ninjitsu basic moves?

[Draven]

Originally Posted by sirdarksol

I don't know about the first two things (especially fighting fair), but it was most definitely about avoidance and fighting last.

Honorable combat, is not so much fighting fair but fighting period. A fight requires two, an assault or an assassination requires only one. Its a big difference between the two.

[sirdarksol]

Originally Posted by Draven

Honorable combat, is not so much fighting fair but fighting period. A fight requires two, an assault or an assassination requires only one. Its a big difference between the two.

By this point we are getting into an argument of semantics. In fact, I would say that the difference between the two is minuscule. Whether or not your opponent gets a chance to strike back, it still requires two people, the question is just whether or not the second person is aware for long enough to fight.

[John Takeshi]

Originally Posted by Unkotare

Um, there were no kamikaze used in the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Yeah there were. They hit the jeeps on the airfields, and crashed into the tankers in the bay. Believe me, I know someone who was there.

[47MartialMan]

Originally Posted by John Takeshi

It was; it was just a different cultural norm.

I know Pearl Harbor is a wretched example, because it was aimed at a US target. But look at the way the kamikazis were treated---almost like royalty/martyrs. They, according to the Japanese, died with honor. It should be noted that samurai codes of living, and Bushido, had a revival during WW2. It's very strange to Westerners, but not to those of us raised in that tradition.

Kamikazis is one thing, ninjas are another....

Ninjitsu and ninjas had not honor, fairness, etc.

They were terrorists in a nutshell

[Draven]

Originally Posted by sirdarksol

By this point we are getting into an argument of semantics. In fact, I would say that the difference between the two is minuscule. Whether or not your opponent gets a chance to strike back, it still requires two people, the question is just whether or not the second person is aware for long enough to fight.

The semantic is important however, like you and me, the yamabushi believed violence in any form was wrong. However, one must take responsibility for every action we take including inaction. So the idea of ninjitsu was the choose the lesser of evils, an overt war that pits two armies against the other, kills civilians in the process is a much heavier price then assassinating a warlord or general.

As spy they insured those who were in power stayed in power by, bringing them word of any problems. And they were also attacked themselves because, they could also insure that whoever they wanted in power would stay in power. Which began the first time ninjitsu was outlawed in Japan. But this is all extra info...

[Draven]

Originally Posted by 47MartialMan

Ninjitsu and ninjas had not honor, fairness, etc.

They were terrorists in a nutshell

I disagree with that, murderers yes but no more so then the samurai, the conscripted soldier, hell even our own military. Remember that killing makes you a killer, and one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Case in point our founding fathers, to us they are/were heros, to the British they were terrorist, in a nut shell. How you kill is important as why you kill, I have to credit the ninja with one thing. They were surgical in their method, better to cut of a finger to save the hand types, as opposed to most overt soldiers, samurai and ashigaru, who caused allot of innocent deaths for "honorable" warfare. The ninja atleast knew there was no such thing...

[Unkotare]

Originally Posted by John Takeshi

Yeah there were. They hit the jeeps on the airfields, and crashed into the tankers in the bay. Believe me.

Um, no. Obviously a number of planes crashed when they were shot down, but kamikaze weren't widely used until towards the end of the war when things were getting desperate and there were not enough trained/skilled pilots. Why waste the life of a pilot you spent alot of time and money training in the FIRST, carefully planned, battle of what could be expected to be an extended period of military hostilities?

[sirdarksol]

Originally Posted by Unkotare

Um, no. Obviously a number of planes crashed when they were shot down, but kamikaze weren't widely used until towards the end of the war when things were getting desperate and there were not enough trained/skilled pilots. Why waste the life of a pilot you spent alot of time and money training in the FIRST, carefully planned, battle of what could be expected to be an extended period of military hostilities?

Of as much importance (if not more) was a lack of fuel/ammunition. The Japanese began only fueling the planes for one-way missions because their reserve of oil was so low. In fact, it was this very lack that had drawn Japan into WWII in the first place, they wanted more resources, and hoped to take China (or at least part of it) as theirs.

[Unkotare]

Those are good points as well.

[sirdarksol]

And once again we wander off topic. Wow, we're really bad at this.

So, basic ninjitsu moves...

[Shinobi_Kokujin]

Originally Posted by sirdarksol

And once again we wander off topic. Wow, we're really bad at this.

So, basic ninjitsu moves...

i was thinking that too.

[47MartialMan]

Originally Posted by Draven

I disagree with that, murderers yes but no more so then the samurai, the conscripted soldier, hell even our own military. Remember that killing makes you a killer, and one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Case in point our founding fathers, to us they are/were heros, to the British they were terrorist, in a nut shell. How you kill is important as why you kill, I have to credit the ninja with one thing. They were surgical in their method, better to cut of a finger to save the hand types, as opposed to most overt soldiers, samurai and ashigaru, who caused allot of innocent deaths for "honorable" warfare. The ninja atleast knew there was no such thing...

I had a feeling that someone would bring up American revolutionary forces. Indeed they had seemed like terrorists to the British. However, the British were more merciless in killing civilians. Fighting for liberty is one thing, fighting by order of a Shogun or for pay is another.

[47MartialMan]

Originally Posted by sirdarksol

Of as much importance (if not more) was a lack of fuel/ammunition. The Japanese began only fueling the planes for one-way missions because their reserve of oil was so low. In fact, it was this very lack that had drawn Japan into WWII in the first place, they wanted more resources, and hoped to take China (or at least part of it) as theirs.

Indeed, they needed to grab as much as they could to ready and keep moving their military machine.

[47MartialMan]

Originally Posted by sirdarksol

And once again we wander off topic. Wow, we're really bad at this.

So, basic ninjitsu moves...

Well, if ninjitsu has so much secracy and stealth, how can any move, be it striking and blocking, be ever considered as such.

Simply, if a ninja blocked, struck, ot thrown, then these were not "exclusive" ninja moves.

[Draven]

Originally Posted by 47MartialMan

I had a feeling that someone would bring up American revolutionary forces. Indeed they had seemed like terrorists to the British. However, the British were more merciless in killing civilians. Fighting for liberty is one thing, fighting by order of a Shogun or for pay is another.

Fighting by the order of shogun was no different, then fighting for an idea. Even the idea of liberty. Kill for money, and in some cases pay means freedom within a system that only be escaped by revolution. Sorry but murder, is murder and it doesn't matter why you did it.

Ninjitsu evolved because people who didn't want to fight were forced to fight. Just as a ninja was considered scum because they would sneak around and kill people by surprise they were no different then samurai killing over slighted honor.

While I agree, we were never as bad as the Brits during our war for freedom. We where always on the diffensive, as they had to cross an ocean to fight us. Not on the side of mountain, in a small island like Japan.

But, the point which I myself am losing is this. Karate before Funakoshi, was about fighting and yes killing. Jujitsu was about killing with your bare hands and was only part of a larger system called bujitsu (literally Martial Arts). And martial means war or pretaining to warfare, there for unless it was part of the origional budo arts (Judo, Aikido, Kendo, and Karate-do) it was a purely physical art (?-jitsu). It was purely about killing on the battlefield.