Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (19911)	7/25/2003 2:30:39 PM
From: jttmab	Respond to of 21614

U.S. military intelligence on military matters is probably pretty good, compared to intelligence on non-military matters. I think the reason for that is humint vs. more definitive forms of intel ... humint sources are very unreliable, while an overhead shot of a division, missile silos, tanks, is very definitive. In the case of military forces, there's a combination of intelligence that can produce a good assessment. Some of the other questions...like what's the coutry x's position [opinion] on "y" relies almost entirely on humint sources. Even intecepts of communications are qualified because opinions change. There also may be more disinformation being used today then there was decades ago, further complicating the problem. Throw in sources manufacturing false intelligence, such as the Niger documents and it's a major challenge in analysis. jttmab