Close-quarters combat between Hamas Al-Qassam fighters and Israeli forces inside a home in Gaza
This is what real CQB looks like. People typically retreat as fast as possible after taking fire and fall over the others behind them, they don’t all push into the area the fire is coming from.
Man shot by police while filming himself in gunfight
We tend to make a lot of assumptions about how people do or do not behave under stress, in a gun fight, after they are shot, and so on.
The “normative assumption” or “presumption of rationality” is the tendency to expect that other people will behave in a reasonable, logical, or rational manner in a given situation. This assumption often leads to misjudgments when others act in ways that are irrational and unpredictable.
This can result in poor tactical and strategic decisions.
You will never be able to understand what motivates some people, or the logic behind their behaviour, and that’s fine. Always leave part of your mind open to the possibility that things could go pear-shaped in an instant.
The gentleman in this video, for example, is completely irrational. You will not make sense of his behaviour. He will not respond to reasonable directions. He is not acting in his own best interest, he is not even responding to a gunshot wound to the chest the way you would expect.
The Ukraine knife fight video – what can we learn?
There is a lot of debate around the difference between “sport” and “street” fighting, and what effect things like eye gouges, biting and knives have, particularly when it comes to ground fighting. Too much of the discussion is based on theories and assumptions.
I think the martial arts community can learn a lot from the infamous Ukraine knife fight video:
- “Dirty” techniques work better from a dominant position, and will not reliably overcome your lack of skill and situational awareness.
- The decision to take a fight to the ground is a tactical consideration and could happen by your choice, your opponent’s, or purely as a matter of circumstance / by accident.
- All knives are lethal, but knife design is critical in combat.
- Pain compliance is unreliable.
- Control is paramount.
First, the idea you should never take a fight to the ground. This discussion is usually oversimplified and misunderstood.
You take the fight to the ground when it is tactically appropriate, and you do everything possible to keep off the ground when it is appropriate. Saying NEVER is a brain dead response. It depends on the situation.
Neither man seemed to have a plan of ending up on the ground. The Ukranian was forced to close the distance because it was the only option left when he was caught without his own firearm. There was nowhere to run.
For a moment, it worked – he disarmed the Russian and was able to force him down, before the Russian drew a knife.
In my opinion, the Ukrainian appears to have fixated on taking possession of the knife at this point, and conceded top position to get it.
Meanwhile, the Russian worked to take a controlling position on top. This was a critical moment in the ground component of the fight.
Many of us assume that if we end up on our back, “dirty” techniques like eye gouges should cause our opponent to react in pain and fall off. Or if we stab them, they will quit the fight or be injured/killed and unable to continue. And yes, this is a possible outcome.
Another possibility is that your opponent is determined to kill you, willing to fight through serious injury and pain, and has achieved a dominant position. Poking them in the eye or even stabbing them might not work without hitting a large artery.
Many have noted that the Russian bit the hands of the Ukrainian. This indeed happened several times.
A very important detail many have missed: almost every time the Russian would bite, it was in response to the Ukrainian reaching up to eye gouge him. However, the Russian was able to move his head and avoid most of the damage.
The reality is that just like strikes and submissions, “Dirty” techniques and weapons work better from dominant, controlling positions.
They stabbed each other. The attacked each other’s eyes. The (smaller) man fighting from a top position was able to do this more effectively.
Another point many have missed is that the Russian used biting not just to cause pain and injury, but for control: he held one hand in his teeth, which allowed him to use two hands to fight against the Ukrainian’s one.
He was also able to scan the environment and look for improvised weapons. He picked up three pieces of rubble, one being a shard of roof tile which was stabbed into the Ukrainian’s eye. Stuck on his back, the Ukrainian was unable to move his head to avoid this.
Knife design played a significant role. The knife lacked a pommel or guard, which would have greatly reduced the risk of hands sliding off each end of the knife. Both men lost control of the knife and were injured by the blade incidentally when their hands slid off at various times.
They also both grabbed at the blade intentionally which worked in terms of delaying attacks and fighting for control of the knife. One of the more stomach-churning aspects to watch, but they really did not have much choice.
Much has been made of the Ukrainian’s last words, asking the Russian if he could leave him to die peacefully. Personally, I don’t believe the Ukrainian gave up on survival.
I think it’s more likely that he understood he had lost the fight and was about to be stabbed a lot more, and his request to be left alone to die peacefully was a tactical decision more than anything; he was hoping that although severe, his injuries might be survivable at that point if the Russian stopped. His last words were “don’t do it” as the Russian placed a grenade under his vest.
