Bumping this thread to see if any of the new members with an intel background care to chime in.
What Is The Purpose of Intelligence?
- Thread starter Marauder06
- Start date
Florida173
SOF Support
I'll take the chance to give a little insight that I have from my very limited experience.
The last three times I was deployed as an 11B I had no idea what intelligence was for me. We did our patrols with no real rhyme or reason, at least none that I could see. Current leadership though is pushing this idea of COIN to its fullest and a good unit can be very effective. Allowing any soldier to be a collector and then arming the right -int(my opinion is HUMINT) with tools like Palace Guard and what not can push the reporting and disem exponentially.
SIGINT is incredible, but increasingly more ineffective in targetting on anyone other than the Tier 3 bad guys. I've heard some good things from my friends in group using SIGINT based targetting. Of course I am only really speaking of Iraq at this point. I have no experience in Afghanistan.
This deployment to Iraq is now HUMINT led. There is no targetting without a warrant. Warrants are based off of my ability to find sources and sub sources that will provide me with the sworn statements and intelligence on the bad guys. Warrant based targetting is frustrating, and especially frustrating when you are dealing with an incredibly corrupt government.
I've been pushed down to a company to provide direct support to a land owner. My partner and I sit every night in a meeting with our Co. Intelligence Suport Team (11Bs that went to a school or a 35M), Targetting NCO, HUMINT (me), and the Commander. We push the nonsense FRAGOs and other admin stuff through quickly, and then move on to what we are doing to make our battlespace better. For instance:
1 - I have my meeting with a source that has knowledge of an RKG-3 attack on KBR convoy in our battle space. I get a sworn statement and information about other people that may know about the bad guys.
2 - I get the information and write my DIIR
3 - I pass the information immediately off to targetting for him to develop a packet that will be sent up to higher once complete.
4 - during our nightly meetings, I brief on the intel and request that the COIST develop SIRs for patrols going out into specific sectors (photos, neighbors, floor plans, atmospherics, etc...)
5 - Answered SIRs go back to me for further exploitation with source and targetting for packets, and maybe new SIRs. Possible Palace Guard IIR sent up from patrolling element.
6 - Finally the Target packet, sworn statements, and published IIRs go through a process that eventually gets it to an Iraqi Judge. Judge issues warrant.
7 - HUMINT trigger used for capture during a combined mission that is led by the Iraqi Army.
Problems:
The bad guys are learning how to use warrant based targetting against us.
Takes time to devolop these targets and make it so the bad guys aren't on some kind of 14 day catch and release program like it use to be.
Takes days for IIRs to be published.
Coordination with Iraqi Army is sometimes clumsy.
Americans' lack of understanding on Iraqi and Arabic naming conventions.
Laziness of BN and higher personnel that just want to get to the gym and DFAC.
This seems like the best way to operate when at a company level. Comany spoon feeds the complete targetting packet to higher to get the warrant. The intelligence coming down is often times useless or misguided. The intelligence coming lateral is sparce.
Just my thoughts and limited experience on how intelligence is driving the mission for me.
The last three times I was deployed as an 11B I had no idea what intelligence was for me. We did our patrols with no real rhyme or reason, at least none that I could see. Current leadership though is pushing this idea of COIN to its fullest and a good unit can be very effective. Allowing any soldier to be a collector and then arming the right -int(my opinion is HUMINT) with tools like Palace Guard and what not can push the reporting and disem exponentially.
SIGINT is incredible, but increasingly more ineffective in targetting on anyone other than the Tier 3 bad guys. I've heard some good things from my friends in group using SIGINT based targetting. Of course I am only really speaking of Iraq at this point. I have no experience in Afghanistan.
This deployment to Iraq is now HUMINT led. There is no targetting without a warrant. Warrants are based off of my ability to find sources and sub sources that will provide me with the sworn statements and intelligence on the bad guys. Warrant based targetting is frustrating, and especially frustrating when you are dealing with an incredibly corrupt government.
