Concepts maybe can be interpreted for modern combat. Core values can of course be applied anywhere, such as finance; at least at the metaphorical level. The basic properties of combat are extraordinarily different though. Offense of course has been prized over all else forever in war ("The best defense, is a good offense". -Clausewitz-). Defense is where you may find one major difference. Assuming of course your opponents are skilled in combat as well, you "will" have to block, parry, deflect, and possibly be expected to take damage. In a gun fight, it's more of a "wear armor, and don't get hit". Although there are training techniques on how to maximize effectiveness and survival whist injured, getting hit, or putting yourself in "harms way", is in itself a failure. You can't block a bullet or deflect a bullet. Your secondary is CQB, or "last ditch effort"; even possibly for egress. You do not use your primary or secondary weapon to repel an attack, unless you return fire (hence: "a good offense"). Although the philosophy is what's important, direct tactical advantage in a modern combat situation leans farther to a more blunt aggressive tactics versus precision killing, within a smaller time frame. If you wanted to apply the mysticism of the east to modern warfare, you'd have an easier time with economic or psychological warfare.
ďREALITY IS LIKE A STONE. TO MANY ITíS HARD AND COLD, THEY CANíT HUG IT OR EAT IT, IT ONLY FRUSTERATES THEM AND DOESNíT DO THEM MUCH GOOD. TO OTHERS ITíS STRONG AND DEPENDABLE, YOU CAN BUILD WITH IT, BUILD UPON IT, OR WORK WITH IT, ALSO USE IT TO SMASH PEOPLE IN THE FACE.Ē