Time for a JFISRCC?

[William F. Owen]

That's true to a point, but in my experience, my Commanders are not satisfied with simple numbers which is really just information, not intelligence.

Well that's telling in and of itself. I know exactly what you mean, and I faced that problem. "Staff, which MMR are facing?" and I wanted to reply "I don't know and it doesn't matter." I also wanted to add, "If I tell you will it change your plan?" I have numerous horror stories from that period.

Looking back we were extraordinarily bad at defining what we actually needed to know versus, what we felt we wanted. At the formation level, we should have limited ourselves to intent and capability.

[wm]

The real problem comes in when doing research-based analysis and not simply supporting current ops. When info is hidden inside websites that require registration, it's unsearchable - IOW no one can find it unless they already know it's there.

Again this is trying to conflate two different efforts it seems to me. If you can't get the feeds you need to provide intelligence to current ops, that is indeed a problem. But I suspect that this is more about providing what I'd call combat information than about providing "finished" intelligence products. And as you noted in your response to Wilf,

That's true to a point, but in my experience, my Commanders are not satisfied with simple numbers which is really just information, not intelligence.

your bosses seem to be more interested in the sort of stuff that comes form the longer-term studies. Again, I'll suggest that putting a new guy in the chain with a button or two on the collar isn't going to get those databases identified and unlocked. To get stuff like that one has to do some HUMINT within our own intel system. But, I don't think that's any different in any dealing with the other systems responsible for providing the various elements of combat power. If it were, then I don't think we'd see the push for common operating pictures and better situatiomal awareness display software and hardware.

Yes, and that's why search tools are so critical today because they allow you to find the information you need. Unfortunately, when people needlessly hide their information then search tools can't find it.

Perhaps the best search tools out there are the old telephone and MIRC Chat. I suspect they are much more productive than Google searches and SQL queries of databases. Sometimes we need to look elsewhere than to a technology solution. Business folks still usually travel to "seal the deal" face-to-face even though VTC is pretty ubiquitous.

[Entropy]

Ken,

Thanks again for the discussion and PM's. You are right that we have different backgrounds and perspectives, but I think we may not be that far apart in the end.

My solution is to look at the equipment that we have and that is in the pipeline; get rid of stupid things like MRAPs (purchased at the behest of Congress just to be PC), rationalize equipment and give Commanders the tools to do their jobs. When a new tool, the MQ-1C for example, becomes available, determine who needs it -- not who should operate it; who needs it -- then assign it to that echelon provided they are capable of operating it and can totally care for it. If they cannot, they should not 'own' it and someone above must operate it for them. Note the need has not gone away, merely the operating capability. Once it is established at an operating and for a supported echelon, any excess capability accrues to higher echelons or adjacent units METT-TC dependent.

I pretty much agree with this, in theory at least. In practice, however, there will be times when there will be more people who need a capability than what is available or can be acquired. So the problem of scarcity remains and my sense is that scarcity will have to be managed somehow. That's really the angle I come at this from.


WM,

Again this is trying to conflate two different efforts it seems to me. If you can't get the feeds you need to provide intelligence to current ops, that is indeed a problem. But I suspect that this is more about providing what I'd call combat information than about providing "finished" intelligence products. And as you noted in your response to Wilf,

My job is both, depending. Air Force DGS's mainly support current ops, but they also do finished intelligence. To give you an example of the latter, we might create a "pattern of life" product for a high interest individual, graphically tracing his movements over a period of time. This is easy enough to do with DGS-only assets, but there is usually video from the Army and other's assets that provide additional information or, more importantly, coverage of that individual from periods when there wasn't a dgs asset.

So, unlike the NSA and SIGINT, there's no "one-stop shop" for this information. It's not like conglomeration is technically difficult - it isn't - but it never happens. There's no reason IMO to require registration on the vast majority of SIPR websites and there's no good reason not to have centralized portals for intelligence and ops information.

your bosses seem to be more interested in the sort of stuff that comes form the longer-term studies. Again, I'll suggest that putting a new guy in the chain with a button or two on the collar isn't going to get those databases identified and unlocked.

Well, my bosses are interested in whatever our "customer" is interested in, which can vary.

Classified information is becoming more fragmented, not less, IMO. Since I first started in the intel business in the early 1990's, my time spent finding information has gone up tremendously compared to the time I spend on analysis and preparing products. I'm not the only one who feels that way. Maybe some higher authority is not the answer, but the status quo is not acceptable. Again, I like NSA's model. We need something similar for the other "ints."

I'm not wedded to the idea of a JFISRC - it was something I threw up for discussion and so far I'm less supportive of the idea than I was originally.

Perhaps the best search tools out there are the old telephone and MIRC Chat. I suspect they are much more productive than Google searches and SQL queries of databases. Sometimes we need to look elsewhere than to a technology solution. Business folks still usually travel to "seal the deal" face-to-face even though VTC is pretty ubiquitous.

Naturally, but you can't get everything over the phone or mirc, assuming you even know who to contact (the contact info on websites is often wrong/out of date). Besides, calling a dozen or so people to see if they have information on subject X is often a waste of my time and theirs. I should simply be able to get the basic information I need, then I can call/chat/email who I need to in order to get context, clarifications, etc.

Now, over a period of months, I've "learned the system." I've learned through experience who has what and I'm somewhat more efficient at finding information. I know, or at least have a general idea, when/if one of those hidden veins of information is likely to have something I need. I know who the key people are that I need to contact for various types of information.

The problem is that it took months to get here, it's still a PITA and I bet there's still stuff out there I'm still unaware of. There's simply no excuse for that.