Military Intelligence?

“on the basis of a HUMINT report from a senior Iraqi scientist. This scientist stated that “a couple of days before the fighting started” he was told to destroy nerve agents and all materials relating to them. “

Hmmm… one source…

“alex : TJ hate to sound paranoid but the question that I have to ask is can we trust what we see?
Remember the US has a lot of ex-Iraqi and ex-Soviet hardware in its hands, so it is possible that GWB got the idea to “show the people what they want to see”.”

Another single source… who to believe?

Here is a recent and fairly interesting report on the discovered mobiles on the CIA website. (Keep an ear out for rotor-blade noise – Black helos and all that!)

http://www.cia.gov/

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/iraqi_mobile_plants/index.html

No doubt it won’t be long before the conspiracy theory groups start finding / Photo Shopping Wallmart stickers on some of the equipment / pipes shown in some of the images!

Of note in the CIA webpage is what Iraqi officials stated about the purpose of the mobiles.

TJ

Haven’t we gone slightly off topic?

Who’s trying to change the subject here?:p

Is there an expression in English for being nummed by stupidity?

I am.

Arthur, this should amuse you too. From our old friend Venik on the Iraqi Foxbat C. Will he never learn?!!

http://www1.iraqwar.ru/iraq-read_article.php?articleId=3967&lang=en

Venik wrote:

“The story with the MiG-25 found by the Australians has raised a number of questions. The aircraft pictured on the photos released by the Australian military is a MiG-25PU (NATO: ‘Foxbat-C’) – a two-seat trainer aircraft. Iraq was not known to have any of these planes. The “PU” stands for “Perekhvatchik Uchebnyj” or Interceptor-Trainer. In addition to the trainer role the MiG-25PU was also designed to carry a cruise missile. No MiG-25PUs were ever sold to Iraq, which purchased only 20 MiG-25s – 12 export-version MiG-25PD improved interceptors and 8 MiG-25RB (reconnaissance/bomber) following Soviet VVS pilot Belenko’s defection to Japan aboard his MiG-25 and the resulting lifting of Soviet export restrictions on this type. The only country other than Russia known to operate the “PU” model is India and it is believed that Syria also has this aircraft. The Australian military says that the MiG-25 they found was one of 51 MiG planes discovered. According to the Australians, this particular MiG-25 was found at some “major airbase in western Iraq” at an undisclosed location.

The problem is there are no major Iraqi AF airbases in the western part of the country. The only exception (and it’s quite a stretch to call this a major airbase) is the airbase near Ardamah located not far from the Baghdad-Jordan highway going through Ar Ramadi and Ar Rutbah. All of Iraq’s major air bases are located in the eastern part of the country along the border with Iran (for obvious reasons). Iraq’s six operational single-seat MiG-25Ps belong to the 96th Squadron and are based at Al Quadisiya airbase commanded by Gen. Ismail Al Sheiks and the Air Wing Commander Brig. Gen. Amer Shaheen. The MiG-21 combat/training wing is located at the same airbase and commanded by Brig. Mohamed Mansour. The Al Quadisiya airbase is located about 200 km south of Baghdad between An Najaf and An Nassiriyah along the Euphrates River – territory occupied by the coalition forces weeks ago, according to Pentagon. So, once again, there is what seems to be a major event in this war – 51 MiGs supposedly found – and once again there are more questions than answers. Why don’t we see more of the captured Iraqi planes? Why weren’t the planes destroyed during the bombing campaign? Why the only public photo of a captured Iraqi MiG is that of a type Iraq did not have? Where was the photo taken and why is it such a secret?

Finally the Australian SAS has revealed the name of the airbase it occupies: the al-Asad. A 150-strong Australian SAS force claimed to have found and captured practically the entire Iraqi Air Force – “57 Soviet-made MiGs, helicopters, anti-aircraft batteries, helicopters and 7.9 million kilograms of munitions and ordnance” [ “SAS reveal the war they fought”, by Tom Allard, with the 1st SAS regiment in Iraq, The Sydney Morning Herald, April 24, 2003]. Naturally and as usual all of this equipment is intact and “will form the basis of the ‘free Iraq air force’” [Tom Allard]. How convenient. It’s worth mentioning that the al-Asad airbase is a small patch of paved sand located on the edge of the Syrian Desert just west of the Hawijat Arban railroad station near the Euphrates. At best this is a support airfield with a few small service buildings and no significant aircraft storage facilities. 57 MiGs and 7.9 million kilograms of ammo? Convenient indeed!”

