I think the description of war as a contest of minds is actually quite correct. War, once it has started, becomes a contest of will, guile, cunning, perserverance and endurance.

As you say Rob - the internet now allows for cheap to free commo, with a reasonable amount of security - and this also makes for easy franchises to start up. As long as people have similar interests in mind, you can start up a group for anything. It becomes more difficult to raise funds and start up actions, because those are tangible acts.

States have never been the sole owners of violence or war. A common misperception from what I've seen. Hell, read any history before 1648 and you'll see groups of people fighting for just about any cause. I think you are right - the small groups see themselves as conducting war - and for them it is just that. It's like the war talking about "low intensity conflict" - it ain't low intensity when you are recieving fire or have rockets explode around you.

I think Robb is trying to drive home the point that the definitions of war are too narrow and need to be expanded. Since the state is losing its legitimacy in many places, and its relatively easy to start an armed group throughout the world, I think he's accentuating the original 4GW article by Lind and Co...