contrary to popular belief

This is Dave Young's Forum.
Can you really bridge the gap between reality and training? Between traditional karate and real world encounters? Absolutely, we will address in this forum why this transition is necessary and critical for survival, and provide suggestions on how to do this correctly. So come in and feel welcomed, but leave your egos at the door!
User avatar
Bill Glasheen
Posts: 17299
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY

Post by Bill Glasheen »

Mike wrote:Some people just don't like the homework you are assigning. I'd rather get a more middle-of-the-road look at things rather than the platform that you and Van seem to take. That, btw, is no insult at either of you (I'm sure you know that). You guys are clearly to the right of things, which I and others don't happen to buy most times.
Here's another publication written by that "right wing" Grossman guy. The premise of this book is discussed in one chapter of On Killing.

Image

In Paducah, Kentucky, Michael Carneal, a fourteen-year-old boy who stole a gun from a neighbor's house, brought it to school and fired eight shots at a student prayer group as they were breaking up. Prior to stealing this weapon, he had never shot an actual handgun before. Of the eight shots he fired, he had eight hits on eight different kids. Five were head shots, the other three upper torso. The result was three dead, one paralyzed for life. The FBI says that the average, experienced, qualified law enforcement officer, in the average shoot-out, at an average range of seven yards, hits with less than one bullet in five. How does a child acquire such killing ability. What would lead him to go out and commit such a horrific act?

There is perhaps no bigger or more important issue in America at present than youth violence. Jonesboro, Arkansas; Paducah, Kentucky; Pearl, Mississippi; Stamps, Arkansas; Conyers, Georgia; and of course, Littleton, Colorado. We know them all too well, and for all the wrong reasons: kids, some as young as eleven years old, taking up arms and, with deadly, frightening accuracy, murdering anyone in their paths. What is going on? According to the authors of Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill, there is blame to be laid right at the feet of the makers of violent video games (called "murder trainers" by one expert), the TV networks, and the Hollywood movie studios--the people responsible for the fact that children often witness literally hundreds of violent images a day.

Authors Lt. Col. Dave Grossman and Gloria DeGaetano offer incontrovertible evidence, much of it based on recent major scientific studies and empirical research, that movies, TV, and video games are not just conditioning children to be violent--and unaware of the consequences of that violence--but are teaching the very mechanics of killing. Their book is a much-needed call to action for every parent, teacher, and citizen to help our children and stop the wave of killing and violence gripping America's youth. And, most important, it is a blueprint for us all on how that can be achieved.

About the Authors:

Lt. Col. Dave Grossman (U.S.A., Ret.) is the author of On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. As a West Point psychology professor and professor of military science, Grossman trains medical and health professionals on how to deal with and prevent killing. He trained mental health professionals in the aftermath of the Jonesboro shootings, and has been an expert witness and consultant in several murder cases, including that of Timothy McVeigh and Michael Carneal.

Gloria DeGaetano is a nationally recognized educator in the field of media violence, and the author of the critically acclaimed Screen Smarts: A Family Guide to Media Literacy.
- Review

Still want to label this subject matter as unworthy of review by "middle-of-the-road" folks like you? :roll:

FYI, Grossman has been nominated for a Pulitzer Prize for his work.

- Bill
Norm Abrahamson
Posts: 283
Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Mansfield, MA USA
Contact:

Not politics?

Post by Norm Abrahamson »

Bill,

With all due respect, it’s not fair to say: “Just what is the topic, anyhow? You two want to talk politics. Right now I don't give a tinker's damn. Mike's original post alarms me for many reasons”. And: “This then is fodder for a political discussion. I'm sorry to disappoint you two, but I don't want to play that game right now.” And then go and talk politics anyhow. You refer to:
1. “the same folks who brought you 9/11”
2. “al qaeda extremists and former Baathists are using innocents as human shields to wage both war and homicide”
3. “facing a minority Sunni group who once dominated and terrorized an entire population, and didn't think twice about gassing women and children in the north or filling mass graves in the south. Now they perform ritualistic beheading for our consumption, and convince unwitting religious zealots to use themselves as human bombs to kill their own citizens en masse. Even the Iraqis see this now as they take over security of their own country and see Iraqis as the victims of this terrorist violence.”
4. “If you need to rid an entire city (Fallujah) of an al-Zarqawi-led cancer, and your men are getting killed while performing first aid on boobytraped wounded insurgents, and the insurgents are firing RPGs from inside mosques, you have to take severe measures.”
These statements, some of which I agree with, are hardly apolitical. As you say, every war is going to cause PTSD among a significant number of the warriors. The larger question posed by Mike’s post, is whether this war was, is, or continues to be, a war worth putting our soldiers through the trauma necessary to fight the war.
Sincerely,
Norm Abrahamson
User avatar
RACastanet
Posts: 3744
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by RACastanet »

Here is one more data point...

