# The Military Discussion of Wing Chun



## Yoshiyahu (Dec 28, 2008)

*Lets start it up here...One of moderator insisted we were too far off topic...so here we go.....*


Past conversation:

CuongNhuka





Martial Talk
*Senior Master*
Posts: 2,034 
Casino Cash: $4361 
Thanks: 57
Thanked 81 Times in 44 Posts 
*1,000 Post Club*
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: NE
Age: 18
Rep Power: 6 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	








*Re: New Weapons of Wing Chun* 
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Yoshiyahu* 

 
_I know one of my uncles fought in North Korea I think in the fifties maybe or the sixities._

Things have changed massivly since then. Things have changed massivly in the last 10 years.
__________________
I believe every style of Kung Fu can be used in fight. Because when it has been invented by ancestor for only one purpose which is fighting. And if it can be used in fighting, it will disappear for no one whould choose it and practise it.
The problem is that nowaday how many people have learnt the fighting part of the style. Because no one needs it for fighting. - ggg214 


Actually I remember when some of Late Uncles often told me how they learn how to kill a man with their bare hands. They were in the Army and learn some pretty nasty techniques. I am not sure what style they learn. But they are deceased now. I know one of my uncles fought in North Korea I think in the fifties maybe or the sixities. I can't remember.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Si-Je 

 
_oh, I'm not familiar with alot of the WT/WC lineages, just Sifu Fung, and Sifu Emin, that's all I know about Wing Chun. _

_It seems the Army doesn't get into combatives as much, but it makes me think of my Dad. He was Army in Vietnam, and he ended up using ALOT of hand to hand in the city, and the jungle. Yet, they didn't even teach the Marines anywhere what they do now. Much less the Army._
_He carried a .45, a machette, and a knife on him just about everywhere. They had to learn hand to hand on the fly there, I'd hate the Army guys now to be in that same situation. I'd figure they would learn from the past._

_But, the Marines do definately use way more of their combat training. And Hubbie does incorporate the MCMAP training he learned a little bit, mostly with the ground fighting and weapons training. And he incorporates WC/WT concepts and principles into the MCMAP weapons he teaches. All the WT/WC is the same as what he was taught by his two teachers._
_Heck, that one technique he's been working with me on the knife jab for about a year. (we only run through it once or twice a month, not alot of focus there or time to train it) So, I'm just now starting to get the gist of what he's teaching with the weapons._


_*Interesting discussion by Si Je*_


_Quote:_
_Originally Posted by *Edmund BlackAdder* 

 _
_Maybe people with more than a couple weeks boot and a little (out of date) book learning would be more credible? Either way, what does any of this have to do with Wing Chun? Last I checked, neither the US Army or the USMC fight with butterfly swords, or bo, and I haven't found a branch of Wing Chun that drills with fire arms. Maybe this topic could be on Wing Chun, and the military branch penis examining taken someplace else where the rutting of dogs, waving of pricks, and telling of tall tales of fiction and seamen is enjoyed? Penthouse Letters comes to my mind actually._

_Wow.. just wow. I was really digging your Black Adder pic and am a big fan of that show. Thought you were cool._
_What is being discussed here is the "mindset of wing chun." and the introduction of wing chun theory, principles, and training in useage of weaponry for today. I gave a great breakdown of knife defense that is ACTUALLY used in USMC MCMAP, but that seems to have been missed._
_Mystic Wolf's fellow marine pal has been bringing me up to speed with the battle mentality difference between the Army and the USMC in correlation to WC/WT approach to fighting with or without weapons. _
_Wing Chun is a more mental approach to your "problem" or conflict than anything else you train as a fighter. If your theory, strategy, and concept is wrong, you lose the fight. In war with military weaponry your dead._

_No one's bragging here, or swinging any appendenges around, we're talking war strategy, fight and defense strategy. _

_Okay, how would you use a gun with WC/WT principles and concepts?_
_1. Keep it in the centerline when you aim, or when you shoot your target._
_2. Follow up after first shot. (chain punching)_
_3. Adapt and flow from one attacker to another._
_4. keep your movements small and precise when shooting, aiming, or changing targets._
_5. "minimum amount of brute strength" don't waste ammo. (one shot one kill, effeciency, follow through with next shots only if target isn't down) _
_6. attack and defend at the same time. (don't shoot at attacking target without "covering" yourself first. no need to run screaming into the night in the open shooting everywhere with no "cover".)_
_7. Attack is defense, defense is attack each the cause and result of the other. (they shoot at you, you shoot back, figure it out)_

_Here are some very very basic WC/WT concepts and principles that could be used in modern warfare with modern weapons. _
_And I'm just a civy, but as Einsten says: " imagination is more important than knowledge."_
__


----------



## MBuzzy (Dec 29, 2008)

Well, unfortunately, I can't comment on the Wing Chun aspect of this discussion, so that limits my inputs a bit although I'm curious as to where this might go.  

I will say that both the Army Combatives program as well as the MCMAP Program are excellent systems of combat fighting, but they are just that, combat fighting.  They were developed with the principles of several martial arts in mind, but were specifically adapted for military use.  For example, they both have portions on using the rifle as a weapon.  They both teach you to use your body armor and helmet as a weapon and use them to your advantage, as well as use your opponent's against him.

As for who uses what more....honestly, with the Army Combatives training that I have and the time that I spent with them and with the Marines that I've met and trained with, I can say that they both spend a great deal of time on their respective fighting systems, it is an important part of training, it is included in their evaluations and both use it in real combat.  Believe it or not, Army, Marines, AND Air Force do quite a bit of "on the ground" urban style missions.  House clearning, Civil Peace keeping, etc.  Many of those missions require the use of their combatives training, but to be perfectly honest, in most cases, it is used the same way that the police use their training - in controlling an aggressor.  In today's world, not in hand to hand, fight to the death kind of comabt.  Both styles are effective, both styles are nasty, and both styles are used in the field.

Incidentally, the Air Force is starting up its combatives program as well.  Up to now, all of us who deployed received training in Army Combatives for any Convoy or outside the wire missions.  

For reference, the source documents for these styles are:

Army Combatives:  FM 21-150
MCMAP Program:  Guidance document:  MCRP 3-02B
MCMAP generation document:  MCO 1500.54A
MCMAP standards document:  MCO 1510.122A


----------



## Si-Je (Dec 29, 2008)

Basic principles of Wing Chun:

1. Simplicity: keep movements simple and uncomplicated.  techniques should be easy to learn and apply, do not involve difficult manoeuvres.  

-can be used in any type of combative situation with or without weaponry.  Military tactics used with team or squad.    

2. Directness: the shortest time and distance taken to strike (or shoot) opponent.
-effenciency in battle on or off the field of combat, war, or just simple self defense.

3. Economy of movement: minimum necessary movement used in all techniques.
-same same with "military manoeuvres" don't waste time and energy when engaging an enemy.  Back to simplicity, and directness.  

4.Minimum use of Brute Strength: use deflection rather than hard blocking, redirect the opponent's force.
- ex. why use your whole team to take out one enemy? effenciency.  Do what needs to be done, don't overdue actions taken to engage single or small enemy force.  even pressure or force to what is given no more.  Don't be wasteful or overkill.

5.  Practicality: explains itself by the very definition of the word.  A "show of force" is not needed, do what works for given situation.  Be problematic and practical in dealing with combat situation, no bravado, back to simplicity.

