This paper examines five internal Jihadi geostrategic arguments and the profound impact different conclusions have on a whole range of tactical considerations. The primary case study is of global jihadists identified with al-Qa'ida. The paper draws heavily on primary sources compiled in the Harmony data project of captured Jihadi documents. The five Jihadi debates examined center on jihad, takfir, hisba, far enemy, and information strategy. The debate over the nature of the jihad focuses on the issue of vanguard, and thus has tactical implications for the use of violence - provoking the state in a Leninist fashion, or constructing a broader social movement. The argument over takfir, made famous in debates between Abdullah Azzam and Ayman al-Zawahiri, has profound implications over the geography of conflict and the allocation of resources: lands of non-Muslim occupation or any nominal Muslim regimeg Gerges has well covered the argument over the near v. far enemy; captured documents in Iraq allow us to add greater nuance to this internal argument. Likewise the internal argument over hisba - should resources of the global jihad be directed to issues of internal moralityr Finally, how hip is too hip in the public messaging of jihad The debates between Abu Musab al-Suri and Zawahiri on this issue are instructive. Suri argued for an information strategy that was hip, that reached out and was made relevant to the young generation of jihadis. But by debasing the message, it was countered, the status of the vanguard was undermined. This paper will be a chapter in a book on Jihadi information strategy, to be published by Stanford University Press.