M
Mon Mon
Guest
How well do you think this art can adapt to 21st Century Warfare and can it help you survive in a modern war environment?
S
Shiatsu
Guest
Well as a military person, hardly at all. We are trained to shoot from a distance, bomb from a distance. Hand to hand is a last resort. I have used hand to hand in my job, but my job makes up less than 1% of the military, so that being said. I don't think it will promote anything at all. In my job, we are all almost exclusively Kajukenbo, or EPAK.:asian:
S
Shiatsu
Guest
From a military and martial stand point they are not the same. And that is not the question he asked.
D
Dennis_Mahon
Guest
Well, it all depends;
As Shiatsu pointed out, most military combat today (and for the forseable future) is not hand-to-hand, but is instead conducted over long distances- either by firearm or indirect delivery munitions. HTH is the exception in today's battlefield, not the rule, so BBT would have little impact on battlefield survival.
However, nothing is static; military science could change the means and method of modern warfare wildly over the next century. Just as firearms eliminated what was once the pinnicle of military force- the armored cavalryman- so too body armor tecnology could advance to the point where firearms and indirect munitions might be rendered ineffectual, and moving HTH back into the prominence it held before the advent of firearms. Under those conditions, BBT would be of great importance on battlefield survivability.
Time will tell.
As Shiatsu pointed out, most military combat today (and for the forseable future) is not hand-to-hand, but is instead conducted over long distances- either by firearm or indirect delivery munitions. HTH is the exception in today's battlefield, not the rule, so BBT would have little impact on battlefield survival.
However, nothing is static; military science could change the means and method of modern warfare wildly over the next century. Just as firearms eliminated what was once the pinnicle of military force- the armored cavalryman- so too body armor tecnology could advance to the point where firearms and indirect munitions might be rendered ineffectual, and moving HTH back into the prominence it held before the advent of firearms. Under those conditions, BBT would be of great importance on battlefield survivability.
Time will tell.
I find it interesting that you could envision a time where a projectile that travels at hundreds of fps. could be rendered ineffectual by body armor but H2H combat would be effective. I dont see this as possible - not if physics continue to prove to be true.
In violent conflict, I have worn body armor - and a fist doesnt penetrate where a bullet cannot. The ' armored cavalry' of today is the soldier in the field - his cavalry is the APC or other means of rapid deploy. They are extremely effective and far from outmoded - it is modern techno-war that spares them high body counts.
H2h will never be a major determinant in modern warfare - as long as the tech and $$$ holds out. Bullets, missles, bombs, mines, air support, night vision, ground sensors, IR, vibration detectors, UAV's, global satellites...man oh man, its getting so much harder to just hide in a bush with a poison bullet to achieve an objective.
In other words, the physical part of Nin-po may not be important on todays battlefield as it once was but wasnt Nin-po meant to change with the times? For that matter, general warfare was never really a nin-ja's forte. They would have been much more comfortable in the guerilla/terrorist warfare that faces the governments of today and tomorrow.
In this theater of combat, h2h is, was and always will be a valuable and defining skill.
In violent conflict, I have worn body armor - and a fist doesnt penetrate where a bullet cannot. The ' armored cavalry' of today is the soldier in the field - his cavalry is the APC or other means of rapid deploy. They are extremely effective and far from outmoded - it is modern techno-war that spares them high body counts.
H2h will never be a major determinant in modern warfare - as long as the tech and $$$ holds out. Bullets, missles, bombs, mines, air support, night vision, ground sensors, IR, vibration detectors, UAV's, global satellites...man oh man, its getting so much harder to just hide in a bush with a poison bullet to achieve an objective.
In other words, the physical part of Nin-po may not be important on todays battlefield as it once was but wasnt Nin-po meant to change with the times? For that matter, general warfare was never really a nin-ja's forte. They would have been much more comfortable in the guerilla/terrorist warfare that faces the governments of today and tomorrow.
In this theater of combat, h2h is, was and always will be a valuable and defining skill.
P
pknox
Guest
As far as hand-to-hand technique, I'm not so sure how much relevance BBT has to today's military, as the overwhelming majority of fights are fought through the use of technology and/or at a distance. The ability to move stealthfully may have some application for some types of soldiers, but that can also be learned through other methods. However, as far as philosophy, especially that which is specific to developing a "warrior mentality", what is taught in BBT is highly relevant. In fact, Jack Hoban, a highly ranked Bujinkan practitioner, contributed some of this philosophy to the Marine Corps' new "Marine Corps Martial Arts Training Program." Here is a link to an article where Shidishi Hoban talks about it:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26437
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26437
D
Dennis_Mahon
Guest
Well, I'm a would-be SF/F writer; I think of at least three strange and unusual things before rolling out of bed every day (Now, turning those ideas into stories that sell- that I'm not so good at).