These basic concepts can and WILL be effective if applied to any situation whether it's combat, dealing with relationships, life, financial problems, dealing with projects at work, etc.  
And they're even easier to apply to military combat, because it is designed for combative concepts in dealing with physical conflict.
Be creative, think and imagine how this can make a team, soldier, etc. more effective and effecient in combat, police actions, "peacekeeping" missions whatever.  (peace keeping, that's funny.  It's a nice way of saying constant conflict and combat in the name of keeping the peace.  So, use minimum amout of brute force in this scenario)


----------



## MBuzzy (Dec 29, 2008)

That is very interesting and I really like the straightforward way of expressing those ideas that you have stated.  The first thing I thought of was one of the Military's most basic concepts, the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC).  This series of regulations and ideas governs how we conduct war.  It is based on three principles: Military Necessity, Distinction, and Proportionality.  

Military Necessity is of course that we only use Military force when it is required to achieve a military objective

Distinction is ensuring that the target you are aiming at is the one that you engage.  It is primarily intended to ensure that Combatants and Non-Combatants or Illegal Combatants are distinguished from one another.

Proportionality is only using the amount of force necessary to complete the mission.  i.e we don't use a nuclear weapon to eliminate a single man.

I can see a direct relationship between our basic concepts and yours.  Most of all, our Proportionality relates to your Economy of Movement and Minimum use of Brute Strength.  Of course there is also a relationship between minimum use of Brute Strength and Military Necessity...they seem to fit very well.

Is there a concept within WC that dictates when and if an attack or defense should be made?  i.e. using your knowledge only for defense or for a "good" purpose?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 29, 2008)

Nothing against Wing Chun but where does Wing Chun come from? China

What does China teach its military? Sanda

Wing Chun is simple and direct but it takes to long to train for military purposes, IMO.

Sanda is a conglomerate of multiple CMA styles. Sanda has no specific stance it has no concern about Qi or any other internal and it is rather simple and incredibly direct in application, Covers hand strikes and kicking, Qinna and Shuaijiao. And it does it with hard training in a short period of time. There are different levels of Sanda meaning that you teach to the average military and that you teach to special forces but it is still takes much less time than Wing Chun.

Now with that said do I feel that a person that has been trained in Wing Chun can be effective in a military situation? Yes I do, but it will take a lot longer than most military training programs want to take to get there. China use to train Xingyiquan to its military and Bajiquan was used in Military as well and if you come across a master of either in a fight you are in for a world of hurt if you are not up to snuff but they both take way to long. Bajiquan is/was big on Taiwan but they teach a specific MA to the Taiwan military that is not Baji. (sorry the name slipped my mind)


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Dec 29, 2008)

Excellent Post I love it



Si-Je said:


> Basic principles of Wing Chun:
> 
> 1. Simplicity: keep movements simple and uncomplicated. techniques should be easy to learn and apply, do not involve difficult manoeuvres.
> 
> ...


----------



## skinters (Dec 29, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Wing Chun is simple and direct but it takes to long to train for military purposes, IMO.



wan kam leung (most in wing chun know his name) trained the VIP protection unit or the G4 unit in hongkong , the first of its kind as im aware.to me this is just one small step from teaching it to the armed forces,of course the G4 unit did not learn the complete system, but what they were shown was more than enough for what they needed. 
*
*


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 29, 2008)

skinters said:


> wan kam leung (most in wing chun know his name) trained the VIP protection unit or the G4 unit in hongkong , the first of its kind as im aware.to me this is just one small step from teaching it to the armed forces,*of course the G4 unit did not learn the complete system*, but what they were shown was more than enough for what they needed.


 
But if they are going to take it down to just some of its parts is it still Wing Chun?

And I have no doubt Wing Chun could be effective for that purpose


----------



## skinters (Dec 29, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> But if they are going to take it down to just some of its parts is it still Wing Chun?
> 
> And I have no doubt Wing Chun could be effective for that purpose



well if i dont do the full karma sutra when i make love,am i not still making love?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 29, 2008)

skinters said:


> well if i dont do the full karma sutra when i make love,am i not still making love?


 
Yes but you are not following the karma sutra and the karma sutra is a book about love making not a style to be followed like Wing Chun or a label describing love making like Wing Chun is a label for a specific styel of CMA. 

To me Wing Chun includes Sil lim tao, Chum Kiu and Bil Jee as well as Muk Yan Jong. 

Now if I train only Sil lum tao can I call myself a wing chun guy? 

Can I teach peopel Wing Chun? 

If I only do Muk Yan Jong and nothing else am I training wing chun? 

If I take just bits a pieces of Sil lim tao, Chum Kiu and Bil Jee as well as Muk Yan Jong and slap them together to train someone is that Wing Chun? 

IMO no to all but that is only my opinion.

If however any of this is still Wing Chun then Yiquan is still Xingyiquan, JKD is still Wing Chun, Xingyiquan is still Xinyiquan and Judo is still Jujutsu


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Dec 29, 2008)

Great answer skinters...i got a better one....If I teach my Son Chain Punches, Side Stance and Sil Lim Tao...When he fights with that is it still wing chun...even though he has very little?




skinters said:


> well if i dont do the full karma sutra when i make love,am i not still making love?


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Dec 29, 2008)

Well Xue Sheng...If someone learns all the drills of Wing Chun and applications and Chi sau...but doesn't learn any of the forms...Would they be using Wing Chun when they spar or fight?

What are the three terrors of Wing Chun? Tan Sau,Bong Sau and Fok Sau. As long as you see these you know its Wing Chun...




Xue Sheng said:


> Yes but you are not following the karma sutra and the karma sutra is a book about love making not a style to be followed like Wing Chun or a label describing love making like Wing Chun is a label for a specific styel of CMA.
> 
> To me Wing Chun includes Sil lim tao, Chum Kiu and Bil Jee as well as Muk Yan Jong.
> 
> ...


----------



## Si-Je (Dec 29, 2008)

No honey. I can't make killing better.  Just do the least you can do without getting all ya'll in trouble.
That's a hard decision , and up to every individual that is ever in that situation.  
Take the basic concepts of WC/WT and do what you HAVE TO to survive.  
there are alot of non combatives in every war. I can't tell you the "right" thing to do. I'm not there.  But, I can hopefully give you insiration on how to be compasionate.  I know it's hard.
Their not compassionate towards you guys, they really think that we are all evil.  But, that is your burden, to show them we are not.
But, make sure you don't let them hurt your friends.  But,make sure your friends don't freak out and hurt the people too much.
That would make us a real enemy.  
I'm sorry I can't give you 



MBuzzy said:


> That is very interesting and I really like the straightforward way of expressing those ideas that you have stated. The first thing I thought of was one of the Military's most basic concepts, the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC). This series of regulations and ideas governs how we conduct war. It is based on three principles: Military Necessity, Distinction, and Proportionality.
> 
> Military Necessity is of course that we only use Military force when it is required to achieve a military objective
> 
> ...


----------



## CuongNhuka (Dec 29, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> They were developed with the principles of several martial arts in mind, but were specifically adapted for military use. For example, they both have portions on using the rifle as a weapon. They both teach you to use your body armor and helmet as a weapon and use them to your advantage, as well as use your opponent's against him.
> .......
> As for who uses what more....honestly, with the Army Combatives training that I have and the time that I spent with them and with the Marines that I've met and trained with, I can say that they both spend a great deal of time on their respective fighting systems, it is an important part of training, it is included in their evaluations and both use it in real combat.


 
Really? I have a few buddies that are Army, and when they got back from Basic they told they spent all of 6 hours on combatives (another 2 on bayonet and pugile stick). I convinced them to demostrate, and what they showed me was mostly really simple BJJ. And if it wasn't, it was really simple Kick Boxing. Or fairly advanced BJJ that had been dumbied down to the point were I had to laugh. And one of them is a medic, so I'd think he'd be high on the list of people getting the good stuff.



MBuzzy said:


> ...for any Convoy or outside the wire missions.


 
You guys do convoys? Wow... I'm kidding. You know I'm only messing with you Buzzy.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 29, 2008)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Well Xue Sheng...If someone learns all the drills of Wing Chun and applications and Chi sau...but doesn't learn any of the forms...Would they be using Wing Chun when they spar or fight?
> 
> What are the three terrors of Wing Chun? Tan Sau,Bong Sau and Fok Sau. As long as you see these you know its Wing Chun...


