DoD ending support to CIA CT Missions

[Kraut783]

"In Awlaki's case, DoJ already concluded that the killing was justified, since he had been identified by the IC as a terrorist leader whose capture was in no way feasible."

DOJ cannot take away someone's right to the constitution. So, if Biden says to take guns away from US citizens and DOJ say ok...that's ok?

Apples and oranges? no.

But, back on topic....I do agree, there has to be more thought into drone strikes and collateral damage.

 

[Locksteady]

"In Awlaki's case, DoJ already concluded that the killing was justified, since he had been identified by the IC as a terrorist leader whose capture was in no way feasible."

DOJ cannot take away someone's right to the constitution.

The DOJ, along with other law enforcement agencies, can and does operate outside of due process if that individual has been determined, like Awlaki specifically was, to be an imminent and persistent threat, which DOJ concluded in its drone white papers.

But, back on topic....I do agree, there has to be more thought into drone strikes and collateral damage.

Agreed.

Unfortunately, as with most new tools on the covert action block, there is often a period of less restricted 'playtime' preceding (and determining) regulations for ensuring those best practices.

 

[BloodStripe]

Who pays for the assets? DoD or CIA?

Def not an open board discussion.

 

[Kaldak]

The DOJ, along with other law enforcement agencies, can and does operate outside of due process if that individual has been determined, like Awlaki specifically was, to be an imminent and persistent threat, which DOJ concluded in its drone white papers.

By arresting them, not killing them.

ETA: I'm referring to law enforcement and DOJ.

 

[BloodStripe]

Not really surprising when you read the NDS.

 

[Teufel]

In broad terms it costs a lot of money to deploy specialized teams of people overseas to do special things. I think Congress estimated this cost at 500,000 to a million per person on a yearlong deployment to OIF/OEF. Im sure this cost goes up for specialized units deployed to locations without a lot of existing coalition infrastructure. Of course these units don’t deploy for a year but bottom line it’s not cheap.

 

[Locksteady]

By arresting them, not killing them.

ETA: I'm referring to law enforcement and DOJ.

In Awlaki's case, DoJ already concluded that the killing was justified, since he had been identified by the IC as a terrorist leader whose capture was in no way feasible.

 

[AWP]

without a lot of existing coalition infrastructure.

I'll bet y'all a cheeseburger this is why the CIA wants DoD UAV/ RPV assets. That shit ain't cheap and if the CIA can pay for flight hours or whatever, it is getting a bargain.

SATCOM, the link backbone, can cost a 10 spot a minute, you know?

 

[Teufel]

I'll bet y'all a cheeseburger this is why the CIA wants DoD UAV/ RPV assets. That shit ain't cheap and if the CIA can pay for flight hours or whatever, it is getting a bargain.

SATCOM, the link backbone, can cost a 10 spot a minute, you know?

Exactly. It’s not just jet fuel and bullets. Secure comms, contracted security, logistics support etc.

 

[Gunz]

Led by the CIA probably. Funded by them as well? Probably not.

I'm assuming this guy has his facts straight...maybe not


"...military forces in the Bin Laden raid were operating under Title 10 authorities, while their CIA counterparts were operating under Title 50 authorities. Just because the CIA funded the operation does not mean the military forces were operating under Title 50 authority. It merely means the CIA, an organization that derives its authority from Title 50, was in charge of an operation supported by military forces that derive their authority from Title 10.80..."

Partners or Competitors? The Evolution of the DoD/CIA Relationship Since Desert Storm and its Prospects for the Future -- Major David Oakly, School of Advanced Military Studies, United States Army Command and General Staff College, 2013

 

[Gunz]

Def not an open board discussion.

Funding issues for certain past operations--like the Bin Laden Raid--are declassified and available from open source material.

 

[ThunderHorse]

"...military forces in the Bin Laden raid were operating under Title 10 authorities, while their CIA counterparts were operating under Title 50 authorities. Just because the CIA funded the operation does not mean the military forces were operating under Title 50 authority. It merely means the CIA, an organization that derives its authority from Title 50, was in charge of an operation supported by military forces that derive their authority from Title 10.80..."

