Talk:Special Combat Aggressive Reactionary System

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Special Combat Aggressive Reactionary System article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This page was proposed for deletion by Dwanyewest (talk · contribs) on 15 February 2010 with the comment:
lack of notability and reliable third person sources
It was contested by Janggeom (talk · contribs) on 16 February 2010 with the comment:
a brief search appears to show reliable sources

Untitled

If ayone sees fit to eliminate sections from this article, please exaplin why. --David3565 00:46, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to touch it - for now - but the "criticisms" section is rather POV, and could use a source of reference. --Mista-X 01:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The "pro" side needs expansion and someone who is in the MA community could provide more detail, as I can't vouch for anything beyond what the section presents, hence the lack of detail.

--David3565 16:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This paragraph is very confusing and I'm guessing it would be to others:

According to official Naval Special Warfare documents obtained through the FOIA, stated on 03/03/98 that the Advanced NSW Combat Fighting Course (CFC) was recommended for cancellation due to the fact, "...that the 30-day Advanced Combat Fighting Course was no longer utilized by the components; it has been 2-years since the the course has been run. Generally, the components can't lose someone for the 30-days that the course runs."

I gather it's supposed to explain the reason why it was cancelled from the Navy SEALS... Is it supposed to be saying that the SEALS didn't need the H2H and that 30 days took too much time? --Mista-X 08:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm uncertain you can infer that the course was not needed from that statement alone. We don't know what politics or lack thereof played a hand in the decision to scrub the program. What I find curious is after a letter of promugation was issued, 4-years later the course was cancelled. It may well be ego's played a hand in the process. The following is written by Navy SEAL LCDR Mark D. Divine at NavySEALs.com

Peterson modified San Soo Kung Fu into his "Special Combat Aggressive Reactionary System ("SCARS") and sold it the NSW as a complete combat fighting system. It was a pretty decent program - I participated in the 2nd 30 day intensive instructor course and I can validate that it is a very effective offensive fighting system. Jerry's problem was his ego and inflexibility. Also there were people in NSW who thought it should be an internal program and not external. So hand to hand training at the Schoolhouse level (as opposed to informal) was brought into the Naval Special Warfare Center Advanced Training and is now called the Combat Fighting Course and is taught as part of Close Quarter Battle training.

As for the '30-day' issue, that very well could be a legitimate concern. Perhaps, more so in a post 9/11 world where special operators are needed more than ever. --Kungfoolss 10:11, 26 November 2006