the emperor the price of empire. They explicitly chose the emperor as the one unspoken but absolute condition of otherwise complete surrender.

McArthur used the Yamato Damashii cult itself, the very engine of the Japanese war effort, to sever the connection between emperor and the imperial ambitions of the Japanese political regime, without severing the ties of sovereignty felt between the people and their emperor. Hirohito deserves much credit here as well. The result is a worthy tribute to both sides.

How else can aiki be applied at small or large scales in the context of the present conflict? Let's not get into personality bashing (and certinaly not any detestable politics). Can we look at given issues, small scale or large scale, and see if we have anything useful and practial to offer from a perspecitve of aiki that will aid in a happier result?

If the enemy will not go away, then wishing it were so is not aiki. Analogizing principles or techniques is the way we expand our repertoire anyway.

Any takers?

Cordially,
Erick Mead

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

For weapons and tools: think about the Japanese concept of kami. Now (as I understand it), kami inhabit all things, even have personalities.

Of course, the West doesn't believe in kami: but we do have an analogue...we imbue our cars, our tanks, our weapons with personalities.

What were the names of the weapons that fell on Nagasaki and Hiroshima? Fat Man and Little Boy.

Why are cars mostly given female names, and people talk about their cars as if they were people?

Now, please: go on and tell me that soldiers don't call their tanks names; don't engage in fanciful imaginings of machines, having personalities.

But, OK: you might well say that this is not proof of a belief in the spiritual, and I say that it is. If you look at how we, as individuals and as a culture, fetish'ize, anthropomorphize, and advertise cars and trace these beliefs to their roots in our collective and individual psyche's, then I think we'd agree that yes, there is a spirtuality inherent in the way ppl treat their cars.

And if their cars, why not tanks?

Taking an oath is the same thing...look at what you are doing, as an oathtaker. Think about the symbolic underpinnings of taking an oath. What pictures come to mind? Arthur and Medieval knights? A court of law? Standing next to a flag?

I mean, if there were no symbol or spirituality inherent, then why bother with the whole "raise your hand: repeat after me" nonsense? Why not just sign a piece of paper? A verbal oath does nothing concrete, save reinforce the seriousness of the job.

Now, about the spirituality inherent in an organization...just look to their motto's. Is not the Army (police force, etc) referred to as a "brotherhood?" Are there not fraternal organizations inherent in the Army, police, colleges and some High Schools?

I mean, be honest, Kevin: even the Boy Scouts admits to a spirituality, in its undertakings. They don't ship kids out to the woods, just to get some fresh air.

Absolutely: capitalism is a spiritual value!

I disagree. The Pentagon does a number of things totally on its own. Also, a large part of why the Vietnam War ended was due to the increasing rumblings within the Army itself.

But, I do agree on the efficacy of directing cries for change at society, rather than the military.

When protestors disobey orders to disperse and, say: blockade recruiting sites, they aren't trying to affect change through the military, they are trying to reach out to society, rather than through the military.

IMHO: your loss. ;)

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Well Kevin, your debatably elected President and by default your Commader in Chief, has openly talked about his taking oders from a 'higher source' or words to that effect. His intensely 'personal spirituality' has a bearing on his deeds/actions. Badly chosen words like 'crusade' slip from his lips, showing his leanings, there by reminding us of his questionable suitability for the head man's job.
Just bringing it up as you said you were unsure. ;)

regards,

Mark

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Person A tells Person B to shoot someone. Person B does and and justifies it with 'I was just taking orders.'.

Any other sphere and A and B might be in trouble.

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

The post second world war saw both Japan and Germany rebuilt into productive peaceful countries, with much credit needing to be paid to the US for the many $$'s that it took and for the leadership in Mc Arthur and Marshall. Aiki in action? yes I would say, but in the case of Japan, only after the double atemi blows dealt by little Little Boy and Fat Man. An Aikido teacher may admonish the student for being 'too forceful', but remember it was WWII aikido, and the 'softer style was yet to come.