Today I had lunch with a group of area vets and active duty types. This is part of the local support group. One of the guests was a Coast Guard (Coastie) Petty Officer (equivalent of a Marine sergeant) just back from a 9 month rotation to Iraq. The CG does over there much of what it does here in the states - port security both on land and in the near waters, vessel interdiction and sea rescue.

He told us that when he returned to the USA and heard what was on the national news he was absolutely outraged. CNN, the networks, etc were completely ignoring what was going on in Iraq. He did say they were not lying, they were just not 'telling the truth' (his words).

Also, in his words, the Iraqis love us! The citizens were aware of who the bad guys are and were vary wary when they were around. What would happen is that the terrorists (they are not the PC 'insurgents' as the press call them) would come into a town and scare the townspeople into denouncing the US. That is when CNN, cameras ever present and ready, would start filming for the evening news! The press showed little interest in the more mundane day to day successes, only the 'hate America' stuff.

So, here is more unfiltered news from the front.

This Petty Officer is now assigned to the local recruiting office for the CG. According to him, the CG has already filled its fiscal year recruiting allotment and new CG recruits have to wait until July to be inducted.

Rich
Member of the world's premier gun club, the USMC!
mikemurphy
Posts: 989
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 1998 6:01 am
Location: Randolph, MA USA 781-963-8891
Contact:

Post by mikemurphy »

Kathy,

Very nicely said.

Bill,

You are correct. It's not about left or right (why do you keep bringing that up then??), it's about violence. But more important than that, it's about the violence (including the resulting PTSD) that is brought about by the hypocrasy of it all. We can all agree we want the soldiers back, but the difference here is, I want them back now before any more are hurt and you seem to want them back as soon as our government's objectives are accomplished (whatever they are today). Did you read the article? 15-17% of the Iraq war vets already suffer from PTSD. How many more will it take to make you feel safe and sound thousands of miles away from the "cradle of civilization." Again, it's always easier when it's not your child, father, mother, relative, etc.

As for your book on killing, I would say it is difficult to speculate from the blurb you quoted, but I have questions concerning it already. Let's blame TV, media, and video games? How about, let's blame parents for allowing their children to watch this stuff, or listen to it (he doesn't mention the music), or access via the Internet? Already I have doubts on this author's ability to be comprehensive. Where is his expertise in children? Parenting? Ok, he's a psychologist. What's his concentration. Well, we know he's trained in military science too. Sorry Bill, I'm not sold, if you are going to flash the guys credentials at me, at least let them mean something. I'm sure that in your research, you could come up with a book that is written by someone that deals with children and violence on a regular basis. How much did DeGaetano have to do with the writing? I would ask the same questions about her?

mike
User avatar
Bill Glasheen
Posts: 17299
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY

Post by Bill Glasheen »

Norm wrote:The larger question posed by Mike’s post, is whether this war was, is, or continues to be, a war worth putting our soldiers through the trauma necessary to fight the war.
To be fair, it is a Gordian knot as viewed by many.

Ask a straight question, get a straight answer. Take dialogue from someone suffering from PTSD and use it as a foundation for a political argument, and I've got problems with it. This to me is a clear dichotomy.

A few months ago, Tim Russert of Meet the Press was interviewing John Kerry about his "war crimes" testimony to Congress. In so many words, Senator Kerry says he regrets how he phrased quite a bit of that testimony. He and the gentlemen he was representing were caught up in one of the worst epidemics of PTSD we have known in modern history. It came about because we (the army) learned how to kill efficiently without understanding the aftermath of that conditioning. And in that conflict, anything that could have been done wrong to the veteran was done wrong.

