It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
If traditional war centered on an enemy's physical strength, and 4GW on his moral strength, the 5th Generation of War would focus on his intellectual strength. A 5th Generation War might be fought with one side not knowing who it is fighting. Or even, a brilliantly executed 5GW might involve one side being completely ignorant that there ever was a war. It's like the old question of what was the perfect robbery: we will never know, because in a perfect robbery the bank would not know that it was robbed.
Originally posted by Aeons
An example of 5GW done slow and focused mainly on economics: China's foreign policies. Explicitly.
Reducing one's opponent, the book notes, can be accomplished in a number of ways other than direct military confrontation. The book notes that these alternative methods "have the same and even greater destructive force than military warfare, and they have already produced serious threats different from the past and in many directions for...national security."
Lawfare, or political action through transnational or non-governmental organizations can effect a policy change that would be impossible otherwise. Because of the international nature of the modern world and activism, it is much easier for nation-states to affect policy in other nation-states through a proxy.
Owing to the interconnected nature of global economics, nations can inflict grievous harm on the economies of other nations without taking any offensive action.
One of the better-known alternatives in this book is the idea of attacking networks. Networks are increasingly important in not only data exchange but also transportation, financial institutions, and communication. Attacks that disable networks can easily hamstring large areas of life that are dependent on them for coordination. One example of network warfare would be shutting down a network that supplies power. If there is a significant failure in the power grid caused by the attack, massive power outages could result, crippling industry, defense, medicine, and all other areas of life.
Another famous instance of Unrestricted Warfare policy is terrorism. Terrorism is used by a group to gain satisfaction for certain demands. Even if these demands are not satisfied, a terrorist attack can have vastly disproportionate effects on national welfare. One only has to look at the economic crisis that followed the terrorist attacks against the United States, or the extensive security measures put in place after those same attacks. Terrorism erodes a nation's sense of security and well being, even if the direct effects of the attacks only concern a minute percentage of the population.
As the authors state, the new range of options combined with the rising cost (both political and financial) of waging traditional warfare results in the rising dominance of the new alternatives to traditional military action. A state that does not heed these warnings is in dire shape.
Originally posted by impressme
The real reason the government wants NDAA, SOPA because they turned on their own people by committing the crime of the century (911) on American citizens and blamed several innocent countries for the attacks as evidence proves this.
A 5th Generation War might be fought with one side not knowing who it is fighting.
These partners (often morally ambivalent markets), will put heavy pressure on the target state to resolve the crisis...the blame for sustained systems disruption typically rebounds onto the state itself.
Originally posted by brokedown
It would appear to me the 5 Generation Warfare model is leveling warfare capabilities back in to the hands of the citizen.
No longer will the citizen have to face a giant with a sling shot.
Since the only legitimate role of Government is the protection of liberty and freedom of its citizens along with the defending from an invasion, 5GW would appear as a serious threat to a Government out of control.
Take for example terrorism. Almost every state worth its weight in military tonnage, knows that by acknowledging the struggle the enemy tries to get attention to, they in effect give them a place to wage their war. If it is separatists for example, by acknowledging them as being wrong you take the position at the other end of the cannon. If you simply denounce their tactics, which is usually the real issue, you force them into your battle ground. Political discourse and diplomatic negotiation. A world scene out on display with rules of conduct on both sides. It is not naive to rely on your community (planet earth) to help and bring reason and order.
Some of the tensions with ethnicity are being provoked through social engineering that is disrespectful, and packaged with economic agreements in such a way that I have to wonder if certain governments / super-governments are intentionally looking to cause a breakdown or if they are just that stupid.
The things they are pushing happen naturally and particularly are driven naturally in a trade economy without need to directly tie them to social immigration policies that are not respectful and encourage cultural-less states. Cultural-less states are weak. People inherently know this, and fight back.
The fact is its going to snowball anytime soon, perhaps that it why the Obama administration order all FEMA camps to be open and in full operation because they expect chaos any time soon.
Originally posted by Frater210
reply to post by Aeons
Yes, that is why they are desperate to understand narrative. I am harping on that because it must be considered as the primary method used at the front line of assault on civilian populations. It concerns you and I and everyone.
Network-centric warfare, also called network-centric operations, is a military doctrine or theory of war pioneered by the United States Department of Defense in the 1990's.
It seeks to translate an information advantage, enabled in part by information technology, into a competitive advantage through the robust networking of well informed geographically dispersed forces. This networking—combined with changes in technology, organization, processes, and people—may allow new forms of organizational behavior.
Specifically, the theory contains the following four tenets in its hypotheses:
A robustly networked force improves information sharing;
Information sharing enhances the quality of information and shared situational awareness;
Shared situational awareness enables collaboration and self-synchronization, and enhances sustainability and speed of command; and
These, in turn, dramatically increase mission effectiveness.
Well implemented networking can contribute to improved effectiveness in other ways. One such technique is 'self synchronisation' which permits 'directive control'. Rather than micromanage a warfighting asset with close control via a command link tether, warfighters are given significant autonomy, defined objectives, and allowed to take the initiative in how they meet these objectives.
Salaried employees aren't tenable for many reasons to most players on this board. So, there's a burgeoning new market for 5GW web mercs.
Just as independent contractors are now favored in the market over dedicated employees; so 5GW mercs are perhaps now being contracted out by various entities to obtain their objective (opinion persuasion) by any means at their disposal.
Originally posted by Frater210
reply to post by mistermonculous
'Web-Mercs', just what we need.
If I plant those flowers day after day and flat out tell him along with all my neighbors who like flowers "we will outlast you", he might have fun for a while, but eventually he will have to deal with everyone who stands by me. It won't be worth it after some time, and more importantly he won't change our tradition of keeping flowers in our front yard. If I gave in and the next and the next, he wins. This way we win.