Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
I know Frank Hoffman very well so I'm going to have to get on to him about this. I suspect it's the price you have to pay when writing for people like "Institutes".

How is calling a "War", "Hybrid" helpful? The US Army/USMC can't get it's head around COIN v War, or like folks here, see COIN as discrete and distinct, so why say "Hybrid."

If there is all the discussion about COIN emphasis degrading "good ole" warfighting skills, then Hybrid is really going to cause panic.

If you are any sort of professional Army you have to deal with any form of armed conflict. It's all finite and well understood. There is no mystery. Why all the agonising?
Good question! If I may be so bold, I would like to point out that if we spent less time arguing the definitions of all of these terms and deciding whether war is "hybrid" or whatever we might avoid a good 40-70% of this malarkey. What does it matter if a war is "hybrid" or where COIN fits into the big picture. They are all conflicts of one sort or another and that is what is important (as William F Owen pointed out.) This obsession with categorization is inhibiting progress. This is not to say that it is not important for us to have definitions for terms, but we should not put form over substance.

Adam L