Here is my take on the worst of 4GW: It reinforces the commonly held belief that history is uniform and linear. First this, then that, now we're here and proceeding on to over there. It's that Hegelian/Marxist hangover causing the consternation. I've just read the first couple of chapters of Hammes' book recently and I keep waiting for him to qualify things more tightly and he has not so far....does he in the end? Timelines don't determine the nature of things, the culture does. I mean one nation state may be fighting a 3GW while a Al Q may be fighting a 4GW and other nations are doing 6GW--whatever that might be... Eurostyle Nye soft power or something? Why is this a problem? In his effort to keep it simple he's misleading. Simple is not harmful, but misleading is. The above posts insisting that it is only in modern warfare seems to have missed my attempt to find that in Hammes' Sling and the Stone.

In order to clarify it more correctly perhaps we should talk more about why an entity like a state or a group, fight the way they do. I think Van Creveld did this to a degree and I would recommend John Linn's book Battle for a good attempt at describing how various cultures manifest their style of warfare. Either Linn or Herodotus! Linn is not hung up on a progressive timeline, but rather discusses the nature of a culture. Interesting similarities appear then, across cultures, not governed by the date but rather more determined by their cultural aspects. He explicitly takes on Victor Davis Hanson.

Once a reader is out of the linear mode, one begins to see that cultures have their own characteristics and that will determine how they will conduct war. Then, with that in mind political leaders and senior military planners begin with examining cultural manifestations in order to understand their adversary's "Clausewitzian Trinity." In other words, for starters....what is the war worth to them and at what point might they consider negotiating or capitulating (depending upon what you seek to achieve). At that point we could get away from technology or Slings and Stones and begin to understand the nature of the war - not the weaponry.

The world does not march in lock step along generational or linear paths. Its messy and I think they gave up clarity in their narrative when some of the 4GW apostles attempt their misleading simplicity.

By the by, I would commend the original Boyd to people. Even HIS OODA loop, not the way its taught in the war college stuff I took, but his discussions hold up well I believe. I did not know about some of his students coming in after him and appending things though...

This is an interesting thread. Very illuminating to this AF guy who believed thinking Marines began and ended with Ellis!