 
Then JKD is Wing Chun, Yiquan is still Xingyiquan, Xingyiquan is still Xinyiquan and Judo is still Jujutsu and what then is Sanda since it has parts of multiple CMA styles.... could it be Wing Chun or Taiji or Bagua or Changchuan or could it be Shuaijiao. Likely not Wing Chun since it does not have a stance nor does it train Tan Sau,Bong Sau and Fok Sau or at least I don't think it does. It does take power form the feet, direct it with the waist and send it where needed and it does train tuishou both big parts of taiji so I guess it is Taiji. 

OK, I'm done. I don't train Wing Chun anymore and I never got past Sil Lim Tao but I tend to feel if you take parts of it and slap them back together and train them to someone else it is no longer Wing Chun and it is HIGHLY unlikely that any military training application would emphasize or train qi so again would it still be Wing Chun? 

If you were to train Wing Chun to Military personel I do believe it would be very useful but it would take time.


----------



## MBuzzy (Dec 29, 2008)

Si-Je said:


> No honey. I can't make killing better.  Just do the least you can do without getting all ya'll in trouble.
> That's a hard decision , and up to every individual that is ever in that situation.
> Take the basic concepts of WC/WT and do what you HAVE TO to survive.
> there are alot of non combatives in every war. I can't tell you the "right" thing to do. I'm not there.  But, I can hopefully give you insiration on how to be compasionate.  I know it's hard.
> ...



I agree with you completely!  Although I think I may have phrased my question wrong.  

In the military and in my style of martial arts, we spend a lot of time on "target selection."  In the military, it is about ensuring that you're shooting at the right person for the right reasons.  In Soo Bahk Do, it is about using your art and knowledge for defense of yourself and others around you - not for offense or for personal gain.  I was wondering if WC had a similar principle that tried to guide its practitioners in the use of their knowledge?


----------



## MBuzzy (Dec 29, 2008)

I really don't think that we will ever find common ground in whether the full Wing Chun style can be used as a direct translation for military applications.  I think that the key principle - of this discussion at least - is whether some of the ideas, principles, and possibly even some of the techniques can be used in military applications.

No Traditional Martial Art will EVER be translated directly to military applications.  There is too much time involved and too much excess.  The combatives that the military teaches are designed for the purposes that we need them for, i.e. combat in gear, with someone who wants to kill you.  And while those ideas may also be used in many martial arts styles....it is applied much differently for the Military.

Personally, I say that WC along with just about every Martial Art can have portions of it and ideas borrowed toward Military Applications and anyone who has TMA training will most certainly have a leg up in learning military Combatives.


----------



## MBuzzy (Dec 29, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> Really? I have a few buddies that are Army, and when they got back from Basic they told they spent all of 6 hours on combatives (another 2 on bayonet and pugile stick). I convinced them to demostrate, and what they showed me was mostly really simple BJJ. And if it wasn't, it was really simple Kick Boxing. Or fairly advanced BJJ that had been dumbied down to the point were I had to laugh. And one of them is a medic, so I'd think he'd be high on the list of people getting the good stuff.



Just like pretty much everything - it depends who you talk to.  I'm also an "n of 1," but I was taught quite a bit of Army Combatives during Combat Skills Training.  My understanding is that a lot of the Combatives comes during "Sergeant's time," AIT, other advanced training schools, etc.  I really don't know just how much time is devoted during Basic, although I would guess not a whole lot.  That isn't what Basic is about.  Of course, being an Officer, I have a different perspective on Basic and what needs to be accomplished there.  Also, the Army people that I have interacted with are generally E-6 and above and have been primarily at Training Bases (Army Instructors assigned to us) or in Iraq.

If you want to see what it is, look up the FM, it is all right there.  I have no clue how much BJJ it is, because I don't know BJJ, but I know that when Army Combatives and I believe MCMAP was developed, they took ideas and influences from a wide range of styles.  The Air Force is developing their Combatives program and I've heard that it borrows heavily from Hapkido, BJJ, Army Combatives, and some other styles.



CuongNhuka said:


> You guys do convoys? Wow... I'm kidding. You know I'm only messing with you Buzzy.



I've heard that from plenty of Marines....and Army for that matter.  But you'd be surprise, I sure was!  I'm an AF Civil Engineer and I've got 28 Combat Convoys.....I know some AF loggies that have WAY WAY WAY more - as in, every day....and some AF cops that do as many convoys as an Army or Marine CLP.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Dec 29, 2008)

Jeet Kune Dao is actually considered to be modified Wing Chun...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeet_Kune_Do


JKD principles

Economy of motion

Be like water

Stop hits & stop kicks 

Simultaneous parrying & punching 

No high kicks

Centerline


_Efficiency_ - An attack that reaches its mark. 

_Directness_ - Doing what comes naturally in a learned way. 

_Simplicity_ - Thinking in an uncomplicated manner; without ornamentation. 


*Qoute from Wikipedia*: 





> The core concepts of JKD are derived from Wing Chun (such as center line control, vertical punching, trapping, and forward pressure). Through his research, Lee incorporated the fluidity of European boxing and fencing stances.


 
So it all sound similiar to me...What better way to teach Wing Chun to western minded folks but include European sports or styles with it. But the Core is Wing Chun...



Xue Sheng said:


> Then JKD is Wing Chun, Yiquan is still Xingyiquan, Xingyiquan is still Xinyiquan and Judo is still Jujutsu and what then is Sanda since it has parts of multiple CMA styles.... could it be Wing Chun or Taiji or Bagua or Changchuan or could it be Shuaijiao. Likely not Wing Chun since it does not have a stance nor does it train Tan Sau,Bong Sau and Fok Sau or at least I don't think it does. It does take power form the feet, direct it with the waist and send it where needed and it does train tuishou both big parts of taiji so I guess it is Taiji.
> 
> OK, I'm done. I don't train Wing Chun anymore and I never got past Sil Lim Tao but I tend to feel if you take parts of it and slap them back together and train them to someone else it is no longer Wing Chun and it is HIGHLY unlikely that any military training application would emphasize or train qi so again would it still be Wing Chun?
> 
> If you were to train Wing Chun to Military personel I do believe it would be very useful but it would take time.


----------



## seasoned (Dec 29, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> Really? I have a few buddies that are Army, and when they got back from Basic they told they spent all of 6 hours on combatives (another 2 on bayonet and pugile stick). I convinced them to demostrate, and what they showed me was mostly really simple BJJ. And if it wasn't, it was really simple Kick Boxing. Or fairly advanced BJJ that had been dumbied down to the point were I had to laugh. And one of them is a medic, so I'd think he'd be high on the list of people getting the good stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> You guys do convoys? Wow... I'm kidding. You know I'm only messing with you Buzzy.


 
You are very correct. My son just graduated from basic combat training, with minimal hand to hand training. They save the good stuff for special forces. He also has a buddy that went into the Marines with a TKD back ground, and was very good. During hell week, when they free for all, his comment was that everything you were taught before boot camp went out the window, when you had many guys on you all at once.


----------



## MBuzzy (Dec 29, 2008)

seasoned said:


> You are very correct. My son just graduated from basic combat training, with minimal hand to hand training. They save the good stuff for special forces. He also has a buddy that went into the Marines with a TKD back ground, and was very good. During hell week, when they free for all, his comment was that everything you were taught before boot camp went out the window, when you had many guys on you all at once.



Fortunately training doesn't end with Basic.  Everyone keeps training for their entire careers.  There is a lot more specialized training after Basic.

Special Forces is a totally different deal, although I would LOVE to see their FM or Guidance.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Dec 29, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> No Traditional Martial Art will EVER be translated directly to military applications.


