The US & Interrogation (catch all)

[Jedburgh]

...MI was devastated after Desert Storm. I worked closely with MI at the time and I recall a number of experiences Officers and NCOs getting their walking papers. We also starting deactivating units (this was under Bush Senior), and it only got worse under Clinton...

I still remember quite clearly how the drawdown affected 97Es - they were offering NCOs generous bonuses to get out for a few years in the mid-'90s. NCO promotions were also virtually frozen for quite a while; one or two token promotions a year at the senior levels. Not to mention unit deactivations and reduction of slots overall significantly affecting assignment options. At the time I didn't care; I was sufficiently engaged with deployments for OPC and UNSCOM. It wasn't until the period just before 9-11 that the stagnation of the field reallly started hitting me.

...The current administration, until relatively recently, didn’t see the need to start expanding the force, so now we’re faced with the reality that we have to mass produce and put a lot of young guys and gals on point without mentors. Life will be their mentor, and “eventually” they’ll get good.

Bill, I agree with your last statement. There are already a few natural talents shining amongst the chaff. Unfortunately, the "mass production" mentality produces a helluva lot of chaff, much of'em unable (or prevented by command misuses) to learn the right HUMINT lessons from the COE, and thereby ending up perpetuating the wrong ones. Hopefully the good ones will rise to the top, and have the necessary influence over the field in the long term. I have doubts about that, however, being all too familiar with the MI TRADOC bureacracy. If the future ends up being a reflection of the past, the good ones will end up slugging away operationally, while the incompetent parasites end up running the schoolhouse. In any case, it will be too late to affect the current fight.

[Ski]

The other problem, and I saw this from my time in Afghanistan, is that everyone wants more 97E's. At one point I had to call every command that was under our umbrella and tell them not to request any more THT's or 97E's..there weren't any to go around.

[120mm]

I remember getting the "you may want to look at getting out" letter in 1991. I was still Armor/CAV, but was scheduled to go to the MIOAC.

[Bill Moore]

They will be provided accelerated training on basic and advanced HUMINT skills and be assigned to units deploying in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom," he said....

What exactly is accelerated advanced training anyway? Doesn't advanced training normally imply learning advanced skills and concepts, which normally acquire more time to learn, and then much practice to really learn?

You look at all the posts on this great council and most address the complexity associated with small wars and the requirement for strategic corporal and Lts, and the Army's answer is shake and bake courses and lower recruiting standards?

There seems to be a serious disconnect between the war fighters and those developing these polices.

[marct]

Pretty much every group of 40+ has one or two, sometimes more, guys who can just chat with everybody. I mention this, because it is the "talent" that underlies what makes a good Anthropologist or qualitative Sociologist. If a unit does not have "official" HUMINT people, then you can made do with people who like to chat. Toss in someone who is a musician or mathematician, i.e. they have the "talent" for either (or both - they are genetically linked), and you have an untrained analyst who has a "pattern recognition" skill. Like an IED, it is not "official", but it will work in a pinch.

Marc

[Bill Moore]

Marc,

I am partially joking, but I did sort of admire one of aspect of the USSR system, and that was their screening process for aptitude (perhaps not genetic screening, I don't think we had the technology or knowledge at the time) screening for their athletes and some of their academics. They produced some of the world’s best athletes. There is a parallel to what you are suggesting, although not a palatable one in the free world, and that is picking the best guy/gal for the job based on their aptitude whether they want to do it or not. If you could coach us on how to identify these people we could use a mentoring approach to persuade them to move into a career field more suited to their skills. However, I wouldn't confuse the gift of gab with a good human intelligence operator. The more important skill is the ability to listen without prejudice, and skillfully get the other guy to talk using empathy and other techniques. I noticed sometimes our gifted talkers are not the best listeners. They are also the ones most likely to give up our secrets inadvertently.

[tequila]

The Sovs also juiced their athletes. Not the best comparo. Also our system produced nearly as many gold medalists and we didn't necessarily cheat to do it, though perhaps it is best to say we outsourced our cheating to the private sector.

[marct]

Hi Bill,

I am partially joking, but I did sort of admire one of aspect of the USSR system, and that was their screening process for aptitude (perhaps not genetic screening, I don't think we had the technology or knowledge at the time) screening for their athletes and some of their academics. They produced some of the world’s best athletes.

Believe me, I' not a genetic determinist by any means . The comments about a talent for mathematics and music going together is, however, quite well documented in the genetics literature and has been for about 40-50 years. You're quite right that we don't have the technology to do the screening and, to be perfectly honest, even if we did I would be against using it. A "talent", even if it is genetically based, is just a predisposition and doesn't replace actual skill, although it may make it easier for someone to acquire the appropriate skills.

There is a parallel to what you are suggesting, although not a palatable one in the free world, and that is picking the best guy/gal for the job based on their aptitude whether they want to do it or not. If you could coach us on how to identify these people we could use a mentoring approach to persuade them to move into a career field more suited to their skills. However, I wouldn't confuse the gift of gab with a good human intelligence operator. The more important skill is the ability to listen without prejudice, and skillfully get the other guy to talk using empathy and other techniques. I noticed sometimes our gifted talkers are not the best listeners. They are also the ones most likely to give up our secrets inadvertently.

I agree with you about the listening component. The thing about people who can talk to anyone is that it's usually pretty obvious to a skilled listener whether or not they are talking to hear themselves talk or whether they are actually listening and engaging the other person. The other type to look for is who do people go to with their problems?

I suspect that both types of people could be identified back in basic training. If so, it might be worthwhile to consider creating something like a para-HUMINT training course. In fact, as I write this, I believe that a course already exists, or at least the syllabus for such a course, done by Phil Agre in the mid-1990's. If I remember correctly, and it's been years since I talked with Phil, he created a "How to do Ethnography" course and ran it very successfully. Since it was one class a week, I suspect that the entire thing could be reduced fairly easily to a 3 week course.

NB: This would give you trained HUMINT people, but it would give you people who have some training in participant observation techniques and analytics that could as as para-HUMINT people. If they like it, then I'm sure they would also like the 30k signing bonus currently being offered .

Marc

ps. to Tom and Stan: $30,000! And you were willing to acept a mere $2,000 to get me in boots?!? Let's just say that the price of frozen Canadians has jumped radically!