5GW: A Free-for-all of surprise destruction

I like almost everything about this summary of 5GW from David Axe:

How to Win a Fifth-Generation War | Danger Room from Wired.com
But the next generation of war — the so-called “fifth-generation” — wont feature armies or clear ideas. It will be what U.S. Army Major Shannon Beebe, the top intel officer for Africa, calls a “vortex of violence,” a free-for-all of surprise destruction motivated more by frustration than by any coherent plans for the future.

the only thing is the ending. It should be motivated by a coherent plan for the future.

5GW, that secretwar of hidden movements, relies on a waterfall development model, whether it is a state exporting 5GW, a state conducting 5GW against itself, or insurgents fighting a state with 5GW.

3 thoughts on “5GW: A Free-for-all of surprise destruction”

  1. All of a sudden we’re drowning in a sea of 5GW links! [1,2,3,4,5]

    I especially like Aherring’s take [6]:

    Speaking for myself, I understand what Lexington Green is getting at, and I agree with him in part. I think what dismays me the most is that I feel like I am forced to defend my work in 5GW and XGW not on its merits (a process that I look forward to because it forces me personally to learn and grow as well as improve and grow my work), but because my work is uncomfortably close enough (or at least assumed to be) to somebody else’s theory, that it is attacked merely for its existence or because it appears to deviate from the orthodoxy. I’m not trying to step on Lind or the Generations of Modern Warfare model or dig up somebody else’s private patch. In truth I owe a lot to GMW, Lind, Hammes and others because they introduced me to a a group of thinkers and a discussion that has kept me interested, thinking and growing for several years now…

    XGW was created not only to be a tool that serves to categorize doctrines, but also to offer solutions for responses to the doctrines of opponents both in conflict and in confrontation (in the sense of conflict and confrontation from Rupert Smith’s The Utility of Force). It is intended to be clear and dynamic in its ability to expand and adapt. It also includes not only a fifth gradient, but goes farther back to define the basis of confrontation and conflict at 0GW, and demands that the potential of a sixth gradient must exist. Its predecessor, the Generations of Modern Warfare model (GMW), shows a historical context for trinitarian warfare and suggests what future warfare may become but does not offer answers for non-trinitarian confrontation or suggest solutions to problems. In GMW, 4GW encompasses all possible future forms of warfare short of a singularity.

    From Michael’s link:

    Light didn’t die in New Black Towers. It was changed into a new, secret language. Most peoples’ eyeballs couldn’t read that language, but the people who lived there could.


    [1] http://purpleslog.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/draft-shadows-of-5gw-the-default-american-pov-has-become-a-leftist-pov/
    [2] http://purpleslog.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/my-suggestion-for-chapters-for-fifth-generation-warfare-5gw-book/
    [3] http://soobdujour.blogspot.com/2009/01/david-axe-on-5gw.html
    [4] http://www.dreaming5gw.com/2009/01/building_a_framework_the_premi.php
    [5] http://cominganarchy.com/2009/01/06/towards-a-general-xgw-framework/
    [6] http://zenpundit.com/?p=2987#comment-10015

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *