I'll play the opposite side to dig a little deeper - since the role individual "global guerillas" is a central component of Robb's book.

I had to ask myself if it was just my preconceptions about "war", or maybe my mental agitation with the idea that an individual or even a small group could enter into the realm of states, or the large organizations we are now familiar with. Some valid points were made about occupation, etc. However, here I think Slapout has an advantage with his LE perspective in that perhaps he understands better the motivations of individuals better then me.

So while Robb may have used the word "war" to help Joe Public digest it, maybe what he means is that the individual or small group perceives his/their action as war - sort of a Michael Douglas (what was the name of that movie) character but perhaps with online charisma - lots of connections, a thorough IT knowledge, and a motive). It is still a challenge to the state, and to stabilization - particularly if the act generates random "copy cat" acts, or spawns a group movement. Perhaps that is the motivation, the idea that one guy says "I'll show them". These individuals can become linked in with other groups through the Internet on a global scale - look at the JFK guy who was headed to Iran. Global communications has put people who lack means in touch with people who have them - it might be a state, or it might be an wealthy individual or organization inside of a state.

Who does Joe citizen identify AQ with? Why are the Democrats able to say that to defeat terrorism we must go to Afghanistan and hunt Bin Laden? You'd think they have the cave number and sat phone #. It doesn't matter that the Democratic presiential candidates either don't understand or don't want to address the decentralized nature of the threat, they are making political capital out of it as a theme because Iraq is a political issue. Its a matter of perception and those perceptions have influence.

I think Robb reached out and grabbed the first term and he had that made the most sense and would be widely understood. I think he is tryng to start a discussion on how the world is changing and what thse conditions have enebled. I'm not much on the description of "war" as a "contest of the minds" either, but I'm willing to entertain it and see where he takes it - it may not fit in my world, but I'll massage it some for the discussion. I suspect there is going to be allot more discussion and constructive argument in regards to Robb's views. I'm a natural skeptic who asks "what is a person selling", but I think he has some useful insights.