Thank you for your excellent comment. Knowledgeable feedback like yours makes tdaxp what it is.

I want to understand your thinking more, so I have some thoughts and:

“The evolutionary changes in insurgent structure, speed of adoption of battle tactics amoung all the groups to include the Shiite militias, the constant unending evloutionary changes in IED technology and insurgent counter IED techniques is amazing to watch AND there is no common standard 4G explanation for this. This insurgency and for that matter al Qaede has moved their fight from the physical battle space to cyperspace and 4G does not talk about that shift.”

I agree with this, so far as the GW framework is technologically-neutral and “open source warfare” describes rapid shifting of technology. Indeed, my post on the Unix Philosophy [1] covered much of the same ground.

“I am amazed that many still do not believe that there is a global Sunni Salafi/Tikfiri driven global jihad.”

I agree — but this poses a problem for the book.

Remember that “global guerrillas” appear to oppose the formation of any strong government. If the jihadis actually want to replace the current apostate regimes with the beautiful Sharia, then they are not global guerrillas. Likewise, if the “global Sunni Salafi / Tikfiri driven global jihad” merely aims to weaken but not destroy or replace states, then they are not trying to implement the Sharia.

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2006/04/09/the-unix-philosophy-modularity-and-patriarchy.html
[2] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2007/02/05/working-definition-of-global-guerrillas-try-2.html

man, we could take this whole thing down, but then it'd lapse into all out war, so we'll just punk enough to benefit our agenda

“I wonder if their main goal is merely noise. I.e., a little more static, so they can move around and do whatever they like”

This may be some objective, but it's hard to see hwo they would focus on noise-creation. So perhaps one is a “gg” only as long as one focuses on means, but once one focuses on ends one is a normal terrorist or criminal?

I read all of Brave New War and Robb never defines GGs, only describes them,

Sean,

“man, we could take this whole thing down, but then it'd lapse into all out war, so we'll just punk enough to benefit our agenda”

I agree. I think Robb would answer this criticism by saying that GGs would pick up cues from the system as to whether they should push hard or not — but this leads back into the criticism of GGs-as-altruists.

I think those that doubt the book, or it's terminology should spend some time in Iraq studying the problem up close and personal. The evolutionary changes in insurgent structure, speed of adoption of battle tactics amoung all the groups to include the Shiite militias, the constant unending evloutionary changes in IED technology and insurgent counter IED techniques is amazing to watch AND there is no common standard 4G explanation for this. This insurgency and for that matter al Qaede has moved their fight from the physical battle space to cyperspace and 4G does not talk about that shift.

I am amazed that many still do not believe that there is a global Sunni Salafi/Tikfiri driven global jihad.

This book comes close to the reality in Iraq and the evolutionary changes in insurgencies that leave the realm of 4G.