23 Dec. 2016 – WAISer Brian Blodgett was a former intelligence officer at the US Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA). Here are some of his posts on the Forum.
==========================
“I am not disagreeing directly with this comment, but as a former military officer (USA) and intelligence officer at the US Defense Intelligence Agency, it is common knowledge that intelligence agencies worldwide are already understaffed and in most of the world, where no threat seems likely to occur, are barely staffed. The lack of focus on a country results in very limited, if any, collection of intelligence. Thus, when an event occurs, like has happened a lot lately, the amount of actionable intelligence is not what the planners and decision-makers need. “
Intelligence Gathering Today (Brian Blodgett, USA, 09/27/11 1:40 pm)
http://waisworld.org/go.jsp?id=02a&objectType=post&o=67107&objectTypeId=61357&topicId=44
==================
“In response to Robert Whealey (29 September), we need to separate the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) from the Department of Defense (DoD), since they are separate in the United States and by no means does the DoD have any control over the CIA. Nor does the DoD control the other national intelligence agencies, and these agencies and DoD often have very different opinions of the same general facts! “
Intelligence Gathering Today (Brian Blodgett, USA, 09/30/11 5:51 pm)
http://waisworld.org/go.jsp?id=02a&objectType=post&o=67137&objectTypeId=61387&topicId=44
==========================
“In my experience, they worked for the government intelligence officer in the section and while they provided actionable intelligence, they were not the only ones that looked at it before sending it up the chain. I worked with several on papers designed for the President’s Daily Brief and in each case, the final product was gone over with a fine tooth comb by those senior to us–much senior.”
Intelligence Gathering and Private Contractors (Brian Blodgett, USA, 10/03/11 5:01 pm)
http://waisworld.org/go.jsp?id=02a&objectType=post&o=67172&objectTypeId=61422&topicId=44
==========================
According to ABC News, it is believed that the Galaxy-3 rocket has the capability to travel approximately 3,400 miles, making it ABLE TO REACH THE WEST COAST of the United States. (We can’t go to the beach anymore.)
When I studied the DPRK’s (North Korea) ballistic missile program several years ago, they were not even remotely capable of achieving this type of success and it is a bit concerning that they are at this point. I do not begrudge any country from doing as they see fit, but this still concerns me. Regarding China’s concern, I believe that they must not only consider political stability, but also the fact that the DPRK could now, if upset enough, target Beijing and other Chinese cities.
Korea -> North Korea Launches Missile (Brian Blodgett, USA) Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 2:36 PM
http://waisworld.org/go.jsp?id=02a&objectType=post&o=73770&objectTypeId=65750&topicId=15
==================
Intelligence Gathering Today (Brian Blodgett, USA, 09/27/11 1:40 pm)
http://waisworld.org/go.jsp?id=02a&objectType=post&o=67107&objectTypeId=61357&topicId=44
Robert Whealey stated in his posting of 26 September that “The CIA and the NSC can still exist, but its staff should have fewer duties.”
I am not disagreeing directly with this comment, but as a former military officer (USA) and intelligence officer at the US Defense Intelligence Agency, it is common knowledge that intelligence agencies worldwide are already understaffed and in most of the world, where no threat seems likely to occur, are barely staffed. The lack of focus on a country results in very limited, if any, collection of intelligence. Thus, when an event occurs, like has happened a lot lately, the amount of actionable intelligence is not what the planners and decision-makers need. A mad rush is made to gather information, something that usually cannot be done without having a solid comprehension of the country and /or ethnic groups involved. One cannot simply pick up a book, read it, and become an overnight expert. Hiring contracted “subject matter experts” usually means that they know the culture, which is great, but they do not know the foreign military that a country may soon be facing. This is often why nations enter into conflicts that they cannot win–the decision-makers lack proper intelligence of the situation, the enemy’s capabilities, even the terrain.
I am not suggesting that we raise the size of our intelligence gathering agencies, but short of there being an international intelligence clearing house (ever hear of UN Secret–I have and it does not work), the nations of the world will continuously find themselves in a conflict that they are not prepared for. This is not a new problem, but one going back centuries.
Conflicts, unfortunately, are going to occur. Nations will become involved without adequate knowledge, and wars will continue. How many nations can fight a war / conflict without US support of some type–remember the Kosovo, the Falklands, and let us not forget World War II and the War to End all Wars. Nations need the power, both in American service members and the high-tech equipment they bring with them–even if it is just strategic lift and some eyes in the sky. How many foreign nations depend on the US to be there for them if called upon?
The concept that Robert mentioned that the US will be able to eventually return to our side of the oceans that offer protection and we will be able to limit expensive weapons of war is idealistic in my opinion and one that I would support–if the world wants the US to return to its once famous policy of isolationism.
JE comments: Brian Blodgett (great to hear from you, by the way!) reminds us of that intelligent intelligence will always be in demand, even though it’s too often in short supply. In unhappy times like these it’s comforting to think of a new era of American isolationism–but as Brian pointedly asks, is this really what the world wants?
