CIA DO Resignations

[Jimbo]

Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc

Oh, I don't know. The Army guys did a pretty good job of running it in WWII when it was the OSS.

Well, the Army's changed a lot since WWII.

[NousDefionsDoc]

Did a pretty good job of running SOG after they took it away from the Agency in Vietnam as well.

I agree, the Army has changed a lot since WWII. Spec Ops has been an acceptble trade.

Who's the Chief of Staff of the Army again?

[Jimbo]

Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc

Who's the Chief of Staff of the Army again?

Shoomaker? I don't get it.

You are right they did a great job of running many programs.

There is a significant difference in worldview between DoD and CIA. Some of the results of that worldview are very bad. Some of the results are very good.

[Roguish Lawyer]

Jimbo:

What reforms, if any, do you recommend in the intelligence community?

Originally Posted by Jimbo

That would be truely awful. Truely.

Hard to believe it could be worse than the CIA doing it...

[magician]

I think that you must have a civilian agency, safely outside the purview of the Pentagon.

Absent this, you will inevitably have some jackass come in and make everyone get haircuts and stand in formations and practice D&C to make a point. This has happened at every SMU in the inventory. While I can understand the motive, I think that letting things get so far where it is seen as necessary is the error.

It is not like the spooks grow their paramilitary guys completely from alien stock, anyway. They are all former military.

[Jimbo]

Originally Posted by magician

Absent this, you will inevitably have some jackass come in and make everyone get haircuts and stand in formations and practice D&C to make a point. This has happened at every SMU in the inventory. While I can understand the motive, I think that letting things get so far where it is seen as necessary is the error.

Yes. That is what I was getting at in my last post.

[Jimbo]

Originally Posted by Roguish Lawyer

Jimbo:

What reforms, if any, do you recommend in the intelligence community?

Observers have identified some areas where things could be improved. Central to any reform needs to be a legitimate effort to change the analytical culture. I have heard that many analysts are not very open-minded and very rarely are willing to challenge their own basic assumptions about issues. Unfortunately, this will require firing or early retiring a number of people. That is a good thing, on the whole.

[NousDefionsDoc]

Originally Posted by Jimbo

Observers have identified some areas where things could be improved. Central to any reform needs to be a legitimate effort to change the analytical culture. I have heard that many analysts are not very open-minded and very rarely are willing to challenge their own basic assumptions about issues. Unfortunately, this will require firing or early retiring a number of people. That is a good thing, on the whole.

I agree with this.

I also think maybe haircuts for DO wouldn't be a terrible thing. They need to get back to the basics. Thier instiutional knowledge and cultre is one of deep -seated crap. Scratch the whole thing and start over. I wouldn't worry too much about haircuts, from the pics I've seen coming out of 'Stan, its not an issue anymore.

[magician]

I think the primary thing is to at least create one safe place where genuine rogue thinkers, guys who think like bank robbers, who have true criminal mindsets, can flourish and wargame and contribute.

There is too much homogeneity, too much careerism, too much worrying about mortgages and college tuitions for the kids, and not enough guys who are kept on a reservation behind a fence with a sign labeled "break in time of war."

If there is one thing that we need, it is guys who can go out on the street and get dirty, get wet, speak languages and blend in and vanish in plain sight, and open a one-man can of whup-ass.

We lost that capability a long, long time ago. We lost it when the OSS got atomized.

Nah, the capability is still around. Remember that the OSS, Raiders, 1st Special Services Force, Ranger Battalions were formed with a selection of people from a variety of civilian concerns and some military and police folks that weren't real popular with the conventional folks in their business.

They're still out there. Just a matter of someone deciding they need a new Donovan to recruit them.

[Jimbo]

Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc

Oh, I don't know. The Army guys did a pretty good job of running it in WWII when it was the OSS.

Went back to double check this. The Army never ran OSS. When COI got split into white and black programs, the black half went under the JCS and was renamed OSS. From the git go, DoD opposed the formation of a civilian intelligence organization. Much like the Marines have an institutional fear that Army want to destroy them, CIA fears that DoD would like to take over is mission (and budget).

[Jimbo]

Originally Posted by Greenhat

They're still out there. Just a matter of someone deciding they need a new Donovan to recruit them.

From what I have read in select snippits from the Washington Post, it seems that they are indeed out there, but they need more than Donovan to recruit them. Whether the capability we have now, however robust it is, survives long after the 5th anniversary of September 11th will largely depend on someone like Donovan stepping forward to create the reservation Magician is talking about. Right now, organizations that currently provide shelter to the individuals that would move to the reservation see a reservation as an opportunity to build a casino.

[lrd]

Originally Posted by Jimbo

Much like the Marines have an institutional fear that Army want to destroy them, CIA fears that DoD would like to take over is mission (and budget).

And that's what it seems to come down to -- who gets to control the budget. If I understand it correctly, General Myers' letter wasn't asking for control of national intelligence, he was asking to retain control of the military portion of the budget for intelligence spending.

Lawmakers also agree that the conference committee remains divided. A coalition of House Democrats and the bipartisan Senate delegation wants broad powers for a national intelligence director, while House Republicans want to limit those powers.

The House Republicans have a powerful constituency: Pentagon officials, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Richard B. Myers. In a letter last month, General Myers endorsed much of the House bill and said the Pentagon needed to retain much of its control over intelligence spending to support troops on the battlefield.

http://www.911independentcommission.org/110804nytimesnegotiators.html

[NousDefionsDoc]

Originally Posted by Jimbo

Went back to double check this. The Army never ran OSS. When COI got split into white and black programs, the black half went under the JCS and was renamed OSS. From the git go, DoD opposed the formation of a civilian intelligence organization. Much like the Marines have an institutional fear that Army want to destroy them, CIA fears that DoD would like to take over is mission (and budget).

I know all of that, but look at the people that were running it. From what I have read, the Army's problem with the OSS was that they didn't have complete control over it due to Donovan's relationship with the POTUS. I shouldn't have said Army, I should have said military. Donovan was former military with the MOH, not just some college boy with a theory. He was also recommissioned. He was placed on active duty and promoted to Brigadier General in March 1943 and promoted to Major General in November 1944. So, since Donovan was King and he was Army, I would say the military was running it - albiet not the way they would have liked.

I'm not advocating military take over the CIA. Just the DO. Or do something different, like General Boykin or somebody else from the SOC for DDO.