World Affairs Board - View Single Post

T_igger_cs_30 · 03-27-2008, 13:36 PM

S-2

Quote:

Concur. The question is how to integrate those resources without disturbing academic sensibilities. We're discussing "applied" vs. "pure". Can we develop martial-related anthropological expertise specific to our intelligence needs without creating undue friction? We need the access.

S-2,
Analysis is changing, the speed the requiered answers and Intel that are wanted/needed is head spinning.
Treverton & Gabbard in their paper "Assessing the Tradecraft of Intelligence Analysis" wrote about a balance has to be achieved through partnerships (academics, industry and governments)and boundaries established (all source v single int gather).
Access to information is so vast nowadays, the days of relying on the individual analyst are long gone (however, the human element "the threat of logic" cannot ever be discounted)
Outthinking the enemy is nothing new, but we are dealing with a completly new threat and enemy nowadays than we are traditionally used to. i.e. the Soviet Union for example.
And to that end to fully understand the new enemy and break down "Shabnama" and other cultural idiocyncrasies Anthropologists have to be accepted and encouraged to join the military community, now more than ever.
Just to compound things a little, neither can we forget or "put on the back burner" the threat from emerging powers either.

Quote:

"I personally believe that negotiations are inevitable," said Thomas Johnson

S-2,
I completely agree, however this raises another very difficult issue and dilema "negotiating with terrorists", how do we at this point change our stance, whilst saving face with the enemy?

Quote:

by acquiring a monopoly on the “legitimate” use of force

WM,
your so right