There is general disagreement among stakeholders on the definition of irregular warfare and where the term and concept fit into the joint and individual services doctrine. The 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review uses the term “irregular” only once in its one hundred and five pages and only in terms of its focus on building the joint force's capability to address irregular warfare while maintaining clear overall conventional and nuclear superiority. . Currently, the definition is ambiguous and causes conflict or duplication of effort among Department of Defense stakeholders. For purposes of this document, the stakeholders discussed are the Army and Marine Corps. Stakeholders must reach consensus and clearly define irregular warfare in order to establish a comprehensive irregular warfare policy and strategy. Department of Defense Directive 3000.07 defines irregular warfare as: “a violent struggle between state and non-state actors for legitimacy and influence over the countries involved.” population(s). Irregular warfare favors indirect and asymmetric approaches, although it can employ the full range of military and other capabilities, in order to erode an adversary's power, influence and will.” This definition is broad and has led many military leaders to simply describe irregular warfare as anything that is not regular warfare. If leaders turn to this oversimplified definition, then it can be logically and erroneously deduced that nonviolent operations such as humanitarian assistance and disaster relief are forms of irregular warfare. The problem with classifying irregular warfare as a distinct and separate form of warfare is that interested parties must in turn dedicate resources solely for the purpose of addressing… middle of paper… similar concepts but different terms to describe irregular warfare . The Army uses the term hybrid threat to describe conditions in which the Army and the joint force are engaged in operations other than traditional high-intensity force-on-force operations. The Marine Corps uses the 3-block concept to describe its approach to irregular warfare and relies on the commander to respond with the appropriate operational approach in time and space throughout his area of ​​responsibility. It is imperative that the joint force and all government stakeholders reach consensus on the definition of irregular warfare in a time characterized by persistent conflict and reduced budgets. Failure to do so could result in loss of institutional knowledge, inefficient processes, flawed doctrine, and wasted resources on the part of the military and other relevant government agencies..