I've been pushed down to a company to provide direct support to a land owner. My partner and I sit every night in a meeting with our Co. Intelligence Suport Team (11Bs that went to a school or a 35M), Targetting NCO, HUMINT (me), and the Commander. We push the nonsense FRAGOs and other admin stuff through quickly, and then move on to what we are doing to make our battlespace better. For instance:
1 - I have my meeting with a source that has knowledge of an RKG-3 attack on KBR convoy in our battle space. I get a sworn statement and information about other people that may know about the bad guys.
2 - I get the information and write my DIIR
3 - I pass the information immediately off to targetting for him to develop a packet that will be sent up to higher once complete.
4 - during our nightly meetings, I brief on the intel and request that the COIST develop SIRs for patrols going out into specific sectors (photos, neighbors, floor plans, atmospherics, etc...)
5 - Answered SIRs go back to me for further exploitation with source and targetting for packets, and maybe new SIRs. Possible Palace Guard IIR sent up from patrolling element.
6 - Finally the Target packet, sworn statements, and published IIRs go through a process that eventually gets it to an Iraqi Judge. Judge issues warrant.
7 - HUMINT trigger used for capture during a combined mission that is led by the Iraqi Army.
Problems:
The bad guys are learning how to use warrant based targetting against us.
Takes time to devolop these targets and make it so the bad guys aren't on some kind of 14 day catch and release program like it use to be.
Takes days for IIRs to be published.
Coordination with Iraqi Army is sometimes clumsy.
Americans' lack of understanding on Iraqi and Arabic naming conventions.
Laziness of BN and higher personnel that just want to get to the gym and DFAC.
This seems like the best way to operate when at a company level. Comany spoon feeds the complete targetting packet to higher to get the warrant. The intelligence coming down is often times useless or misguided. The intelligence coming lateral is sparce.
Just my thoughts and limited experience on how intelligence is driving the mission for me.
bump for the new folks
My take on intel, as I am in the 02 field
I, by choice lat moved into intel. Everyone can have their own opinion or take on what they think it is, and here is my professional take.
The purpose of intel is not only to understand and wait for the end state to see if a hypothetical guess comes true (because honestly that happens a lot based off of speculation and past events), but to:
1. Reduce the commanders uncertainty of the battlefield
2. Read between the lines of the unknown based on pattern and trend analysis
3. Reduce the threat of uncertainty to boots on ground through the use of all intel assets (OSINT, MASINT, IMINT, SIGINT, HUMINT)
4. Establish and Answer CCIR's and PIR's of a threat enviroment
5. Ultimately, purpose of intel is to inform commanders of risks and let them base op planning of of our findings.
We can debate the whole "intel drive ops / ops drives intel" until we are blue in the face, but face it without intel you walk blindly into a volatile situation and end state will not be pretty. Intel Drive Ops, Ops do not go with out intel.
Semper Fidelis.
I, by choice lat moved into intel. Everyone can have their own opinion or take on what they think it is, and here is my professional take.
The purpose of intel is not only to understand and wait for the end state to see if a hypothetical guess comes true (because honestly that happens a lot based off of speculation and past events), but to:
1. Reduce the commanders uncertainty of the battlefield
2. Read between the lines of the unknown based on pattern and trend analysis
3. Reduce the threat of uncertainty to boots on ground through the use of all intel assets (OSINT, MASINT, IMINT, SIGINT, HUMINT)
4. Establish and Answer CCIR's and PIR's of a threat enviroment
5. Ultimately, purpose of intel is to inform commanders of risks and let them base op planning of of our findings.
We can debate the whole "intel drive ops / ops drives intel" until we are blue in the face, but face it without intel you walk blindly into a volatile situation and end state will not be pretty. Intel Drive Ops, Ops do not go with out intel.
Semper Fidelis.
slick
Verified Military
The purpose of intelligence is a tough question to answer. Its purpose encompasses a vast majority of things. In my personal opinion it really depends on what your mission is, who you are providing intelligence products to and why the information is needed. Normally intelligence answers set questions established by commanders, and these can be changed at any point in time. Intelligence is a complicated beast and for one try and tame it is simply madness. In the intelligence community many things are left open due to the simple fact our missions, technology, capabilities and intent are changing constantly. Further, I don't feel there is a right or wrong answer to this question. Only good points that any intelligence professional should really consider when providing any type of support to anyone.
