Hand-to-hand in combat

[Presley Cannady]

The gunfighter is the spear tip of the modern infantry, but I'm curious as to how (in)frequently the fight pushes to close quarters. Looking at the casualty statistics for Iraq, it's obvious that deaths and wounds resulting from firefights and explosions vastly predominate, but I'm not sure if this tells me all I'd like to know about how often hand-to-hand is used to settle accounts on the field.

[William F. Owen]

The gunfighter is the spear tip of the modern infantry, but I'm curious as to how (in)frequently the fight pushes to close quarters. Looking at the casualty statistics for Iraq, it's obvious that deaths and wounds resulting from firefights and explosions vastly predominate, but I'm not sure if this tells me all I'd like to know about how often hand-to-hand is used to settle accounts on the field.

I can tell you from my own research on this matter that Hand-to-hand combat is largely a myth. Does it take place? Yes, but so rarely that it is of no training or doctrinal importance. The vast majority of training associated with Hand-to-Hand is emotionally based and used to build confidence.

A great many modern accounts of so called hand-to-hand are usually over dramatised or even fabricated. Paddy Griffith's and Rory Muir's work show quite clearly that bayonet fighting (as opposed to charging) was very rare in both the Napoleonic and US Civil Wars.

[selil]

I can tell you from my own research on this matter that Hand-to-hand combat is largely a myth. Does it take place? Yes, but so rarely that it is of no training or doctrinal importance. The vast majority of training associated with Hand-to-Hand is emotionally based and used to build confidence.

A great many modern accounts of so called hand-to-hand are usually over dramatised or even fabricated. Paddy Griffith's and Rory Muir's work show quite clearly that bayonet fighting (as opposed to charging) was very rare in both the Napoleonic and US Civil Wars.

The only place that I have found hand to hand combat truly exists as a daily part of life is in the corrections world. Rarely considered by law enforcement as true policing the county jail system and especially intake can often result in hand to hand combat between officers who are unarmed and different levels of armed assailants (be nice if those street officers removed the weapons). Having worked both sides of the booking counter the jail side is incredibly violent. Sorry if it is outside the scope of the discussion, but corrections is a valid example.

[William F. Owen]

The only place that I have found hand to hand combat truly exists as a daily part of life is in the corrections world. Rarely considered by law enforcement as true policing the county jail system and especially intake can often result in hand to hand combat between officers who are unarmed and different levels of armed assailants (be nice if those street officers removed the weapons). Having worked both sides of the booking counter the jail side is incredibly violent. Sorry if it is outside the scope of the discussion, but corrections is a valid example.

This is somewhat of a special case, as you concede. It is worth noting that this example is a confluence of circumstances that do not normally occur as part of operations. - However it does support one of my basic beliefs that there is some need for arrest and restraint training, and some equipment, to be given to soldiers, when dealing with civilians who require less than lethal use of force to be used against them.

[Ken White]

I've been involved in four such actions, all on a small but deadly scale and have witnessed two involving a fairly large number of combatants on both sides with bayonets and rifle butts as well as hands and feet. I know of half a dozen others involving various numbers from reliable sources.

As mentioned, aside from those incidents, I've been involved in or witnessed dozens of detainee or PW dustups where physical means had to be used to effect the capture or transport. As Wilf says, that is not hand to hand combat but it does require some training. Have a Son who is an in-service training Officer in a mid size police department and his defensive tactics classes are oriented to not using excessive force...

The hand to hand action in military combat is very much type of unit and operation dependent, no question -- but given bad circumstances it can involve anyone who serves and it is a facet of training wherein the psychological benefit to those trained is very beneficial and the skills gained are generally dire emergency items one hopes will not be used. Most will not use those skills; the few who have to will be glad they have them...

An interesting aside on this is that the current batch of 18-20 year olds in the US generally has little experience of physical contact (to include sports) and tend to be contact averse, this has caused not only the Armed forces but the Police to have to strengthen their combatives training just to counter this trend.

[selil]

An interesting aside on this is that the current batch of 18-20 year olds in the US generally has little experience of physical contact (to include sports) and tend to be contact averse, this has caused not only the Armed forces but the Police to have to strengthen their combatives training just to counter this trend.

When I went to the police academy (corrections) in Washington State I had been through Army basic training (1983) and Marine Corps Boot Camp (1984). The hand to hand combat training was much more intense in the civilian world. Almost every student in residence had formal martial arts training. This was 1987-8 though (so right at two decades distant).

From 1987 to 1993 I saw a transition from hand-to-hand to chemical reactants and "communications skills". The changing flavor was mirrored in patrol tactics as "cover and contact officer safety" and other techniques became more common place and distance for contact seemed to increase.

The changes that seem to have occurred are intriguing. Maybe I should go back and try Q school or boot again. I'm not THAT old... just fat. It would be interesting to see the differences between then and now.

[selil]

This is somewhat of a special case, as you concede. It is worth noting that this example is a confluence of circumstances that do not normally occur as part of operations. - However it does support one of my basic beliefs that there is some need for arrest and restraint training, and some equipment, to be given to soldiers, when dealing with civilians who require less than lethal use of force to be used against them.

