What conidtions was TKD made in?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 39746
  • Start date
They set off with them, if it's possible or a good idea to use them is another thing all together,

You statement was that unarmed combat had not been use in wars in the last hundred years is clearly just wrong
Apparently I was not clear. I rarely speak in absolutes. I never meant to imply "It had not been used" since there is clearly anecdotal evidence of those rare occurrences where it happened. Once again here is what I posted. : "In the last 100 years how often do you think modern military combat involved a weaponless encounter? Now measure whatever percentage of conflicts you think this involved against time spent training for it." So, it wasn't a statement, it was a question. Do you care to provide an answer.
 
Apparently I was not clear. I rarely speak in absolutes. I never meant to imply "It had not been used" since there is clearly anecdotal evidence of those rare occurrences where it happened. Once again here is what I posted. : "In the last 100 years how often do you think modern military combat involved a weaponless encounter? Now measure whatever percentage of conflicts you think this involved against time spent training for it." So, it wasn't a statement, it was a question. Do you care to provide an answer.
It was a leading question masquerading as a statement,

So to answer your statement, ( leading question) I strongly suspect that all conflicts in the last 100 years have had an eminent if unarmed combat in them.

So that's a 100 % of conflicts, unless you can say with some certainty that x conflict has no unarmed conflict in it, can you? in which case it will be 99.9%
 
Guys unarmed combat is taught in the military as it always has been lol it kinda just has (ok it has and will in future take different forms and call itself different things) however if it gets to that then the brown stuff really has hit the big fan.

It more likely you will find military dudes using their unarmed combat skills outside the pub than in combat.
 
Guys unarmed combat is taught in the military as it always has been lol it kinda just has (ok it has and will in future take different forms and call itself different things) however if it gets to that then the brown stuff really has hit the big fan.

It more likely you will find military dudes using their unarmed combat skills outside the pub than in combat.
The brown stuff frequently hits the fan in war zones, once someone is up close and personal, it's extremely difficult to shoot them that's if they are in front of you, just about impossible if they have you in a choke le hold.

If you can organise a battle so that both sides stay 100 meters apart and shoot at each other, then there seems little need for unarmed combat, but that level of organisation is rare, perhaps if they had a referee and an offside rule
 
If you can organise a battle so that both sides stay 100 meters apart and shoot at each other, then there seems little need for unarmed combat, but that level of organisation is rare, perhaps if they had a referee and an offside rule


They did it was called the Sport of Kings and how they kept the population at controllable levels lol

fall out arrange a battle ...watch the slaughter and all home for tea cakes and medals
 
The brown stuff frequently hits the fan in war zones, once someone is up close and personal, it's extremely difficult to shoot them that's if they are in front of you, just about impossible if they have you in a choke le hold.

That my friend if it happens you then know if you have a certain type of leader

of which there are two

the murdering type

and the killing type

the first one gets you in the crap and killed on purpose as he or she wants the medals and the glory and doesn't share your fate and you find out in modern times the unarmed stuff don't work as the bad guys know it better

the second gets ya in the crap and killed by accident but he or she didn't mean to, they usually share your fate and you can hear the poor sod yell the unarmed stuff don't work he not doing what he should but you forgive him before the pearly gates and say I told ya it didn't work sir or ma'am but i forgive you cause you dead too now shift as i gonna be there for a while as that dude with that book umm most of it about me and my sins
 
Soccer on the other hand started as a combat sport, that vaguely involved a ball and developed from there, to a largely non contact sport, a bit like wing chun,

One of the genuinely funniest things I’ve read on here in quite a while. Thanks for that.
 
One of the genuinely funniest things I’ve read on here in quite a while. Thanks for that.

he actually is telling the truth lol in fact they had to ban it for a while as the men were playing that as opposed to practicing the longbow another useless but true fact lol
 
he actually is telling the truth lol in fact they had to ban it for a while as the men were playing that as opposed to practicing the longbow another useless but true fact lol
Soccer or Wing Chun? I was laughing about the Wing Chun bit.
 
soccer lol I don't think wing chung had made it to the UK at that time ...mind you who knows lol
 
It was a leading question masquerading as a statement,

So to answer your statement, ( leading question) I strongly suspect that all conflicts in the last 100 years have had an eminent if unarmed combat in them.