For the question of which -INT is the best. Ha, I see many professionals get locked into their own little worlds and forget that they need every bit to paint a complete picture. There is a reason to why there are different disciplines in intelligence. Each intelligence provides a key piece to the artwork. HUMINT brings the human element of what locals know about the enemy and the local populaces sentiment to coalition forces. SIGINT has a few sub disciplines, COMINT, ELINT, FISINT, and MASINT. Each of those SIGINT subcategory has to deal with some type of electronics or RF energy. IMINT is imagery intelligence information provided from pictures taken by cameras to satellites. As you break down each discipline you can start to see why each is important to the other and why each needs each other to paint the complete picture. To ignore one is to increase your chance to get someone killed on the battle space. To be an analyst is not only to be technically proficient, but to be creative and artistic. Intelligence is more or less an art. The best analyst are ones who are creative and who aren't afraid to make analytical leaps to help try to bridge gaps and understand information. Granted there are technical aspects to intelligence and people can take that slap it on a powerpoint, and yes it is true and its does provide somethings. But, they could provide so much more. This profession is an intimate one, you have to hate, love and understand your enemy. You have to know his insides and outs, where he eats, sleeps and works. If an analyst fails to realize this he is not only neglecting his duty, and he is failing the entire purpose of intelligence.
I have worked at division level for the Army in Afghanistan and at the agency. Each day I have ever gone into work I have never done the same thing. I have watched the purpose of intelligence change day to day. To put a stamp of the purpose of intelligence is to hinder its entire intent. I have seen the frustrations of operators because they feel they are being slighted on information and they start to gather this opinion that we are useless. A lot of time we are restricted due to classification issues. Most of the time these issues can be overcome by simply rewording and leaving out some information without destroying what is trying to be stated. But again this is why I say intelligence is more or less an art because you have to get creative with how you plan to disguise where the information came from in order to be able to push it down to lower levels.
I probably didn't answer any questions, but I felt like I should put in my two cents. Sorry if any of this was redundant; guess it just re-emphasizes how import somethings is. Feel free to lay waste.
For the question of which -INT is the best. Ha, I see many professionals get locked into their own little worlds and forget that they need every bit to paint a complete picture. There is a reason to why there are different disciplines in intelligence. Each intelligence provides a key piece to the artwork. HUMINT brings the human element of what locals know about the enemy and the local populaces sentiment to coalition forces. SIGINT has a few sub disciplines, COMINT, ELINT, FISINT, and MASINT. Each of those SIGINT subcategory has to deal with some type of electronics or RF energy. IMINT is imagery intelligence information provided from pictures taken by cameras to satellites. As you break down each discipline you can start to see why each is important to the other and why each needs each other to paint the complete picture. To ignore one is to increase your chance to get someone killed on the battle space. To be an analyst is not only to be technically proficient, but to be creative and artistic. Intelligence is more or less an art. The best analyst are ones who are creative and who aren't afraid to make analytical leaps to help try to bridge gaps and understand information. Granted there are technical aspects to intelligence and people can take that slap it on a powerpoint, and yes it is true and its does provide somethings. But, they could provide so much more. This profession is an intimate one, you have to hate, love and understand your enemy. You have to know his insides and outs, where he eats, sleeps and works. If an analyst fails to realize this he is not only neglecting his duty, and he is failing the entire purpose of intelligence.
I have worked at division level for the Army in Afghanistan and at the agency. Each day I have ever gone into work I have never done the same thing. I have watched the purpose of intelligence change day to day. To put a stamp of the purpose of intelligence is to hinder its entire intent. I have seen the frustrations of operators because they feel they are being slighted on information and they start to gather this opinion that we are useless. A lot of time we are restricted due to classification issues. Most of the time these issues can be overcome by simply rewording and leaving out some information without destroying what is trying to be stated. But again this is why I say intelligence is more or less an art because you have to get creative with how you plan to disguise where the information came from in order to be able to push it down to lower levels.