Inspired by Venik’s ramblings some of the forum participants comments are hilarious:

“If you examine the photograph depicted in the link below, there are two flaws with the image of the Iraqi flag on the tail of the aircraft. (1.) The angle of the tail made it difficult for the Adobe Photoshop trickster to position the image correctly. Examine the lower edge of the flag (black stripe) – it does not line up correctly with the rivets below, which form the true horizontal line. (2.) The flag image is surrounded by speckles, caused by pasting an image of different resolution onto the background, I believe. Look at the rest of the photo. It is clear and concise, with no speckles (other than possibly where the English text (!) appears on the plane).”

“The flag appears like a sticker rather than painted one, the adobe editor was smart enough to cut the flag from a old iraqi equipment but failed to blend it with the rusted tail surface. What they are trying to achieve by showing this?, have they declared MIG25 as part of WMD? I guess the adobe editor must be trying to cut & paste a WMD equipment inside… MIG25 can be used as VX sparying machine??? huh…. “

“all the sas men in the MiG pictures have clean clothes, even the ones running around in the ‘village’ or whatever it was, webbing and equipment is dirty and worn, as you would expect from soldiers who excersise regularly, but the clothes don’t even have dirty knees or elbows, compare with photos of GIs in baghdad who one would assume had a more comfortable trip than a sas man crawling around behind enemy territory. once again it could mean nothing, who knows maybe the australian sas look so much like iraqis that they don’t need to hide and duck and crawl from cover to cover, or maybe they can only side step, like the marine from doom… “

“There are plenty of identifiable flowers and possibly unique palm tree species on that photo of the Mig-25. Somebody ought to be able to figue out if they grow in Iraq. If they do, noone any the wiser. But what of they don’t? “

Save us from the loons!!!!!

TJ

Awww…. those people are stupid.
Hilarious, TJ!

Originally posted by TJ

What these [unidentifiable] hooded men are guarding is a very rare Russian aircraft known as the Mig 25-PU. Known generically to the world as the Mig 25 “Foxbat”, this version is a two-seat interceptor trainer produced in numbers so small that every aviation buff in the world knows where they all are.

Give me some contact information for every aviation buff in the world then, because i have been looking for that info for quite some time :rolleyes:

Who are these people? So it’s impossible for spotters and researchers to keep track of B-2s, German Tornados and B-52H’s while we do know where each and every MiG-25PU is? I honestly wish it was true…

As a matter of fact, since quite a few MiG-25PU’s were rebuilt to MiG-25RU to comply with CFE issues, the clue is completely lost on me.

Alex wrote:

“TJ hate to sound paranoid but the question that I have to ask is can we trust what we see? ………. “

Alex, yes you do sound very paranoid! If they wanted to plant evidence then they would have done it a long time ago and in the first couple of weeks. Imagine a scenario of “Bush or Blair’s minions” planting a couple of ex-Taliban SCUD and their TELs into western Iraq. Imagine “Bush or Blair’s minions” planting stockpiles of agent filled 155mm shells alongside Iraqi M109 SP howitzers. Imagine media access after the “finds” and there you have Hussein’s regime busted. Ludicrous I know, but it is incredible how much individuals / groups belive that anything found must have been planted.

Surfing the web last week I came across one website that simply beggars belief. If the rest of the stories aren’t ludicrous enough this one caught my eye. Most people have seen the images / video of the Iraqi Foxbat C in Iraq near Al Asad. This website / group actually believes:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steveseymour/subliminalsuggestion/oil2.html