As O Sensei got older and 'perhaps' wiser? his aikido became 'softer' but no less powerful. As the priciples of aikido were in him, they also expanded. His early martial ability and effectiveness is accepted. And through this the priciples were developed.
I think but am not entirely sure, that many MA Masters tend to move towards the deeper and more subtle levels that the arts inherently posess - surely this is logical and it's why they are called art's.

Perhaps the seeds of the transformation of global 'hard style' to global 'soft style' are sown in a worldwider cyber dojo 'right here'.

It must be our responsibility as aikidoka to translate the principles of aikido to the wider world. It's not going to happen on it's own.

I practice with the 5 priciples of practicing ki aikido in the dojo.

1. Extending your mind
2. Know your partners mind
3. Respect your partners ki
4. Put yourself in your partners place
5. Perform with confidence.

They are pretty straightforward and the non aikido world can easily understand them if you substute 'will' or 'intent' ( or any other suitable word ) for the untranslatable 'ki'. The corporate world is already working in an aiki way, they already practice the principles in the best run companies.
An example of corporate aikido:
VW and Ford were competitors in a fierce marketplace, but they shared their resources to build a common vehicle. They still competed with each other but they both benefitted through lower costs.

I personally believe through my own experience, and the fact that I am a commited secularist, these priciples are as close to 'truth' as I am going to get.

By practicing these priciples in the dojo, we can achieve improvement as human beings, albeit slow and hard won, and also have alot of fun in the process.

IMO These priciples can be applied to all human interaction, micro and macro. We are pest placed to put these principles into our own lives, then, and only then can we go out with our candle into the world.

We as akidoka are not the warriors we like to think we are, if we don't aspire to be one of the ones 'fighting' for "the loving protection of all things" that O Sensei said aikido was for.

Something to mull over maybe?

regards,

Mark

p.s. I still reserve the right to have a good moan about things though ;)

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Re: trying to call a skunk a cat, I mean, talking about war and bombs as if they are compatible with aikido techniques, the page

http://www.aikidofaq.com/interviews.html

shows

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

I am going to give advice; this is not my opinion.

Honor the warrior, detest the war.

This way those of us who served, those who fought, were injured, killed in battle, those noncombatants and civilians upon whom horrors are visited - are not disrespected.

David

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Ah, IMHO, here we get closer to the truth as I see it. Quit looking at the symptom, war, and start looking at the cause. The military does not start wars, it fights them. Society is the collective minds of the majority of the individuals. Fear and pain in the mind of the individual effects society. Change the mind, not others, but our own. The mind is the tool of change.

When I served, I did what I was told and what I was trained to do. It saved my life and those with me. Too much thought caused hesitation and death.

We can all think and express idealistic views from our relative safety because some one is standing guard and watching our backs. Domo arigato.

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Please note the stated condition:

"Heaven on earth"/"entire world... in harmony" --- "THEN" we do not need atomic weapons.

Still working on the harmonious preconditions, I am afraid.

The moral case of the only use of atomic weapons vice worse casualties, to both sides, (by an order of magnitude, at least) by invasion of Japan, and the noted use of Aiki (on both sides) in reaching the ultimate surrender of the Japanese without further bloodshed are all very instructive cases.

The Cuban Missile crisis may also be a case in point. It was very much Aiki for Kennedy to choose tenkan and respond only to the first telegram, but it only worked because of the full commitment to the irimi before, which prompted it.

The (send a message) economic model of sanctions agasint Iraq, Iran and North Korea and the related (send a message) military model of Vietnam represent the opposite (and demonstrably failed) alternative. They were tentative negotiating tools. Aiki may be (rigorous) negotiation, but it can never be tentative; the atemi is always implied and ready to be actualized.

Either one enters (irimi) with everything, and/or performs tenkan completely, or no technique can be effective because you will never reach the center of the conflict, but remain entirely on its periphery.

The difference is simply that in irimi I bring the center to my opponent, and in tenkan he brings the center to me. Either way I commit entirely to becoming the center.

