Being trained in "Espionage" does not guarantee you'll be able defend against sneak attacks?

[7BallZ]

Inspired because some of the comments I seen in my thread about people in nonviolent jobs being more skilled at weapons reminded me of this thread.

Self Defense: Does being trained in "Espionage" (for lack of better term) does not guarantee you'll be able to survive the hoods and detect a sneak attack and remain aware of your surroundings in such violent places?

What do you think? I already mentioned in my other threads about angry French war veterans from the Algerian Revolution criticizing Battle of Algiers for portraying French soldiers getting slaughtered by Algerian working class people (specifically farmers) in sneak attacks with such finesse and skill.

Because there is a tendency to think just because you know how to sneak up to a person and KO him out with a read chokehold, a lot of people learning sneak attack techniques think they are immune to being ambushed or that they would be able to react with their skills if they even found themselves in one.

Which as the link above shows, real war veterans, including special forces, have been killed when traveling in the hoods because they got attacked from a blindspot by shady people they were completely unaware were stalking said SF vets or eyeing war veterans movements.

 

[drop bear]

Now before we start. I understand this clip is fiction. I am using it to illustrate a point.

You can catch anybody out if you get them at the right spot. Part of espionage as the OP defines it is being able to recognise where you have little chance to defend or even anticipate an attack.

Part of what make organisations like special forces effective is the support and logistics that let them know about threats ahead of time.

So one special forces guy off duty with no support cn be effectively targeted just like anybody else.

 

[Tez3]

Oh good grief. Espionage has nothing to do with special forces, violence or sneaking up on people! You are confusing real life with fiction.

 

[frank raud]

What do you think? I already mentioned in my other threads about angry French war veterans from the Algerian Revolution criticizing Battle of Algiers for portraying French soldiers getting slaughtered by Algerian working class people (specifically farmers) in sneak attacks with such finesse and skill.

If I understand this correctly, you are surprised that veterans don't like the way they are portrayed in a movie?

 

[Jenna]

Inspired because some of the comments I seen in my thread about people in nonviolent jobs being more skilled at weapons reminded me of this thread.

Self Defense: Does being trained in "Espionage" (for lack of better term) does not guarantee you'll be able to survive the hoods and detect a sneak attack and remain aware of your surroundings in such violent places?

What do you think? I already mentioned in my other threads about angry French war veterans from the Algerian Revolution criticizing Battle of Algiers for portraying French soldiers getting slaughtered by Algerian working class people (specifically farmers) in sneak attacks with such finesse and skill.

Because there is a tendency to think just because you know how to sneak up to a person and KO him out with a read chokehold, a lot of people learning sneak attack techniques think they are immune to being ambushed or that they would be able to react with their skills if they even found themselves in one.

Which as the link above shows, real war veterans, including special forces, have been killed when traveling in the hoods because they got attacked from a blindspot by shady people they were completely unaware were stalking said SF vets or eyeing war veterans movements.

yes, though who is suggesting that any one trained in these skills would be *guaranteed* safety? surely safety in the real world cannot be guaranteed?? If any one believe they are guaranteed never to be caught out or sucker punched, ambushed, set upon or what ever, then they ought to examine their weaknesses: one of which may be complacency..

still, I do not know who is suggesting trained persons are guaranteed safety??

 

[Tez3]

Espionage is intelligence gathering, which is done in several ways none of which has a lot to do with being violent. Special Forces aren't espionage agents, they undertake reconnaissance but that isn't espionage. Espionage has absolutely nothing to do with the fighting in Algeria which probably wasn't what you think it is anyway. Military veterans aren't espionage agents either, you are muddling together a whole load of stuff which comes out not making much sense.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

1) Espionage has nothing to do with avoiding sneak attacks.
2) What soldiers do is not espionage.
3) Experienced veterans of a military campaign who have been exposed to ambushes will probably have an edge in spotting the specific kinds of sneak attacks that they have encountered.
4) That edge is not any sort of guarantee, just improved odds compared to someone without that experience.
5) This skill does not generalize to all the potential forms of ambush in all contexts.