 
Actually, the orginal conversation between me and Si-Je was about ocmparing Military tactics to Wing Chun theory.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Dec 29, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> I have no clue how much BJJ it is, because I don't know BJJ


 
I don't either. I'm not even sure it is BJJ. I think it is because:
A, it looks like BJJ (MMA fights, youtube clips, and so on)
B, it's a popular martial art that focuses on the ground
C, one of my army buddies told me he thinks it's BJJ because of some comments made by his instructors during boot and later his MOS school.


----------



## MBuzzy (Dec 29, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> Actually, the orginal conversation between me and Si-Je was about ocmparing Military tactics to Wing Chun theory.



Exactly right and I agree, my comment was that I don't think that a TMA is able to be directly translated.  The ideas and concepts, yes.  i.e. military tactics to theory.  That is certainly an easy translation for many styles.  And from what it sounds like, WC fits VERY well with Military concepts and applications.  At least in my styles, we don't have such a simply laid out set of concepts that Si-je laid out.  Perhaps that comment wasn't phrased correctly.  

I think that the discussion of military theory to martial arts theory is a very good discussion, since martial arts great from and for combat.  I mean....MARTIAL arts!  Makes perfect sense to me!  

What I don't believe, though is that an entire Traditional Martial Arts system can be directly used in a military application.  There simply isn't the time to decode forms, we have our own form of discipline and rank, so that part isn't needed, the basics that most arts use don't have the simple, direct, and effective applications that we require.  Therefore, we take the good parts of other styles, get rid of the stuff we don't need and POOF - MCMAP


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Dec 29, 2008)

Persoanlly I love wing Chun but America is roman and greek society...i think its armed forces do better training their soldiers in western boxing and wrestling...something the average amercan excels in.


But as for Wing Chun....If you have soldiers who are in the reserves during peace time Wing Chun would be a great art for them learn...It takes about three years in my opinion for someone to effectively fight with Wing Chun who has never had any previous martial arts training

How long is boot camp?


But it would be great if The Armed forces could learn wing chun...But this is a western country...it would be exceptional but not realistic.





MBuzzy said:


> Exactly right and I agree, my comment was that I don't think that a TMA is able to be directly translated. The ideas and concepts, yes. i.e. military tactics to theory. That is certainly an easy translation for many styles. And from what it sounds like, WC fits VERY well with Military concepts and applications. At least in my styles, we don't have such a simply laid out set of concepts that Si-je laid out. Perhaps that comment wasn't phrased correctly.
> 
> I think that the discussion of military theory to martial arts theory is a very good discussion, since martial arts great from and for combat. I mean....MARTIAL arts! Makes perfect sense to me!
> 
> What I don't believe, though is that an entire Traditional Martial Arts system can be directly used in a military application. There simply isn't the time to decode forms, we have our own form of discipline and rank, so that part isn't needed, the basics that most arts use don't have the simple, direct, and effective applications that we require. Therefore, we take the good parts of other styles, get rid of the stuff we don't need and POOF - MCMAP


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 30, 2008)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Jeet Kune Dao is actually considered to be modified Wing Chun...
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeet_Kune_Do
> 
> ...


 
Well since we can't ask Bruce Lee what he thinks....

You see the core of Yiquan is Xingyiquan too but Yiquan is not called a modified Xingyiquan. The core of Xingyiquan is Xinyiquan and Xingyiquan is not called a modified Xinyiquan. The Core of Judo is Jujutsu and yet it is not called a modified Jujutsu. Sanda is from multiple styles and it has a rather large amount of Shuaijiao but it is not Shuaijiao nor is it any other CMA style it is Sanda. Chen style Taijiquan could possibly have a base of a Qigong style called Taijiqigong and Shaolin Paoqui and yet it is not called by either name or called a modified version of either. But Hebei, Shanxi are both styles of Xingyiquan and Yin and Chang are both styles of Bagua and Chen and Yang are both styles of Taiji. But then I am a self professed traditionalist so maybe it&#8217;s just me being stubborn and old fashion.

But I still have to wonder why is it that parts of wing Chun can be put together into a military training system and still be called Wing Chun. Teach a bit of Sil Lim Tao a touch of The Muk Yan Jong form and some other stuff thrown in possibly and is it still Wing Chun. You say yes, I say no. :asian:

By the way those JKD principles you posted can be found in many CMA styles...so are they Wing Chun too?


----------



## skinters (Dec 30, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Yes but you are not following the karma sutra and the karma sutra is a book about love making not a style to be followed like Wing Chun or a label describing love making like Wing Chun is a label for a specific styel of CMA.
> 
> To me Wing Chun includes Sil lim tao, Chum Kiu and Bil Jee as well as Muk Yan Jong.
> 
> ...



yes its still wing chun,i mean if i get what your saying right,nobody can call it wingchun unless they know every single part of it.

no matter what art your in you continue learn and improve into old age,and not many can claim to know an art in its entirety,and if you dont know all of your art do you mean you cant call it anything ?   

thinking about it i really dont know if it matters either way.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 30, 2008)

skinters said:


> thinking about it i really dont know if it matters either way.


 
Bingo


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Dec 30, 2008)

Very interesting...Well Only thing i can share...is that JKD was mainly derived from Jun Fan Kung Fu...which was infact what...Wing Chun in the united states...

Have you studied Jun Fan Kung Fu...tell me what you think of that?

*Wikipedia says:*


> Lee began teaching martial arts after his arrival in the United States in 1959. Originally trained in Wing Chun Gung Fu, Lee called what he taught Jun Fan Gung Fu. _Jun Fan Gung Fu_ (literally Bruce's Gung Fu), is basically a slightly modified approach to Wing Chun Gung Fu.


 
_Bruce Lee however didnt have the complete WC system so he had to fill in the gaps._

*Wikipedia says:*


> Lee trained in Wing Chun Gung Fu from age 1318 under Hong Kong Wing Chun Sifu Yip Man. Lee was introduced to Yip Man in early 1954 by William Cheung, then a live-in student of Yip Man. Like most Chinese martial arts schools at that time, Sifu Yip Man's classes were often taught by the highest ranking students. One of the highest ranking students under Yip Man at the time was Wong Shun-Leung. Wong is thought to have had the largest influence on Bruce's training. Yip Man trained Lee privately after some students refused to train with Lee due to his ancestry.


 


Xue Sheng said:


> Well since we can't ask Bruce Lee what he thinks....
> 
> You see the core of Yiquan is Xingyiquan too but Yiquan is not called a modified Xingyiquan. The core of Xingyiquan is Xinyiquan and Xingyiquan is not called a modified Xinyiquan. The Core of Judo is Jujutsu and yet it is not called a modified Jujutsu. Sanda is from multiple styles and it has a rather large amount of Shuaijiao but it is not Shuaijiao nor is it any other CMA style it is Sanda. Chen style Taijiquan could possibly have a base of a Qigong style called Taijiqigong and Shaolin Paoqui and yet it is not called by either name or called a modified version of either. But Hebei, Shanxi are both styles of Xingyiquan and Yin and Chang are both styles of Bagua and Chen and Yang are both styles of Taiji. But then I am a self professed traditionalist so maybe its just me being stubborn and old fashion.
> 
> ...


----------



## CuongNhuka (Dec 30, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> Exactly right and I agree, my comment was that I don't think that a TMA is able to be directly translated.


 
Oh, it seemed like the people posting thought Si-Je and me we taslking about teaching Wing Chun to military personal. I geuss I misread, or something....