We as a society are just beginning to understand much more, and learning how to care for our veterans who have received both physical and psychological wounds in their tours of duty.

When a woman is raped, does an understanding spouse or boyfriend take vitriolic language in the aftermath personally? Should he use an absence of libido for an extended period as a sign that their relationship is over? If so, then I say the woman is even more traumatized by it all. Sadly this is the norm rather than the exception.

While the conditions I cited may appear political, they are factual in nature. They are the backdrop that creates the vicious scenarios that our troops endure. This is the psychological warfare that the enemy understood so well in North Vietnam, and the members of al qaeda preach to their followers.

Let's be careful not to exploit the casualties of an extended war on civilization. IMO, there are better ways to approach these political subjects.

- Bill
User avatar
Bill Glasheen
Posts: 17299
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY

Post by Bill Glasheen »

Mike wrote:I want them back now before any more are hurt and you seem to want them back as soon as our government's objectives are accomplished
And I want to debate you on the issue, but in a thread void of exploitation of others. You and I will not agree on this subject; of this I am sure. But let's find a better way to debate it.
Did you read the article? 15-17% of the Iraq war vets already suffer from PTSD.
I prefer the peer-reviewed article I cited in a medical journal that did proper pre and post assessments of the soldiers. This repeated measures design gets to the bottom of the issue. A certain percentage of our population is depressed - period. Measuring a point in time after-the-fact tells me nothing.

Please read that whole article.
Mike wrote:As for your book on killing
Why do you continue to comment on it and refuse to read it? To be fair, I refused to see F-911, but for good reason. I did my homework and found out that there were serious factual errors in the film. Meanwhile, Grossman heavily references the peer-reviewed literature in his work, and it was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize. Do you have a problem with that?

Would you like me to buy you a copy?

- Bill
Stryke

Post by Stryke »

I think the issue really is wether or not the war is worth it , not just in terms of financial and casualties, but the long term effect it will have on society coping with such things as PTSD vets ,and resulting community issues .

I personally see the move to democracy a positive and the elections a positive step , no matter what the politics it is a step forward from the situation we have now .
As for your book on killing, I would say it is difficult to speculate from the blurb you quoted, but I have questions concerning it already. Let's blame TV, media, and video games?
I think Grossmans work is interesting and good , I dont agree with him 100% but as a rule it`s well thought out and presented . there is somewhat of a leap of faith between the media and the desensitisation used by the military but theres far more important information in there .

I still feel it a valid veiw point that some consider the war not worth it considering the incredible price , But I really think only time will tell and the only way is forward , hopefully it will prove one of historys great success storys .
User avatar
RACastanet
Posts: 3744
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by RACastanet »

If you have not done so, head to Van's forum and the notes from our friend Drew in 'Warrior Transition'. It is applicable to this thread and spells out the process in effect and as used by the USMC.

http://forums.uechi-ryu.com/viewtopic.php?t=13332

Rich
Member of the world's premier gun club, the USMC!
Guest

Post by Guest »

I don't know if I agree with the they love us statement...they have killed 1400 American soldiers. With over 10,000 civillians dead so far what would we expect them to say to the army that invaded. I suspect most are not terrible happy to have you there.

A new government will be supported and equiped. When the last american troops have rotate home they will have their own war and sort things out.

In the mean time I hope Americas fine sons and daughters make it home safe.

Laird
User avatar
Tokezu
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2000 6:01 am
Location: Cyber Space

Post by Tokezu »

Bill-
I wish you would quit recommending books.

I am going broke here trying to keep up!

:? :o :D

AND i am anxiously awaiting my "Lost Kata" DVD!

On war and warriors-

Tough subject.

Strong feelings on either side of the argument do each person credit. That one cares is a good start.

I believe there are Iraqies that want us gone. I believe there are some that are happy we are there fighting for their freedom.

Our government is not Lilly white and free of all self-interest. Niether is any other government. But let's put it in perspective-

At least I can write in this very public forum what I just wrote above....


NO! Wait!! Who's that at the door? I see Jack Boots!!!


Ahhhhh!

