Quote Originally Posted by Cavguy View Post
Personally, I'm happy to let 4GW as a concept die (and all the GW's). It's bad history, bad theory, and not really useful other than as a metaphor for "not conventional war". Plus the whole 2GW/3GW construct is a bludgeon of Lind's own construction and not really reflective of practice.
The key point of the 4GW theory that almost always gets buried in discussions about the UW/COIN/FID/Small Wars methods that are used and not used is that the theory is based upon the idea of WHO fights and WHY they fight. That is the part that is different and is also the part that is most often overlooked. I believe it is useful from the stand point that it shows the most likely enemies around the world both known and developing. And they are likely to be based upon Race,Religion and Language not some traditional nation-state-political motivation..