Is US Intelligence working?

[mindlight]

Given the war of words between Trump and the Intelligence community one wonders if they are in for some serious cutbacks.

Is there a case to be made for the US intelligence community or are cuts and reforms long overdue?

Given:

1) the failure to predict 911 2) false predictions about WMDs
3) a failed Middle Eastern policy that has led to a genocide of the Christian church , a magnification of civil strife combined with general religious illiteracy
4) the failure to prevent the hacking of the Democrats whoever carried it out

What do these guys add to American security and by extension to that of of its allies? Has political correctness and politicial interference wrecked American intelligence?

What can be done to turn this around?

 

[Calvinist Dark Lord]

Given the war of words between Trump and the Intelligence community one wonders if they are in for some serious cutbacks.

Is there a case to be made for the US intelligence community or are cuts and reforms long overdue?

Given:

1) the failure to predict 911 2) false predictions about WMDs
3) a failed Middle Eastern policy that has led to a genocide of the Christian church , a magnification of civil strife combined with general religious illiteracy
4) the failure to prevent the hacking of the Democrats whoever carried it out

What do these guys add to American security and by extension to that of of its allies? Has political correctness and politicial interference wrecked American intelligence?

What can be done to turn this around?

The intelligence community is a problem no doubt about it. It has been a problem since Truman separated it from the military in 1947...and yes, it bit Harry Truman a couple of times too.

It has been involved with every spectrum of corruption from blatantly disregarding Presidential orders (Truman ordered the VERONA intelligence gathering mechanism shut down and destroyed during his administration...it continued into the 1980's), to the politicising of intelligence, as was demonstrated with Bush 43 and Obama.

The cure would probably be to give it back to the Military where it can be used as it was designed as per the Church Amendment in the 70's. Besides that there would be accountability to the President, SEC DEF, Joint Chiefs, and the individual chain of command of the various military establishments. If somebody is accountable to people who can and WILL put you in Ft. Leavenworth for disobeying an order, it tends to make people more inclined to follow lawful orders.

After that the US should affirm the protections of the 4th Amendment, and stop the mass collection of data without warrants for each individual who is having his or her data collected. That means the FISA courts need to be disestablished.

The question of cyber protection is separate from the gathering of intelligence. It is an area that SHOULD be bi-partisan. However, both the left and the right (whatever those terms mean) seem to be opposed to people being secure in their communications. i have been told that every version of Windows since Windows 95 has hard back doors embedded into the code. It's one reason i don't use any Microsoft products, and this computer is too old to have any hardware that is questionable.

 

[Cearbhall]

What do these guys add to American security and by extension to that of of its allies?

We don't get to hear about the 99% of problems and threats that they successfully take care of.

 

[Calvinist Dark Lord]

We don't get to hear about the 99% of problems and threats that they successfully take care of.

And unfortunately, by the same mechanism, we don't get to hear how badly the rights of Americans have been violated in the supposed interest of "keeping us safe".

i note that no office holder takes an oath to preserve our security. They take an oath to preserve, protect and defend the CONSTITUTION.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Given the war of words between Trump and the Intelligence community one wonders if they are in for some serious cutbacks.

Is there a case to be made for the US intelligence community or are cuts and reforms long overdue?

Given:

1) the failure to predict 911 2) false predictions about WMDs
3) a failed Middle Eastern policy that has led to a genocide of the Christian church , a magnification of civil strife combined with general religious illiteracy
4) the failure to prevent the hacking of the Democrats whoever carried it out

What do these guys add to American security and by extension to that of of its allies? Has political correctness and politicial interference wrecked American intelligence?

What can be done to turn this around?

I think the intelligence agencies just need to be purged of Obama's political appointments.

Obama has politicized just about every part of the government.

 

[Calvinist Dark Lord]

We don't get to hear about the 99% of problems and threats that they successfully take care of.

Sorry, i got distracted and really didn't give the reply that first came to mind.

The answer to your supposition is that we have no way of knowing how much if any trouble has been successfully taken care of by the US Intellgence establishment. The reason for that is that it is 'secret'.

It is what we call a "non-statistic".

It is a bit like the question of "How many Rapes go unreported?" There is no way of knowing if there are any, and no way to prove any assertions unless it IS reported...which takes it out of the unreported category.

 

[Calvinist Dark Lord]

I don't think cuts are needed. I think the intelligence agencies just need to be purged of Obama's political appointments.

Sure cuts are needed. We need to cut administrative overhead and devote the savings to intelligence gathering...BOOTS.ON.THE.GROUND, the old fashioned way. Only so much that intercepts and satellites can tell you, and easy to spoof both.

 

[Winken]

Given the war of words between Trump and the Intelligence community one wonders if they are in for some serious cutbacks.