MBuzzy said:


> What I don't believe, though is that an entire Traditional Martial Arts system can be directly used in a military application. There simply isn't the time to decode forms, we have our own form of discipline and rank, so that part isn't needed, the basics that most arts use don't have the simple, direct, and effective applications that we require. Therefore, we take the good parts of other styles, get rid of the stuff we don't need and POOF - MCMAP


 
MCMAP (whether or not anyone wnats to admit it) is a traditional martial art. There is a rank structure, with a defined material, a defined way to do that material, and a defined way to pass is it on. The Marines created a tradition when they made MCMAP. Just because they don't bow and have Kata, doesn't mean there isn't a tradition. And there is a kiai. They just call it a 'war cry'.



Yoshiyahu said:


> How long is boot camp?


 
Differnit branches do differnit things. Each branch has there own location(s), training cycle, and training length. The longest is the Marines at 13 weeks, we train at either Parris Island North Carolina or San Deigo California. The Army has (I think) 7 differnit sites, and theres is 9 weeks. Airforce and Navy are both 6 weeks with one site (I think). Buzzy can probably tell you alot more (he's been in alot longer, is Airforce and works with Army guys). One thing I can you with certaintly though,  ONLY the Marines have 'Boot Camp'. Everyone else has 'Basic training'. Thats not Marine pride/ego (whatever you want to call it), thats actually what the differnit branches call it.



Yoshiyahu said:


> But it would be great if The Armed forces could learn wing chun...But this is a western country...it would be exceptional but not realistic.


 
Then I'm geussing you'd be surprised to know there are quite a few Martial Arts schools on differnit bases? I know there is a pretty big BJJ school at Camp Lejeune.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Dec 30, 2008)

Do you know Chen Tai Chi and Yang Tai Chi in its entirety?




Xue Sheng said:


> Bingo


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 31, 2008)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Do you know Chen Tai Chi and Yang Tai Chi in its entirety?


 
Actually I do not know anyone that does, but they do train the complete curriculum not just a bit here and a bit there a little single hand push hands a bit of grasp the sparrows tail a touch of wild horse parts its mane and a cat step or 2 does not make it taiji. Even Chen Xiaowang has said he is still learning and if someone ever tells you they know it all... get away from them as fast a possible because they can't teach you anything.  

And may I ask what the heck this has to do with Military Wing Chun?

If you are going for something like well you don't know it entirely so you don't train it..... don't try it will fail.

And I am really getting to a point here where I REALLY need to ask you what do you find so lacking in Wing Chun that you need to make it things it is not?


----------



## MBuzzy (Dec 31, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> MCMAP (whether or not anyone wnats to admit it) is a traditional martial art. There is a rank structure, with a defined material, a defined way to do that material, and a defined way to pass is it on. The Marines created a tradition when they made MCMAP. Just because they don't bow and have Kata, doesn't mean there isn't a tradition. And there is a kiai. They just call it a 'war cry'.



That, I suppose depends on your definition of what a TMA is, although this is a good point, it does meet many of the criteria.  



CuongNhuka said:


> Different branches do different things. Each branch has there own location(s), training cycle, and training length. The longest is the Marines at 13 weeks, we train at either Parris Island North Carolina or San Diego California. The Army has (I think) 7 different sites, and theirs is 9 weeks. Air Force and Navy are both 6 weeks with one site (I think). Buzzy can probably tell you a lot more (he's been in a lot longer, is Air Force and works with Army guys). One thing I can you with certainly though,  ONLY the Marines have 'Boot Camp'. Everyone else has 'Basic training'. That's not Marine pride/ego (whatever you want to call it), that's actually what the different branches call it.


 
Air Force's Basic is 8 1/2 weeks now at Lackland AFB, one location.  The Navy's Basic Training is 8 weeks at Naval Station Great Lakes in Illinois.  Both the Navy and the Marine Corps call their Basic Training "Boot Camp," although it is a slang term for any Basic Training.  Officially, the Air Force's is Basic Military Training and the Army's is Army Basic Training (Army uses 5 sites).


----------



## MBuzzy (Dec 31, 2008)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Persoanlly I love wing Chun but America is roman and greek society...i think its armed forces do better training their soldiers in western boxing and wrestling...something the average amercan excels in.
> 
> But as for Wing Chun....If you have soldiers who are in the reserves during peace time Wing Chun would be a great art for them learn...It takes about three years in my opinion for someone to effectively fight with Wing Chun who has never had any previous martial arts training
> 
> But it would be great if The Armed forces could learn wing chun...But this is a western country...it would be exceptional but not realistic.



I really don't think that Wing Chun is right for the Military.  Now, I don't know Wing Chun, but this isn't a knock against the style.  I don't think that ANY of the traditional Asian Martial Arts are right for the military.  In fact, aside from one created specifically FOR the military, NO Traditional Martial Arts are right for the military.  If you consider MCMAP a TMA, then it is fine.  Army Combatives is another great way to go.

I think that we have the right idea.  Take the good stuff from other styles and put it into a system specific to our needs.  It is done all the time, new styles are constantly being formed to adapt to new needs.  

The military has a very specific use, which includes different types of weapons fighting (Very non traditional Martial Arts Weapons), hand to hand combat requiring fast and decisive kills, fighting in a very specific uniform (IBA and Helmet), and they need to learn it, teach it, and know it in a very short period of time.  

While WC is a great style that has or could incorporate many of those things, there is some extra that isn't needed and there is some more that needs to be added.  Honestly, I think that the way we're going is a good plan.  With MCMAP, Army and AF Combatives Programs and I'm sure that the Navy is on their way too, we are training our troops smarter and more efficiently in the fighting styles they need.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 31, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> I really don't think that Wing Chun is right for the Military. Now, I don't know Wing Chun, but this isn't a knock against the style. I don't think that ANY of the traditional Asian Martial Arts are right for the military. In fact, aside from one created specifically FOR the military, NO Traditional Martial Arts are right for the military. If you consider MCMAP a TMA, then it is fine. Army Combatives is another great way to go.
> 
> I think that we have the right idea. Take the good stuff from other styles and put it into a system specific to our needs. It is done all the time, new styles are constantly being formed to adapt to new needs.
> 
> ...


 
Agreed

This is why the Chinese military now uses Sanda that is made up of multiple CMA styles Kicking, punching, Qinna and Shuaijiao minus any Qi training.


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 31, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> That, I suppose depends on your definition of what a TMA is, although this is a good point, it does meet many of the criteria.
> 
> 
> 
> Air Force's Basic is 8 1/2 weeks now at Lackland AFB, one location.  The Navy's Basic Training is 8 weeks at Naval Station Great Lakes in Illinois.  Both the Navy and the Marine Corps call their Basic Training "Boot Camp," although it is a slang term for any Basic Training.  Officially, the Air Force's is Basic Military Training and the Army's is Army Basic Training (Army uses 5 sites).


Just a note about the natures of Basic Training.

There's a reason USMC Basic is so much longer; the Marine Corps model is that every Marine is a rifleman, and has basic infantry capability.  So their Basic training includes a lot more of that material than the other services.  (The Basic School at Quantico includes quite a lot of the same boot camp material, just for officers.)  The goal of basic training in the other services to transition a civilian to a soldier/airman/sailor who will then get their other training to build on that.  Sure, they get some of the shooting and combative type stuff -- but the emphasis isn't quite the same.


----------



## MBuzzy (Dec 31, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> Just a note about the natures of Basic Training.
> 
> There's a reason USMC Basic is so much longer; the Marine Corps model is that every Marine is a rifleman, and has basic infantry capability.  So their Basic training includes a lot more of that material than the other services.  (The Basic School at Quantico includes quite a lot of the same boot camp material, just for officers.)  The goal of basic training in the other services to transition a civilian to a soldier/airman/sailor who will then get their other training to build on that.  Sure, they get some of the shooting and combative type stuff -- but the emphasis isn't quite the same.



Exactly, every service also has several different levels of advanced schools.  Not only to initially train them in their career fields, but along the way as well.  Almost every rank or group of ranks has a group devoted specifically to them, at least in the AF.  I know that the other services have similar types of advanced training.  The Air Force for example, can afford to have a short basic because there is so little common group.  We are really a service of specialists....some of our technical training schools are over a year long.  There is much more commonality in what Soliders and Marines do in their day to day jobs.  They do of course, have specialties....but if you ask a Marine what he does....he'll say that he's a Marine.  If you ask an Airman what he does, he'll say that he's a Civil Engineer or a Mechanic or an Information Analyst.  There is a big paradigm shift between how the services view their troops.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Dec 31, 2008)

If you mean why am I trying make Wing Chun internal...Its not I am trying make it that way...thats the way I was Taught Wing Chun. From inside out. I was taught internal method over external. You only have a little tai chi...So your not practicing Tai Chi.




Xue Sheng said:


> Actually I do not know anyone that does, but they do train the complete curriculum not just a bit here and a bit there a little single hand push hands a bit of grasp the sparrows tail a touch of wild horse parts its mane and a cat step or 2 does not make it taiji. Even Chen Xiaowang has said he is still learning and if someone ever tells you they know it all... get away from them as fast a possible because they can't teach you anything.
> 
> And may I ask what the heck this has to do with Military Wing Chun?
> 
> ...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 31, 2008)

Yoshiyahu said:


> If you mean why am I trying make Wing Chun internal...Its not I am trying make it that way...thats the way I was Taught Wing Chun. From inside out. I was taught internal method over external. You only have a little tai chi...So your not practicing Tai Chi.


 
That is actually a pretty funny response you have there 

I told you not to go there but you still did you took the nah nah na nah nah approach, IMO. But then I guess I am in good company because if you actually read my previous response Chen Xiaowang says he does not know everything either and I am absolutely not telling you who Chen Xiaowang is, look it up. 

But if you must know

Over 17 years of taiji 15 specifically in Yang style in a rather good lineage

probably now 3 years in Chen, some of that with the Chen family. 

If you think that is a little then by all means go with that my friend

You don't know what neijia is and you want to make Wing Chun a Neijia ok here you go this is what you have to do

The only people you really have to convince are Sun Lutang and Huang Zongxi but since Sun Lutang died in 1932 and Huang Zongxi died in 1695 I guess it is to late to convince them that Wing Chun is a neijia, damn the luck. One started this mess and the other defined it. But both are basically saying, amongst a few other things, that it has to be linked to Taoists and most certainly not Buddhists. 

And while we're talking Taoists just in case you are thinking of a way to associate Wing Chun with Taoists is through Zhang Sanfeng, the Taoist said to have come up with Neijia and Taijiquan; it is likely he is a myth, but if you do wish to go there you need to choose one to make it more believable

Here are a few

Zhang Sanfeng who may have lived in either the Yuan Dynasty (1279-1368) or the Sung Dynasty (969-1126) or the Southern Sung Dynasty (1127-1279) and someone did make a reference that would put him in the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) but for any of the histories to work he can't be from the Ming Dynasty so I wouldn't choose that one.

Are you beginning to see how silly this whole thing is? 

So someone takes you off balance and throws you on the ground with such a relaxed ease and grace you just can't believe you were thrown like a Yang Taiji master or someone takes you out by slamming you square in the head and/or stepping on your knee like a Sanda master might or they come straight at you so fast you can't counter and hit you like a truck knocking you backwards 6 feet like a Xingyiquan master might do or they grab hold of you and throw you on the ground so hard you can't get up like a Shuaijiao master might or move around you so fast you don't know where they went and then they whack you in the back of the head so hard they knock you out like a Bagua master might do or they grab you lock you and then hurt you real bad like a qinna master might do or they hit you with a flurry of punches that all hit the mark real hard like you might get if a Tongbei master was attacking or they hit you in the chest so hard you forget how to breathe like a Wing Chun master might do what difference does it make if they are labeled Neijia or Waijia?

I have to say after a few days and several posts on this I no longer care, call it what you will it does not really matter anyway

But I will leave you with this, one of the possible origins or at least one possible reason Neijia got stressed to much and hung on so long was that it was away to make one superior to another without having to prove it. And this was propagated by less than stellar pupils of illiterate masters. It was so much easier to make up for a lack of skill and training by claiming the superiority of say taiji (calling it a Neijia) over say Hung Ga (calling it waijia). This way the less than stellar taiji practitioner could get off looking good and not taking the challenge (which would likely get him killed) by claiming his style was a neijia and by far superior to the lowly waijia and he just simply did not want to hurt the poor fellow that wasted his time training Hung Ga. And to be honest I have seen this very thing used today, had it used against me once actually in a comment that was "I don't DO Martial arts... I DO Taiji" Funny thing was I do taiji too and we were talking about taiji shanshou (form only) at the time of which the other guy was absolutely awful at. 

Also in one of the multiple threads you have on Wing Chun ui a Neijia that also does not seem to be getting the response you wish I asked you a whole lot of questions I await your answers.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Dec 31, 2008)

I know who is Chen Xiaowang is...on another thread about FaJin i posted a video on him there...very interesting actually you brought him up?

An wow...you said alot and answer those questions of yours...I am by no means a master in anything...not even WC...I am just a student...But you disagree..many probably will thats okay...maybe my Wing Chun is MMA meaning External WC and Internal Tai Chi principles...lol....ha ha...




Xue Sheng said:


> That is actually a pretty funny response you have there
> 
> I told you not to go there but you still did you took the nah nah na nah nah approach, IMO. But then I guess I am in good company because if you actually read my previous response Chen Xiaowang says he does not know everything either and I am absolutely not telling you who Chen Xiaowang is, look it up.
> 
> ...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 31, 2008)

Yoshiyahu said:


> I am by no means a master in anything...not even WC...I am just a student


 
Good to hear

Xue Sheng is Mandarin for student by the way.



Yoshiyahu said:


> maybe my Wing Chun is MMA meaning External WC and Internal Tai Chi principles...lol....ha ha...


 
That could be and that I cannot say anything about it. Your flavor of Wing Chun might be exactly what you say it is. But that does not make all Wing Chun Internal.

My flavor of Yang Taiji comes form Tung Ying Chieh (his teacher was Yang Chengfu) and there are 2 fast forms in my flavor of Yang style Taijiquan but that does not mean that all flavors have fast forms. If you learn Yang Taiji for Yang Jun (Yang Chengfu's Great Grandson) you will not be taught a fast form. For these you need to be in the Tung Ying Chieh lineage.

If you learn Chen style Taijiquan from Chen Yu you will learn Xinjia Yilu and Xinjia Erlu but if you learn from Chen Zhenglei you will learn Laojia Yilu, Laojia Erlu and Xinjia Yilu and Xinjia Erlu they are both Chen and they are both 19th Generation Chen. There is another 19th Generation Chen family member in Chengdu... I think he is there or is it Xian... either way he will only teach you Laojia Yilu and Laojia Erlu and frankly I would happily train with any one of them but you cannot make any blanket statement about Chen curriculum based on training with any one of them. 

You train Wing Chun as an internal ok I cannot disagree with that. But that does not mean all Wing Chun is internal.

Happy New Year
:asian:


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Dec 31, 2008)

My Main Style is Wing Chun...I can tell you lineages there...but as for Tai Chi Lineages...I dont even remember...never really asked...an didn't pay attention to it for real when some of teachers were speaking about lineage...I am the one who is there to practice and get the techniques down so I can grow on my own and learn and receive...




Xue Sheng said:


> Good to hear
> 
> Xue Sheng is Mandarin for student by the way.
> 
> ...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 31, 2008)

Yoshiyahu said:


> My Main Style is Wing Chun...I can tell you lineages there...but as for Tai Chi Lineages...I dont even remember...never really asked...an didn't pay attention to it for real when some of teachers were speaking about lineage...I am the one who is there to practice and get the techniques down so I can grow on my own and learn and receive...


