Definition of Hybrid Warfare

The Peloponnesian War (431-405 BC): Athens and Sparta fought each other with a mix of naval, land, and proxy forces. The French and Indian War in North America (1755-1763): The British and the French allied with different Native American tribes. The American Revolution (1875-1883): The Continental Army and the militia forces fought against the British regulars and loyalists. In more recent times, Russia’s approach to Ukraine is an example of hybrid warfare. It involved a combination of activities, including disinformation, economic manipulation, use of proxies and insurgencies, diplomatic pressure, and military actions. The term hybrid warfare originally referred to irregular non-state actors with advanced military capabilities. Hybrid warfare is a complex and fluid form of warfare that can involve state or non-state actors. For example, in the Israel–Hezbollah War of 2006 and the Syrian Civil War, the main adversaries were non-state entities within the state system.  The methods used in hybrid warfare can include conventional capabilities, irregular tactics, irregular formations, diplomacy, politics, terrorist acts, indiscriminate violence, and criminal activity. 

I'm of the opinion, what is currently being experienced in the United States of America is a very complexed form of hybrid warfare. Social Engineering can also be included in an attempt to persuade others into forming a particular opinion. Social engineering is a term used in two different contexts; Information Security: In the context of information security, social engineering is the psychological manipulation of people into performing actions or divulging confidential information. It’s a type of confidence trick for the purpose of information gathering, fraud, or system access.  It’s often one of many steps in a more complex fraud scheme.  Social engineering attacks manipulate people into sharing information they shouldn’t share, downloading software they shouldn’t download, visiting websites they shouldn’t visit, sending money to criminals, or making other mistakes that compromise their personal or organizational security. Political Science: In political science, social engineering refers to top-down efforts to influence particular attitudes and social behaviors on a large scale—most often undertaken by governments, but also carried out by media, academia or private groups—in order to produce desired characteristics in a target population. Forced immigration, is a form of Hybrid Warfare, which is being committed on our southern border [United States of America - Mexico border] but many people appear to be in denial about this fact. 

Forced immigration, can also be considered another form of Hybrid Warfare, I.e., Finnish - Russian border crossings currently. To include the American - Mexican border crossings, and the lack of enforcement, is causing mass amounts of illegal immigrants the ability to cross into the United States of America with very little oversight, or knowledge of whereabouts, nor criminal backgrounds of these individuals making said illegal crossing.

12/08/2023 Finland; being targeted via Hybrid-warfare from Russia and China reports suggest. Russia is guiding third-country immigrants to the Finnish border crossings. China on the other hand is showing less evidence of this, but most observers and Chinese experts agree, they have a hand in the geoengineering of the situation on the Finnish border currently.

12/10/2023 I'm also of the belief the current tensions between Abrahamic religions, could be included in a much deeply rooted type of Hybrid Warfare, something terror groups have been facilitating for decades. Though I have many friends who're Muslim and are followers of the faith Islam. All sides of religions have they're radical sects, currently in the United States, we're witnessing unity between evangelical Christians and Jewish communities, and the opposing side(s) appear to be Leftist atheists who have seemingly sided with Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, to include the United States Domestic grown Hamas sympathizers [mainly from U.S. Islamic/Muslim majority communities not that they should be targeted either]. It's clear to most the left has created a movement/cause/ideology they can no longer control.

12/27/2023 Definition of Lawfare; Lawfare is the use of legal systems and institutions to damage or delegitimize an opponent, or to deter an individual’s usage of their legal rights.  The term may refer to the use of legal systems and principles against an enemy, such as by damaging or delegitimizing them, wasting their time and money (e.g., SLAPP suits), or winning a public relations victory. Alternatively, it may describe a tactic used by repressive regimes to label and discourage civil society or individuals from claiming their legal rights via national or international legal systems. This is especially common in situations when individuals and civil society use non-violent methods to highlight or oppose discrimination, corruption, lack of democracy, limiting freedom of speech, violations of human rights, and violations of international humanitarian law. The term is a portmanteau of the words law and warfare; It was first used in the 1975 manuscript “Whither Goeth the Law,” which argues that the Western legal system has become overly contentious, and utilitarian as compared to the more humanitarian, norm-based Eastern system.  A more frequently cited use of the term was Charles J. Dunlap, Jr.'s 2001 essay authored for Harvard’s Carr Center.  In that essay, Dunlap defines lawfare as "the use of law as a weapon of war". 

SLAPP units; SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.  These are lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.  The plaintiffs in SLAPP suits do not usually expect to win the lawsuit. Instead, their goals are accomplished if the defendant succumbs to fear, intimidation, mounting legal costs, or simple exhaustion and abandons the criticism. To protect freedom of speech, some jurisdictions have passed anti-SLAPP laws.  These laws often function by allowing a defendant to file a motion to strike or dismiss on the grounds that the case involves protected speech on a matter of public concern.  The plaintiff then bears the burden of showing a probability that they will prevail.  If the plaintiffs fail to meet their burden, their claim is dismissed, and the plaintiffs may be required to pay a penalty for bringing the case. However, determining what constitutes a SLAPP suit can be challenging, and if the Anti-SLAPP statutes become too broad, they can prevent private parties from bringing meritorious libel or related claims. State Anti-SLAPP statutes differ greatly in the scope and requirements as states try to balance these concerns.

1/22/2024 is a form of hybrid war being committed against us, via our own government, or portions of our own government? I think is an important question every American citizen should be asking themselves right now, and how long has this "rogue portion" of the government been committing these acts?