==================
Intelligence Gathering Today (Brian Blodgett, USA, 09/30/11 5:51 pm)
http://waisworld.org/go.jsp?id=02a&objectType=post&o=67137&objectTypeId=61387&topicId=44
In response to Robert Whealey (29 September), we need to separate the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) from the Department of Defense (DoD), since they are separate in the United States and by no means does the DoD have any control over the CIA. Nor does the DoD control the other national intelligence agencies, and these agencies and DoD often have very different opinions of the same general facts!
Ranking of countries of interest does occur due to the need to effectively “watch” various countries, but in the end, a country that has a very low priority can suddenly become a high priority overnight, or perhaps more realistically over the course of weeks. In either case, the lack of focus on a particular country for years has a negative effect on the ability of the decision-makers to have access to actionable intelligence, thus often creating quagmires that should have been avoided if proper intelligence had been available.
I am a bit confused about the comment, “to control the millions…,” since I believe the objective is not to control, but to have situational awareness in order to be proactive or reactive when necessary and in both cases, with the proper level of scrutinized intelligence. Often, what appears on CNN may actually effect a country’s national security–take Somalia for example. In the example Robert provided, Norway was important to both Britain and the Germans due to their mineral wealth and the actions of both countries in planning for ensuring Norway remained either neutral or in their camp was rather unique and naive in all reality, since neither Britain or Germany had adequate knowledge of the topography, military forces, weather, and public / government opinion that they would be facing. This is unique, since Norway was Britain’s number one priority and also high for the Germans.
I agree that the US cannot police the world, nor should it. The concern is, if the US reduces its intelligence gathering capabilities, then many of our current and future friends may suffer. As it is, the limitations already in place could very well already be ensuring that this occurrence is much more likely than known.
==================
Intelligence Gathering and Private Contractors (Brian Blodgett, USA, 10/03/11 5:01 pm)
http://waisworld.org/go.jsp?id=02a&objectType=post&o=67172&objectTypeId=61422&topicId=44
Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich (1 October) brings up an excellent point about outsourcing intelligence. When I was with DoD in various positions, we had individuals from several of the private companies Soraya mentioned working for us. They were viewed as a part of the team and often provided a type of intelligence that the agency did not have its own inherent ability to staff.
In my experience, they worked for the government intelligence officer in the section and while they provided actionable intelligence, they were not the only ones that looked at it before sending it up the chain. I worked with several on papers designed for the President’s Daily Brief and in each case, the final product was gone over with a fine tooth comb by those senior to us–much senior.
Personally, the use of private contractors to work in the intelligence community is useful, but I can definitely see how there could be a conflict of interest. I just did not knowingly experience it. I believe that as long as we have the proper checks and balances in the flow of intelligence that we are doing fine, but that is only my personal opinion.
Thank you for asking the question.
JE comments: And thank you, Brian, for the answer!
==================
North Korea Launches Missile (Brian Blodgett, USA, 12/12/12 2:36 pm)
http://waisworld.org/go.jsp?id=02a&objectType=post&o=73770&objectTypeId=65750&topicId=15
According to NightWatch, “North Korea launched its long-range rocket on 12 December. The North Koreans claimed the launch was a success. The Yonhap news agency, citing a South Korean government source, said the rocket took off from the Sohae/Tongchang-ri launch center on the west coast at 0951 local time (0051 GMT), and was immediately detected by South Korean navy ships deployed in the Yellow Sea. Multiple other news sources reported the rocket launched at 0949 local time. Japanese sources reported a rocket stage fell into waters off the Philippines at 1005, 12 December, giving a flight time of 14-16 minutes. The US military confirmed the trajectory of what it called a missile and said, ‘Initial indications are that the missile deployed an object that appeared to achieve orbit.’
“Comment: The information about technical troubles appears to have been disinformation. A 16-minute flight time would support the North’s claim that the launch was a success. If confirmed, this would be the first North Korean success in launching a satellite into orbit, and the first successful test of the components of an intercontinental ballistic missile. That makes this a great marketing tool for the North.
“Naturally and reflexively, the Allies condemned the launch. The only comments that matter, however, are those from China. None have been reported during this Watch. The Chinese made clear last week their opposition to any North Korean action that promotes instability in Northeast Asia. On the other hand, the Chinese will be the first to observe that this launch has caused no significant instability, aside from diplomatic bombast.
“This is North Korea’s second rocket launch this year in apparent defiance of Chinese official public opposition. It is time to question whether all factions in the Chinese government are opposed to North Korean provocations. Alternatively, it is time to explore which factions in the Chinese government are encouraging North Korean provocative behavior.”
http://www.kforcegov.com/Services/IS/NightWatch/NightWatch_12000235.aspx
According to ABC News, it is believed that the Galaxy-3 rocket has the capability to travel approximately 3,400 miles, making it able to reach the west coast of the United States.
When I studied the DPRK’s ballistic missile program several years ago, they were not even remotely capable of achieving this type of success and it is a bit concerning that they are at this point. I do not begrudge any country from doing as they see fit, but this still concerns me. Regarding China’s concern, I believe that they must not only consider political stability, but also the fact that the DPRK could now, if upset enough, target Beijing and other Chinese cities.
JE comments: Brian Blodgett’s last point must make the Chinese nervous–they really have no choice but to treat their rogue ally with kid gloves, and never force them into a “what do we have to lose?” scenario.
I’m sure someone has already calculated how much food the North Koreans had to forego to build that rocket.