 
No problem :asian:


----------



## Mystic Wolf (Dec 31, 2008)

Just read all the post and  Being a former MCMAP instructor, I have to say, MCMAP is a style.
As MCMAP instructor I was learning Wing Tsun (EBMAS) on my free time and the Jim Fung system.

I do believe that the wing chun principles fit well with the Marine Corps doctrine and the way fire teams are deployed.

The army believes a squad takes out a fire team, a platoon takes out a squad, and ect..., they play the numbers game.

As a Marine we are taught to adapt, overcome, and improvise. And that you imagination is your greatest weapon.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Dec 31, 2008)

Excellent post...i love the info...




Mystic Wolf said:


> Just read all the post and Being a former MCMAP instructor, I have to say, MCMAP is a style.
> As MCMAP instructor I was learning Wing Tsun (EBMAS) on my free time and the Jim Fung system.
> 
> I do believe that the wing chun principles fit well with the Marine Corps doctrine and the way fire teams are deployed.
> ...


----------



## Si-Je (Dec 31, 2008)

hey guys, good thread.  But, I think I've given enough to give you an idea how to use WC theory and concepts in war, or battle, even military strategy.
I won't give anymore hints. You guys figure it out. lol!
I know what I'll do if I have too, and I don't have the MCMAP and marine training to tell me what to do.

Be creative.  You don't need the forms of WC. You don't need to decode the complete "chinese traditional style".
Just the very basic concepts.  Think.
Think
How can these 5 simple concepts be applied to military stratagy, application, and such.  I don't know the military lingo, or whatever like hubbie.  But, I know what to do.  
Give me a scenario (and yes, you'll have to explain more because I don't understand the military code words and phrases that say so much. sorry for being a dirt bag civilian! lol!) and ask what you will.  How can I put WC/WT concepts to that situation.  I'll do my best.  I think you'll like it.

If you don't then, at least you'll have something new to gripe about instead of gripping about one branch or the other. lol! (I'm a civy, you'll all the same to me. )


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 1, 2009)

Okay *Si-Je* I will bite...here you go?

Lets say the Taliban invade North America after they totally subdued canada...there is war in the streets...six taliban invade your living space,,Hubbie disarms all six of them...three attack your husband...he  starts ripping their throats out...that leaves two attacking you and one grabbing the baby...How do you use your WC to kill the two intruders to give hubbie time to rip the other three heads off so he come an kill the other one touching the baby????




Si-Je said:


> hey guys, good thread. But, I think I've given enough to give you an idea how to use WC theory and concepts in war, or battle, even military strategy.
> I won't give anymore hints. You guys figure it out. lol!
> I know what I'll do if I have too, and I don't have the MCMAP and marine training to tell me what to do.
> 
> ...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 1, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Okay *Si-Je* I will bite...here you go?
> 
> Lets say the Taliban invade North America after they totally subdued canada...there is war in the streets...six taliban invade your living space,,Hubbie disarms all six of them...three attack your husband...he starts ripping their throats out...that leaves two attacking you and one grabbing the baby...How do you use your WC to kill the two intruders to give hubbie time to rip the other three heads off so he come an kill the other one touching the baby????


 
Asking a mother how she will protect her baby is going to get the same answer from just about every mother IMO, Wing Chun or not, they will protect the baby with their life if necessary.


----------



## Si-Je (Jan 1, 2009)

Break the knees so I can focus on the one messing with boobo girl.
Come back and kill them later, or let hubbie catch up and finish them after I have baby kid.  



Yoshiyahu said:


> Okay *Si-Je* I will bite...here you go?
> 
> Lets say the Taliban invade North America after they totally subdued canada...there is war in the streets...six taliban invade your living space,,Hubbie disarms all six of them...three attack your husband...he starts ripping their throats out...that leaves two attacking you and one grabbing the baby...How do you use your WC to kill the two intruders to give hubbie time to rip the other three heads off so he come an kill the other one touching the baby????


----------



## MBuzzy (Jan 1, 2009)

Si-Je said:


> hey guys, good thread.  But, I think I've given enough to give you an idea how to use WC theory and concepts in war, or battle, even military strategy.
> I won't give anymore hints. You guys figure it out. lol!
> I know what I'll do if I have too, and I don't have the MCMAP and marine training to tell me what to do.
> 
> ...



The good thing is that we really don't have to decode anything or for that matter think too much to make the connection.  

If you examine the history of military strategy, our strategies and writings have been largely based on history and strategic writings.  Starting with the Art of War by Sun Tzu, we have a great wealth of geniuses who have already done the work.  These ideas seem to be entrenched not only in Asian Martial Arts in general, but also in military strategy across the centuries. 

What interests me the most is that the military has many of the same concepts and ideas already, probably from the same sources that WC got them from.  Although it has been altered to fit our needs and mission constraints, it is based on the same principles.

Honestly, discussion how WC can be used in a specific incident really doesn't relate to the military usages, especially of civilians.  How Martial Arts can be used on the battlefield is a discussion that's been going on for centuries.  Obviously Martial Arts came about BECAUSE of war.  The way that hand to hand combat is used today is vastly different, but the same principles apply to achieve different ends.  I know soldiers who have used Martial Arts (Tang Soo Do specifically) recently in war, so it isn't an outdated concept that has been overshadowed by the use of weapons.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 1, 2009)

So true..I would have to agree with you...But no one else answered her question...an that was the only thing I could come up with at the time?




Xue Sheng said:


> Asking a mother how she will protect her baby is going to get the same answer from just about every mother IMO, Wing Chun or not, they will protect the baby with their life if necessary.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 1, 2009)

Okay what country do soldiers who use tang so do come from...Are the American Soldiers...also have they said they actually used their art in hand to hand combat...

Also if their any real military people here who have actually seen war...how much would you say you use your hand to hand skills. Most people seem to think all you do is shoot and throw grenanes...but never really actually have to punch,block kick,throw or break limbs?





MBuzzy said:


> The good thing is that we really don't have to decode anything or for that matter think too much to make the connection.
> 
> If you examine the history of military strategy, our strategies and writings have been largely based on history and strategic writings. Starting with the Art of War by Sun Tzu, we have a great wealth of geniuses who have already done the work. These ideas seem to be entrenched not only in Asian Martial Arts in general, but also in military strategy across the centuries.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mystic Wolf (Jan 1, 2009)

Hand to hand is more common in urban warfare. You may think a room is clear or by pass a closet and out from behind comes the enemy with a knife. My first reaction is to turn and hit him with the butt of my rifle and then put some lead in him.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jan 1, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> So true..I would have to agree with you...But no one else answered her question...an that was the only thing I could come up with at the time?



If we're going to talk single instances and applications....I would be interested to know, as a Tang Soo Do practitioner with only 2 seminar's worth of WC knowledge, in what military instances WC may be applicable.  

_disclaimer - I'm using the word soldier here in place of saying "Soldier, Marine, Airman, or Seaman" every time._
For example, A solder is wearing full body armor (very thick vest with two 15 lb plates (one in front, one in back)), plus a helmet, holding a rifle, possible wearing a thigh or drop holster with a hand gun in it, and in military uniform (so combat boots, plus BDUs or service equivalent).  Said soldier is out of his convoy (on the ground) doing civil interaction type of stuff.  Civilian approaches solider, grabs his rifle and starts screaming at him in Farsi.  Soldier can't reach his side arm and the aggressor is controlling the rifle.

Now...within MCMAP and Army Combatives, this situation is dealt with pretty straight forward.  Since they are designed SPECIFICALLY for troops holding weapons and include a robust section on fighting with those weapons.  Now the ideas and concepts of control, use of force, proportionality, etc all hold, since they are shared by military and martial arts.  But in what ways would WC help in such a situation?