Because there is a tendency to think just because you know how to sneak up to a person and KO him out with a read chokehold, a lot of people learning sneak attack techniques think they are immune to being ambushed or that they would be able to react with their skills if they even found themselves in one.

No. This might be a fantasy in the minds of kids watching a ninja movie. It's not a common belief among people who actually have training.

 

[drop bear]

1) Espionage has nothing to do with avoiding sneak attacks.
2) What soldiers do is not espionage.
3) Experienced veterans of a military campaign who have been exposed to ambushes will probably have an edge in spotting the specific kinds of sneak attacks that they have encountered.
4) That edge is not any sort of guarantee, just improved odds compared to someone without that experience.
5) This skill does not generalize to all the potential forms of ambush in all contexts.



No. This might be a fantasy in the minds of kids watching a ninja movie. It's not a common belief among people who actually have training.

I think when he said espionage be basically picked the wrong word. More what people here terms self defence which is also the wrong word.

Mabye threat mitigation. Common sense don't know. This trying to take control of the terminology irritates me anyway.

For me when I read someone's post I try to get the gist of what they say rather than focus on a word like espionage apply a literal meaning that is out of context. And then pull them up for a multi page rant on what espionage means.

Ironically I posted the wookie defence on that other thread. Then looked it up. And above is an example of it.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I think when he said espionage be basically picked the wrong word. More what people here terms self defence which is also the wrong word.

Mabye threat mitigation. Common sense don't know. This trying to take control of the terminology irritates me anyway.

For me when I read someone's post I try to get the gist of what they say rather than focus on a word like espionage apply a literal meaning that is out of context. And then pull them up for a multi page rant on what espionage means.

Ironically I posted the wookie defence on that other thread. Then looked it up. And above is an example of it.

In general I'm in agreement with not getting too hung up on a mistaken word (although it's still worthwhile to let the person know when it's totally the wrong word so as to mitigate confusion). That's why I addressed the question regarding the military after correcting the terminology.

In this particular case the OP has been so consistently confused over basic concepts that I'm not even sure it is just a matter of choosing the wrong word. Maybe he actually thinks soldiers and spies do the same thing. It would be no more off-base than some of the other things he's posted.

 

[elder999]

Inspired because some of the comments I seen in my thread about people in nonviolent jobs being more skilled at weapons reminded me of this thread.

This thread is only slightly dumber than that one.

 

[drop bear]

In general I'm in agreement with not getting too hung up on a mistaken word (although it's still worthwhile to let the person know when it's totally the wrong word so as to mitigate confusion). That's why I addressed the question regarding the military after correcting the terminology.

In this particular case the OP has been so consistently confused over basic concepts that I'm not even sure it is just a matter of choosing the wrong word. Maybe he actually thinks soldiers and spies do the same thing. It would be no more off-base than some of the other things he's posted.

He is testing ideas rather than repeating doctrine. I mean i did the same. I remember looking at krav and really hoping that would actually work.

 

[lklawson]

In general I'm in agreement with not getting too hung up on a mistaken word (although it's still worthwhile to let the person know when it's totally the wrong word so as to mitigate confusion). That's why I addressed the question regarding the military after correcting the terminology.

In this particular case the OP has been so consistently confused over basic concepts that I'm not even sure it is just a matter of choosing the wrong word. Maybe he actually thinks soldiers and spies do the same thing.

I just watched Spectre last night. Based on that Documentary, I'm pretty sure they do.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Tony Dismukes]

He is testing ideas rather than repeating doctrine. I mean i did the same. I remember looking at krav and really hoping that would actually work.

I've got no problem with questioning doctrine. You yourself do that frequently. Sometimes I might disagree with your conclusions or think that you are misunderstanding the doctrine you are questioning or think that you are expressing your point unclearly, but overall I think you are making a worthwhile contribution to the conversation.

