Dog Brothers Public Forum


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
February 17, 2018, 05:49:28 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
107370 Posts in 2403 Topics by 1095 Members
Latest Member: dannysamuel
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2]
51  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: February 19, 2011, 05:19:49 PM
completely OT, but

I cannot but be amazed with what ardent vigor and persistent consistency you guys are contemplating the US political continuum. Simply put, incredible.

On a sidenote it gives me peace of mind, that the politics of the big guys are just as panic driven and burdened by yellow press as they are in our little, dwarven country amidst the Alps.
52  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: European “Gathering of the Pack” 2011 on: February 10, 2011, 11:18:13 AM
see you soon !!
53  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: VIDEO CLIPS OF INTEREST on: January 31, 2011, 06:39:54 PM

over under clinch at 0:07 ?? uki goshi-hip throw at 0:12 ?? inside collar tie at 0:13 ?? triceps biceps control at 0:33 ?? arm triangle attempt at 0:45 ??

Can Fedor armbar it ?


54  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: VIDEO CLIPS OF INTEREST on: January 26, 2011, 05:42:14 PM

on this link i am pointing out the two you tubes about a kiai master, the first shows him with his students in training, the second showing him fighting an mma guy, the video speaks a volume or two to me.

thanks Tim, good link. Although, the old man accepted the bet and all, I think that this total materialisation of "truth" lately, especially since the mma and nhb has taken off in martial arts, is just sad.

The logic of "testing" like this seems completely flawed to me. You take some guys art, take it out of its context and put it in context where YOUR art is proven to work the best.

Think of it as a sumo wrestler loosing in MMA. Does this prove that mma is the ultimate contact sport ? Not at all, it means that in that specific set of conditions, sumo might be insufficient in some parts of the endeavor. Switch the positions, and take the mma guy to the dohyo. Does it mean that sumo is the ultimate full contact sport ? Not at all, it means that in that specific set of conditions, MMA might be insufficient in some parts of the endeavor.

btw Stickgrappler, incredible link.


55  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Dealing with the adrenaline dump on: January 24, 2011, 06:33:18 PM
thank you Stickgrappler for that link. and please, call me Andrew. I will search the site thoroughly, seems theres a wealth of info on it...hope that the links work tho

@ guro Crafty : hahahhaa, I started a notes updater on my mobile, called "crafty reminders".

Cant wait to hear the stories out Cheesy:D
56  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Dealing with the adrenaline dump on: January 23, 2011, 03:16:12 PM
@ guro Crafty :

the Macyoung story reminder is noted. Hmmm this Eskrima digest thing sounds intriguing. What was it, why is it now there a place I can learn more about this ?

Yes, I think I know what you mean, but Vunak had a different name for it, which eludes me at the moment. Although I am not sure he had a systematic training method developed for it....correct me if I am wrong please.

Thank you for that Peyton Quinn quote. Ive read a couple of his books. Like DogHowie said, a "been there, done that" kind of guy.

I will duly read that article on NLP and get back to you of course. I read it some time ago already I think, but I must refresh my memory.

57  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Dealing with the adrenaline dump on: January 20, 2011, 10:03:59 PM
hello Barna.

some good pointers from kind folks already.

Before anything, I advise you to read these two sites regarding handling all kinds of weird and violent behaviour. They have made tremendous impact on the way I perceive conflict.  -  this is the brainchild of Rory Miller and Marc Macyoung, which is basically a universal matrix for deescalation. Incredible work, highly recommended. - site with vast amounts of articles by Marc Macyoung covering basically everything there is to cover regarding the "transcendent" dynamics of violent, marginal conflict.

If you already know these two, please, ignore the above.

Now, about the adrenaline dump..

If we look at it without any other prerequisites or implications or reasons for occurence, the Dump is a preety marvelous human reaction. When in a specific state of "awareness" our body automatically starts to produce (cant find a better word) hormones and neurotransmitters, epinephrine, norepinephrine, dopamine. These substances are a natural intoxicant and boost to help the body cope with an acute situation. Here are a couple of general effects :

-extensive focusing, otherwise known as tunnel vision
-higher heartrate and bloodpressure
-warped time and space perception
-pain tolerance barrier shift
-mental block (Fight, flight...and freeze, posture, submit, as Guro Crafty noted)
-loss of fine motor movement and coordination

If you wish to rid away of the Dump, because you feel it makes you a coward, sure you can do that. But bear in mind the process usually starts because of YOUR perception of the problem, rather than the state of the problem/conflict in itself. Thats why Miller and Macyoung use the mantra of "Deescalate yourself first". Anyhow, in effect, the adrenaline dump, when used correctly acts as an incredible natural boost, which usually makes people do extraordinary things. So the other route is try to learn some SOPs on how to try to reprogram the shift via training and use the Dump in your favor.

1. Positive self influence

At first signs of incoming Adrenaline dump, intentionally identify all the effects of it. Shaky knees, sweaty hands, dry mouth, shaking voice to name a few. Instead of going down the logic --->oh no, shock----->shit I am scared------>crap I am a pussy------>ill get killed--->shutdown...and automatically making yourself a target, force yourself to identify the natural effects of the dump as a signifier that your body is readying itself to do "out of borders" activity, probably including physical intervention. Use this reasoning instead : Identifying the effects------>Shock in effect---------->I am ready-------->I am ready....say the words out loud, start talking. Most importantly because this is how you can trick your initial shock/breathhold reaction and automatically start breathing through talking. The reason why people usually get so incredibly tired in real life threatening scenarios/attacks is, they literally forget to breathe, which obviously has BAD Smiley get stiff, freeze, but most importantly, simply put, because brains oxygen demand isnt met you cant readily operate its primary think (which in turn means negotiate, cheat, talk your way out of shit)

In training you obviously need to RECREATE the effects of the adrenaline dump. The way this is done is, that you must force yourself to the edge of your "wellness circle". When we train, we usually say that training has started when you cant take it anymore. Everything up to there is warmup. Try it with a regular excercise/training/running, whatever you do, and when you feel you cant take it anymore, or you stop, force yourself to do 10 more, or run 500 more metres. Next time do 12 more, another time 15 more, thus gradually broaden your spectrum.

When you feel you are going out of your comfort zone, start with the positive self influencing. You will also start to feel the chemical changes happening when going "overboard", thats the part when you rationally identify the physical effects of the Dump. If done correctly, first time "crossing the line" usually makes people regurgitate or "barely keeping it in" (its late and I cant really find correct words, sorry)

2. Neurolinguistic anchor

This is the second part of the SOP. Basically it is a training method with which you try to condition a certain personal stress level to a word, or a phrase. The way this is done is, you do some stress drills (pushups without breathing, sprints, max. output bag work, whatever) for about 1 min. or 30 seconds so you try to force yourself to the very limit of your current psychophysical capabilities. During this time, use all the crippling ache and pain and loss of air, and build it inside, forcefully suppress the feeling of anxiety and artificially switch to agression via your own "mini ritual"... clench fists, bite hard, whatever you do. Then at the "end of stress drill signal" whistle, pop, whichever, let everything that you build up inside out in a single raging galvanizing tantrum. Hit air, punch a bag, a mitt, maybe hit sticks with a friend untill you break them, stuff like that. At the same time connect it to a word or a short 2 word phrase.

It doesnt take too long before you will start to feel weird alarms, "heads up" feelings when you will unintentially say the chosen word. The idea here is, that when you start to feel shit hitting the fan, you forcefully try to cheat yourself and go into the "red level" alot quicker with the help of the linguistic anchor.

Another "hint" about perceiving environment and thus use avoidance instead of damage control is dictation of surroundings. I was first being noticed about it in some DT/bodyguard crisis, anti ambush driving course. While you drive you basically constantly say all the things you see on the road and in the peripheral vision out loud. This way you are slowly making a subliminal habit of constant assesment of the surroundings and at the same time, your mind has a harder time to wander away and put you off guard. Do the exact same thing when you go for a walk next time. You dont need to say it out loud of course, if you have fears you will be put in an asylum, but talk to yourself, have a test. Any action you see, acknowledge it and say it to yourself. Eventually it becomes automatic...

hope that made any sense Smiley

best regards,

58  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Legal Issues created by the War with Islamic Fascism on: December 14, 2010, 11:07:03 AM
hi GM, Doug and JDN.

thanks for the responses. Since this is starting to go into the monolith proportions, I will have to take time to study your posts and positions and get back in a couple of days. ATM my freetime priority is elsewhere.

@Doug, you are right, gaps started to appear in my post, specially towards the end, since as I am sure you have noticed, I posted it at about 3 o clock in the morning my time, and finished with some cosmetic corrections at 5. That "right wing" conservative came out wrong, as I now see I could simply say" a more determined Republican" Smiley...partisan historian?? hehee not really. Well I guess it depends what you mean with it. The European sphere of historiography is very much different to the anglosaxon paradigm. Our philosophy and theory of history is still heavily relied on Marxist conception of time (which has nothing to do with his political implications) and of course, the french Annales school.

see you soon !
59  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Legal Issues created by the War with Islamic Fascism on: December 13, 2010, 06:18:03 PM
Hi guys.

Sorry for the delay. I have had time to reflect on the answers, so forgive me for the long post. I completely understand if it goes below radar for being a wall of text.

Without gibberish, let me get right to the replies.

dear GM, thanks for your response. I have a lot of things on my mind concerning what you just wrote, and to be perfectly honest, I am a bit dissapointed in your blind righteous fury.

first of all. It seems a bit degrading, that you post in response a recycled dictionary entry about a topic, that I am almost finishing my phd thesis on, especially since it is a most
complex topic, devoid of any room for discrete simplification. It is specially out of context, because it even expands my idea further. ESPECIALLY since the title of this topic is
capitalized as Fascism with a big F. Lets forget the superficial semantics for now.

But ok, if citing dictionaries is your version of discussing humanistic topics, have it this way.  defines Islam as

1.     the religion of Muslims, having the Koran as its sacred scripture and teaching that there is only one God and that Mohammed is his prophet; Mohammedanism
2.     a.  Muslims collectively and their civilization
    b.  the countries where the Muslim religion is predominant

"From the start, islam has been a violent, totalitarian political ideology disguised as a religion."

I cannot see here, or in any other definition OR academic milieu for that matter that labels it as a totalitarian political ideology disguised as a religion. If you really want to continue that
thought, you might want to read (or study again) Althusser and Marx, since what you wrote rings very closely to what in his opinion was the ideological role of religion in the social

 "Mohammed tortured and murdered any who opposed him and engaged in ethnic cleansing, as well as having a 9 year old wife. When a muslim today asks "What would Mohammed do?" the answer is bomb a subway, cut a head off, slam a plane into a building until the non-muslims are conquered."

Ok, I hoped I am speaking with a man, well read in what he is saying, thus I presumed you have read at least partially the Qu'ran and The Bible. After this however, I am getting the
impression that I was wrong, since these types of comments really show a harshly ignorant side to what in general you come across as ; a well read, well versed intellectual of the right
wing position.

Here is a nice read about violent passages from both scriptures, by the Penn state academic professor of religious studies Phillip Jenkins, I strongly advise you to read it. Just in case, I
am going to quote a few more important parts from the article :

"Even Westerners who have never opened the book – especially such people, perhaps – assume that the Koran is filled with calls for militarism and murder, and that those texts shape Islam....

...In the minds of ordinary Christians – and Jews – the Koran teaches savagery and warfare, while the Bible offers a message of love, forgiveness, and charity...

...Commands to kill, to commit ethnic cleansing, to institutionalize segregation, to hate and fear other races and religions . . . all are in the Bible, and occur with a far greater frequency
than in the Koran. At every stage, we can argue what the passages in question mean, and certainly whether they should have any relevance for later ages. But the fact remains that the words
are there, and their inclusion in the scripture means that they are, literally, canonized, no less than in the Muslim scripture....

...The Bible also alleges divine approval of racism and segregation....In fact, the Bible overflows with “texts of terror,” to borrow a phrase coined by the American theologian Phyllis
Trible. The Bible contains far more verses praising or urging bloodshed than does the Koran, and biblical violence is often far more extreme, and marked by more indiscriminate savagery. The
Koran often urges believers to fight, yet it also commands that enemies be shown mercy when they surrender. Some frightful portions of the Bible, by contrast, go much further in ordering
the total extermination of enemies, of whole families and races – of men, women, and children, and even their livestock, with no quarter granted....

...The difference between the Bible and the Koran is not that one book teaches love while the other proclaims warfare and terrorism, rather it is a matter of how the works are read

I would hope that douses some of the rampant flame that you carry. Im not singing praises here, of either side. Just opening a new sphere that might force someone to rethink his
position, which is what progress should be about, constantly rethinking ones position within a framed dialectic going upwards.

An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America....

Informative article. But I fail to see where it fits in all this. Is it supposed to be an example how all Islam groups are hell bent on the destruction of the USA ?
I am sure you can do better. I guess we can also use names like Guy Fawkes, who (wanted to) blew up the houses of parliament and assasinate King James or the Tripura liberation front, that was forcefully converting people to christianity, or the protestant Northern Ireland Orange Volunteers who were coordinating terrorist attacks on catholic churches, or the KKK for that matter as signs that crhistianity uses blatantly senile ways of coercion.

Formally (by Aristotles Organon) your type of argument in a debate is a logical fallacy. Specifically, it is called converse fallacy of accident or Hasty generalization.

There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq after all.

Informative article. Again.

"The massive cache of almost 400,000 Iraq war documents released by the WikiLeaks Web site revealed that small amounts of chemical weapons were found in Iraq and continued to surface for
years after the 2003 US invasion, Wired magazine reported.

Ok. If this has been around, and surfacing, A) why hasnt anyone used it as concrete evidence that Iraq has WMDS since -it would most definitely help your political position-, B) why dont we
see legions of right wing conservatives jumping up and down for finally having an enforcable and justifyable reason for the 1,121,057,0450 dollars (I think I cant even read this out loud)
and C) how come it hasnt been presented to the commissions going there to assess the situation ?

If this is true, it poses all new kinds of state trust issues and expands on what I said above. Administration KNEW they had WMDS, told everyone they didnt find it, and thus for
appropriately subjective reasons decided to prolongue their forces stay in Mesopotamia. I am not going to go into more detail here, since I am not well read on it all, but I will quote a few
Bush quotes that expand on the matter.

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." --State of the Union Address, Jan. 28, 2003, making a claim that
administration officials knew at the time to be false

"You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror." --interview with CBS News' Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006

"I think I was unprepared for war." –on the biggest regret of his presidency, ABC News interview, Dec. 1, 2008

"So what?" –President Bush, responding to an ABC News correspondent who pointed out that Al Qaeda wasn't a threat in Iraq until after the U.S. invaded, Dec. 14, 2008

**As a historian, can you explain how the talks between PM Chamberlain and Germany's leader worked out?

I am afraid, I fail to see the connection here, again, especially since the way you reason your comparison is again the same type of argumentative fallacy. I may seem pedantic about this, but,
like you demand sources for cited thoughts and ideas in your posts, I demand at least a partially solid argumentative structure.

Ok, even if I take that comment for what it is, are you saying that Bush was in the place of Germany's leader ? Or the other way around ? I would certainly think not the latter, since he
hasnt even responded to any initiative, and PM Chamberlain certanly WAS initiating talks, more than once even (on behalf of the sovereign of course). Now, I would gladly expand on the
Sudeten Germans, and what several kinds of problems their national identity with Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia as German states pose, but it seems to me that you do not understand what the
underlying conditions on both sides were, because the underlying problem of the Iran/USA is completely different. And neither should you, (since it is a very specific and complex issue)
unless it is an interest of yours. But lets continue with the topic...

I shall use your last comment as a linking point with DougMacGs post.

hi Doug, thanks for the reply Smiley

"The Saddam regime was supposedly secular but he was praising Allah in almost every sentence that I read,.." .....and "A little insight into A-jad's less than rational world-view."

My God of course I dont mean Ahmadinejad was/is a bastion of ratio in the middle east. I am merely trying to point out, that ones subjective implications should be questioned/doubted first,
(especially) in hand with such severe one sided criticism. Let me quote some more Bush brilliance, in regards to rational world-view and praising "Him" in what he says.

" I am driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in
Iraq'. And I did. And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'. And, by God,
I'm gonna do it." Sharm el-Sheikh August 2003.

" I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job."
Statement made during campaign visit to Amish community, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, Jul. 9, 2004

"One of the great things about this country is a lot of people pray." Washington, D.C., Apr. 13, 2003

"The short-term objective of this country is to find an enemy and bring them to justice before they strike us. The long-term objective is to make this world a more free and hopeful and
peaceful place. I believe we'll succeed because freedom is the Almighty God's gift to every man and woman in this world."
Portsmouth, Ohio, Sep. 10, 2004

"Well, first of all, you got to understand some of my view on freedom, it's not American's gift to the world. See, freedom is God -- is God given." Interview with TVR, Romania, Nov. 23,

"What existed in Iraq before the invasion was not peace.  It was another version of fascism, a totalitarian prison." combined with this "And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the
tyranny in Iraq...."

 is what is really intriguing me. This self righteous condescending aura of the invasion. Like you did a noble deed. Well you did, I guess, but what bothers me, is why did you choose Iraq ? Because it was a totalitarian fascistic regime ? Suffocating prison, which people had to be freed from ? Hm, here are a few numbers for potential, more suitable candidates to save. And it would entail NOT loosing your own men and NOT gaining as much new enemies.

according to there were 22.5 million hiv/aids infected children and adults (adult counts as age 15 and up) and 1.3 million deaths in Sub saharan Africa in
2009 alone. Slow down and imagine that, almost like the whole state of Texas, anyone you meet when you go out, and anyone you see, is infected.

a couple of other numbers from conflicts, from the early 90s to 2008 (secondary source wikipedia, search there for primary sources) : Kinshasa civil war, 4 million deaths, Guinnea Bissau, 350 thousand civilians without a piece of iron left to spare, Kenya civil war 200 thousan civilians left without a home or personal belongigs,  Mozambique civil war, 1 million deaths, Nigerian civil war, 1.2 million civilian and army deaths, Rwandan genocide, 1 million deaths - 20% of countries population, Sierra Leone 80 thousand deaths, Darfur 350 thousand deaths, almost 3 million displaced, and I havent even counted Somalia, where the UN has plowed around a bit, did nothing, lost a few men and then retreated (with all due respect to all the fallen soldiers. on both sides). All in the name of some national freedom Democratic front.
It might not be appropriate to include this, since I was subjectively involved in it, but what the hell. It connects in part with what I mentioned in first post, about the attitude the US has towards militaristic procedures.  

The help we got in the last Balkan War was a gesture worthy of a Shakespearean comedy. Everything from hitting kindergardens, Chinese embassies to bakeries, missing 90% of fired projectiles, to a downed f117 the invisible fighter with a 40 year old soviet RPG weapon, to supporting the "retaking of croatian sovereign territory" in Kninska krajina, which was one of the biggest undercover genocides in the war, apart from Srebrenica, which is a tragedy on its own. It was openly supported by the CIA with intelligence and US air force surveillance. When we went there to bring uncle back home, there were piles upon piles of dismembered and mauled men and adolescents and 10 year old girls, with white grey hair to their waist, raped, searching for their loved ones with tearless cries, wandering alone through the barren lands, , that the guerilla "rambo" forces left in their wake. All in the name of democratic equality of peoples, OF COURSE.

At least thank god for the peacekeepers.

The way the UN/US incursion was portrayed in the western media almost made me vomit in contrast to what it has effectively acheived. This portrayal of war like it is an entertainment blockbuster, like a game of Risk, or a Real Time Strategy video game. Like a John Wayne movie, after he kills all the baddies and rides off in the sunset. Wearing a mission accomplished tag on his back. This is the reason the USA gets so much bad mouthing and enemies.

I must stop now. This is getting out of hand.

I guess after all that, Iraq was THOUGHT to be the best compromise of easy victory, combat heroism and potential ally with mutual benefits afterwards. But as it stands, at least 2 of the 3
goals have turned for the worse.

be friends at the end of the day Smiley


EDIT REASON : some typos and forgot to add wiki source
60  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Legal Issues created by the War with Islamic Fascism on: December 12, 2010, 02:35:27 PM
hello all. Massive topic.

I know I am going to regret this, I just want to post a couple of pointers, that kept popping up while I was, admittedly, struggling and reading all the data in this post.

As a historian, who spends most of his time at the university, I am really intriguied to know, if most of you guys have done your homework here. I am not hinting at the legal issues of it all, nor the political circus, neither of which I wont and even cant comment, since I am living on the European continent.
To start, the term "Islamic Fascism" alone, sounds very problematic to me. The word Fascism (which comes from the Latin fasces, authority of magisters) isnt some abstract notion, that can be carelessly thrown around events that imply some sort of evil or repression. It means a very specific thing. It means a radical political ideology, that regards a nation as an organic corpus - hence corporativism -, with scraps from the far right and far left of the political continuum. It was greatly influenced by the growing nationalism in the 19th century, and the Sorelian power of myth in peoples lives (Eugene Sorel was a french philosopher and radical syndicalist).
The Sorelian myth ironically preety much describes the "Islamic Fascism" in the way it is used in the USA, but I will not go into factual confrontations of this, since I see some guys are terribly passionate about the whole ordeal. And I am here to make friends.

Second, the word Islamic in "Islamic Fascism". Now I am sure you guys know, but there are more than 20 denominations in Islam, besides the lately made "popular" Sunni, and Shia, and the less known Sufi. Each have their own ecclesiastical practices, codes of conduct, ontology, metaphysics, ethics and, yes, morals. Just like christianity has. That is a terrible simplification if I have ever seen/heard one. I guess saying that all right wing politicians in the USA are kkk, with their idiosyncratic interpretations of the Holy Text and citing Old Testament to back up Christian terrorism, would sprout more than one objection.

The third term, which seems important to shed some light on, is the term Jihad. It falls on the bottom of the barrel of "the worst misinterpreted words in history". Somewhere near Marx' class struggle. Or make that preety much everything else he has written. The word Jihad, quite simply means struggle. Internal, external, implicit, explicit. Here are of course more than one different interpretations, but generally this holds much of the same ground :

Fiqh Made Easy: A Basic Text of Islamic Law; Saalikh bin Gahneem As-Sadlan pg. 117-18  (quote info and text is taken from wikipedia)

- Jihad against the soul: Struggling against the soul to yearn for the Religion, act upon those teachings, and call others to them. (Paraphrased)
- Jihad against Shaytan: Struggling against Satan without doubts or desires.
- Jihad against the disbelievers and hypocrites: this is done with the tongue, hand, heart and wealth.
- Jihad against heretics, liars, and evilfolk: This is best done with the hand, if not the hand then the tongue, if that's not possible then the heart."

Again, a very dangerously overreaching simplification.

If one takes a few steps back from it all, and takes a birds-eye view on the situation. Yes the radical extremists can be taken as a legitimate threat, yes they have done terrible things, yes they cannot be reasoned with. BUT, as with any such group, it must be said, that they are always a minority untill they use a situation to fill their ranks with a very specific social demographic, that is usually very passive, neutral and even though I do not like the word, ignorant. They are used, swindled and twisted into their rank and made warriors for a cause. And this is where I might chime my 2 cents in, where America is taking very poor (and very dangerous) choices. These actions are taking its massive toll, by constantly getting new enemies, while acting as the new big kid in the gutter, that doesnt understand all the small, unwritten rules and restrictions, that come bundled with violent behaviour.

The War on terror supposedly started in 2001, with the joint attack on Afghanistan, in lieu of the 9.11. and was followed by more subsequent attacks, most notable of which was the invasion of Iraq under the position of hidden WMDs. Now we know there werent any. This alone is a totally ignorant, stupid and unwise decision of the Administration. Bringing the troops home, would most definitely save countless more lives than having them crawl in the sand in search of an enemy that doesnt even have a face. And most importantly it would save the USA a hell of a lot of financial troubles in the upcoming years, especially now, that the monetary and fiscal debacle is starting to unveil.

I will leave the conspiracy theories of the TRUE underlying reasons of war, i.e. sustaining the dollars fall, and oil dominion, to people more susceptible to its content. To me it seems the only thing we can learn here, is the confirmation of US senator H. Johnsons quote : "The first casualty when war comes is truth"

As opposed to Iran...this might come as a shock, but why arent they allowed to have nuclear arms, whereas others can ? Especially since the UN comitee watchdogs are issuing generally positive reports? Why dont they have problems with Russia having them, or China, India, North Korea ? IMHO it is EXACTLY this, this stepping on other peoples toes, this ignorance of boundaries, overriding other cultures values with their own, bringing democracy into mesopotamia, meddling into affairs not their own, that even brings a need having to define "torture", or "enemy combatant". Fools words. Again in street terms, if you look for a fight in the wrong neighbourhood, you will more than probably find it.

Here you have an 18 page note that Ahmadinejad wrote to Bush, and here inviting him to a public debate, saying "...we are all rational beings, why cant we sit down and talk ? " A very enlightened gesture, I must say. Shame it has fallen on deaf ears.

By the way, I wouldnt be that much worried about the anti Western Islamic terrorist or enemy combatant, that is so terrfyingly portrayed in our hemisphere, I am alot more afraid of incredibly gifted physicists and scientists, which accept the radical findings at the sub atomic level ALOT easier than most, through Islam, with its unique religious ontology.

be friends at the end of the day Smiley


61  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: DB Euro Gathering 8/13-14, 2010 on: December 04, 2010, 12:50:31 PM
@ Gong fu : hiiiiiiii mate, nice to know we have this contact here. I was actually thinking about that chat not that long ago, and couldnt remember if you said you have facebook profile or not. But great to hear from you again, no doubt !!

@ guro Crafty : thank you for that explanation, I am sure people cant forget that Tongue
62  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: DB on PPV TV on: December 04, 2010, 12:45:22 PM
wow !!  excellent work on this, guro Crafty.

63  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Fencing masks on: December 03, 2010, 05:33:49 AM
if you are from the EU or UK, just use this site :

I ordered 4 of them for 150 euros, plus some postage. Hard as hell, comfortable, compact, great for stick work and very,very cheap.
64  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Mismatched fighting scenarios -rcsf- on: December 02, 2010, 05:45:17 PM
My first topic on here, hello everyone.  afro

Here is some food for thought, would appreciate your guys' input. Its a part of my discussion with guro Crafty.

We were doing alot of multiple opponent strategies lately, and I noticed that alot of people have serious problems attacking/defending/working in pairs or more. Of course the easiest and fastest method is the ole throw down kick the shit out version, but we put ALOT of attenuation to the use of force continuum for officials, and law for civilians (fighting is not self defense) so that comes out of the question. Anything with more "damage control" not to mention "professionalism" is downright hard. People stumble upon each other, get in the way, hit one another, just general chaos, most of the times even worse than a trained man working alone.

Thats why we do, what I call MMFS-mismatched fighting scenarios.

Participants work in pairs, trios, against mismatched, sometimes also uneven odds. They also get a goal to work towards to, so its not just random brawling. Some short examples are, to put a person in handcuffs within 2 minutes, or to guard a vip person behind them as best as they can against more attackers....etc. even if they are failing, point is to instill the correct focus, mindset of working against all odds. Safety equipment protocols are same as for Gatherings. Other "tools" include, backpack, staff, all types of stick, belt with buckle, suitcase, knife and improvised weapons of all sorts, even a chair.

The "beauty" of it is you cannot rely on your regular gameplan, like, I dont know, going to the ground, breaking the distance, going to clinch and work from there etc... because you never know in which type of situation you are going to start the fights (because untill the whistle is blown you dont know which weapon you are going to be given) and there are ALWAYS more people around, so you have to constantly adapt.

That in mind what are your thoughts (or experiences if you have ever done anything similar?) with doing theset types of mismatched scenarios for our RCSF dog brothers gatherings ?? Say 3 on 1, solo has staff + backup knife in holster, trio-one empty hand, other short stick, third some other instrument, maybe sports bag or something like that. Or other combinations, 4 on 2, etc... basically the strenght in numbers must balance out in lack of firepower.

Like I said, some food for thought, would love to get some feedback on that.

Actually, we have one such event coming up on monday, so I will try to put up pics and videos as soon as they are available.

wuff from Slovenia

65  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: DB Euro Gathering 8/13-14, 2010 on: December 02, 2010, 05:06:28 PM
hi guys and girls !

only now got access to the forums, so, hi Smiley

To reiterate what was already said, it was a fantastic experience, I met very nice new people and learned alot. Cant wait to see you next year!!

regards from Slovenia.

Pages: 1 [2]
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!