Part of my thoughts in posting was that full spectrum operations (going back to LIC) include law enforcement activities and replacement in theater of indigenous law enforcement by military personnel (and not always by military police). Within full spectrum (over used hyperbole) operations I imagine training in corrections topics might be necessary. Considering that most operations appear to occur in highly centralized authoritarian states with minimal resources I can perceive a need for training and replacement activities as humanitarian and stability operations.

[Global Scout]

With all due respect to William Owen I don't think your research would stand up to reality. I have been involved in two hand to hand incidents in OIF, but admittedly in both cases I could have shot the enemy and have been within the ROE, but preferred not to excalate to that level in those situations.

I had a peer kill an enemy fighter in hand to hand combat after he scaled a roof and was immediate attacked by an Iraqi whose weapon jammed, there was no time for him to get his weapon ready before they were in a stand up grappling match. There was a documented case of a SF Team Sergeant in 5th Group who killed an enemy combatant in Afghanistan after a tough struggle using combatives in a building after his weapon jammed. He received a Silver Star for his actions. Of course there was the well known case when a famous military blogger captured a Stryker Bn Cdr getting shot, and then his CSM engaged in a fatal hand to hand to fight with the assailant.

The value of bayonet fighting has only been degraded in value due to the M4 rifle. That doesn't mean you still can't jam your rifle barrel into someone's throat, or deliver one hell of head butt with a kevlar helmet. My experience indicates that a situation can get out of control quick, and some basic combative skills can be very useful.

If the book "We were Soldiers once and young" is credible, and I believe it based on the character of the authors they experienced plenty of hand to hand combat in that hard fought battle. The stories of hand to hand combat in Korea are legend. Oli Mais (sp?) received a Medal of Honor for killing 11 north Koreans with an e-tool.

It is ugly fighting, nothing fancy, just scared men fighting for survival. I question a lot of the training programs I see today, especially the ones that emphasize ground fighting as though they are going to fight in the Octagon, but that is another discussion for another day.

[Timothy OConnor]

The following two books provide descriptions of hand-to-hand/CQB in Iraq. They won't provide stats on frequency but are certainly detailed.

Of the two I found House to House far more compelling and it includes a detailed description of literal hand-to-hand combat in Iraq (not only CQB w/firearms but a harrowing knife fight).

My Men Are My Heroes
http://www.amazon.com/My-Men-Are-Her.../dp/0696232367

House to House
http://www.amazon.com/House-David-Be.../dp/1416574719

[William F. Owen]

The following two books provide descriptions of hand-to-hand/CQB in Iraq.

Hand-to-hand and CQB are two different types of action.

Hand-to-hand is the attempted use of lethal force, within arms reach, with or without firearms. It is very rare, and even more so, as part of planned action.

CQB is merely the close application of fire arms or hand thrown and projected HE. Generally characterised at under 25m and engagement windows of 2-5 seconds. This does occur on a regular enough basis that it requires training.

[Timothy OConnor]

Hand-to-hand and CQB are two different types of action.

Yup, that's why I included both in the description

Hand-to-hand is the attempted use of lethal force, within arms reach, with or without firearms. It is very rare, and even more so, as part of planned action.

CQB is merely the close application of fire arms or hand thrown and projected HE. Generally characterised at under 25m and engagement windows of 2-5 seconds. This does occur on a regular enough basis that it requires training.

Yup, and for those who have been involved in the real thing that might well be an academic distinction without a difference.

But seriously, there's certainly a gray area. As the actual combat veterans decribe in the two books I reference above one man's CQB action...is another man's hand-to-hand action...is another man's confusion. A small unit such as a squad contained entirely within a single building can experience all within moments with some engaged in actual fisticuffs Captain Kirk-style (but more violent and bloody) while others are engaged in "firefights" through/around walls and yet others, just mere feet away, are left wondering what's going on.

As Ken and others have pointed out law enforcement and detainee situations are probably more likely to result in actuall hand-to-hand combat.

A friend who served in the U.S. army once engaged in what he described as "Roman-style" massed-combat against rioting Cuban refugees (I believe it was in Panama). His unit was given riot shields and clubs but were denied their firearms. The Cubans were armed with sharpened metal stakes/poles taken from their bunks and tents.

He and his comrades waded into the Cuban mob shoulder-to-shoulder with shields virtually touching. Soldiers in the front rank did their best to swing their clubs (difficult in the scrum) while those behind stommped on Cubans who had fallen and were overrun by his unit. My friend was stabbed in the lower gut when a "spear" got under his vest. To this day he suffers repeated hernias from the wound and now guards Federal buildings in DC (virtual desk duty). Both sides suffered horrible wounds in a very concentrated area. He said the carnage was just terrible.

[Presley Cannady]

The following two books provide descriptions of hand-to-hand/CQB in Iraq. They won't provide stats on frequency but are certainly detailed.

Of the two I found House to House far more compelling and it includes a detailed description of literal hand-to-hand combat in Iraq (not only CQB w/firearms but a harrowing knife fight).

Thanks, I'll get my hands on these as soon as possible. I'm definitely looking for anecdotes, but more importantly I'm trying to determine how frequent CQB is in the era of firearms and warfare at range. As I understand it, the last time CQB played an important role in the age of rifle infantry was the Boshin War.