A) Technology is a tool and has nothing to do with the generational level of an organization. That is determined by the doctrine applied to the technology.

B) Fabius Maximus, to defeat a 4GW opponent, ideally would require a 5GW organization. Each generation of warfare is by definition designed to defeat the generation before.

4GW theory tells us what the US Army is slowly, very slowly, learning in Iraq and Afghanistan about the nature and methods of those we fight. Of course, this is nothing that could not have been learned in 1991 by spending a few bucks and buying Martin van Creveld’s book Transformation of War.

Perhaps the blood of the 4,000+ dead Coalition and NATO troops will accelerate the leaning process at our Dept of Defense.

Now we need someone to take it to the next step and tell us how to win against a 4GW opponent. Hopefully before we’re fighting them in Mexico. Or LA.

Fame and glory awaits that smart guy or gal.

It’s still a very overt action and sounds more like systems disruption (global guerrilla/4GW.)

If one could gradually infiltrate a nations media and “infect” it with very subtle elements or “packages” of misinformation (or even slanted information) I think you’d be looking at 5GW.

2GW is 1GW with forts. The losers to the Qin used 1GW and 2GW. The Qin used 3GW, so did the Parthians 300bc-300ad; so did Caesar in the Gallic wars and the Civil war; so did the Crusaders (see the first battle of Ramleh where Baldwin and 261 Knights destroyed an Arab army of 10,000). The Vikings conquered by lightning swift attacks. Except for Sicily and perhaps the Danelaw, they were not much good at holding territory already conquered. Holding territory after a 3GW conquest is what 4GW is all about. 4GW wars start when 3GWs end and usually last at least a century and some, like the British invasion of Ireland in the 900s, have lasted over a thousand years.

One doesn’t ever know if a 4GW war has been won. But you know you have lost if you are forced to leave. 4GW is a PR war; hearts and minds stuff; it is old hatreds, fanatics, and mysticism – any excuse for killing.

Having survived the tyranny of the Baathist Sunni minority for decades and yet again outlasted (assuming it comes to that) the most powerful military on the planet I have my doubts that the Arab Iraqi Shiites are just going to lay down for Persian domination. Any overlording on behalf of the Iranian regime might well result in the same situation they face in the Khuzistan province. Ethnic resistance. I don’t believe it’s so cut and dry.

You just realizing this? :)

I think you’d find a Roman or Hama like approach would ignite the entire region. We are not an Arab nationalist tyrant (al Assad, Hussein) but a “western invader.” I think the reaction would make our problems worse than they are now.

http://www.chicagoboyz.net/archives/002543.html

However, the real issue I raised was about minimising casualties when we are in conflict with an enemy who uses 4GW tactics. My conjecture is that a short, brutal suppression may result in fewer losses all round than a policing form of insurgency control extending over many years.

Sol,

I think your lists are worth studying, but I do not understand why they must be called “4GW.” What would be 1GW, 3GW, or even 0GW be in such a formulation?