Here is a comment he made at CPS:
One of the useful features of 5GW is that it is a reminder that war is a full spectrum conflict. However, any replacement term for 5GW should indicate what 5GW is.
My spin on 5GW has been:
1. It would normally be described as politicking.
2. However, its intent is hostile and its intent is hidden. It is this combination of hostile intent and hidden intent makes 5GW war.
3. It is a war of influence.
4. If violence is involved, it is triggered through influence and politicking that induces someone else to conduct the violence. Violence is always indirect.
I think the defining element of 5GW is deception. Any name change should reflect that.
That being said, it’s probably stuck as 5GW, especially when Dan’s book comes out.
Filed under: 5GW |