Finally, pain compliance is unreliable, because it is not direct control. Compliance might be a secondary effect of pain, or it could cause more resistance. Control and position must be of highest priority in a fight.
In this instance, we see both men fighting through gunshot wounds, stab wounds, eye gouging, biting.
Both men were equally aggressive and willing to do anything to win the fight.
In the end, the fight was won by situational awareness, adaptability, improvisation, and positional control.
Two men fight to the death in Ukraine with guns, knives, improvised weapons
This is absolutely the most brutal – in the truest sense of the word – combat footage I have ever seen.
Watch this at your own discretion, and I recommend that you first read the short summary below to decide if you would still like to watch.
A second angle was also filmed by a drone:
A Ukranian solder, wearing a GoPro, approaches a structure and takes fire through a window. He was possibly hit, blood is visible.
He falls, returns fire, gets up and attempts to throw a grenade through the window.
The Russian soldier exits the building at the same time and approaches the corner where the Ukranian is standing. They both step around the corner and run into each other, clinch and fight over the Russian’s gun, before they end up on the ground.
They fight hand to hand with knives, teeth, and eye gouges. Both are drenched in blood.
The Ukranian is stuck on his back, while the Russian is able to cause more damage due to his dominant position on top of him.
Translation of the final moments below, from 6:40 in the video:
Ukrainian soldier: That’s it, mum, goodbye. Wait, let me die in peace. You’ve opened everything (meaning critical blood vessels) in me. Let me catch my breath. Very painful. *unclear*. Let me pass away in peace. Just don’t touch me. Let me die. Don’t touch me, let me die. Please go away. I want to pass away on my own. Thank you. You were the best fighter in the world. Goodbye. You were better.
Russian soldier: Goodbye, brother.
Ukrainian soldier: goodbye. Don’t do it.
The Jon Romano story: offender, advocate, victim and… liar?
How much can the life of a single man teach us about crime, punishment, rehabilitation and redemption? And is he even telling the truth?
Textbook ambush of armoured vehicle convoy – Ukraine War
A Leopard 2A4 tank performs a textbook ambush on a column of Russian armoured vehicles.
Typical ambush tactics for a convoy. You kill the last vehicle first, because no one else typically has eyes on it, so everyone will be confused for a few seconds. If you kill the first one first everyone knows what is going on instantly. Killing the rear vehicle is not always feasible, however.
Next you kill the first vehicle. You now have a dead vehicle at the rear, and a dead vehicle in the front, and if the road is narrow enough, you have created a kill zone. The convoy cant reverse without going off road, and it cant advance without going off road, either.
You call in artillery immediately on this kill zone. Or, if you’ve timed your ambush right, you put command detonated explosives on the road side and fuck everyone up as they try to get out of the kill zone.
Pain compliance fails again
In this video I break down the errors made by police before the shooting of Elroy Clarke.
Some viewers may find this content disturbing. This video is not intended for entertainment, but for education and training purposes only. My objective is to prevent violence and trauma, not to glorify, encourage, or incite it.
Source – Critical incident video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vASxVQYkbSc
News coverage:
https://www.nbc-2.com/article/bodycam-video-deadly-shooting-unarmed-man-florida/62720131
Effective use of Tasers
Tasers only create a window of opportunity. They are not reliable and will not do the job for you.
Misconceptions about knives
There are a lot of misconceptions about knives and blades.
One thing I find frustrating is that people often believe purely aesthetic decision choices, or features that might improve everyday quality of life for the weapon, actually make a knife more lethal.
In reality, two pointy metal objects with a sharp edge, of a similar size and shape, will have a very similar injury profile. If you stab someone to the neck with a butterfly knife, it will have the same practical effect as the blade on a pair of scissors.
Ultimately, this means two things:
- All sharp, pointy metal objects are lethal and must be treated that way; police, for example, are equally justified in using lethal force whether the subject is armed with a balisong or a pair of scissors.
- Banning particular kinds of sharp, pointy metal objects does not make the street safer, because they can be substituted for other sharp and pointy metal things which are equally lethal (balisong -> kitchen knife or scissors for example).
Kitchen knives are used in many fatal stabbings. They are just as effective as knives “designed” for killing.
Most knives are small, simple, easy to use, easy to conceal, fast to deploy, and very effective. The qualities many people worry about are superfluous to their function, or merely improve quality of life and comfort. Much of it is about style and aesthetic concerns.