The author mentions the DoD concept of information operations, answering affirmatively.

Is activism warfare?

The author alludes to the White House at "war" with liberal activism. Also, the author makes reference to "low intensity conflict." Again, the answer is affirmative.

Are domestic law enforcement operations warfare?

Drawing parallels between domestic law enforcement and foreign counter-insurgency, the author again answers affirmatively.

Summing up the blog post, the author confutes "conflict" with "war" further by considering how expanding populations, resource conflict, homicide, and even super-empowered individuals -- "from Al Gore to Vladimir Putin to Hugo Chavez to George Bush" to the individual on the ground -- may ultimately be responsible for the outcomes of many conflicts. However, quoting a blog comment left elsewhere by "Smitten Eagle", the blog author promises a follow-up post which would tie the Uncertainty Principle into the consideration (given the large scope of so many actors involved in conflict?)

I agree 100% that 5GW is an event horizon for warfare theory—it’s where war merges with everything else, where things become so radically different that the old theory is more of a hinderance than a help. (Thirtyseven commenting at Skilluminati Research)

Seizing upon the idea that 5GW will be an "event horizon for warfare theory", Dan tdaxp agrees, "with one change: 5GW is the event horizon, beyond which the xGW framework breaks down as violence is dispersed and action indirect enough that the study of war becomes the study of politics."

A lively discussion ensues, during which William Lind's "generations of modern warfare" (GMW) -- an important precursor to study of 5GW -- is distinguished from "xGW", to which 5GW belongs. 0GW - 5GW are more properly seen to exist through the framework of xGW than through Lind's GMW.

“5th Generation “holistic” warfare requires a coherent global security strategy that places its primary emphasis on nurturing legitimate governance everywhere. Only legitimate governments can be effective at internal security against the minority seeking to be terrorists

<snip>

“5th Generation warfare is total war through total engagement, and it demands that the first priority be on both homeland education and infrastructure, followed by very high investments in global peaceful preventive measures (what Joe Nye calls ‘soft power’), with narrowly focused military intervention being a last resort.....”

Technological Singularity Track -- 5GW marks where "the human body becomes the limitation"; 6GW will occur when humans have replaced their human body (except for brain?) with technology; and 7GW will occur "when brains are made obsolete by machines".

OODA Loop Track -- With consideration of Dan tdaxp's xGW & OODA mapping: "The human decision cycle becomes irrelevant." Presumably, this will apply to 7GW, previously described.

Said systems disruption, and the Global Guerrilla dynamic, are called fifth-generation warfare. Scenarios involving the Ukraine, Georgia, and Russia are considered:

The answer is similar to the approach used by Ukraine when faced with a similar level of economic pressure earlier this year. In that crisis, Russia tried to cut-off supplies of natural gas to the Ukraine while at the same time pumping natural gas through pipelines that ran through the country. Of course, the Ukrainians naturally siphoned off the gas they needed from Russia's european customers. These customers quickly forced Russia to resolve the crisis.

Such methods may work to influence the target down a pre-determined path (in this case, retreat?)

John Robb suggests systempunkt attacks; system disruption could coerce Russia to back down: This approach would not be 5GW, but 4GW (even though John Robb has called it fifth-generation), for two reasons:

1. "Directly hiring terrorists / mercenaries to carry out the operation may be old school very shortly. It allows too much opportunity for tracing the activity back to the employer, threatens the very secrecy necessary for running a successful 5GW operation."
2. "Again, we have the standard GG and 4GW ‘negativity’ approach, of merely: disruption, chaos, confusion, destruction. 5GW may indeed use these things, but the ultimate goal is not so much systempunkt as the creation of new orders that will continue to operate long after the 5GW force has finished its operations."

The post continues with a consideration of how micropowers, which seem to be forming on the world stage, may be setting the stage for 5GW. First, they are too small to directly attack (by whatever means, kinetic or non-kinetic) much larger nations; retaliations would be swift and probably decisive. Second, the "power" in "micropowers" may translate to a great capacity for influence if not control on the world stage: thus, a 5GW paradigm which greatly differs from pre-5GW paradigms.