Is there a case to be made for the US intelligence community or are cuts and reforms long overdue?

Given:

1) the failure to predict 911 2) false predictions about WMDs
3) a failed Middle Eastern policy that has led to a genocide of the Christian church , a magnification of civil strife combined with general religious illiteracy
4) the failure to prevent the hacking of the Democrats whoever carried it out

What do these guys add to American security and by extension to that of of its allies? Has political correctness and politicial interference wrecked American intelligence?

What can be done to turn this around?

Prayer.

(We're working on draining the swamp).

 

[faroukfarouk]

The intelligence community is a problem no doubt about it. It has been a problem since Truman separated it from the military in 1947...and yes, it bit Harry Truman a couple of times too.

It has been involved with every spectrum of corruption from blatantly disregarding Presidential orders (Truman ordered the VERONA intelligence gathering mechanism shut down and destroyed during his administration...it continued into the 1980's), to the politicising of intelligence, as was demonstrated with Bush 43 and Obama.

The cure would probably be to give it back to the Military where it can be used as it was designed as per the Church Amendment in the 70's. Besides that there would be accountability to the President, SEC DEF, Joint Chiefs, and the individual chain of command of the various military establishments. If somebody is accountable to people who can and WILL put you in Ft. Leavenworth for disobeying an order, it tends to make people more inclined to follow lawful orders.

After that the US should affirm the protections of the 4th Amendment, and stop the mass collection of data without warrants for each individual who is having his or her data collected. That means the FISA courts need to be disestablished.

The question of cyber protection is separate from the gathering of intelligence. It is an area that SHOULD be bi-partisan. However, both the left and the right (whatever those terms mean) seem to be opposed to people being secure in their communications. i have been told that every version of Windows since Windows 95 has hard back doors embedded into the code. It's one reason i don't use any Microsoft products, and this computer is too old to have any hardware that is questionable.

Part of the difficulty is that methods of data collection can differ vastly between the FBI and CIA. The FBI basically collects information internally with a view to possible prosecutions. The CIA engages in worldwide strategic intelligence, much of it variously on a hidden, informal commercial basis which might illegal in its manner of transaction if carried out in the US, or even on a goodwill basis; and sometimes the CIA's assets are even unware of their significance to the Agency. For a host of practical reasons, the streamlining of the FBI and the CIA would prove well nigh impossible, given Americans' longstanding view of themselves and the outside world.

In fact, while the 1947 legislation which set up the CIA did give the Agency primacy over military intelligence, President Truman actually built upon the heritage of the OSS, set up by FDR under Donovan, for whom strategic intelligence emerged from his long experience as a well connected and powerful New York City lawyer, whose need to amass facts about overseas issues came about in his service of corporate clients' interests: this perception of US interests worldwide being tied to corporate interests continues to this day. Thus while OSS's strategic intelligence role in WW2 was extensive, it grew from an already wide, but informal, process of information gathering which was far broader in scope than ever police action - complex though this may be - could be.

 

[LoAmmi]

1) the failure to predict 911

The sitting President at the time not listening to warnings, one of which involved planes being flown into buildings, isn't a failure of US Intelligence.

2) false predictions about WMDs

If I recall, reports from US Intelligence saying that the WMDs weren't there were scraped by higher ups who were political.

3) a failed Middle Eastern policy that has led to a genocide of the Christian church , a magnification of civil strife combined with general religious illiteracy

How is the US Intelligence?

4) the failure to prevent the hacking of the Democrats whoever carried it out

US Intelligence were not the security administrators that ran the DNC servers.

Can we at least blame them for their actual failures?

 

[faroukfarouk]

Sure cuts are needed. We need to cut administrative overhead and devote the savings to intelligence gathering...BOOTS.ON.THE.GROUND, the old fashioned way. Only so much that intercepts and satellites can tell you, and easy to spoof both.

So what if an Asian country is manufacturing items which 20 - 30 years hence, could seriously affect US industries - including but not limited to defence industries?

Would a resolution to concentrate on 'boots on the ground' or FBI-style actions to bring prosecutions furnish senior policymakers with this sort of information?

This is what is meant by strategic intelligence, practised by the CIA. Henry Kissinger has long warned of the need for the US to avoid the extremes of isolationism and overcommitment, shown by the US's periodic, almost Manichean expansions and cutbacks in its overseas role.

 

[faroukfarouk]

We don't get to hear about the 99% of problems and threats that they successfully take care of.

Good point!

