Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Military Intelligence Blunders and Cover-Ups

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Military Intelligence Blunders and Cover-Ups

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 7th Oct 2006, 10:38
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Military Intelligence Blunders and Cover-Ups

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

Last edited by flipster; 9th Oct 2006 at 09:48.
flipster is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2006, 00:38
  #2 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Aw C'mon

There must be someone out there who knows how much truth there is in this book?
flipster is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2006, 08:29
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Military intelligence = Oxymoron
4Greens is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2006, 09:47
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you read this book you will be frightened as to how true that is - especially how blinkered our leaders can sometimes be!!
flipster is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2006, 10:06
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This review was written in 2004. I have a feeling I know the reviewer.


Reviewer:
R.G.Mitchell (High Wycombe,, Bucks. England) - See all my reviewsIt 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?
Wader2 is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2006, 10:11
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Planet Tharg
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Solid Rust Twotter is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2006, 10:39
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Grid ref confused
Age: 63
Posts: 843
Received 19 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
cynicalint is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2006, 00:55
  #8 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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!
flipster is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.