The Chinese, a people who invented gunpowder and the compass were also the first to develop a technique of unarmed combat. Chinese monks, to protect themselves against robber bands and nomad tribes, are said to have originated and developed man's first system of unarmed defense and offense. It was a system which has remained basically unchanged.
The Japanese, soon after the twelfth century, came interested in this type of combat and, adopting Chinese ideas, began the development of their jiu-jitsu technique. They gave to jiu-jitsu a mythological background and developed a form of religion based on the application of its principles. Before 1900 many variations of jiu-jitsu were taught. Then a professor named Kano established a school for the purpose of studying and applying this method of unarmed combat. The new system was called judo. At present judo, which has peen given an aura of mysticism, is used in body building to develop an offensive spirit. It is a part of every Jap soldier's basic training.
In the early 1920s a branch of the group using judo established itself in New York City and spread throughout larger cities in the United States. It was practiced principally by Orientals and did not gain much popularity among Americans because, as in all things Oriental it involved a tedious amount of practice and a great deal of patience. In later years, certain instructors set up schools and sought wealthy young men as pupils.
The pupil was told that he was being introduced to an age-old secret method of combat, which had come down through centuries of Japanese history, and he was then initiated into some of its basic fundamentals. As time went on and he grew more interested, he was told that for an additional sum he could learn more holds and tricks. It was a lucrative racket.
Between the last war and the present, a number of books were written by experts in judo, jiu-jitsu, and unarmed combat technique. All of them have stressed defense as their sole purpose. Indeed, the new Army Field Manual on this type of combat, dated June 30, 1942, is called "Unarmed Defense for the American Soldier". Instruction given in the past to police and other law enforcement men have all stressed self defense and restraint as the background of unarmed combat.
Throughout the country today numerous articles are being written for publication in magazines and news-papers, and illustrations are being printed in the rotogravure sections of leading dailies of so-called "rough stuff" and underhand tactics. Throughout our armed forces various schools of instruction and courses are being given by individuals who are qualified along orthodox lines and in many cases have had experience in ordinary police or other restraining types of manhandling. But no one has yet outlined a uniform system of instruction or a constructive training course for unarmed fighting with the grandstand and non-practical methods eliminated. Moreover the Army needs a manual on "Unarmed Offense" as well as one on unarmed defense. All unarmed combat should be taught on the theory that it is useful to a man only after he has lost his weapons.
The knife is the ideal weapon for close work. Its use should be encouraged and adopted by all units of our armed forces because of its deadly and silent effectiveness, the confidence it gives a man skilled in its use, and the psychological effect of a bright blade upon an opponent.
Much of the close combat being taught our troops today is ineffective and impractical. This is because we do not teach a system that is simple, one that a man can execute with great speed and practice intensively until he instinctively reacts with the few blows, kicks and releases that are necessary. Then too, many of the tricks taught our men are neither practical from the standpoint of their quickness of application, nor feasible as a means of finishing an opponent permanently. They are useful only as a means of restraint. Too many instructors teach a system that implies that an opponent will remain completely passive, enabling the student to apply any hold.
You can't engage in unarmed combat without getting hurt. That is true despite the popular impression that such methods of combat provide fool-proof ways of subduing an opponent without personal risk.
A man in combat for his life quickly reverts to the animal. He may be lucid when he begins and if well trained he will automatically plan his offense. But after a few seconds, and especially after he has been hit hard and hurt by his opponent, his combat becomes instinctive. For that reason a simple type of instruction with a great deal of emphasis on the few elementary methods which can be easily and instinctively used is necessary. The trimmings are soon forgotten in a hand-to-hand encounter for life or death.
Although the style of fighting which involves kicking a man when he is down, gouging out his eyes, and kicking him in the testicles does not appeal to the average American, we must forget the Marquise of Queensberry and his often violated rules of sportsman like combat when dealing with our Jap and Nazi enemies.
Ruthlessness is what we seek. It is best defined by two words: speed and brutality. In this type of fighting it does not matter much what is done so long as it is done fast and energetically. Surprise and speed are the two elements of success. This applies as much to the individual as it does to the strategy of armies. Attack is always the aim and it should be carried out so that each blow is the means to, or ends in a fatality. Each attack is also a defense.
Books on this subject illustrate many effective releases from grips around the waist, under the arms, and other encumbering holds. But their proponents have also lost sight of the fact that although these holds and releases are effective in the isolated cases of a few highly trained and experienced men, no one but an absolute fool would ever allow a man to apply them while his arms were free and his own animal fighting instincts were aroused.
该帖子在 2007/7/12 11:38:41 编辑过