I probably didn't answer any questions, but I felt like I should put in my two cents. Sorry if any of this was redundant; guess it just re-emphasizes how import somethings is. Feel free to lay waste.
_KJ_
Unverified
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2010
- Messages
- 11
Hey slick,
I am not in the intel field myself, too bloody thick but I do have a question.
IF you can answer it that is.
I see you have worked with/are working with the agency thus you may have alittle more insight then the ordinary Joes.
The "Iraq are about to buy plutonium from Egypt" report, how did that thing come to be?
Was it straight up a disinformation campaign on behalf of the opposition or was someone trying to paint a "picture/masterpiece" and the thing got away from him?
I am asking this trying not to look retarded, since I don´t have neither the experience you have or intel as my speciality.
I think there might be a lesson to be learned for all of us in there somewhere?
I am not in the intel field myself, too bloody thick but I do have a question.
IF you can answer it that is.
I see you have worked with/are working with the agency thus you may have alittle more insight then the ordinary Joes.
The "Iraq are about to buy plutonium from Egypt" report, how did that thing come to be?
Was it straight up a disinformation campaign on behalf of the opposition or was someone trying to paint a "picture/masterpiece" and the thing got away from him?
I am asking this trying not to look retarded, since I don´t have neither the experience you have or intel as my speciality.
I think there might be a lesson to be learned for all of us in there somewhere?
Using the search tool I found this thread, though old I think its a good place to ask the question I have in mind. This thread helps me when it comes to why there is intelligence, but I am looking into the works of it. I guess im simply asking for the how not the why, more specifically im looking for any good books that would give good information on how the intelligence community works. If this post is out of place or just plain stupid let me know and I will go back to shutting up and reading.
I was reading the thread , and I started thinking about one thing.
When it comes to police operations , or some COIN/LIC ones - does role of intelligence is the same? When the informations gathered must often be shown during the legal procedures and trial, does it limit scope and usefulness of various - INTs?
Robal2pl
When it comes to police operations , or some COIN/LIC ones - does role of intelligence is the same? When the informations gathered must often be shown during the legal procedures and trial, does it limit scope and usefulness of various - INTs?
Robal2pl
JimMCpog
Unverified
Bump, this is interesting and perhaps it could become it's own thread.
I'll say that I believe some of the collection efforts are the same. Don't police run source operations all the time? While wiretaps require warrants, don't FISA courts grant the warrants most of the time?
I don't know how it works in Poland, but information is often redacted from testimony that could reveal sources, methods and operatives. With that said, Italian prosecutors got enough information to indict and convict in absentia a handful of alleged CIA operatives and their agents.
Let's be real careful here, guys, particulalary since most of you don't know what you're talking about.
I'm about to delete some posts.
I'm about to delete some posts.
OK, I've been thinking about this for a while, what about this as a definition of the purpose of intelligence (compiled from several different sources):
"The purpose of intelligence is to provide timely processed, contextualized, accurate, and predictive information in order to provide early warning, prevent surprise, and drive operational decisionmaking."
Thoughts?
"The purpose of intelligence is to provide timely processed, contextualized, accurate, and predictive information in order to provide early warning, prevent surprise, and drive operational decisionmaking."
Thoughts?
I think I would go with your definition but include something to the effect of: the purpose of intelligence is to reduce the commander's uncertainty and support his operational decision making.
I agree with Free that prevent early warning and prevent surprise are the same.
Florida173
SOF Support
LOL... are you saying intelligence drives operations? that always seems to cause animosity between the 2 and 3 shops
Outside looking in, I can see rare cases where it should. "Hey guys, we have a report of an HVT/ MVT (or whatever) in village X." At that point the commander elects to launch a raid or not based on the validity of Intel's reporting. Otherwise, I see it as a necessary supporting arm for our maneuver elements. Ultimately in my Utopian world, the commander has the say, not his -2 or -3 shops.
Although it's obvious, I'd add "...to (or "for") commanders." at the end of your statement. But, that being said, I think you've captured it.
Well done, Iron Major!
Are we helping you write a paper........?
It's true, no matter what the 3 thinks.:)
Well done, Iron Major!
