Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Social and Behavioral Sciences
Generations, Waves, And Epochs: Modes Of Warfare And The Rpma, Robert J. Bunker
Generations, Waves, And Epochs: Modes Of Warfare And The Rpma, Robert J. Bunker
CGU Faculty Publications and Research
Tofflerian concepts, which have gained so much credence with the Army, are now beginning to openly influence Air Force dialogue on information-based future wars.
Ricochets And Replies: Rpma Update, Robert J. Bunker
Ricochets And Replies: Rpma Update, Robert J. Bunker
CGU Faculty Publications and Research
My article "Generations, Waves, and Epochs: Modes of Warfare and the RPMA" (Spring 1996)—which I wrote in the summer of 1995—made reference to two lesser-known theories of future warfare not debated at the time in the military journals. However, these two theories have now begun to actively influence military thinking. In order further facilitate the emerging revolution in political and military affairs (RPMA) debate within the Air Force, I'm including a synopsis and analysis of these two theories.
The Tofflerian Paradox, Robert J. Bunker
The Tofflerian Paradox, Robert J. Bunker
CGU Faculty Publications and Research
Given the issue's importance—the Army's future as an effective 21st-century warfighting institution—Tofflerian theory attributes that are conceptually flawed should be forcefully acknowledged. With this perspective in mind, I posit that the war forms developed in War and Anti-War, specifically First and Second Wave war, are overgeneralized and distort Western warfare's historical development. As such, the war forms do not significantly further RMA theory and potentially pose a great liability. Still, these terms are becoming accepted by Army scholars because of the Tofflers' great theoretical influence.