Partners or Competitors? The Evolution of the DoD/CIA Relationship Since Desert Storm and its Prospects for the Future -- Major David Oakly, School of Advanced Military Studies, United States Army Command and General Staff College, 2013

(You know that jet fuel we just expended? Here's the bill, fuck you, pay me)

 

[Grunt]

During times like these - protracted wars and such - I wish we weren't so compartmentalized and were able to simply focus more on the targets and victories versus who actually funds it. I know the reasoning behind it, I just wish it wasn't so since we supposedly all have the same end-goal in mind, work for the same "people" and such. It will never happen, but it would be nice at times.

 

[Devildoc]

During times like these - protracted wars and such - I wish we weren't so compartmentalized and were able to simply focus more on the targets and victories versus who actually funds it. I know the reasoning behind it, I just wish it wasn't so since we supposedly all have the same end-goal in mind, work for the same "people" and such. It will never happen, but it would be nice at times.

That was one of the theories behind creating the Department of Homeland Security, to cut through all the bureaucracy and red tape and funding issues, and to prevent communications failures that led up to 9/11. For the life of me, I know that it cannot be that complicated.

Organizationally speaking, if you put the CIA and the DOD into a room with one ball bearing and one anvil, they're going to break one and lose the other.

 

[Teufel]

I'm assuming this guy has his facts straight...maybe not


"...military forces in the Bin Laden raid were operating under Title 10 authorities, while their CIA counterparts were operating under Title 50 authorities. Just because the CIA funded the operation does not mean the military forces were operating under Title 50 authority. It merely means the CIA, an organization that derives its authority from Title 50, was in charge of an operation supported by military forces that derive their authority from Title 10.80..."

Partners or Competitors? The Evolution of the DoD/CIA Relationship Since Desert Storm and its Prospects for the Future -- Major David Oakly, School of Advanced Military Studies, United States Army Command and General Staff College, 2013

I think they probably paid for a lot of the mission development but doubt that they funded any costs the DOD incurred during the operation like aviation fuel, secure comms, shipping equipment and personnel, UAV hours etc. None of that is cheap.

 

[BloodStripe]

Funding issues for certain past operations--like the Bin Laden Raid--are declassified and available from open source material.

Source? I question this because the raid is still classified despite dumb asses talking and writing about it. Finance is a huge topic of discussion for many a units right now.

Also, anything CLAN related, to include finance and logistics, is going to be classified and covered under at a minimum an ACCM.

 

[ThunderHorse]

Source? I question this because the raid is still classified despite dumb asses talking and writing about it. Finance is a huge topic of discussion for many a units right now.

Also, anything CLAN related, to include finance and logistics, is going to be classified and covered under at a minimum an ACCM.

Not to speak for @Gunz but he posted the title to this paper. Here's the link. https://www.socom.mil/JSOU/JSOUPublications/JSOU14-2_Oakley_PartnersorCompetitors_27Feb.pdf

 

[BloodStripe]

Not to speak for @Gunz but he posted the title to this paper. Here's the link. https://www.socom.mil/JSOU/JSOUPublications/JSOU14-2_Oakley_PartnersorCompetitors_27Feb.pdf

Thanks. I'll give it a read through. Without reading it yet, it wouldn't be the first or last thing I've seen SOCOM publish online that contained CLASSIFIED information though.

There's even a book out there where the author thanked the SOCOM historian who he stated without their help the book never would have been possible. That book fucked a lot up.

 

[Gunz]

Thanks. I'll give it a read through. Without reading it yet, it wouldn't be the first or last thing I've seen SOCOM publish online that contained CLASSIFIED information though.

There's even a book out there where the author thanked the SOCOM historian who he stated without their help the book never would have been possible. That book fucked a lot up.

This has been around for a long time. It was part of my profession for nearly 30 years to read every open-source military/intelligence paper/publication that I could get my hands on...as boring and nerdy as that sounds.

 

[BloodStripe]

This has been around for a long time. It was part of my profession for nearly 30 years to read every open-source military/intelligence paper/publication that I could get my hands on...as boring and nerdy as that sounds.

This book was published within the past 3 years.