Cordially,
Erick Mead

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

My grandfather served in as a Marine in WWII. He always said that when you fight in a war, you fight because your friends (fellow Marines) die if you did not. He never mentioned personal glory or country, but he talked about honor and courage. He knew many of the Marines that beached Normandy and these Marines knew they would die as soon as the doors from their amphibeous vehicle opened, but they did it anyway.

Why is that story relevant? Irregardless of the stated purpose of war, it is ugly and violent and terrible. Then there are those that fight with courage and honor, and those warriors are beacons of light that inspire others to be more than they are. Budo is the way of the warrior, aikido is training that warrior to be a symbol for others to emulate. Courage is the reason why we need budo in war; courage is the bane of terror.

Courage is that little voice that tells you to do something in the presence of knowledge that contradicts your survival instincts. Bravery is the little voice that tells you to do something that you are confident you can accomplish. Honor is the little voice that tells you the manner in which you set about accomplishing a goal.

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Jon wrote:

That is true. I serve these days for no other reason, but really very selfish reasons, for myself and my family, to provide for them. I would fight not for them, but for myself and for the soldiers I serve with.

God knows I am not fighting for the self involved that drive huge SUVs, smoking cigarettes, while talking on the cell phone and drinking a Starbucks...all at the same time..that think they have "real problems" because their Realtor got too much money when they sold there house for a huge profit.

The people I serve with are good, honest, and caring people. I owe them to be the best officer I can be, and to do my job which is making sure they are trained properly and have what they need to do there jobs! It really is that simple.

Lynn, thanks for your comments....they are at the core of the issue!

By the way, you haven't lived until you have physically carried an 80 year old veteran down the steps of the sea wall on Omaha beach, Sector DOG, in the Verville draw, to the same place he landed 60 years ago and had not been back since then. He was the one of the few survivors from his platoon. I did this two years ago on 6 JUN 04 at 0600 in the morning.

It was the single most humbling and spiritual experience I have ever had in my whole life.

If you cannot appreciate and respect what these fine gentlemen did for each other and the cause then there honestly is something wrong with you!

It is not about the killing or violence of war, but about compassion and courage.

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

The end of Black Hawk Down expressed much of your grandfather's same sentiment about why men fight. If only we could bottle it for civilian consumption. The British response to the attempt at terror during the Blitz was remarkable -- precisely because it was unremarkable -- the vast majority simply carried on as though rubble of the last night's bombing were nothing more than an inconvenient rain. If we could muster that courage collectively, terrorists efforts would be fruitless and soon abandoned. A very deep tenkan-tenkai.

Unfortunately, two things, one most un-aiki-like, intervene in the generla applicaiton of this scenario.

First, there is the inevitable application of the political syllogism:

1) Something must be done.
2) This is something.
3) Therefore, this must be done.

Second, the applicability of strategems or techniques depend on range and effect of weapons at different scales. Change the weapon OR change the scale, and the stratagem must change to fit. The center of the conflict thus changes and the technique must change with it to remain aiki.

Bottom line -- terrorists (short of WMD's) cannot kill enough of us by old-fashioned bombing campaigns to do significant social or economic harm unless we ourselves contribute to it by our reactions, which they count upon, and we have obliged under the rubric of the political syllogism.

All things being equal -- an Aiki response to simple bombing terror would be to mourn the slain and honor them by going on with life as though we had not noticed the reason why they died, as the British did in WWII. Of course, they were waiting for a really BIG irimi.

The most disconcerting thing to do to an unarmed attacker is to stand there placidly waiting for him -- let him miss you through proper maai --- then stand placidly again, waiting to see what he wants to do now... Tenkan, once again.

Of course, he might have a knife. The issue of unstable and technogically savvy regimes is what ups the ante, and the mere hint that WMD's are on the table does not make the foregoing response a good strategy. Even with two swordsmen the calculus is vastly different. To rely solely on taijutsu and maai as evasion against a swordsman will get you killed. Run fast away or irimi like hell because you have no other choice, but you cannot just stand there. Running away is not surrender. It is irimi -- along the other leg of a Great Circle route. Remember -- we can do aikido on BIG Circles.