“On a lighter note, it seems that US Central Command in Qatar lied to us yesterday, which I feel sure will come as an enormous surprise to everyone! Apparently in an attempt to deflect attention away from the very real Mosul to Haifa pipeline that the SAS has been inadvertently protecting for Israel, the PR folk hastily rushed out some really pretty pictures which, they claimed, showed the SAS “guarding captured Iraqi aircraft at a secret airfield west of Baghdad”.
What these [unidentifiable] hooded men are guarding is a very rare Russian aircraft known as the Mig 25-PU. Known generically to the world as the Mig 25 “Foxbat”, this version is a two-seat interceptor trainer produced in numbers so small that every aviation buff in the world knows where they all are. Iraq had never bought any Mig 25-PUs, has not borrowed or been given any Mig 25-PUs, so this official picture from US Central Command cannot have been shot in Iraq. It really is that simple…
The headgear worn by these heroes is mildly interesting, because it is very similar if not identical to that worn by Russian special forces, normally but not always in Russia. The colors on the aircraft indicate that is most likely one belonging to Tajikistan, where certain units of the SAS [hush my mouth…] went on exercise a year or two ago. Remember Exercise “Enduring Freedom”?
Someone really should have a quiet word with US Central Command. If you know their telephone number, call and tell them that if they really want to fool the western public, their PR folk really should use a picture of an aircraft that most people will actually believe is [or can be] in Iraq. Try to stick to the ubiquitous Mig 21. Almost everyone in the Middle East has a few of these, including Saddam…”

TJ

I see what you’re saying Jonsey. But the core of my argument about the state of strategic intelligence is simply the shortage of hard results – a non-functional product, as you might say.

It beggars belief that 2 decapitation strikes were carried out, with what now appears to be no results, just what kind of information where they playing off here. Lets not even get onto the fact that they cant find Saddam, Mullah Omar or Osama. Do you know how much money these people have to throw at getting sources to talk, many millions. Then they’ve got 24/7 satellite and drone coverage as well as on the ground teams. That’s a huge resource.

With the commercial media, you a have variety of different outlets each acting independently, and putting their news out independently. In theory someone wanting an objective view of the news should be able to cross reference these independent sources of information to distill the most probable facts.

With government intelligence agencies, you have a vast network ,with competing interests, that acts under a centralised system of beauracratic control. The problem with this system is that there is a single point of gatekeeping that is far removed from the actual sources and which acts as a final arbiter of what is
put out. Take for example how an agent on the ground was aware of the 9/11 suicide pilots being trained, but the information was nullified in the administration process.

Ps Jonesy – I hope you don’t think I’m one of the people here who indulges in conspiracies, its not my game at all.

Tempest,

Problem is you’re treading into a dangerous grey area in terms of definintion of the word “unnaccountable” and blurring it in with the factor of third-party spin on the resultant intel product.

Oversight on the Intelligence Agencies in both the UK and US is maintained, quite strenuously (though more visibly in the US naturellement!), by Committees made up of elected representatives. In the UK this is Parliaments’ Intelligence and Security Committee, in the US its, I believe, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

Obviously, due to the nature of the work these agencies do, such Commitee rulings are, for the most part, going to be reactive in nature. There is no way around that without providing, in this country, five sitting MP’s with minute-by-minute briefings on intel ops on a global basis. Would be great for them if they were John le Carre fans I suppose, but, the operational security vulnerability makes the whole thing plainly ludicrous!.

As to the general operational methodologies, who knows!?, might not even be uniform across different officers in the same department!. Journalists don’t seem to be able to manage not to insert a little of their own, or institutional, bias in their work so I’d not be suprised too much if something similar happened in the Intelligence world. Then again though that is precisely the reason that, when forming an intelligence analysis, the orchestrating body is meant to use numerous sources and look for correlations and discrepancies.

It was always a risk that Bush or Blair’s minions would plant evidence to support their claims.

I’d flip that around on you Alex. Wasn’t it always likely that some people would have claimed that irrespective of what US or UK forces found in Iraq?. Certainly people were stopping just short of accusing Blair and Bush of doing precisely the above one week after the end of the fighting!.

Personally I think Robin Cook has highlighted, perfectly, the naivete of many people over this issue. Rumsfeld made his “WMD’s may have been destroyed prior to the war” speech on the basis of a HUMINT report from a senior Iraqi scientist. This scientist stated that “a couple of days before the fighting started” he was told to destroy nerve agents and all materials relating to them. If we are to accept this as credible, as the good Mr Cook MP seems willing to in order to support his position that none were left etc, it makes one fact so perfectly clear it astounds me – there WERE WMD’s present in Iraq, in quantity, right up to March 2003 just as all the various Agencies reported. Media doesnt seemed to have made that leap in logic yet though – which is a bit of a shame!.

