X vs X Table: 0GW - 2GW | 3GW - 5GW | 0GW - 5GW

"First generation warfare reflects tactics of the era of the smoothbore musket, the tactics of line and column. These tactics were developed partially in response to technological factors — the line maximized firepower, rigid drill was necessary to generate a high rate of fire, etc.— and partially in response to social conditions and ideas, e.g., the columns of the French revolutionary armies reflected both the élan of the revolution and the low training levels of conscripted troops. Although rendered obsolete with the replacement of the smoothbore by the rifled musket, vestiges of first generation tactics survive today, especially in a frequently encountered desire for linearity on the battlefield. Operational art in the first generation did not exist as a concept although it was practiced by individual commanders, most prominently Napoleon."

"Second generation warfare was a response to the rifled musket, breechloaders, barbed wire, the machinegun, and indirect fire. Tactics were based on fire and movement, and they remained essentially linear. The defense still attempted to prevent all penetrations, and in the attack a laterally dispersed line advanced by rushes in small groups. Perhaps the principal change from first generation tactics was heavy reliance on indirect fire; second generation tactics were summed up in the French maxim, "the artillery conquers, the infantry occupies." Massed firepower replaced massed manpower. Second generation tactics remained the basis of U.S. doctrine until the 1980s, and they are still practiced by most American units in the field."

"The first generation of war grew not just from the invention of gunpowder but also from the political, economic, and social structures that developed as Europe transitioned from a feudal system to a system of nation-states ruled by monarchs...
Massed manpower had been the rule in ancient Greece and Rome and had even been a major part of war during the Middle Ages. However, the combination of changes across society provided the much larger armies and massed direct-fire weapons that marked the culmination of the first generation of war at Waterloo."

"Several key factors normally associated with second-generation war (2GW) drove the supremacy of the defense over the offense: machine guns, magazine-fed rifles, rapid-fire artillery, and barbed wire. The combined effect of these elements took away freedom of movement and forced both sides to rely on firepower--mostly indirect firepower--in tactical engagements."

"

• example: Napoleonic War


• characteristic: mass armies


• method of fighting: man-to-man

1GWs, like the Napoleon Wars, were extremely fluid. Armies could march whenever men’s feet could carry them. Information was relatively symmetrical — precise locations of either army were unavailable to any commander, while general knowledge of the land was known to all commanders....1GW was defined by conflict centered around an enemy’s ability to decide and act. "

"

• example: First World War


• characteristic: mass armies


• method of fighting: fixed-artillery-to-men

2GWs, like the First World War, were sticky. Armies took marched, drove, or took trains to the front line — where they stopped. In 2nd Generation War, action is easy: charge. You know exactly where you are, exactly where the enemy is, and exactly where you are going to die...2GW was defined by conflict centered around an enemy’s ability to orient and decide."

"While it is true that 1GW forces had a bit more observational capability — reconnaissance capability — ..., one’s own scouts or the spies in an enemy’s encampment would have been greatly limited in what they could observe and report.  In the first place, their reports would have been old news by the time they were received by one’s generals — perhaps months old in the case of espionage activity; perhaps days old if movement from the enemy forces to one’s own force (to report) required days.  Individual movements on the battlefield once battle had commenced would be too chaotic, ever-shifting, man-to-man, making the scout relatively useless.  Furthermore, a limited range weapon must still be targeted, and targeting elements behind the enemy lines — or beyond the range of those weapons — would have been relatively useless.  In the case of limited long-range capabilities, the targeting mechanisms then in use were relatively primitive; it was enough if the cannonball or shell hit somewhere the enemy was if it hit behind the front line."

"2GW observational capabilities were improved by speed of communication as well as targeting of weaponry. The telegraph and railway sped up long-range communications, and rifles and artillery had better aim as well as better reach. Primitive air forces also increased, and sped up, observational capabilities.  Greater fire power in artillery and aerial bombings meant that one could more accurately target more enemies whenever one used these things (unlike, say, a cannonball in the previous generation that might have hit nothing when it fell or only one or a handful of enemies. I.e., increased destruction capability actually helped limit the need to know an exact enemy placement.)"