 

[Calvinist Dark Lord]

Part of the difficulty is that methods of data collection can differ vastly between the FBI and CIA. The FBI basically collects information internally with a view to possible prosecutions. The CIA engages in worldwide strategic intelligence, much of it variously on a hidden, informal commercial basis which might illegal in its manner of transaction if carried out in the US, or even on a goodwill basis; and sometimes the CIA's assets are even unware of their significance to the Agency. For a host of practical reasons, the streamlining of the FBI and the CIA would prove well nigh impossible, given Americans' longstanding view of themselves and the outside world.

In fact, while the 1947 legislation which set up the CIA did give the Agency primacy over military intelligence, President Truman actually built upon the heritage of the OSS, set up by FDR under Donovan, for whom strategic intelligence emerged from his long experience as a well connected and powerful New York City lawyer, whose need to amass facts about overseas issues came about in his service of corporate clients' interests: this perception of US interests worldwide being tied to corporate interests continues to this day. Thus while OSS's strategic intelligence role in WW2 was extensive, it grew from an already wide, but informal, process of information gathering which was far broader in scope than ever police action - complex though this may be - could be.

Actually, there were two organisations that had their genesis in the OSS. That would be the CIA and the Army Special Forces. The Special Forces were derived from the OSS Jedburghs. Unfortunately with a civilian controlled agency, you find people in the role of feudal warlords trying their hand at "empire building" within their organisation. Not quite so in the military. The chain of command still functions.

The FBI is as you noted the lead agency on domestic espianage. However, they either are or SHOULD BE constrained by constitutional limits on their activities. Again, unfortunately, secrecy leads to the possibility of abuse.

FYI, Truman and Donovan DID NOT get along. That is why Donovan (a Medal of Honor recipient from WWI) never became the Director of CIA.

One important difference between the OSS and today however: We were at war back then. Not so today. Different rules for a genuine war.

 

[Aryeh]

Given the war of words between Trump and the Intelligence community one wonders if they are in for some serious cutbacks.

Is there a case to be made for the US intelligence community or are cuts and reforms long overdue?

Given:

1) the failure to predict 911 2) false predictions about WMDs
3) a failed Middle Eastern policy that has led to a genocide of the Christian church , a magnification of civil strife combined with general religious illiteracy
4) the failure to prevent the hacking of the Democrats whoever carried it out

What do these guys add to American security and by extension to that of of its allies? Has political correctness and politicial interference wrecked American intelligence?

What can be done to turn this around?

Nothing can be done to turn this around.

Technically, WWIII has begun (it bEgan arguably, in 1991, or 2002.) What we are seeing now is the exhibition build up for our entertainment.

Intelligence isn't the problem at all. The rhetoric going on now is purposefully to make America seem weak. It is a destabilization tactic.

Ideally, if the BRICs can destabilize and destroy the US without dropping a bomb, or firing a shot that is what will be done.

But, it won't happen without a shot; hot war will happen (but, it will be quick.) All of this is also to psychologically prepare Americans for "breaches in security" - to justify why the country with the largest intelligence beast with many tenticles can be vulnerable.

I hear people say all the time, "We have the largest (insert military branch here,) they wouldn't make it (insert some ridiculous distance) to the US. Sure. Keep believing that, or that there is no incentive for allowing attacks to happen.

 

[faroukfarouk]

Actually, there were two organisations that had their genesis in the OSS. That would be the CIA and the Army Special Forces. The Special Forces were derived from the OSS Jedburghs. Unfortunately with a civilian controlled agency, you find people in the role of feudal warlords trying their hand at "empire building" within their organisation. Not quite so in the military. The chain of command still functions.

The FBI is as you noted the lead agency on domestic espianage. However, they either are or SHOULD BE constrained by constitutional limits on their activities. Again, unfortunately, secrecy leads to the possibility of abuse.

FYI, Truman and Donovan DID NOT get along. That is why Donovan (a Medal of Honor recipient from WWI) never became the Director of CIA.

One important difference between the OSS and today however: We were at war back then. Not so today. Different rules for a genuine war.

Bob Woodward's 'Veil: The Secret Wars of the CIA', the multidimensional aspect of conflict through technological change, and the military-industrial complex's reliance on worldwide raw materials and strategic forecasting provide huge amounts of examples of how intelligence cannot simply be relegated to military hierarchies and chains of command. This in fact is what FDR wanted to avoid in the first place: getting a purely military view of issues overseas relevant to long term US interests.

 

[Calvinist Dark Lord]

So what if an Asian country is manufacturing items which 20 - 30 years hence, could seriously affect US industries - including but not limited to defence industries?

Would a resolution to concentrate on 'boots on the ground' or FBI-style actions to bring prosecutions furnish senior policymakers with this sort of information?