Are we helping you write a paper........?
It's true, no matter what the 3 thinks.
:)
LongTabSigO
Verified SOF
Early Warning is not necessarily the same as Prevent Surprise.
Early warning enables direct action, attack, or other actions and/or provides a trigger for decision at the time and place of our choosing. Preventing surprise inhibits an adversary from having that advantage.
Concur with "support to operational decisionmaking" vice "driving".
Consider:""The purpose of intelligence is to support decisionmaking with an accurate assessment of the operational environment derived from timely, contextualized, accurate, and predictive information.
:2c:
Early warning enables direct action, attack, or other actions and/or provides a trigger for decision at the time and place of our choosing. Preventing surprise inhibits an adversary from having that advantage.
Concur with "support to operational decisionmaking" vice "driving".
Consider:""The purpose of intelligence is to support decisionmaking with an accurate assessment of the operational environment derived from timely, contextualized, accurate, and predictive information.
:2c:
Wow, excellent responses, thanks everyone.
Sadly, I am not writing a paper on this topic, this was genuine intellectual curiosity. Although it would probably make an interesting one... :)
I omitted "commander" from the definition because I'm trying to make it applicable in both military and civilian contexts, although I agree that in a strictly military definition "commander" should be in there.
I chose "drive" operations deliberately. I believe operations (including commanders) "direct" intelligence, and intelligence "drives" maneuver. I think the choice of words that invoke "support" do not capture the synergy between ops and intel that is necessary for optimum success. Yes I recognize intel is a "combat support" function. The commander and ops personnel direct intel ("I want to achieve this effect on the battlefield," "I want to know this about the enemy"), and intel drives operations by answering those questions and providing other information essential to mission success.
The above said, I really like SIGO's definition above, even with the "support" verbiage.
edit:
thought about it during class today. I think "enable" might be a better choice of words than "drive" or "assist," based on the the way intel is employed. I also decided to phrase it in a task/purpose manner. Reworded version:
The purpose of intelligence is to acquire, process, and disseminate timely, accurate, predictive and contextualized assessments of the operational environment in order to provide early warning, prevent surprise, and enable operational decisonmaking.
Sadly, I am not writing a paper on this topic, this was genuine intellectual curiosity. Although it would probably make an interesting one... :)
I omitted "commander" from the definition because I'm trying to make it applicable in both military and civilian contexts, although I agree that in a strictly military definition "commander" should be in there.
I chose "drive" operations deliberately. I believe operations (including commanders) "direct" intelligence, and intelligence "drives" maneuver. I think the choice of words that invoke "support" do not capture the synergy between ops and intel that is necessary for optimum success. Yes I recognize intel is a "combat support" function. The commander and ops personnel direct intel ("I want to achieve this effect on the battlefield," "I want to know this about the enemy"), and intel drives operations by answering those questions and providing other information essential to mission success.
The above said, I really like SIGO's definition above, even with the "support" verbiage.
edit:
thought about it during class today. I think "enable" might be a better choice of words than "drive" or "assist," based on the the way intel is employed. I also decided to phrase it in a task/purpose manner. Reworded version:
The purpose of intelligence is to acquire, process, and disseminate timely, accurate, predictive and contextualized assessments of the operational environment in order to provide early warning, prevent surprise, and enable operational decisonmaking.
I agree that intel should drive operations but often times this is not the case. Operations will continue with or without intelligence. How many times have members of this board been told to go patrol without any objective or conduct an attack without a good idea of what lies on the other side?
LongTabSigO
Verified SOF
"Enable" is less appropriate for the same reason "drive" is: it implies too much priority where that is not necessarily the case. Intel, while hugely important, is only one aspect of decisioning. I would suggest that the JAG does as much to "drive" decisioning (or even "enable") via ROE interpretation as intel does.
Further, while "support" can imply both "enabling" and "driving", the reverse is not necessarily true. This is especially so if the scope of the definition of intel is expanded beyond a purely military context.
Further, while "support" can imply both "enabling" and "driving", the reverse is not necessarily true. This is especially so if the scope of the definition of intel is expanded beyond a purely military context.
