The discussion of what Strategic-Operational-Tactical capabilities will be needed to fight the next war(s) is one based on perspective. Just what is meant by the 'the next war' and 'future war(s)' is not something easliy grasped.

Are we talking about peer (or near peer) conflict for hegemonic or hemispheric domination?

Or is it peer vs peer (peer refering to nation state) regional dominance, a conflict based on political and resource controls in a limited area capable of being confined to a particular region?

Or is it a conflict against a rouge state of moderate but inferior means such as Iran or Pakistan in relation to the U.S.?

Or is it a humanitarian conflict based on stabilizing and reconstructing a failed, failing state or region, such as seen in West Africa?

Or is it a conflict fought against transnational terrorist?

Does the future of conflict involve bits of all these?

Most Dangerous COA: it would seem obvious that a HIC involving peer to peer fighting such as China vs U.S. would be the most devestating, but perhaps the simpler of conflicts. It is doubtful that an invasion by large ground forces in order to conquer then stabilize and reconstruct would be involved. The target of this type of war would be to destroy the others capacity to wage offensive war and it would span many spectrums from electronic to economic as well as space and sea. Basically all other conflicts would pale in comparison. This type of conflict would change history for better or worse.

Most Likely COA: a LIC that revloves around stabilizing and reconstructiing a failed or failing state or region. The reason for intervention could be to prevent the growth of a transnational terrorist base, the need for stability to maintian the flow of precious natural resources (oil, bauxite etc) or a combination of both. This conflict requires a more nuanced approach as it is very likely to be done on the cheap, with limited resources across the board and with a coalition of various often competing international partners. Further direct combat operations would need to be kept to a minimum in a more 'hearts and minds' operation.

The two conflicts are vastly different and require different means. It reminds me of an arguement we used to have at AWS: what do you train for HIC with the intent that you can always ramp down to fight LIC or vice versa? Whixh is harder? What skills are the same and which are different. For one you don't have to seal off a battlefield to collect evidence in HIC.

-T