Talk:LINE (combat system)

message: Why is there a period in the title? --mav 07:30, 15 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting

message: It's probable that LINE is not taught with the described method, simply because even three hundred pounds of force directed at an opponent's face isn't going to kill reliably.  Situations of non-lethal utomobile accidents include force that exerts anywhere from eight hundred pounds of force, driving a person headfirst through a windshield, and against concrete.  Even an athletic marine trained to kill by stomping on someone's face will, at most, exacerbate blood loss and cause disfigurement and pain -- but could not kill the average healthy adult soldier with this method.
I suspect that whoever labelled this an official military text is spouting fiction in their vanity, and it's not an ego-boost that Wikipedia is here for.  A lethal manuever would be blunt force on the throat.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.115.17.73 (talk) 11:36, 11 July 2006
: So very wrong. I don't know much about physics so bare with me. In a car accident you are usually hit in the face with an airbag while it hits you with alot of force it also gives which cushions and spreads the blow across a larger surface. Non-airbag impacts such as flying through a windshield also has teh advantage of give where the glass gives out (shatters or cracks) and also spreads teh force across a larger surface. Also there are incidenst where the head is knocked back by the blow being able to reduce the damage by "rolling" with the hit. But if your head is stomped on effeciently and powerfully by a muscular soldier wearing combat boots you cant roll with the blow and most of the force is under the hell not the whole foot. This means you have force at a smaller area not being absorbed by the whole surface and that the head cant "roll" with the blow because the ground prevents this. ALso sign your comments. And powerful force to the temple is often fatal.Eno-Etile 09:37, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: The text below was deleted from the body of the article and moved to this talk page - a more appropriate location.  It was also copied above.}}
----
Response:  See the following on sources and citations:
* WP:Verify
* WP:Cite
Telling one where they can research it is not sufficient citiation.  Citing reliable sources is.  First person accounts do not meet the criteria. — ERcheck (talk) 22:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved from body of article to talk page - discussion of sources 

message: In the article it is stated LINE stands for "Linear Involuntary Neuralogical overriding Engagement". However, in the source article it is said it stands for ”Linear Infighting Neural-override Engagement”. 
So which one is correct? The first phrase also contains the incorrect word "neuralogical".
--Arny (talk) 10:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know which is "correct" but I have restored the version given in the magazine.fighttimes.com source. If other published sources give different backronyms then the article could mention those too, with their sources. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:39, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The name