Sorry for interupting your conspiracy theories and machiavellian plots lads…please carry on! 😀

I gather that because Saddam hasn’t been found that he didn’t exist either.

Sauron

Originally posted by Arthur
Any intelligence agency will find what it’s superiors want it to find, or at least suggestions to it. The US has a good track record of this.

I agree. It’s a serious problem, because intelligence agencies are too unaccountable.

What is the CIA’s typical methodology? Do they go in with no preconceptions and just report what they find, or do they go in with a specific purpose and try to prove something?

I can quite understand the logic of the first option, but the 2nd option is wide open to abuse. Maybe there should be a division of labour – a whole different agency should analyse and interpret and the CIA should only gather data.

Maybe the analysts should be members of the judiciary, as the gatherers are clearly controlled by the executive branch. Segregations seems crucial to restore credibility.

And that’s exactly what it should do Hand;)

No Tempest . I did understand the purpose of your thread.

I just replied to you because you initiated this thread :)…
and I share your point of view.

The tiltle just made me laugh 🙂

“The truth in war is the property of the victors.” – Winston Churchill

Hand: You missed my use of the [?] at end of the word Military Intelligence. We who use the english language make extensive use of the power of irony to say things without using long explanations.

Isn’t it funny, when observing a war from the outside it is perfectly normal to expect both sides to lie or exaggerate and generally nothing can be beleived until verrified by an outside party or unless both side’s stories match. However, if the US is involved we’re expected to beleive what they say all the time as though they are somehow purer… Since Allied Force I’ve seen things rather differently – the USAF, the CIA, the US government, the State Department or in fact any other source connected with the US (e.g. NATO) has, in my eyes, been utterly discredited as a reliable source of information. They are clearly prepared to twist the truth or blatently lie about anything as long as it suits their purpose.

Tempest ,

” Military intelligence ” : that’s funny , those 2 words don’t match together.

Clemenceau once said ” War is a too important business to let militaries deal with it “

TJ hate to sound paranoid but the question that I have to ask is can we trust what we see?
Remember the US has a lot of ex-Iraqi and ex-Soviet hardware in its hands, so it is possible that GWB got the idea to “show the people what they want to see”.
It was always a risk that Bush or Blair’s minions would plant evidence to support their claims.

Sorry, but I wouldn’t trust either of them as far as I could throw them, which isn’t very far at all 🙂

Ink wrote:

“Yes, thats right, none of the things we were told were true. “

The intel on the mobile labs played out to be correct. Although clean these labs were discovered. The Iraqi’s were not allowed to have these in their possession and obviously never declared them. The SIGINT tape played at the UN had commanders discussing / referring to vehicles that they didn’t want inspection teams to find. It appears likely that the labs discovered were those vehicles discussed.

TJ

“Military Intelligence which allows an army to win a war with less than 200 fatalities, is very deserving of respect.”

True but they could have had fewer casualties by invading Hawaii, and at least they might have found a few WMDs, though the chances of getting saddam there would have been lower… 🙂

“During the running-up to the war, the CIA in fact stated that the ‘evidence’ against Iraq was not as strong as the Bush administration presented it, but George Tenet was whistled back from the White House… He should of course keep his intelligence nicely in line with the ideas of those in the Oval Office “

The same thing happened with the bomber and missile gap. The politicians always made a bigger deal out of anything the CIA presented than the CIA wanted. In the end it was CIA satellites that proved both gaps were rubbish, but even then it took a while to convince the politicians. The result was not a scale back of plans for building more weapons for parity, but to go ahead with those plans in an effort to get a credible first strike capability… decisions made in the military and political circles… nothing to do with intelligence (in any sence..).

Any intelligence agency will find what it’s superiors want it to find, or at least suggestions to it. The US has a good track record of this.

The Soviets are evil, so the intelligence services invented the Bomber Gap.
The Soviets are still evil, so the intelligence services invented the Missile Gap.
The Iraqis are evil, so the intelligence communities come with ‘evidence’ supporting the existance of WMD’s (…ready to be used operationally within 45 minuts… great one, Tony!) and Saddam’s links with Al Qaida.

During the running-up to the war, the CIA in fact stated that the ‘evidence’ against Iraq was not as strong as the Bush administration presented it, but George Tenet was whistled back from the White House… He should of course keep his intelligence nicely in line with the ideas of those in the Oval Office :rolleyes: