US Army Combatives Symposium

http://www.GracieAcademy.com
On January 18, 2010 Rorion and Rener Gracie were summoned by Major General Michael Ferriter to participate in a symposium at Ft. Benning, GA aimed at reviewing and refining Armys combatives program. The Army was first introduced to Gracie Jiu-Jitsu in 1994, when Rorion and Royce were hired to teach the second Ranger Batallion at Ft. Louis, Washington. In 2002, the Army rewrote the official combatives doctrine to include the techniques that were introduced to them by the Gracie Brothers. Now, the Army is more determined than ever to make Combatives training available to all U.S. Army soldiers (approx. 1.2 million people) and how to accomplish this goal was the primary focus of the meeting. In the time since the Army was first introduced to Gracie Jiu-Jitsu, there have been several advancements in the way the techniques are executed, and taught, so Rorion and Rener used the opportunity to share the refined techniques to ensure that the Armys program is up to date with what is being taught in the modern-day Gracie Combatives program. For security reasons we cannot show the complete video, but we do have a few short clips of some of the Combatives discussion in which they had soldiers demonstrating the techniques in full battle regalia.

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• gracie
• jiu
• jitsu
• academy
• self
• defense
• us
• army
• modern
• day
• combatives
• master
• cycle
• rorion
• rener
• ralek
• ryron

[lsloewen2]

Worst trolls ever

[Nerstow]

@CreedOfHeresy Who is going to exploit our national resources if we had a small military that stays on American soil? Is Mexico going to invade us and take our oil? I don't expect to hear an answer from you because all you have are stupid theoretical straw man statements.

[Nerstow]

@CreedOfHeresy Do you think an unaccountable mercenary force is going to go over to Iraq and fight for free? No, they do it for money right? How do you think these companies make money? Our Government pays them. You are so addicted to war you can't fathom having a government that doesn't provide public or private sector soldiers to other countries.

[CreedOfHeresy]

@Nerstow I'll keep this short so your poor meth-addled brain can process it. You can have people serving the people or at least a government for the people, OR, you can have an unaccountable mercenary force that does not need any oversight. No reporting to anyone on any official level. Just numbers as a defense budget, for people who are just in it for the money.

[Nerstow]

@CreedOfHeresy if we stopped funding overseas wars then our government wouldn't be paying "security contractors" to screw around in iraq and afghanistan. you seriously so bereft of thought you can't make that connection without it spelled out to you? you think the security contractors are making money for someone? no, they are ran off taxation just like the official military.

[CreedOfHeresy]

@Nerstow No, you're just too stupid to realize that our leaders are the ones who tell soldiers to go die at our behest.  Do you honestly believe that without a volunteer military force, our leadership wouldn't go doing the same thing? Really? So then how do you explain the droves of "security contractors" under the employment of the US government being used in Iraq and Afghanistan, where they are obligated to report to nobody but their money-hungry bosses? You fuckin' peabrain.

[CreedOfHeresy]

@Nerstow Are you really so stupid as to think our national resources would not be exploited in a heartbeat without a military?  Clearly you are.

[Nerstow]

Soldiers don't protect us either way. Are you really so stupid you think other governments are going to invade and try to take us over?

[Nerstow]

you're too stupid to understand that having soldiers overseas in every country getting involved in their affairs and fucking with their governments is what causes hatred of America throughout the world and terrorism like 9/11? do you think it's all just jealous hate of our great economy? this is the price of imperialism. carried out by the soldiers.

What is the difference if we are talking directly about Iraq, or other countries we've invaded to put in a puppet dictator?

[rpatrizzi]

@Nerstow

Seriously are you still talking? Ok so first off this wasn't a debate about the War in Iraq, is was about War itself. You stated "sending soliders overseas to interfere everywhere" now you are saying we are just talking about Iraq. Are you seriously such a stupid shit that you don't remember your own words. Secondly, you stated "The soldiers make our lives LESS safe, not more so" How the fuck does that make sense, Have you ever read a history book? Fucking Dummy.