marine corps tactical concepts

[bruce]

the below is from the 1999 marine corps close combat manual. i think it is a good guideline or way of thought that can apply to our training.

Concepts
Close combat techniques support the following
key Marine Corps tactical concepts. The concepts
are not standalone ideas but are to be combined to
Close combat can be characterized by friction, un-
certainty, disorder, and rapid change. Each situa-
tion is a unique combination of shifting factors
that cannot be controlled with precision or cer-
tainty. For example, a crowd control mission may
call for Marines to employ various techniques
ranging from nonlethal restraint to more forceful
applications. Marines who adapt quickly will
have a significant advantage.

Achieving a Decision
Achieving a decision is important in close
combat. An indecisive fight wastes energy and
possibly Marines’ lives. Whether the intent is to
control an opponent through restraint or defend
themselves in war, Marines must have a clear pur-
pose before engaging in close combat and act de-
cisively once engaged.


Gaining an Advantage
A basic principle of martial arts is to use the op-
ponent’s strength and momentum against him to
gain more leverage than one’s own muscles alone
can generate, thereby gaining an advantage. In
close combat, Marines must exploit every advantage

Speed
Marines use speed to gain the initiative and ad-
vantage over the enemy. In close combat, the
speed and violence of the attack against an oppo-
nent provides Marines with a distinct advantage.
Marines must know and understand the basics of
close combat so they can act instinctively with
speed to execute close combat techniques.
tage over an opponent to ensure a successful out-
come. This can include employing various
weapons and close combat techniques that will
present a dilemma to an opponent. Achieving sur-
prise can also greatly increase leverage. Marines
try to achieve surprise through deception, stealth,
and ambiguity.

Exploiting Success
Typically, an enemy will not normally surrender
simply because he was placed at a disadvantage.
Marines cannot be satisfied with gaining an ad-
vantage in a close combat situation. They must
exploit any advantage aggressively and ruthlessly
until an opportunity arises to completely domi-
nate the opponent. Marines must exploit success
by using every advantage that can be gained.

what do you think about the above comments and how they relate to your training? i think it presents a practical and compassionate outlook on self defense.

[DeusTrismegistus]

The part about being decisive is a very important part. Many people throw techniques uncertain of themselves and whether or not the tech will work. When you go to do something you need to have decided to do it and follow through with it. This is true in training too. Only by following through with a course of action will you know if it is effective or not, how it can be used, and how to protect any weaknesses it has. Only by doing something that puts you in trouble in training will you learn how to deal with being in trouble and how to avoid it while still being decisive in your actions.

[Chris McKinley]

bruce,

Interesting thread. Sometimes military descriptions can be as vague (and therefore not particularly pragmatic) in their own way as IMA literature is known for being. This article is mostly that way IMO. However, there are a couple of concepts which can be expanded upon to produce something which can actually translate to direct application in training.

Adapting quickly and achieving a decision are two sides of the same coin. In order to do both successfully, you have to already have a clear idea of a) what constitutes various levels of threat situations and b) what specifically you are prepared to do at each level of intensity. Being able to recognize rapid, even instant, changes in threat level is absolutely necessary. Having the experience through training to function appropriately at every level is equally necessary. Without both, you will either fail to recognize the appropriate threat or you will be hesitant/unable to function instantly and appropriately to it.

Speed in this case refers to more than maximum physical movement speed. Just as vital....in fact, much more important...is your perceptual speed. This gets to how quickly you perceive and recognize changes in a situation. There's also what you might call here decision speed...how quickly you decide to act, choose which actions are appropriate, and begin to take that action. This kind of speed can also be much more crucial to survival than simply how fast you can move.

RE: " i think it presents a practical and compassionate outlook on self defense.". That's an unusual and somewhat rare sentiment in the martial arts world. I state that because it's a view I've held for years. Ultimately, in situations where physical force cannot be avoided, providing an assymetrical and overwhelming response does not increase the total amount of violence necessary, it actually minimizes it. Responding tit for tat almost always escalates any physical confrontation. Overwhelming and neutralizing the attack at the lowest possible level of intensity is best, once violence of some level is no longer avoidable.

That principle is one that often runs diametrically opposed to much popular civilian martial art practice in the West. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with the principle of doing the least amount of harm necessary when defending oneself. It's just that, most often, doing the least amount of harm doesn't mean responding at the lowest level of intensity possible. In reality, it often means responding in such a way that the attack is neutralized and any further attack is prevented by overwhelming the attacker as early as possible in the confrontation before the situation has a chance to escalate.

[Doc Stier]

[roger hao]

Marines make the "Decision".

