Quote:
|
Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc
I don't like this analysis. Let's take the first block.
1. How exactly does infiltrating a terrorist group stop the violence? Eventually you will be able to destroy the group, but I don't see this at all. And look at the implied tasks that go with this. Much easier said than done.
2. Again, how is this on the Agency? There are billions of Muslims. AQ's grandparents were born in Egypt. How in the hell are they supposed to influence events in the Territories? Algeria? COME ON!
3. How?
|
Of course I can only speculate as I have no experience in intelligence -- I was just a grunt in the IDF for a very short while. But DEBKAfile gathers its information from their connections in various intelligence communities around the world (probably mostly Mossad and Shabbak) and their analysis likely reflects comments they've heard from such agents.
1. Infiltrating a terrorist group -- whether by placing agents who are native speakers of the language and know the culture (much more difficult for the US in Iraq than for Israel in the West Bank or Gaza, of course) or buying those connected to a group -- allows for access to information such as hide-outs, movements of operatives, and painting targets. Israel has been using these techniques for a while. Then again, Israel has far better knowledge of its territories from a longer history than the US of Iraq. Israel also has a large population of native- or heritage-speakers of Arabic who look like Arabs in its military and in its other security services. The United States does not.
2. If the CIA were to identify terrorist organizations' operatives and track their movements, they would better be able to inform other governments of infiltrations and, hopefully, of where these operatives have been setting up camp. Egypt, notably, has recently had extremely low success in battling Al Qaeda camps in the Sinai. Al Qaeda has been there for a while and appears to be fairly secure there. It looks like they were not sufficiently monitored.
Further, according to Debka, the US military has claimed that it is near to catching Zarqawi. If it's so hot on his trail, how can he be expanding his organization so successfully? From what I've been reading, Zarqawi's Al Qaeda wing relies on central planning and hierarchical structure to a greater extent than bin Laden's Al Qaeda. When Israel started hitting Hamas targets about a year ago, Hamas's activities dropped significantly when leaders' communications and mobility were hampered. We don't see that in the case of Zarqawi. Does this indicate that
(a)al-Qaeda in Iraq is not a centrally-planned organization? I recall that the Jordan bombings were apparently planned in part by Zarqawi himself, with his right-hand man sent as a suicide bomber.
or,
(b)Zarqawi isn't really all that close to being caught?
3. No clue. But I wonder why no action seems to have been taken? Should Iranian agents be given free access to Iraq and especially its government?
All that I see -- from far away, of course -- is that the CIA doesn't seem to be doing an amazing job at stemming terrorist organizations' growth and continued operation. The expansion of Zarqawi's network is particularly troubling, and part of the fault lies with Israel's new government in my opinion. Maybe these tasks are extremely difficult for any intelligence agency to accomplish. But should that be an excuse for a lack of success in these times when good actionable intelligence is of central importance?