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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (59136)	5/17/2007 5:49:18 AM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

One can derive a certain amount of entertainment criticizing congressional Democrats for wanting to lump polluters in with terrorists (though maybe then they would start to warm up to the idea of coercive interrogation techniques), but if we do not rescue our intelligence community from its current death spiral, its degradation will be so complete that it will become incapable of effectively executing any mission we give it, environmental or otherwise. Declining Intelligence How low can we go? by Michael Tanji The Weekly Standard 05/17/2007 RECENTLY a six-man jihadi cell in New Jersey was arrested while allegedly planning an armed attack on a military base. In California a jury is now deliberating the fate of a naturalized Chinese-American, who the government alleges worked as a spy for China. Per various media reports Russian intelligence activity against the United States and its European allies is back to Cold War levels. You would think that if ever there was a time to focus our intelligence community on clear and present dangers, it would be now. Think again. Congress is now debating the merits of turning the intelligence community loose against global warming. There is precedence for this: in 1997 then-director of Central Intelligence Deutch established an "Environmental Center" in the CIA's analysis directorate. Since climate change is now an official threat (according to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences), what better time to take resources away from the fight against al Qaeda? Speaking of former CIA directors, there have been numerous comments made about George Tenet's inability to get people, places, and dates right in his new memoir. Kind of makes you wonder just how concerned he was about facts, accuracy, and standards during his tenure as head of the U.S. intelligence community. I personally know of no former colleague who would operate in such a slip-shod manner. But in an bureaucracy such disregard for core principles from the leadership eventually becomes part of the institutional culture. While we are on the topic of the CIA, did you know that the majority of the workforce there has been on the job for only five years? Twenty percent have been on the job for just about one year. Some of these people are filling new positions but by and large they are filling billets emptied by professionals who received their security clearances when the new kids on the block were learning how to walk. A recent survey of National Security Agency employees noted that the vast majority of them do not trust their bosses as far as they can throw them. How bad can their leadership be? Despite the key role that NSA's capabilities plays in the war on terror, they still cannot write a check for equipment without first getting approval from Pentagon overseers. This was an authority that was taken from them years ago, and their continued inability to effectively field new systems that actually work suggests that they should not receive that authority back any time soon. The inability of NSA management to perform basic planning functions now has them flirting with the prospect of not having enough electrical power to run operations or storage for all the data they are vacuuming. WE SHOULD START to remedy this dismal intelligence situation by accepting the fact that while we live in dangerous times, not every problem is a national security problem. There may be security implications to many issues, but primacy for all the world's ills does not fall on the shoulders of Defense secretary Gates or DNI McConnell. Figuring out how to address pending humanitarian crises does not require people skilled in military science. Building up the capabilities of our intelligence and security apparatus also requires that we rebuild trust in the system. Seasoned veterans and new hires both need to be confident that their leadership will not undermine them by bending to political whims or burden them with administrivia. People who cannot be trusted need to be fired (or aggressively encouraged to enjoy their pensions). Nothing buoys morale more than the elimination of dead weight. To a certain extent you can hire your way out of the manpower problem, but only if you do it smartly. You need the mid-careerists to return as employees--not contractors. Fix the leadership problems and the people who fled will start to think about reuniting with their Uncle Sam. If we get smart about pay, personnel, and quality-of-life issues--pay-banding, flexibility in assignments, and dispersing operations outside the D.C. area--then the prodigal sons and daughters will form a line to get back in. Functionally speaking, the intelligence community needs to reduce its dependence on the hierarchical, industrial-age model. We see signs of progress in efforts such as Intellipedia and classified blogs, but such efforts are still the exception to the rule. With subject-matter expertise across the board at an ebb, we need to leverage knowledge and experience regardless of what agency it happens to reside in. Recently announced inter-agency exchange programs might help, but none of the similar programs in the past ever worked to any serious extent. One can derive a certain amount of entertainment criticizing congressional Democrats for wanting to lump polluters in with terrorists (though maybe then they would start to warm up to the idea of coercive interrogation techniques), but if we do not rescue our intelligence community from its current death spiral, its degradation will be so complete that it will become incapable of effectively executing any mission we give it, environmental or otherwise. Unless we are prepared to delineate national security threats from issues-of-national-concern, and make the serious, systemic changes that are necessary to bring about real reform and extract top-notch performance, we should declare a moratorium now on expressing surprise at any future intelligence failures. Michael Tanji is a former senior intelligence officer and an associate of the Terrorism Research Center. He opines on intelligence and security issues at Haft of the Spear. weeklystandard.com

To: Sully- who wrote (59136)	5/17/2007 11:42:49 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

So much for optimism. It was, after all, cautious because I was uncertain if the trends would continue, and in spite of a sunny outlook at the time of my last posting, the conditions deteriorated again about 10 days ago. It all began just after dusk as I was walking back to our headquarters building where I live and work. A bright flash on the horizon from the direction of downtown Ramadi, a delay, and then the distant boom that we have all become familiar with. As the sound reached me, there was second flash from the same area. Things were getting serious down there, and for the next several hours, the intensity of the activity fluctuated, but it continued and spread out across the city. Optimism shattered. The mud was coming back with a vengeance! That electrical storm dropped 1 1/4 inches of rain before it dissipated, and we were plunged back into the mire of Ramuddi. On the tactical front, the massive sweep of Iraqi Police (IP) through parts of Ramadi has turned out be a significant catalyst for the entire area. Shortly after the sweep, there were a few targeted operations into the known insurgent hiding areas, where several insurgents were killed or captured, and from that point 'til now, the entire city has gone quiet. That's 6 weeks of relative peace throughout the entire city. There are still occasional shootings or snipers, but heavier forms of combat have virtually ceased. The local residents nearly swarm patrols to tell them where munitions are cached or IEDs are planted. It's been kind of bizarre. Even here on the FOB, we have not been mortared in several weeks. For about a week this winter, it seemed that every time I decided to go eat lunch, we'd get mortared. The food here isn't too bad, but let's face it, it's not THAT good. I guess you could say that the food isn't gruel and unusual punishment, but it certainly wears on you to see the same stuff day after day for 8 months. The city of Fallujah is experiencing similar success to what we have seen here. However, for all of our success, the insurgents are not out of the fight yet, and this is still a hazardous place. We have been largely successful in securing and bringing some degree of peace to the major population centers of Al Anbar province. The strategy employed here is working, and our tactical optimism continues to grow. I don't suppose any of this has been in the news? Speaking of the news, you've probably seen that there have been a series of car bombings here over the last 2 weeks. I can certainly understand the newsies desire to get the word out quickly on what has transpired, but I do take issue with their complete lack of accuracy. I can also see where things get distorted. Within 15-20 seconds of the truck bomb in Ramadi, our communications systems were alive with initial reports; direction, distance, personnel status, and shortly there after initial casualty estimates. Listening to the first reports, I hear that 25-30 people have been killed and more injured. Chaos and differing perspectives. Conflicting information. One of my credos to my Operations Center staff is to always assume that the initial information for any combat situation is wrong and that they need to aggressively pursue the facts and corroborate the details. In the final count, there were 2 people killed and 9 injured. The news reported 27 killed and a similar number injured, which is consistent with the first blush report, but grossly wrong. When's the last time you saw a news agency update a report with revised casualty figures on an attack here? From personal experience, I can tell you that the news is using the initial figures and not the actual (lower) figures. We've had 3 vehicle bombs here lately, and every one of them were reported with overstated casualties. ... Message 23547336 This is an email from a Major who happens to be a cousin of a friend.