I wasn't exactly thinking strictly in terms of armor per se, but more along where the path in current armor trends seem to be leading. Right now, most armor uses Kevlar, and in the near future, it could be a mix of spidersilk/Kevlar/Nomex; this is the continuation of a trend towards making body armor lighter, stronger, and better able to disperse the inpact energy of high-velocity/low-mass projectiles. If we ever get the knack of nanotech/picotech engineering down, you might one day see something as exotic as personal force-fields for the infantry. A powerfull enough force-field would render high-velocity/low-mass projectiles (firearms & shrapnel) ineffective or lessen their effectiveness to the point where the cost/benefit ratio would be too great to warrant their use in "modern" armies. Then you might see a shift back to HTH combat.
Mind you, the above assumes a lot of things- we most likely wouldn't see anything approaching the above within this century. But it isn't entirely beyond the realm of speculation.
Like I said, nothing is static- only time will tell.
Not to change the subject of the thread, but your talking my Language here now...
How would Nano-tech develop a personal forcefield exactly?
I find it would be more likely that if nanotech was developed, we would see armored skin and or self repairing wounds long before we would ever see Nano-tech powered forcefields. I actually think the combat application to nano-tech would negate Bullets and shrapnel all together.
You would have "Controled" Biological warfare, except the microorganisms would be machines, and they would only kill who they were programed to kill...
But its all theory.
How would Nano-tech develop a personal forcefield exactly?
I find it would be more likely that if nanotech was developed, we would see armored skin and or self repairing wounds long before we would ever see Nano-tech powered forcefields. I actually think the combat application to nano-tech would negate Bullets and shrapnel all together.
You would have "Controled" Biological warfare, except the microorganisms would be machines, and they would only kill who they were programed to kill...
But its all theory.
D
Dennis_Mahon
Guest
How would Nano-tech develop a personal forcefield exactly?
Hell, if I knew that, I'd patent it, and make a mint.
I'm just trying to point out that nothing is static. Don't take it as prophecy.
Hell, if I knew that, I'd patent it, and make a mint.
I'm just trying to point out that nothing is static. Don't take it as prophecy.
Aint it the Truth, aint it the truth.
heretic888
Senior Master
Not necessarily. Just because the feudal-age shinobi were reknowned to be very skilled in things like guerilla warfare, sabotage, and the like in no way means they were not *equally* skilled in conventional warfare.
This seems to be an assumption that many have that doesn't have a whole lot evidence to back it up. There seems to have been at least some Ninja schools, such as Koto ryu, that at least had partial battlefield application.
Just my two cents, of course.
Hmm.... I find this all very, very intriguing.
As has been said before, only time will time. But, at the very least, these would be very cool ideas to apply into a fictional format.
Laterz, y'all.
My use of the term 'forte' > 'strong point < differs from "There seems to have been at least some Ninja schools, such as Koto ryu, that at least had partial battlefield application."
Partial application being the focal point of your statement.
Although you might be able to apply certain teachings of ninjutsu in the battlefield of the times gone by - the people who are most associated with the art were not a major component of the battlefield of the 'golden age'. Particularly when you look at the vast 'warring states' period. Nin-ja were never a major component of warfare of the period.
Your statement "seems to be an assumption that (you) have that doesn't have a whole lot evidence to back it up".
I dont make assumptions but would be welcome to view any proof that I am wrong in my statements above.
Partial application being the focal point of your statement.
Although you might be able to apply certain teachings of ninjutsu in the battlefield of the times gone by - the people who are most associated with the art were not a major component of the battlefield of the 'golden age'. Particularly when you look at the vast 'warring states' period. Nin-ja were never a major component of warfare of the period.
Your statement "seems to be an assumption that (you) have that doesn't have a whole lot evidence to back it up".
I dont make assumptions but would be welcome to view any proof that I am wrong in my statements above.
heretic888
Senior Master
Please remember that Koto ryu was only one Ninja school. There were literally dozens.
Yes, but this could equally be ascribed to their very small numbers and relative geographical isolation (thus making large armies difficult to move about). Nothing in this above quotation somehow "proves" they were not as equally skilled in conventional warfare as unconventional (although, admittedly, unconventional warfare would have been more intelligent and beneficial for them given their situation).
I don't have proof to the contrary and, even if the Iga and Koga bushi were actually involved in conventional warfare, it is very unlikely there would be any real records of this.
All I've presented is open-ended speculation. It just seems that, to me, many people *assume* the historical Ninja weren't skilled in battlefield warfare when there is in fact no evidence to really support this claim. Just because a group is really skilled in one area of expertise (in this case, the skills related to "ninjutsu") does not necessarily mean they aren't just as skilled in others (in this case, conventional warfare).
Just my thoughts. Laterz.
Originally posted by heretic888
But, at the very least, these would be very cool ideas to apply into a fictional format.
Laterz, y'all.
"The Diamond Age" by Neal Stephanson actually paints Nanotech this way, and in a VERY negative light as far as combat applications for the little buggers. It would actually scare you to think of some of the uses he suggested the Nanotech was being put to use for in this book.
Similar threads
