G-2
posted in General |G-2
I can remember the first time I encountered the word “oxymoron”. The teacher explained that it meant mutually exclusive or contradictory terms. The example she cited was “military intelligence”. Frankly I was a bit miffed by that example because I had spent 18 months in an Air Force G-2 section and I thought we did quality work. Not the super secret cloak and dagger kind of stuff — just accumulating information to be fed into a data bank, and receiving information disbursed from the same source.We did not regard ouselves as dolts or dimwits. But the GI experiencee whetted my appetite for the spy thrillers from Ian Fleming, John LeCarre, Robert Ludlum,Ken Follett, and Tom Clancy. Powerful reading.
Spying on the enemy is as old as history, and it probably reached its peak in the Cold War years following WWII. It was the US vs the USSR with their agents and double agents. But many critics decried ”on the ground” human intelligence (humint as it is called) as unreliable, incomplete, unsatisfactory, and a waste of money. And of course they were able to cite specific high visibility examples since intelligence failures are highly publicized while the successes are downplayed or consigned to dusty files. Then along came the attractive alternatives of electronic surveillance via intercepted messages and “spy in the sky” satellites. What could be better? The CIA was downgraded into relative obscurity.
In the 2003 Iraqi War, intelligence based on electronic surveillance and satellites is now being harshly criticized for being incomplete, unsatifactory, unreliable, and a waste of money. Now we complain about the absence of on-the-ground Humint — and of course, we blame the CIA. There is little doubt that intelligence information was pooled almost world wide before the invasion of Iraq to depose Saddam. All of it concurred that he had to go for very explicit reasons – and it is true that George Bush acted on the best informatiion that was available to the #1 guy in the world. Hindsight is always 20:20 – just ask the beltway balloon (or is it buffoon), Teddy Kennedy, who accuses the President of lying to the American people about the decision to go to war in Iraq and depose Saddam. This from a guy who can't drive across a bridge without killing someone.
Tough lessons are learned in the world of G-2. Electronic survaillence gives us a leg up but humint is indispensable. The faint hearted have to understand that harsh fact of life in the “underground” world of international relations. Was the decision to take down Saddam a good one? You bet it was. George Bush – or any President – faces a harsh reality. You either wait until we are attacked and then respond, or we head them off at the pass ahead of time. George chose the latter — and I think he was right. The very thought (Kerry?) that US forces would not be committed anywhere except thru the United Nations is unthinkable. I could never support a leader who would place the security of this country in the hands of the UN. Do we want UN support? Of course! Are we handcuffed without it? Never.
Intelligence is 90% of the game — not 100%. And any leader depends upon the best information available. Finger pointing and baseless accusations by the oversized beltway balloon benefit no one. To suggest that in Iraq we made the right decision for the wrong reason is debatable. But even so, the result is what counts. That's how history will see it.
How about a Constructive Kennedy? Is that an oxymoron??