shotbanner.jpeg

November 29, 2004

Lack of Intelligence

The Strib is concerned about the "failure" to pass the intelligence "reform" bill:

Before it adjourned last weekend, the U.S. House failed to pass an urgently needed intelligence reform bill, the one developed out of recommendations by the 9/11 commission. President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney supported the bill. House Speaker Dennis Hastert supported the bill. The 9/11 commission supported the bill. Families of 9/11 victims supported the bill. But it failed in the House? What's wrong with this equation?
What's wrong is that while the bill is something that, on its surface, is something that we all want, its actual implementation is completely wrong.

We don't need a national intelligence czar; indeed, centralizing intelligence under one common bureaucracy is not going to solve anything.

Competition among a variety of agencies (which we currently have), combined with communication among the agencies (which we don't, and which the "reforms" make only token, bureaucratized efforts to change) will improve intelligence, as the Israelis learned when they abolished their analogue to the Intelligence czar.

So - the most terror-stricken nation on earth rebukes the precise reform that the nattering nebbishes at the Strib are demanding; what does this tell us?

As the Strib would say - "What's wrong with this equation?"The Strib tries to analyze the situation:

Well, the bill would create a new national intelligence director and give the person appointed to that office control of most of the U.S. intelligence budget. The Pentagon, which now controls 80 percent of that budget, doesn't like that and has worked hard to defeat it. Pentagon officials have found willing accomplices in their hard-line supporters in the House. Especially upset was Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., who is chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and a strong friend of the Pentagon. Hunter's committee would lose oversight of much of the intelligence budget, and thus much of its power over intelligence, under the proposed reform.
It's all about a budget battle, in the Strib's special little world.

But behind the numbers - which seem to be the only way the left can analyze matters of intelligence and the military - are a few simple historical facts; the Central Intelligence Agency has had a forty year record of incompetence and failure, from the Bay of Pigs through Iraq. The Defense-controlled intelligence agencies - the DIA, NRO and NSA, plus the individual service intelligence branches - have a record of doing the jobs within their purviews - strategic intelligence, photo analysis, ELINT and cryptography, and tactical and operational intelligence, respectively - very, very well. Why fix the part that's not broken?

The editorial concludes:

The Republicans control the House, the Senate and the White House. They also have run out the string on blaming President Bill Clinton for their problems. If Washington fails to enact strong, comprehensive intelligence reform soon, put a big, black check on the Republican side of the demerits ledger.
Only if it's a bad idea.

So why is it a bad idea?

So far, most of the "reforms" seem to be of the "bigger, better bureaucracy" variety. Duncan Hunter and James Sensenbrenner aren't impressed - why should I be?

Posted by Mitch at November 29, 2004 08:40 AM | TrackBack
Comments

Is it permitted to NOT put big black checks on the GOP's side of the Strib's political ledger?


Yes. I know. I know. Rhetorical question.

Posted by: Mark at November 29, 2004 02:34 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?
hi