Hybrid Warfare (merged thread)

[William F. Owen]

I know both Doug MacGregor and Frank Hoffman, extremely well and have immense respect for both men - and I don't give that out lightly

Like most men I respect, I do not agree with all they say, but Doug hits the nail on the head with this one.

The IDF has made close examination of Hoffman's work, but they have very different ideas, that do no equate to "Hybrid". For the IDF Gaza and Lebanon are State v State warfare the civilians to be protected are their own. The fact that the enemy does not posses armoured brigades is utterly irrelevant - as it should be. There is no "new war". War is war and all wars are basically the same.

In my opinion "Hybrid" does serve a purpose if your Army/Services are intellectually incapable of grasping the nuance of the wider problem. It's the same justification as Manoeuvre Warfare.

[Entropy]

I need to read more on hybrid warfare, but at first glance it does not seem all that new. I've been reading Roman (Republic) history lately and it seems to me they would be quite familiar with the concept of "hybrid warfare" if not the terminology.

Col.(ret) Macgregor said above:

In addition, the IDF embraced the use of armor, artillery and fuel air explosive in the conduct of urban operations with the object of minimizing the exposure of dismounted IDF troops to enemy fire. While the Hamas enemy may qualify as one of Frank Hoffman's hybrids, the IDF wasted no time in fighting for hearts and minds because the IDF knows there are none to win in the Islamic World.

He goes on to say that the IDF got it tactically and operationally right in the recent Hamas war. I agree with that to an extent, but Hamas' incompetence and mistakes, and the IDF's limited operational objectives (they didn't go "downtown" to root out hidden Hamas fighters/leadership) were factors as well.