|
|
|
|
|
by hga
5945 days ago
|
|
Military intelligence is inevitably oriented towards the needs of the military and in the US the needs of the particular branches who are calling the shots at any one point in time. Our national political leadership needs higher level political intelligence, like "what's this foreign leadership likely to do?" and so on, in addition to what they can do (based on e.g. their military resources). There's also a selection bias in your comment "What have they EVER gotten right?" We hear all about many of their mistakes, but by definition we don't hear about most successes until they're declassified many decades later. |
|
Please share all the slam dunks I'm unaware of.
> leadership needs higher level political intelligence
Subscribe to Foreign Affairs. The idea that you need a multibillion dollar agency to sound out the geopolitical landscape in today's world is absurd.
Let's be honest that their primary function is global agitprop and covert ops. Analysis is a bolt-on, and not better than what you can get in the private sector.