Robb's response, and I think the underlying point to all of this: "I believe that global guerrillas will not collapse the West any more than the Internet collapsed Microsoft's monopoly. Their emergence will, however, *change* things. Don't think Vietnam. Think Israel."
Every armchair strategist talks about playing for keeps, but I believe there is no such thing in the world we currently live in. No ideological enemy can be destroyed; even dominance is not a victory. If this is true, it's not an outright condemnation of military solutions to political/cultural/economic conflicts, but it greatly reduces the scope of military solutions that make sense for a state actor.
All Comments
---
Sorry for getting meta, but Robb's writings on asymmetric warfare and 4GW (Fourth-Generation Warfare) are thought-inspiring stuff.
Here's his blog:
http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/
From the other side, here's a convincing criticism of the glorification of 4GW:
http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/weblog/archives2...
Robb's response, and I think the underlying point to all of this: "I believe that global guerrillas will not collapse the West any more than the Internet collapsed Microsoft's monopoly. Their emergence will, however, *change* things. Don't think Vietnam. Think Israel."
Every armchair strategist talks about playing for keeps, but I believe there is no such thing in the world we currently live in. No ideological enemy can be destroyed; even dominance is not a victory. If this is true, it's not an outright condemnation of military solutions to political/cultural/economic conflicts, but it greatly reduces the scope of military solutions that make sense for a state actor.