When the answers to the 'why?', 'who?', 'where?', 'how?' and other questions of warfare are blurred, the simple concepts of 'attack' and 'defense' are no longer sufficient.

Destruction based concepts have to give way to new and baser control based concepts.

In the context of modern warfare, it is even more visible that "science must become art".

As an alternative for the concepts of 'defense' and 'attack', it seems to me that the concepts of 'integrity' and 'assimilation' would be a viable choice.

Integrity corresponds to defense.

Integrity is the structure and the balancing of the questions of warfare. It is the internal flow and the resistance to undesired assimilation.

Assimilation corresponds to attack.

Assimilation is the active component of shifting control. It is the external flow and the erosion of undesired integrity.

In the context of modern warfare, the advantage of these concepts of 'integrity' and 'assimilation' over those of 'defense' and 'attack' is that while the 'multi-dimensional' perspective has to be forced on 'defense' and 'attack', the concepts of 'integrity' and 'assimilation' already operate from this view.

Control based warfare requires much more flexibility.