Military Intelligence Blunders and Cover-Ups

[flipster]

I have just read 'Military Intelligence Blunders and Cover-ups' by Colonel John Hughes-Wilson.

This book deals with 'int' c0ck-ups from the Stalin/Hitler relationship via Dieppe, the Falklands and GW1 to the WTC and GW2 - especially the 'human factor' shortcomings of intelligence specialists and organisations. It is a well written, and I thought it most thought-provoking; if not a little worrying!

Mil Int is not my specialist subject so I would welcome any comments from the floor (esp from any 'int' peeps out there) about the veracity, or otherwise, of the book.

Even if only half true, this book should become essential reading for all military personnel especially operational commanders who would learn, at the very least, to always look for something other than the easy or 'expected' answer and to guard against complacency.

There are even parallels in CRM.

In any event, it is a 'cracking good read' and I would heartily recommend it.

Flipster

[flipster]

Aw C'mon

There must be someone out there who knows how much truth there is in this book?

[4Greens]

Military intelligence = Oxymoron

[flipster]

If you read this book you will be frightened as to how true that is - especially how blinkered our leaders can sometimes be!!

[Wader2]

This review was written in 2004. I have a feeling I know the reviewer.


Reviewer:
R.G.Mitchell (http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/pdp/profile/A127CLWO03JYLV/ref=cm_cr_auth/202-4103392-2524645?ie=UTF8) (High Wycombe,, Bucks. England) - See all my reviews (http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A127CLWO03JYLV/ref=cm_cr_auth/202-4103392-2524645?ie=UTF8)It is quite obvious that the author has an intelligence backgound but to me the most interesting chapter was on The Dieppe Raid & the involvement of Lord Louis Mountbatten. My Father, now dead, was involved and his opinion on this "Great Royal Hero" was quite unprintable. If you want to know why then this is the book for you.
His comments on political interference & ignorance are also well worth reading & I have often heard that the Falklands War was a war that should not have been fought, here you can see why that is an accurate description.

Was this review helpful to you?

[Solid Rust Twotter]

I don't think there's a real problem with military intelligence, the way it's gathered, collated or disseminated. The problem lies with those to whom it's disseminated and their lack of understanding of the way it should be used, on top of political and bureaucratic agendas that make good intelligence virtually worthless. Haig would probably be a good example of this.

[cynicalint]

I don't think there's a real problem with military intelligence, the way it's gathered, collated or disseminated. The problem lies with those to whom it's disseminated and their lack of understanding of the way it should be used, on top of political and bureaucratic agendas that make good intelligence virtually worthless. Haig would probably be a good example of this.

It's not so much how it should be used, but more likely that the answer is not what was expected and the Into may be sent away to re-think until he comes up with the 'correct' answer. Again, spending on ISTAR assets has been reduced and removing a vital collection platform like the Canberra without thought of a suitable replacement is indicative of the prioritiy placed on collection by the powers that be.

[flipster]

Wader

Thanks, yes.

It seems as if there are 3 major probs that crop up with Int:

1. As already mentioned by solid rust, the politicians/leaders keep interfering - until they get the answer they want/expect - despite all evidence to the contrary.

2. We are quite good at collecting the capabilities of potential agressors (WMD excluded!) but we don't often have the assets (humint) to gauge the agressors intentions.

3. Leaders/politicians don't learn from history, so we are often destined to repeat it!