Orcophile is asking questions and making arguments based on profound confusion about the fundamental concepts involved. He's making statements that seem to have no factual basis beyond his imagination. When clarifications are offered. he gives no indication that he understands the point being made. Assuming that he isn't just a dedicated performance artist, he's sufficiently confused that it's difficult to know how to communicate with him.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Oh good grief. Espionage has nothing to do with special forces, violence or sneaking up on people! You are confusing real life with fiction.

Thank you. I was just about to post the definition of Espionage. And you are right he's confusing real life with fiction. Real spies look nothing like what we see in the movies nor do they look like what anyone would respect, which is the talent of being a spy. 1st not to look like one lol.

 

[Steve]

Thank you. I was just about to post the definition of Espionage. And you are right he's confusing real life with fiction. Real spies look nothing like what we see in the movies nor do they look like what anyone would respect, which is the talent of being a spy. 1st not to look like one lol.

What do real spies look like? You seem conspicuously confident on this subject.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Only thing I will say

noun: espionage - the practice of spying or of using spies, typically by governments to obtain political and military information.

plural noun: special forces; noun: Special Forces; plural noun: Special Forceses
an elite force within the US Army specializing in guerrilla warfare and counterinsurgency


espionage does not equal Special Forces

 

[elder999]

What do real spies look like? You seem conspicuously confident on this subject.

They could look like that guy who took pictures of the construction of that Syrian reactor, or that IAEA inspector-the "Arabic" guy that you just can't seem to find pictures of-you know, the one who went to North Korea? Or the IAEA inspector who went to Iraq....or the ones that went to ...some other places?

Of course, all those guys could all actually all have been the same guy....who never had to beat someone up, or avoid an ambush, or detect a sneak attack.....or even be in a "violent place." He just had to look like he was where he belonged, without looking scared out of his mind, while being scared out of his mind....

 

[Steve]

I took conceptual physics at the community college. Does that count?

No... I didn't think so.

 

[JowGaWolf]

What do real spies look like? You seem conspicuously confident on this subject.

Yep I took an educational trip to the spy museum in DC. with my family this year (son, brother, nephew, wife, grandparents). It was like a big library of spy history, real spy gadgets and tactics. For examples, we always think of someone placing a bug in the room, but with espionage they would place many of the bugs in the building during the construction of the building. So it wasn't uncommon to find bugs inside of walls and pipes. The whole point of being a spy was not to look like a spy. Spies look like everyday people which is the point of being one, to blend in. Some spies look like grandparents other spies were movie stars. The disguises were slight alterations that could be done quickly, my guess is that less meant less risk of wardrobe malfunction. The drop off stuff was cool which helped to give an idea of what a real spy drop off looks like. For example soda can in the woods that looks like litter would be a drop off place. Everyone else would just see it as trash, but to a spy it would be a drop off. Holes at the base of a tree could also be a drop off place as well. There was a lot of reading at the spy museum, but it was good as usually we were looking at actual spy gadgets and learning about them. It was definitely worth the money. We actually stayed there for about 3 hours. There are 2 sections. A real spy section about real espionage and a James Bond spy section which was just about the James Bond movies and trivia with a couple of interactive entertainment games. One game was how long can you hang on the landing skids of a helicopter, where people would hang from beam that was about the same size of a landing skid, while the having air blowing on you. Lets just say most people are expected to fall after 10 seconds and not hang on forever like in the movies. Some of the stuff below is what I got to see there, but there was much more.

The most notorious spies in history
6 people you didn't know were WWII Spies
Famous spies (with video)

These are some of the gadgets I got to see.
What's it really like to be a spy?

The spy museum has weekly podcasts about spying that you can listen to here.

I forgot to mention that the museum has an activity where you go out into the city to hunt spies or be a spy. I can't remember exactly but it's played outside in the city of DC. We didn't have enough time to do that one.

 

[Steve]

Sounds pretty neat. Not to be a wet blanket or anything, but even after a 3 hour visit to the spy museum in DC, I'd caution you to be a little less confident in what you think you know. That's what got the OP into this in the first place. Right?

I've spent hours and hours at the Experience Music Project in Seattle. One of my favorite museums to go to with my kids. That doesn't make me an expert on music.