This is what is meant by strategic intelligence, practised by the CIA. Henry Kissinger has long warned of the need for the US to avoid the extremes of isolationism and overcommitment, shown by the US's periodic, almost Manichean expansions and cutbacks in its overseas role.

Bad example. Very bad example. Industrial espionage is not a concern of the US Government. That is the concern of the industries and corporations involved.

i have to admit a bit of sympathy towards corporations that spend sometimes in excess of $1 Billion in order to develop a product or medication or patent...only to find it cheaply copied by foreign manufacturers without license or compensation to the originator. Were it my corporation, i would be very tempted to go looking in the Yellow Pages for "Assassins R' US". However, that way be dragons. It is just a small step into the unfortunate corporatism that permeates the US Government today.

ON THE OTHER HAND: One legitimate function of government is the enforcement of contracts and copyrights. However, using intelligence services is a bit excessive.

As for the rest, we actually need to get out of the affairs of other nations. Blowback didn't just happen yesterday. My difficulty with Kissinger and his ilk is that everything --including what should not be-- is negotiable.

 

[Calvinist Dark Lord]

Bob Woodward's 'Veil: The Secret Wars of the CIA', the multidimensional aspect of conflict through technological change, and the military-industrial complex's reliance on worldwide raw materials and strategic forecasting provide huge amounts of examples of how intelligence cannot simply be relegated to military hierarchies and chains of command. This in fact is what FDR wanted to avoid in the first place: getting a purely military view of issues overseas relevant to long term US interests.

And our defficiencies can be traced to the actions of removing intelligence from those spheres.

 

[faroukfarouk]

Bad example. Very bad example. Industrial espionage is not a concern of the US Government. That is the concern of the industries and corporations involved.

i have to admit a bit of sympathy towards corporations that spend sometimes in excess of $1 Billion in order to develop a product or medication or patent...only to find it cheaply copied by foreign manufacturers without license or compensation to the originator. Were it my corporation, i would be very tempted to go looking in the Yellow Pages for "Assassins R' US". However, that way be dragons. It is just a small step into the unfortunate corporatism that permeates the US Government today.

ON THE OTHER HAND: One legitimate function of government is the enforcement of contracts and copyrights. However, using intelligence services is a bit excessive.

As for the rest, we actually need to get out of the affairs of other nations. Blowback didn't just happen yesterday. My difficulty with Kissinger and his ilk is that everything --including what should not be-- is negotiable.

One person's industrial espionage is another person's economic forecasting and strategic planning, when it occurs transnationally.

So what about reserves of uranite, from which uranium is extracted, previously known to be found only in a few places like Kolwezi, Congo and Joachimsthal, Germany. Was the US supposed to wait until private companies happened to find out what the state of reserves of this raw material was? If this had occurred, the Manhattan Project would never have gotten off the ground, and Nazi Germany could have gotten the Bomb first.

Strategic intelligence can never be exclusively a matter for private corporations pursuing their business interests overseas, nor for boots on the ground under a chain of military command.

 

[wing2000]

Given the war of words between Trump and the Intelligence community one wonders if they are in for some serious cutbacks.

Is there a case to be made for the US intelligence community or are cuts and reforms long overdue?

After 9/11, billions of dollars were poured into the Intel community. I think there are opportunities to streamline the structure and eliminate overlap. It must be done in an informed, apolitical and logical manner.

Given:

1) the failure to predict 911 2) false predictions about WMDs

1) failure to work in an integrated manner - a lot of reforms have occurred since 9-11. 2) An example of politicized intelligence --information was shaped to fit the executive's branch's policy of regime change.

3) a failed Middle Eastern policy that has led to a genocide of the Christian church , a magnification of civil strife combined with general religious illiteracy

Is there a specific Intelligence failure? Or is your issue with the policies of the executive branch (decision makers)?

4) the failure to prevent the hacking of the Democrats whoever carried it out

US Intelligence cannot possibly protect all computers connected to the Internet...nor is that their mission.

What do these guys add to American security and by extension to that of of its allies? Has political correctness and politicial interference wrecked American intelligence?

These guys?
Political correctness does not impact intelligence gathering capabilities.

What can be done to turn this around?

See point one.

 

[faroukfarouk]

And our defficiencies can be traced to the actions of removing intelligence from those spheres.

In the 1970s this was tried; the activities of the Church and Pike Congressional committees severely restricted the CIA's role, in a practical sense, because it became highly lawyered and risk averse. Thus, when the Ayatollah emerged in Iran, CIA failed to predict it; and the complex nature of assisting and funding Aghan opposition to Soviet intervention was not well appreciated either.

But the moralizers on the Church and Pike committees and their sounding boards in the media did not come back and say: We were wrong to restrict the CIA.

Instead, the CIA gets blamed for the effects of the restrictions upon it.