"It seems to be that “G” measures the kinetic intensity of conflict, which every new G being approximately 20 times less intense than the one below it.

This holds up under a first analysis. Pre-Modern Warfare (the Zeroth Generation of Modern Warfare, “0GW,” about 0Gs) is unremittingly genocidal. If the AD 1900s had the same fatality-from-war rate as the 6000s BC, we should have seen something like two billion war deaths. We might say that form the dawn of man to the dawn of agriculture war meant from measuring around 0.1 Gs on the kinetic intensity scale to .9 Gs.

Or think of it another way: 0G Warfare focuses on ending an enemy’s ability to fight by killing their men."

"The first generation, or 1GW, emphasizes concentration-of-soldiers. The most famous 1GW was the Napoleonic Wars, where the commander who could throw the most soldiers at the decisive point would in the war. "

"The second generation, or 2GW, emphasizes concentration-of-force. The most famous 2GW was the western front of World War I, where the force that could concentrate the most artillery and explosive power at one point could win the day. Both 1GW and 2GW are made possible by reducing your fog of war, so that you know where your soldiers (1GW) or artillery (2GW) should go."

"Steve Pampinella, a friend of this blog, sent me a link to a very solid article, which wonders [if] the African Wars should be considered as part of the fourth generation of modern war (4GW)....

The short answer is No, the African wars are not 4GW. The African wars tend not to be state-centered, but that is because they are before-the-state, not after-the-state...Africa’s wars are pre-modern wars, or “0GW.” "

"1GW Operative Action: Organization and concentration of mass to move toward or from key points on the field of battle.

Hannibal to Napoleon, the great captains of history knew the key to victory lay in attacking into and from, or holding, the key points of the battlefield. To do this most effectively, they organized their army, and the force represented by its mass, in order to most effectively and efficiently accomplish this. The organization and placement of mass in 1GW puts it just to the left of Boom on the continuum."

"2GW Operative Action: Destruction of an opponent’s mass in order to weaken the opponent to the point that resistance is impossible.

As the “King of the Battlefield” artillery ruled the muddy trenches of World War 1, just as air power shattered any resistance inside the “Kill Box” of the First Gulf War, and with the “Shock and Awe” of the Second Gulf War. Both are examples of the 2GW effort to cause enough direct attrition of enemy forces that the opponent is unable to organize and concentrate its mass, becoming unable to effectively resist. However, without the kinetic action the attrition does not occur. This places 2GW just to the right of the Boom."

"2GW defeats 1GW because, 1) 2GW forces can advance at multiple points, with some autonomy for the individual units, and 2) massed artillery is quite capable of dispersing the kinetic attacks on the field of battle."

"0GW is the heading for genocidal/survival warfare. Individuals fight for themselves and for the right of their line to survive."

"1GW encompasses projection of force to and from key geographical postions. The Spartans and Persians at Thermopylae is a good example of this as are the campaigns of Hannibal and many other battles from antiquity to modern times."

"2GW covers doctrines of attrition, where force is used to degrade the physical ability of the enemy to oppose you by direct force. Agincourt is a prime example of this but so are many battles in the American Civil War, WW1 and WW2."

"0 (Base) Gradient - Darwinian Warfare - 0GW

Confrontation and Conflict at its most basic level is an expression of natural selection. This genetic imperative is the principle behind any doctrine that is essentially the projection of Force for the survival of an individual organism.

Note: Howard Bloom argues in The Lucifer Principle that ideas/memes act in the same manner."

"First Gradient - Cooperative Warfare - 1GW

Cooperative warfare doctrines are based upon the principle of creating organizations that require the individual to surrender control to the group in order to project Force to accomplish goals that are necessary to the survival of the group."

"Second Gradient - Attrition Warfare - 2GW

The Principle behind attrition warfare describes doctrines that use the strength of the attacker to target the strength of the opponent."