Libya, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, all posed some of these same problems. The fact that different solutions have been used in attempting to address each one is remarkable. Whether it is Aiki remains to be seen, since we are not yet privy to all of the concerns driving each of the different specific stratagems or techniques being employed.

Cordially,
Erick Mead

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Good post Kevin,

I can't imagine that there are many alive that do not resepct the people who gave their lives in the last global conflict. They did not perish in vain. The world is a better place for their sacrifice.

Life is so precious yet so tenuous, some of us are so fortunate to live the lives we do. Many live free lives with our families and friends, working, practicing aikido, and generally having a pretty decent time. There are many in the world who are not nearly so fortunate. The more evenly balanced that this becomes, the less conflict there will be.

I look forward to the time when the dominant military force is a 'global peace keeping army'. I hesitate to suggest under the command of the UN as that body in itself is not as effective as it should be, if not them thenb we need to create something that is. We must move beyond 1 State having the ability to invade another country for it's own reasons, even if it does have some support from others.
All 'invasions' need to have massive global backing, and the raison d'etre needs to be to contain any 'rouges' inside their own borders.

I may be an old hippy at heart, but I accept the use of 'violence' in times of war, but as Erick mentions in his post for aiki to be present, the irimi-atemi or the tenkan and lead must be swift, powerful and effective. The 'body' of the military are the men like Kevin and others on these fora, they are better trained and equiped than any other soldiers in history. They are good men doing a tough job. The 'mind' of the military are the generals and politicians. It is here that the change has to take place. If this 'student' came into the dojo most teachers would immediately come to the conclusion that their body is in good shape but the mind could do with some 'training'.

In the current conflict, 'intelligence' was the dominant justifier for invasion. This has since been seen and accepted as unsound.
The invasion was swift and hard, but harmony has not been achieved 'yet'. Lack of forward planning, some bad decisions in the immediate aftermath, and we are left with a conflict that has 'gone to ground' and both sides seem to be digging in for the long term.
Not good aiki, the 'body' is still engaged in the tussle but the mind is a bit 'confused' not quite knowing how to overcome the opponent.

This is an interesting thread, aikido and its relevancy in global warfare, now we are really talking :)

regards

Mark

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Yes, we can all think and express idealistic views about the military, as well. We can reverently pause and bow our heads for the security that we are granted, and ignore all of the rest of the actions of the US military, inside and out of the US.

Sometimes, those backs protecting us are turned around, the soldiers used to threaten us internally, as well. Is this the fault of the military? No, of course not (it is, as Kevin pointed out, merely a tool): but it is disingenuous to hallow an institution while ignoring its excesses.

And while I'm no expert on the subject, I believe that expressing one's views sometimes takes as much courage, as putting on a uniform and taking orders for one's country. Sure, people have died for protecting our freedoms, but people have also died for speaking truth to power.

Perhaps the bravest folks are those already in uniform, speaking truth to power. Consider this film:

Sir. No Sir

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

My dad and his family lived in central London during the Blitz. He used to tell me about having to go down into the Underground train stations to sleep on the platforms, no knowing each morning whether they would find their house still standing. He told me about a guy who abjectly refused to go down there as he was of a mind that said "stuff the gerry, I'm sleeping in my own bed!". One night the house next door was flattened leaving him still in his bed, but missing one of the walls!
They did live through awfull times, but I do envy them the sense of 'community' that they felt with each other. It still remains with those still alive today.

regards

Mark

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Liberty lives upon the edge of a knife. In every way you can construe that phrase.

Law will not protect you, though law is why you fight. Speech will not protect you, though speech is why you fight. Love will not protect those you love, though love of them is why you fight.

Aiki demands that we remain poised there on that narrow edge -- precisely to be free -- free of the attack so that we may fight, and free to preserve that for which we fight.

Cordially
Erick Mead

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Good response. I might differ on the small points; but in the main...kudos, Erick.

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

As a (possibly) final thought...

Yesterday during warmups, I asked my (Middle School) students to define what is a warrior (this thread-topic got me thinking along those lines).

"Someone who is very strong, and powerful!" one answered.

