Form: Quote Commentary

(FB 1549400841 Timestamp) —“These guys don’t recognize the civil rights movement as an example of 4GW. They are all picking up the wrong historical examples to argue the point that “we can’t win.” … They aren’t seeing the new battle space, so they are getting it wrong. … A post comparing and contrasting examples of 4GW with earlier forms of conflict might be goods for a lot of us.”— Daniel Roland Anderson

(FB 1549369098 Timestamp) —“bruh you wanna take on the world’s only superpower with dudes in pickup trucks​”— Hmmmm… you mean, that superpower that is 0 wins and 4 losses against guys with 80 IQ’s in flip flops? And we can’t do better on our own turf? Maybe you’ve had your head somewhere other than in the present moment, but we’ve failed in Afghanistan, failed in Syria, and we failed in Iraq. We didn’t fail because of our generals or our soldiers. Or because of our advanced weaponry. Or because of our billions of investment. We failed because Combined Arms warfare cannot defeat domestic militia playing institutional and infrastructure attrition warfare. (Which is why we are teaching courses on 4GW at the institute, by people who do so for our own forces. ) You don’t take on the superpower. You take advantage of the fact that you can be everywhere, and combined arms military cannot be. You never fight the military. You fight the infrastructure. There is a reason the muslims were able to conquer the ancient world. And why they are so hard to conquer today. The religion is one of continuous warfare and a warfare conducted by continuous cumulative raids that collapse infrastructure, civil order, economy and popular and political will to resist. The difference is, if you see our new constitution it is very hard to disagree with it OTHER than voluntary disassociation (that will make the minority left freak.) The rest will see the rather obvious benefits that are reforms impossible under the current political order. Therefore the objective is to make such a civil war sufficiently believable that it is unnecessary, or short, and that the military prefers taking control of the government over conducting a domestic civil war that it cannot win. (I’m a lot smarter than you are. I promise.)