Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
1. I suggest the area of interest is what information "informed" the opinion.

2. Their opinions could create any number of subsequent actions. I would limit myself to what they say and do. "If you come we will fight you," is a threat, not an opinion.

3. What a population thinks is indicated by words and actions. Assessing those words and actions are the critical part of the job. People who think stuff but do nothing generally don't make an impact.

...and it occurs to me that I may be defending a purely semantic position, but may be not.
Semantics stand aside

Words, facts, and actions are part of it. But at the critical moment the intelligence analyst has to take it all in, digest it, and in the end offer what it means. That means making an assessment of whether words are indeed threats or bluster. Sometimes it means assessing whether what is unstated is a threat or a sincere promise. that applies at the tactical level and at the strategic. It is an art and some have it. Others do not. When the commander or the policy maker trusts you he/she will ask "what do you think?" or words to that effect. If you do the classic, "the enemy has the capability" to do whatever, you have lost the commander's trust. He wants your best and that is an informed opinion.

Tom