"Good," I said. "Anyone else?"

"Someone who is never afraid."

"But, isn't fear something everyone feels, now and again? Maybe it's about not letting fear rule his actions?" I suggested. Oh yeah, they muttered thoughtfully.

"A warrior is someone who acts on his own and never puts on a uniform," my problem-child chirped brightly.

"But," I countered, "what about a warrior who joins the Army? Is he no longer a warrior, just because he puts on a uniform?" Thoughtful noddings of heads, in response.

"I'd like you to consider this definition: 'a warrior is someone who gets things done... someone who acts with integrity.'

Now, let's act like warriors at the end of class, and let's all put the mats away together and make sure our gi's are properly hung, instead of lying about the floor."

After warmups, we had our last class for the season. They tested, bowed out, and (for once, diverging from the usual chaotic silliness) put away the mats and hung their gi's in record time.

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Neil wrote:

I agree. I tend to have much more respect for people along these lines than i do for any other. If I had to say I joined the military to defend anything, it would be to defend these people and the ideals that they represent. MLK, Rosa Parks, Ghandi, and others.

(yea I know Ghandi was not an American! I may be an infantryman, but I still have some culture!) :)

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Kevin,

Thanks for that one. I hold those 'silly' ideas about freedom too. Maybe we're all hippies. Not so bad a thing.

Not bad for an infantryman, ay Neil?

david

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

A problem is that all sides involved think in this manner (glorify war) so the killing continues.

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Ok, stop it. All this blending is makin' me dizzy. :cool:

:ai: :ki: :do:

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

On Earth Day this year our dojo did a demonstration we had practiced for, aikido with several weapons techniques, iaijutsu, kendo, naginata-do. etc.

My thirteen year-old son asked me , "Dad? Earth Day? Is that that thing with the hippies? "

I replied, "Yes."
"But we're the hippies with swords."

Cordially,
Erick Mead

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

I feel like I'm among friends - One Love! brothers & sisters :D

peace

Mark

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Justin wrote:

Go back and read my post carefully. I am not talking about a macroscopic view of war in which society dehumanizes the enemy and develops an emotional idealogy to keep popular opinion motivated to sustain a war effort, that happens in all wars that I can think of. I am talking about on the interpersonal level of soldiers and why they fight.

You won't find too many soldiers that when you get down to it that will fight for glory, they fight to survive the battle, avoid shame, and to protect the ones they love. They may believe in an ideal such as the U.S constitution, but in reality, it is probably not why they decide to stick it out and do their job. Patriotism is a wonderful initial motivator though, and a tool on the road to war!

I do recommend you read David Grossman's book "on Killing" if you are interested in the subject.

Psychologically, soldiers traditionally go through a "detachment" to cope with emotions. They do this in a number of ways, dehumanizing, objectifying, rationalizing, idealizing, and such. IMO, this is not WHY they fight, but HOW they cope.

Big difference.

If you've ever been to war or in battle of some kind, you don't really glorify it to much. You survive it as best you can. The glorifying thing is for the media and popular opinion back home.

Keep in mind, at least in the U.S and most western world militaries, it is the civilians that put and support the soldiers on the battlefield. Soldiers don't choose to go necessarily. Typically as soon as they are told to stop killing they do (most at least). Most of us are not sociopaths.

The killing goes on for social, economic, emotional, and ideological reasons for the most part....not for the glory of war in and of itself. The problem of war and killing is much, much more complicated than for the glory....that only occurs in John Wayne movies for the most part.

War should never be glorified. As I stated I am more impressed with those that have the courage to stand up socially against popular opinion and to push for change, than I am for my fellow soldiers that do heroic actions in battle. Soldiers don't plan or choose the circumstances they do the heroic deeds in, they are forced into the situation and must survive or take action. People like Martin Luther King had the option of choosing their course of action/inaction and that takes real courage.

That does not mean I have extreme amount of respect and honor for my fellow soldiers both past and present, but on a scale, I feel that social change heros are on a higher scale!

Okay...off topic!