D.l..
....
.
User avatar
Bill Glasheen
Posts: 17299
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY

Post by Bill Glasheen »

Wow.... 8O :wink:

I thought I would pull out a transcript of a Meet the Press interview I referenced earlier. This is from April 18, 2004.
MR. RUSSERT: Before we take a break, I want to talk about Vietnam. You are a decorated war hero of Vietnam, prominently used in your advertising. You first appeared on MEET THE PRESS back in 1971, your first appearance. I want to roll what you told the country then and come back and talk about it:

(Videotape, MEET THE PRESS, April 18, 1971):

MR. KERRY (Vietnam Veterans Against the War): There are all kinds of atrocities and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free-fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50-caliber machine guns which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search-and-destroy missions, in the burning of villages. All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare. All of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down. And I believe that the men who designed these, the men who designed the free-fire zone, the men who ordered us, the men who signed off the air raid strike areas, I think these men, by the letter of the law, the same letter of the law that tried Lieutenant Calley, are war criminals.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: You committed atrocities.

SEN. KERRY: Where did all that dark hair go, Tim? {grins}

That's a big question for me. You know, I thought a lot, for a long time, about that period of time, the things we said, and I think the word is a bad word. I think it's an inappropriate word. I mean, if you wanted to ask me have you ever made mistakes in your life, sure. I think some of the language that I used was a language that reflected an anger. It was honest, but it was in anger, it was a little bit excessive.

MR. RUSSERT: You used the word "war criminals."

SEN. KERRY: Well, let me just finish. Let me must finish. It was, I think, a reflection of the kind of times we found ourselves in and I don't like it when I hear it today. I don't like it, but I want you to notice that at the end, I wasn't talking about the soldiers and the soldiers' blame, and my great regret is, I hope no soldier--I mean, I think some soldiers were angry at me for that, and I understand that and I regret that, because I love them. But the words were honest but on the other hand, they were a little bit over the top. And I think that there were breaches of the Geneva Conventions. There were policies in place that were not acceptable according to the laws of warfare, and everybody knows that. I mean, books have chronicled that, so I'm not going to walk away from that. But I wish I had found a way to say it in a less abrasive way.

MR. RUSSERT: But, Senator, when you testified before the Senate, you talked about some of the hearings you had observed at the winter soldiers meeting and you said that people had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and on and on. A lot of those stories have been discredited, and in hindsight was your testimony...

SEN. KERRY: Actually, a lot of them have been documented.

MR. RUSSERT: So you stand by that?

SEN. KERRY: A lot of those stories have been documented. Have some been discredited? Sure, they have, Tim. The problem is that's not where the focus should have been. And, you know, when you're angry about something and you're young, you know, you're perfectly capable of not--I mean, if I had the kind of experience and time behind me that I have today, I'd have framed some of that differently. Needless to say, I'm proud that I stood up. I don't want anybody to think twice about it. I'm proud that I took the position that I took to oppose it. I think we saved lives, and I'm proud that I stood up at a time when it was important to stand up, but I'm not going to quibble, you know, 35 years later that I might not have phrased things more artfully at times.
Don't you think this man regrets what he said back then?

Here's a man who was part of the first generation of warriors who achieved a 90% firing rate in combat. From WWII to Korea to Vietnam, the increase in warrior firing efficiency was nothing short of phenominal (20% to 50% to 90%). But at the same time, these warriors took a fast plane ride home - without debriefing - to a country that showed disdain for the war and the warriors who participated in it. As I said earlier, everything that could have been done wrong for them was done wrong.

Should we be surprised at the anger expressed in 1971? Do you see how costly that was to him in 2004, and the changed perspective on it all?

Don't those who know and like this man wish he had come back to a more understanding public who could have let him express himself without holding him for what he said at the moment?

Contrast that with John Kerry and Tim Russert on February 1, 2005.
Appearing on the NBC television news program “Meet the Press,” Kerry was shown a videotape of his fellow Massachusetts senator, Edward Kennedy, calling for a timetable for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, beginning with the immediate removal of at least 12,000.

“Do you agree with Senator Kennedy that 12,000 American troops should leave at once?” asked NBC’s Tim Russert.

“No,” replied Kerry.

“Do you believe there should be a specific timetable of withdrawal of American troops?” Russert continued.