[Michael Dasargo]

It seems to be an detailed expansion of the OODA cycle: Obeserve, Orient, Decide, and Act.

[Daniel]

KISS.

And if your sergeant can see you, so can the enemy.

And if it´s stupid but it works, it isn´t stupid.


D.

Sarcasm. Oh yeah, like that´ll work.

[JusticeZero]

I don't focus so much on speed as I do on directly controlling the opponent's decision process, these days. Action may be faster than reaction, this is true, but there is only so far you can go by trying to be 'the fastest draw in the West'.

Ultimately, in situations where physical force cannot be avoided, providing an assymetrical and overwhelming response does not increase the total amount of violence necessary, it actually minimizes it...

...doing the least amount of harm doesn't mean responding at the lowest level of intensity possible. In reality, it often means responding in such a way that the attack is neutralized and any further attack is prevented by overwhelming the attacker as early as possible in the confrontation before the situation has a chance to escalate.

Generally wise. Mind, based on my own training, our response is framed a touch differently, but I expect you can appreciate the thought behind it..
As far as my own teaching is concerned, my 'force levels' go:

1: Escape. Mobility is good, we are very mobile and learn to move on some annoying terrain such as ice.
2: Deter attacker with defensive, distance-gaining techniques while attempting to pin blame on the attacker by staging responses in order to claim victim status in any witnesses present, then escape. So I have them train a full body whipping palm strike using coiling energy and a body lunge that looks like a total "girlie" slap. I actually have them practice shrieking in helpless terror while throwing this. Another favorite is my combo of screaming "Don't hit me!" (with terrified shriek and hands coming up in a cowering sort of shake; lisping is optional depending on who is likely to be in the area); then a low line heel stomp kick to the abdomen, groin, or knee which ends in a stance transition into "falling on the floor" (in one of our floor stances); rolling away, and coming up in position to sprint away.
3: Shock and awe with overwhelming force, steamroller over and through an attacker to reach an open space, then escape. This is where we get things like throwing a takedown that chains into doing an elbow cartwheel off of their sternum on our way to the exit.
4: Shatter the attacker's knee or deliver lethal force so that they can no longer attempt pursuit, then escape.

[Chris McKinley]

For those interested in the OODA Loop model, I gave a brief description of it on a previous thread here:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2299&p=38450&hilit=OODA+loop#p38450

[bruce]

thanks for your comments

the choice to "offer" violence is a tough one that needs to me made quickly. in the manual it only touches on that a little. how do you train to really know if you were in danger. what if i broke the dudes arm and all he was going to do was shove me?

[Mut]

'always go in search of peace ... but if you have to fight win!'

Bruce I don't think it is a tough choice. Actually I don''t think it should be a choice, it ought to be a reaction... not nessessarily to a physical movement such as a punch or kick, but rather a reaction to an attitude or believed level of threat. We can go with the what if's all you like, but I know that when I am teaching people drills and they constantly ask me 'what if....?' i get pissed off and say there is always a what if, i can only deal with the energy that I am presented with, and if that energy is threatening me I will do my best to eliminate that threat ASAP.

[Chris McKinley]

bruce, fair question, but Mut essentially handled it. My personal solution is that you expand your training repertoire to include assessment skills in addition to tactical combat ones. If you have the privilege and opportunity, learn about verbal and body language cues to hostility, how to identify routes of ingress and egress, how to spot additional assailants, how to assess environmental obstacles/weapons, allow for bystanders and their patterns of movement, etc.

All of these things are factors that go into the decision of whether or not you are able to choose to prevent or de-escalate the situation. Being able to recount them precisely and accurately also helps tremendously in a court of law. Once you determine that hostility is unavoidable, then as Mut stated, you have to "deal with the energy [you] are presented with".

P.S. I wouldn't go to a martial artist/martial arts instructor for such information; they are notoriously untrained and unskilled in these areas. I'll take a good cop over a dozen martial arts masters when it comes to these things. Cops, federal agents, professional security people, professional doormen....these are the kind of resources you want.

[dragontigerpalm]

I agree with Mut and Chris' posts Bruce. I would add, though, about martial arts instruction for this purpose that one of the things that drew me to study I Liq Chuan and that I've found of benefit in my limited training to date is that being attuned to the nature of the conflict determines the response.

[TrainingDummy]

"Know your exits."

One of the first lessons drilled into me as a professional firefighter, and I can often pick someone with a (para)military background if they do a quick scan of any room they walk into.

[Mut]

Chris, as always you a another depth of insight to my experience and thinking, thank you!