It is possible to be a soldier, do your job, to be mindful, and compassionate to both your self, your fellow soldiers, and your enemy. It does not require you to hate, dehumanize, or glorify, if you develop your mind, body, and spirit properly.

Iraq and Afganistan seem to be wars of a different type, that started with the French in Vietnam. Soldiers must be "civic" on one day, and then flip and pull the trigger on the next day. I think we have learned alot of lessons over the last 50 years. I see an evolution going on that allows for compassion and yet still allows you to be strong and pull the trigger if necessary. However, I am not a expert in this area, so I have no substanial proof to support this claim...just my thoughts and observations!

Are things different today than they were in the past? How does today's environment/wars differ from say the crusades, or roman wars of the past? Maybe they are not any different?

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Kevi wrote:

That's basically a tautology, Kevin.

Sides can attempt to justify violence on a grand scale all they want (and they do), but it is still empty, and says that sides havn't intelligently thought of better means of conflict resolution.

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

Hey Neil, you're 100% right. I've heard that illegal war thing done to death. Is a war ever legal? Who decides what's legal and whats not? Is it right to attack a country before they attack you as a sort of first strike? How about attacking a country due to the actions of one of their citizens (or a visitor who just hangs out there)

Thats a crazy debate that will go on forever. There are just way too many angles and points of view to even come close to a right answer.

I've found the peace demonstrators can be as nutty as the war mongers. Both sides need to suck back and take a breather.

Awesome, I really like your point of views on applying aikido to this situation. I can't add too much (just starting to apply aikido principals to life) but I'm really enjoying the different points of views and way to apply aikido to present day situations.

As do I. If you can't play nice we're going to take your toys away.


I've done a lot of pondering on what a warrior is. I think the journey there is more important like the end result. I think your example is a good one of what I consider the beginnings of a warrior mentality.

An example of my own. I was in charge of some young soldiers. We spent monday to friday camping out in the woods getting rained on eating bad food and getting eaten alive by bugs. By friday all everyone wanted to do was go home and drink and party. I would not let them go until they cleaned their weapons and equipment so that sunday night they were prepared to hit the field just incase we got called out. the other groups all left their stuff dirty and just took care of it sunday night or fumbled around with it money.
I wasn't very popular come fridays :)

Regardless, I wanted them to take pride in their station as a soldier and respect the tools of their trade. I feel too many people don't respect their tools. Even more so when you're asking someone to clean and maintain something that someone else (likely unknown to them) is going to end up using. Maybe thats more a case of professionalism but I feel the whole 'warrior' thing gives someone a goal to strive for. Pride and respect in your job, equipment and for other people. Especially respect for others. I hate drawing equipment that's broken and someone was just too lazy to report it. A warrior is someone who puts mission before self in that their own personal pleasure of fun time takes a back burner. Perhaps students who remain after class to sweep the Mat's or helping newer students with problems vice everyone rushing home?

In any case I think your example of instilling a warrior mindset on your students, as young as they are, is bang on. Warrior is a scary word to some people (say parents). Easy to change it to professional or respectful, warrior just sounds cooler :)

Too true! I've read a zillion quotes about generals using patriotism to get soldiers or citizens to do whatever they want.

I think there is always the glory or pride part of the job. Taking pride in your job isn't a bad thing, if more people came to work every day LIKING their job the world would be a much happier place. I don't see anything wrong with enjoying being a soldier or being the pointy end of the stick (I know you're not suggesting there is).

In the end it's always about your buddies.

For sure. I like a quote I heard. Hate is fear turned inside out.
Regarding David Grossman's book "on Killing" he brings up a great point about how young soldiers are conditioned to hate- one of the main reasons being it's much easier to kill someone you hate.
Hating someone helps allow humans to overcome the psychological roadblocks. (killing is wrong)

I do believe conditioning soldiers is an important method of enabling us to close with and destroy the enemy. Human looking targets instead of square ones. Targets that give feed back (instant gratification) instead of holes in paper etc..
That said I'm not a big fan of the hate the enemy approach. I'm pretty subtle about it ( I figure anyways) but when someone is willing to listen I try and give them a different perspective on "the enemy".