So that's a 100 % of conflicts, unless you can say with some certainty that x conflict has no unarmed conflict in it, can you? in which case it will be 99.9%
I am not sure if the word "eminent" above was meant to be "element" or "imminent". In any event, since I restrict my question to military combat AFAIAC you are 100% wrong. Few if any battlefield wounds throughout history are from non weapon contact. Can I give you sources or statistics, No. Just have never seen a news story or video showing stories or recounting non weapon caused casualties of military battle.
 
The brown stuff frequently hits the fan in war zones, once someone is up close and personal, it's extremely difficult to shoot them that's if they are in front of you, just about impossible if they have you in a choke le hold.

That is what the pistol and blade are for.
 
II strongly suspect that all conflicts in the last 100 years have had an eminent if unarmed combat in them.

So that's a 100 % of conflicts, unless you can say with some certainty that x conflict has no unarmed conflict in it, can you? in which case it will be 99.9%

I am not sure if you are interpreting the question as I intended . Are you saying that if there were 10,000 battles involving 1 million men on each side that there would be one empty hand encounter in each of the 10,000 battles giving you the 99.9% or are you saying there would 999,999 empty hand encounters?
 
I am not sure if the word "eminent" above was meant to be "element" or "imminent". In any event, since I restrict my question to military combat AFAIAC you are 100% wrong. Few if any battlefield wounds throughout history are from non weapon contact. Can I give you sources or statistics, No. Just have never seen a news story or video showing stories or recounting non weapon caused casualties of military battle.
Hang on your rolling the goal posts in to a Different field, your statement was it had never been used in combat, not that it hadn't resulted in mass Deaths, and / or serious injury,
 
I am not sure if the word "eminent" above was meant to be "element" or "imminent". In any event, since I restrict my question to military combat AFAIAC you are 100% wrong. Few if any battlefield wounds throughout history are from non weapon contact. Can I give you sources or statistics, No. Just have never seen a news story or video showing stories or recounting non weapon caused casualties of military battle.

Well, there is the Time magazine story about GM Nam Tae Hi during the Korean war...
But I think you're right in that unarmed combat represents a vanishingly small and completely insignificant part of any military conflict.
 
Last edited:
Well, there is the Time magazine story about GM Nam Tae He during the Korean war...
But I think you're right in that unarmed combat represents a vanishingly small and completely insignificant part of any military conflict.
if it's insignificant rather depends if it's you or a loved one it saves,
Though small and insignificant is still greAter than his claim of non
 
I am not sure if you are interpreting the question as I intended . Are you saying that if there were 10,000 battles involving 1 million men on each side that there would be one empty hand encounter in each of the 10,000 battles giving you the 99.9% or are you saying there would 999,999 empty hand encounters?
Conflicts are wars not battles, so I'm saying that in every War in the last 100 years there MUst have been at least one situation where somebody fought an enemy with out being armed, I'm not even claiming that they won, just that it must have happen
 
Hang on your rolling the goal posts in to a Different field, your statement was it had never been used in combat,,
I would like you to specify the post where I said "Never" . I may have said rare and even referred to anecdotal accounts.
 
Well, there is the Time magazine story about GM Nam Tae Hi during the Korean war...
But I think you're right in that unarmed combat represents a vanishingly small and completely insignificant part of any military conflict.
Never saw the Time magazine story however I did see this one:) https://1c47d0f0-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/ntkdacad/files/NamTaeHiTKDTimesJan.2000.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7cqlimTAJ7kmQM9WhhuslACk5FUz3_mFmA0TjPXWJJ_ysYG-nTUJgmHQMAxfzJwIH49y488XfxXLA7FHM0-9rTZ6rwwB2y0E1D9Sxkv0rTBgxXl5OMR5JX6RuBHkMWyir4IEmUXnnr3LFKHHn4bJiOGaQ3WlwZ1o4qClfWsteQGScG9mmiRp5l1pnzvASBOJtVd_SOty0QGZ0cNkhOFbPotpRifaZg6M6j_zaiizaJOnFGfuLqM=&attredirects=0
And he did tell us the story:)
 
Back
Top