“No,” Kerry repeated.
Wow!
Mike wrote:Anyway, I couldn't wait to hear his story as I know he was very "gung prostitute" when he left. He told me all the same kind of war stories that come out of every war I'm sure. For example, his having to kill Iraqis who were sleeping in a house without warning because they were afraid of who might be hiding under one of the blankets. Or, the killing by his own two hands of a family or five with a bazooka because they wouldn't leave their house. This included three children. There is more, but I'm sure you all get the picture.

I feel real bad for him because he tells me that he, or any of his company, get a good night sleeps anymore, even as they are back home. The nightmares, he's told, could be with him for a long time. But, once again, contrary to the popular belief that some people may have others believe, he tells me that most of the people he works with do their job there because it is their job, but they don't have any "doubt that this is a war about President Bush and his oil buddies. These people just want to be left alone for the most part."
Now do you see why I would listen to this returning veteran and not hold him to what he says at the moment?

Yes, war *****! Let's give our returning soldiers all the love and support they need, and give them time to sort it all out. Maybe some day one of these vets won't be haunted by that past, but instead rise from it like a phoenix and achieve greatness.

- Bill
User avatar
Van Canna
Posts: 57244
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Post by Van Canna »

Bill
The issue isn't just dealing with the aftermath of combat or even a simple assault. For the average karateka, the issue is understanding that a student must engage in more than physical training to prepare for deadly encounters. The average individual is mentally unprepared to do what is necessary even to defend him or herself when their very life is threatened. And after an assault, the assault has just begun. If anyone bothered to read the thread I linked folks to (on the NEJM article), I talked about my own anecdote of a female student who successfully defended herself from rape using a technique I taught her in class the week earlier, and subsequently self destructed in the aftermath of the event.
Bingo.

We have been discussing this for years on my forum, and Bill's forum.

What is hilarious to me, and continues to be a rollicking platform, is the belief and the "teaching" that a student, only need do a few katas, a few kumites, a bit of conditioning, a bit of bunkai, and the "emotional" will take care of itself because it is "built in" into the style. :lol:

Why, most people reading the forums today, were shocked when I first introduced "fight or flight" [the chemical cocktail]

Never even knew it existed, never mentioned it to students, not until after we began discussing it here.
Van
User avatar
Panther
Posts: 2807
Joined: Wed May 17, 2000 6:01 am
Location: Massachusetts

Post by Panther »

Tokezu wrote:NO! Wait!! Who's that at the door? I see Jack Boots!!!
Heard something interesting from a former soldier that was in Desert Storm... I was introduced to him by a friend of mine while I was visiting. I have no way of confirming or denying any of this, but it's an interesting perspective regardless.

His take on a lot of this was that there were ulterior motives to all these conflicts. He said he still has close contacts in the military and that with the National Guard & military rotations into Iraq, the fact that it won't be over any time soon, his belief that we're heading to a couple of other countries in the not-too-distant future, the fact that we still have major military stationed all around the world... all are severely draining our manpower to militarily protect our home soil. He pointed out that there are significant numbers of foreign troops wearing the UN insignia already stationed in the U.S. He thinks that this is all so that when the jackboots come down on U.S. citizens, the UN soldiers won't hesitate to take actions against U.S. civilians and our military will be everywhere else in the world but here to help and protect us. He thinks it's coming and not too far away. He mentioned that he sold his house and just bought a secluded spot waaaaaaay out in the woods "somewhere".

Just relaying a different and, ummmmm... "interesting" view of things.

BTW, he was all for helping other folks gain their freedom, but felt that those other folks should only get our help if they show they're willing to fight for their freedom themselves.
User avatar
Panther
Posts: 2807
Joined: Wed May 17, 2000 6:01 am
Location: Massachusetts

Post by Panther »

Also, welcome to the new posters to this forum...

As I ask everyone who comes here, please read the rules on this forum's first page.

Take care and...

be good to each other.
User avatar
Van Canna
Posts: 57244
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Post by Van Canna »

Originally posted by Mike
Some people just don't like the homework you are assigning. I'd rather get a more middle-of-the-road look at things rather than the platform that you and Van seem to take. That, btw, is no insult at either of you (I'm sure you know that). You guys are clearly to the right of things, which I and others don't happen to buy most times.

And this is not to be disrespectful to you, Mike, but I could care less who buys and who does not buy my right or left of things. :wink:Image
Van
Post Reply

Return to “Realist Training”