I would say yes they are different. IMHO Today we are facing an enemy who cannot be identified by wearing a uniform. They wear civilian clothes, shoot at you, blow you up and then blend back into the crowd. It gives a soldiers a feeling of being surrounded. Soldiers then treat civilians differently (perhaps more inclined to be less compassionate, they could be the enemy after all?).
Strategic soldier. We are seeing cases all the time of a single soldiers actions having HUGE ripple effects.

-A US soldier getting accused of rape in japan put the US in hot water (and beefed up anti US sentiment in japan, correct me if I'm wrong.

-A soldier shoots a very wounded enemy combatant in order to (up to argument) put him out of his misery. Mercy killing. A US drone plane caught it on tape. That officer was charged if I'm not mistaken and kicked out.

-Afghanistan 2002 Canadians working with Americans. A young officer gives into conjecture he heard from his troops and while writing a book makes a comments about Canadians committing war crimes or some such. Apparently *&%$ hit the fan, I'm not sure if there was an investigation or not but this platoon commanders unfounded accusations caused a lot of grief.

-Enemy combatants fire on our guys and then hide in religious buildings knowing full well allied soldiers have to walk on egg shells and are under constant media and political scrutiny.

I think todays wars are much much different because the actions of a single soldier (or warrior :) ) can have huge national ramifications.

This is why I feel cookie cutter soldiers just don't cut it. We need to give soldiers a strong sense of ethics, morales and teach them there ARE alternatives to violence in some cases. I think using aikido principals will really help towards the whole winning their hearts and minds thing.

Re: Aikido, the military and fighting
 

War is beyond law, and is a reset button for many forms of law when they get out of bounds, , i.e. -- become intolerably unjust. War is neither legal nor illegal. It is simply either just or unjust according to its cause and its methods. Very old thinking this.

No army can keep any peace. An army can aid in making peace by removing its impediments. Peace keeping is the job of the peaceful. Force is to break the peace breaker, not to keep peace or to build it up. In the current assymetrc mode of warfare, it is even less possible for any such army to be effective in establishing peace.

Military can best serve ( perhaps only serve) as the remover of impediments that ahve unjustly injured or prevented the operation of those parts of society tha do bring peace. Grocereis, kids, parks, schoool, hairdresser, commutes to work, and all the litte bits of lfie that keep people from trying to kill one another becasue they have more important things to do.

Aiki is working when such force is keep to its place, as reactive potential rather than a constitutive active component of aa society at peace, not being expressed regualrly but held in reserve and only displayed at uttermost need.

I think the assymetric strategies of the Salafi Jihadists are in fact returning to very old forms of warfare, with improved suites of wepaons. There is less and less distinction betweencombatant and non-combatant in their calculations, contrary to the modern trend, and which the decline of unifromed combatants reinforces. Salafi Jihadists do not honor our rules of war, they do not even honor those of their own tradition.

But the role of our individual soldiers approaches the significance of the ancient champions, standing forth from the body of the assmbled warriors for acts of honor or dishonor before their compatriots, their enemies, and the nervous populace of both sides looking on from the battlements, knowing that one misstep of that lone soldier, in skill or honor, could bring them to ruin.

For this reason, arts such as aikido may become more important in developing a critical mass of thought on these topics, especially the last one.. Aikido has one foot firmly fixed in the robust but pragmatic attitudes of koryu, and one foot firmly resting on the supple growing shoot of gendai with its exploration and idealism. (It is not the only such art, but it is preeminent in the degree to which this combination is honored and celebrated is true)

Aikido is the only art that seems to embody the resilience of the mune with the biting edge of the ha iin both its methodology and its doctrine. Having both aspects is something our soldiers and their trainers recognize they need to be trained more and more to do. In dealing with civilians in an asymmetric war situation, the enemy's role and manuever are not displayed in advance, and honor hangs by a thread on a knife blade.

This seems inherently an aspect of aiki in their training, and which aikido could therefore aid if addressed more explicitly.

Cordially,
Erick Mead