Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Going to war with the spies is perhaps the first thing Trump has actually done that I support. I find it so odd how the "left" now sides with war, and spies.
Sad really.
The NSA & CIA & the rest of the US intelligence agencies are hardly spies, in the cloak-&-dagger sense. Since the 1960s, we've specialized in electronic intelligence, signals intelligence, photo reconnaissance, radar & other imaging systems. Since the fall of the USSR, we've neglected human intel - because processing signals plays to our technical strengths. & because the USSR was a nation, & it was relatively easy for us to target their national defense structure for intelligence purposes.
One of the lessons of the end of the Cold War & the subsequent analysis of additional data - the USSR was failing economically for a long time. They never could compete with the US & the West generally, in having a strong military & scientific & technological base running on their version of a command economy - their planning was too rigid, & too prone to ripple effects & self-dealing throughout the economic & political systems.
Consequently, the US could have redirected defense & some intel efforts to more constructive purposes - which would have put additional pressure on the USSR & Warsaw Pact economies to perform. It was the obvious failures of the planned economy & the political system underlying that economy that eventually forced the USSR & Warsaw Pact countries into chaos.
Why did CIA miss the economic problems within the USSR? For one, it was politically inconvenient - the military & the defense industries wanted more budget, personnel, & equipment. Even though Pres. Eisenhower had noted that every dollar spent for defense beyond what was necessary was a kind of theft from the civilian economy, & that persistent & systematic shortfalls in the civilian economy would eventually affect the military force & budgeting, & the political will to continue defense funding @ their current levels. CIA was meant to be an analytical outfit, balancing the military intel agencies, reporting directly to the President, & not running paramilitaries nor overthrowing governments across the globe.
The US still needs excellent intel. & yes, if it comes to that - one reason for the need for good intel - our political & military decision-making needs to be informed by the facts on the ground, not by wishful thinking. Analysis follows the facts, it doesn't determine the facts.
No, Trump was stupid enough to go to war against the intelligence community and he is paying the price for it. The the idiot just did it again by publicly accusing them of stuff.
He's doing it to gin up his sycophantic and gullible supporters. This what his rallies are for. Bannon has instructed this bloviated narcissist to demonize the press, the intel community and the judiciary so that their base will only believe the words of the birther-in-chief, never mind that he is a liar to beat all liars.
The NSA & CIA & the rest of the US intelligence agencies are hardly spies, in the cloak-&-dagger sense. Since the 1960s, we've specialized in electronic intelligence, signals intelligence, photo reconnaissance, radar & other imaging systems. Since the fall of the USSR, we've neglected human intel - because processing signals plays to our technical strengths. & because the USSR was a nation, & it was relatively easy for us to target their national defense structure for intelligence purposes.
I would not say HUMINT was neglected, but the Soviet Union was a massive physical entity that was largely closed to anything but national technical collection.
Quote:
One of the lessons of the end of the Cold War & the subsequent analysis of additional data - the USSR was failing economically for a long time. They never could compete with the US & the West generally, in having a strong military & scientific & technological base running on their version of a command economy - their planning was too rigid, & too prone to ripple effects & self-dealing throughout the economic & political systems.
Consequently, the US could have redirected defense & some intel efforts to more constructive purposes - which would have put additional pressure on the USSR & Warsaw Pact economies to perform. It was the obvious failures of the planned economy & the political system underlying that economy that eventually forced the USSR & Warsaw Pact countries into chaos.
Why did CIA miss the economic problems within the USSR? For one, it was politically inconvenient - the military & the defense industries wanted more budget, personnel, & equipment. Even though Pres. Eisenhower had noted that every dollar spent for defense beyond what was necessary was a kind of theft from the civilian economy, & that persistent & systematic shortfalls in the civilian economy would eventually affect the military force & budgeting, & the political will to continue defense funding @ their current levels. CIA was meant to be an analytical outfit, balancing the military intel agencies, reporting directly to the President, & not running paramilitaries nor overthrowing governments across the globe.
I began to suspect the Soviets were not ten feet tall when we got a good look at the FOXBAT. There was plenty of knowledge of the shortfalls of the Soviet economy because they directly affected Soviet military effectiveness in ways we could actually quantify.
On the military side, we did quantify it--Soviet military effectiveness shortfalls became part of operational military planning factors by field commanders. But such things did not cross over into political considerations.
Quote:
The US still needs excellent intel. & yes, if it comes to that - one reason for the need for good intel - our political & military decision-making needs to be informed by the facts on the ground, not by wishful thinking. Analysis follows the facts, it doesn't determine the facts.
For sure, when you shorten your fangs you need to enlarge your ears.
Your politically inspired opinion withstanding, the intelligence agencies work for the President.
Not the way the other way around, as you describe it.
The CIA, as originally chartered, reported directly to the president. The military intel agencies ultimately report up, but it's through their military chain of command. State Dept. intel, NSA, National Reconnaissance Office, & the others have been bundled - as of the last reorg - into the National Intelligence Office, I think it's called. However, the military swears to support & defend the Constitution of the US - the president, as Commander in Chief, stands in, & is part of the chain of command. But if pressed to disobey the Constitution, the people @ the sharp edge aren't likely to weasel on their oath.
So no, in reality, the intelligence agencies & the president are all in the chain of command, & all swear to support & defend the Constitution. The oath is deliberately structured this way - the loyalty is to the Constitution, not to the president personally.
It's odd that you would suggest that when the people treating ebola in Africa were were covered head to toe in plastic "space suits."
But I guess it was all a "lie" by Fox.
No, everything I've seen indicates that the Ebola in the West Africa outbreak was not airborne. & a good thing, too. The infection rate would have been still higher than it was. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola_...e#Transmission
The bunny suits were to prevent contact with blood, saliva, body fluids in general. Points of entry include nose, eyes, mouth - & so caretakers & cadaver teams typically also wore face shields. I don't recall that workers in the field in Africa also wore SCUBA-type gear (which would have been required, if Ebola were airborne).
Did Fox lie? I don't take them seriously - they seem to sensationalize whatever coverage they put up. & their standard defense, whenever they're taken to court over factual inaccuracies, is that Fox net is an entertainment net, not a news entity @ all. On that, I do take them @ their word.
And the blackmail thing -- that's so far-fetched as to be laughable.
...
Not @ all - if Flynn was careless enough to discuss matters with the ambassador that he wasn't authorized to discuss (say, the sanctions that Pres. Obama put in place against Russia), then Flynn was crossing lines. If Flynn then lied to VP Pence or anyone else in the chain of command about his conversation with the Russian(s), then he was vulnerable to blackmail - assuming that the Russian ambassador took notes on the conversation - a sensible thing to do.
& bear in mind that KGB Lt. Col. & CIS Pres. V. Putin was a lifer - 16 years in the organs, & specializing precisely in recruiting/blackmailing/suborning foreign sources. Flattery, honey pots, inebriation, drugs, photos, videos, tape-recordings in compromising situations - the odd ultraviolence up to & including murder, if it came to that, I'm sure. We may well have done Flynn a favor.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
LOL
In the details