----------



## MBuzzy (Jan 1, 2009)

Mystic Wolf said:


> Hand to hand is more common in urban warfare. You may think a room is clear or by pass a closet and out from behind comes the enemy with a knife. My first reaction is to turn and hit him with the butt of my rifle and then put some lead in him.



Exactly why I saw that Martial Arts are GREAT and it is wonderful if soldiers know them....BUT, in most situations, we will use gun fu or give the give a nice rifle butt to the face, so the effectiveness of traditional asian MAs is diminished a bit.

Although, I do know a Marine who was clearing houses (he is a 4th degree in Tang Soo Do) and side kicked a guy in the chest.....


----------



## Mystic Wolf (Jan 1, 2009)

Hey Fly Boy. I know the air force sometimes has trouble understanding tactics and thet they usually follow army tactics. As a Marine we start off with a four man fire team then it developes from there. We are taught to adapt and improvise on the fly.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jan 1, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Okay what country do soldiers who use tang so do come from...Are the American Soldiers...also have they said they actually used their art in hand to hand combat...
> 
> Also if their any real military people here who have actually seen war...how much would you say you use your hand to hand skills. Most people seem to think all you do is shoot and throw grenanes...but never really actually have to punch,block kick,throw or break limbs?



Tang Soo Do is a Korean Martial Art, developed in 1945 and based on a conglomeration of Chinese and Japanese styles.  The Korean military is trained in a combat oriented (NOT SPORT) version of Tae Kwon Do, which is a derivative and very close cousin to TSD.  Every Korean soldier gets a very in depth training in TKD through their entire career, daily training in fact.  In many jobs within the Korean Army and Air Force, a 2nd Degree or higher is required to even be considered.  Notice that these styles were created BEFORE the Korean war, so they have been battle tested.  They are still used within the Korean military.  In fact, Korea is STILL at war and the North and South are still in a very very unstable cease-fire.  

TSD was actually brought to America by soldiers who had learned it in Korea during and after the Korean war.

As for how much hand to hand is used in modern warfare....My experience is limited.  I've been on less than 30 convoys and never been in direct urban combat.  My engagements have all been security oriented or guarding based in Iraq.  

In my experience, hand to hand combat is BY FAR a last resort.  Let's just say that I'll THROW my M-16 at someone before I resort to hand to hand.  All other weapons have to have been taken away.  For example, in one situation, we were guarding suspected insurgents.  They were taken at gun point, zip tied, put on their knees and guarded at gun point.  If any of them had breathed wrong, they would have gotten a bullet, I would not have tried to incapacitate them with my hands.  Depending on the Rules of Engagement for your mission and theater, in today's environment, you are generally authorized to use deadly force if the aggressor shows an intent to harm you.

The situation in which I would be punching, throwing, breaking limbs.....well, let's just say that the proverbial crap had really hit the fan.  hehehe, especially since I'm in the Air Force, so I probably won't be in much Urban combat.

Also, just remember, most of our enemies now have minimal traing if any (some are no more than farmers).  Chances are, they are shooting from a distance or trying to blow you up.  Once you are close, they pretty much recognize that they are going to lose and don't try anything.  So basically, they are trying just as hard to NOT get into hand to hand combat.  The majority of Iraqis at least, have NO DESIRE to go toe to toe with ANY American soldier.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jan 1, 2009)

Mystic Wolf said:


> Hey Fly Boy. I know the air force sometimes has trouble understanding tactics and thet they usually follow army tactics. As a Marine we start off with a four man fire team then it developes from there. We are taught to adapt and improvise on the fly.



hahaha, exactly!    And you're dead on, all of my combat training is Army training.  We got the basic Fire Team training during our Combat Skills Training, but in the situations that I was in, we were not set up in Fire Teams, they were all Convoy situations where we dismounted.

This actually demonstrates my point.  The CONCEPTS that are taught in Martial Arts are very useful and beneficial and from what it sounds like, WC's basic tenets mirror our LOAC pretty close.  

We could go back and forth about single instances all day long, but in the end, knowing basic ideas and concepts is all that will help.  A person will do whatever they can and will resort to muscle memory in a stressful situation.  If you know WC, you'll use it, if you know MCMAP, you'll use it, if you know BJJ, you'll use it - but all only if you need it and chances are, as a last resort.


----------



## Mystic Wolf (Jan 1, 2009)

In combat your learn to improvise and the imagination is a very powerful weapon.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jan 1, 2009)

Mystic Wolf said:


> In combat your learn to improvise and the imagination is a very powerful weapon.



It is also one of the basic principles of just about every Martial Art on the planet.  Martial....Military.....no coincidence.  We do the same stuff, train something as often as possible to build muscle memory, so that when you're in the situation, you have the tools to improvise.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 1, 2009)

To answer your question: 





> Now the ideas and concepts of control, use of force, proportionality, etc all hold, since they are shared by military and martial arts. But in what ways would WC help in such a situation.


 
Well....Let answer your question concerning how Wing Chun could help a Military Soldier. Now my answer will be civilian based...Since I have little to No information on how the Military Tactics of Hand to Hand Combat works.

*You said*:"_Civilian approaches solider, grabs his rifle and starts screaming at him in Farsi. Soldier can't reach his side arm and the aggressor is controlling the rifle." _

Now in this case if its a Non-combatant. Their are a couple of ways you can take care of the situtation. If the Civilian doesn't have a Weapon. You can hold your gun with both hands. Try to twist your gun out of his grasp by rotating it or turning with your elbow as threating force aiming towards his head. I suggest putting the gun on safety just in case. Keep the hole of gun turned away from your body at all times. Maybe while twisting your drop kick him in the side of his knee or front kick really hard in the thigh near the groin. If your flexible enough do a chain kick. Kick side of Knee alternate to opposite thigh then kick possibly the wrist of the assailiant as step forward an stomp the knee. If he is a Non-Civilian or an combatant do the above with another power to break the knee. While possibly elbowing the face at the same time. Or you could reach with one hand grabbing the fingers or side of palm and twisting his hand backwards to his pain thresh hold while kicking repeately the side of knee or groin to make him release. If you have steel toe boots possibly use the toe of shoe to snap kick the groin,pelvis or gonads. When the combatant lets go of the gun follow up with elbow strike to hit with butt of the gun then follow up with securing measures unto your fire team re-connects with you. Lets say your cut off from Bravo team and their ETA is two minutes. This little hand interactation may give you enough time for an officer who translate Farsi to come an clear matters up. If the Combatant turns out to be Armed then needless to say. Shot him as soon as the sights of your gun lines up with his person's. But if he is not a Foe then keep him secure by placing pressure down on middle of his spine with your boot so he can not get up an have your gun drawn on him until Fire Team Rendevues with you.

Chain kicks are consecutive kicks. Wing Chun also employs elbow strikes that are use to release gaurds or grabs as well as strike vital points. A Downard Diaganol Elbow strike would work nicely against an Civilian or Combatant that has he his hands on you or your gun. Along with Pulling the gun outward from his reach while Simutaneously kicking his foundation to unsteady his root. Allowing you to kick him or sweep him to ground so he can be secured with the knee or foot in his back and spine. If you can cuff him one handed while holding your M-16 Rifle do so. But never loose your gun. If you can't reach your Gun in the holster. What about a knife. Why not use the knife to slice the wrist holding the end of M-16. Then he will let go and you can proceed to ordering him to get down on he knees and turn around so he can be secured?

But these are just ideas that are coming in my head of possibly solutions. If you are a military guy who practices Wing Chun you may be able to share more details?

Than I please share your feed back?





MBuzzy said:


> If we're going to talk single instances and applications....I would be interested to know, as a Tang Soo Do practitioner with only 2 seminar's worth of WC knowledge, in what military instances WC may be applicable.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------

