English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

11 answers

NO... martial arts is made for defense not war. weapons are made for war.
military personelll train independantly and some do get trained some form of aikido (deflecting attacks) also they learn a a mixed martial arts style now too. mostly they learn how to deflect and hold down or how to break and enable.

2007-02-05 17:45:32 · answer #1 · answered by sam 4 · 1 6

Military training is a martial art, even the use of guns and explosives. However how practical is it for you or I to carry around a grenade or ak-47?

Yeah, dropping a bomb is the easiest way to kill a mass group of people but can you disarm a knife attack without killing the attacker with one? Can you avoid killing your attacker when using a gun? You can but it's harder and you still face many more legal issues when using a weapon then with unarmed combat.

Kung Fu and Karate were designed in a time when the weapons of war were used at an arms length. The styles and forms have been honed over thousands of years. Then as the weapons moved away from hand-to-hand and into ranged combat these styles remained mostly unchanged to this day. These styles are still useful in a street fight, law enforcement, close combat, urban warfare, self defense or a handful of other conditions. Would I go to war armed only with hand fighting skills? No, but I wouldn't go to a street fight with an a-bomb either.

2007-02-06 01:58:48 · answer #2 · answered by jjbeard926 4 · 2 0

Martial Artist best a thanks to strive against those that are unarmed, because even at the same time as there is weapon protection education it really is continuously very unfavorable and unrealistic. customarily a stunning good Martial Artist is time-honored with of that if yet another human being has a weapon it really is better effective to run. guns are made to provide people an benefit and so even someone with out skill utilising a gun or a knife can nonetheless be existence threatening to a Martial Artist who has experienced for decades. at the same time as there are techniques to strive against those who've a knife or a gun, both require quite a number of skill besides as quite a number of success. it really is really user-friendly for an coincidence to take position and as quickly because it does try to be lifeless. it really is the reason MAist understand it really is better effective to run except they *have* to strive against. ought to a Martial Artist carry a weapon? in the journey that they sense that they could get right into a situation the position they *have* to apply one, and it really is legal, then why not? regardless of the indisputable fact that that is a lot a lot less stressful on ones ideas to run away than to heavily harm or kill yet another human being. That being reported, if I had no decision and had to strive against someone who had a knife, i'd not ideas having one myself.

2016-12-03 19:05:00 · answer #3 · answered by klosterman 4 · 0 0

Well i don't see to many armies running around on horses with lances and swords or spears.and to my knowledge the feudal systems pretty well finished.
I haven't done a lot of overseas travelling but the ones I've been to have evolved quite a bit past the horsed warrior stage,but i havn't been to Hawaii or America though.I would assume there a bit more advanced than that.
Even us back ward antipodeans dont have an army that rides horses and throws spears at the enemy.And your talking about something entirely different.Going on what your asking dubya is the best martial artist in the world because he can beat the whole world with one finger.
PUSH "BOOM"the whole worlds nuked.
youve convinced me anyway ive wasted 39 years training,i'm just gunna(lol)carry a rocket launcher everywhere i go.lol.

2007-02-05 19:07:16 · answer #4 · answered by BUSHIDO 7 · 4 0

In a way yes . While the term martial arts is generally used in reference to hand to hand combat , it also encompasses all aspects of military fighting . Tactics, armament, etc...
Just being able to shoot well doesn't make you a martial artist though . You would have to be able to do a lot more then fire your weapon, strategy, hand to hand, and that type of thing.

2007-02-05 23:19:21 · answer #5 · answered by Ray H 7 · 3 0

martial arts is about finding out about yourself. not just how to kill or maim, but you learn a lot about yourself, and this is the best result of training. shooting a gun isnt personal and is easy, but choking a stranger out becomes personal, and you see your reflection in their eyes... that talks volumes to you.

its joining body and mind, outside of reason.

but if you follow the reasoning behind: why run when you can walk, then the Nuclear bomb is the OM of modern fighting finesse. the ultimate take down technique. bow to the master of light and death!

if only they made nuke hand grenades, now that would quicken the pace...

2007-02-06 07:11:52 · answer #6 · answered by SAINT G 5 · 0 0

It's true that martial arts started out as key war tactics; but in today's military, technology is far more effecient than any human being. Now martial arts is used as sporting event, form of excercise, or for self-defense.

2007-02-05 18:09:25 · answer #7 · answered by ? 3 · 1 1

yes it does.

however people tend to think in the incorrect mindset that martial arts means unarmed combat.

and when people tend to talk in terms of "best martial artists" they tend to talk in terms of comparative styles.

If you really think of it albert einstien was the best martial artist.

however people talk on different levels, the best with x type of style (weapons) no weapons etc.

and people do tend to talk in terms of what thier everyday role is. people in large cities don't live in warzones that thier reality is guns and bombs.

however the best martial artist (as martial arts means "the arts of mars" mars is the god of war- thus the arts of war) is in fact the most damaging bomb or military weapon.

2007-02-06 06:31:25 · answer #8 · answered by Bluto Blutarsky4 2 · 1 0

martial arts isn't made to kill in the first place, but self-defence.
situations you face when dealing inside a warzone or with criminals is different, then civilians on the streets. the kind of stuff they teach in millitary is hybrid from different styles and designed to suit best to the millitary's purpose. can contain lethal techniques and purpose used to efficiently subdue/control the opponent or at times to kill.

2007-02-05 18:44:27 · answer #9 · answered by bill 2 · 1 2

martial arts is meant for self defence

not for offence

it is the best way to keep our body healthy
i mean the exercises which we do helps us to stay fitter than any gymnasium

2007-02-05 17:48:11 · answer #10 · answered by yash_slim_shady 2 · 1 3

fedest.com, questions and answers