Become a SOFREP Member

Subscribe now to get news and insider perspective from the former special operations and intelligence professionals that mainstream news media can’t access.

January 25, 2013

Empty Chessboards

This shit is chess. It ain’t checkers. – Alonzo Harris, Training Day

Bottom Line Up Front: This is a rebuttal to “Fixing Intel: A Blueprint for Making Intelligence Relevant in Afghanistan”(Flynn 2010), and includes my own assertions regarding military intelligence. This post is a series of observations based on my own experience within the community (spanning more than a decade) and a response to navel gazers within the community that have determined that specific emphasis on intelligence du jour will solve our nation’s problems.

or Log In

About the Author

background is as an all source fusion intelligence analyst. He currently works as a hybrid intelligence analyst and security engineer. He has worked in the intel industry for over ten years and specializes in DoD joint intelligence analysis, counter terrorism, joint targeting, and cyber information operations, among others. Coriolanus has worked at the tactical, operational, and strategic levels of war working for special mission units and policy makers; and working in areas such as Central and South America, Iraq and Afghanistan theaters of war, and throughout Southeast Asia.

To comment on this article please join/login. Here's a sample of the comments on this post.

  • johngreenwood1982

    Over haul. From the ground up with emphasis added to joint operations. Superficial restructuring adds little in the end.  There are many flaws just in intel.I would suggest a longer basic training for all troops and make sure that training to standard dictates the score. Individual units should be tested and scored yearly from outside graders from within the sphere of JSOC. Training over seas should be done regularly by everyone.  FOB should take on the look of fire-bases and become more layered in defences. OER's and NCOER's should be more based on the performance of subordinates. not on individual actions and 3rd party reports. Thus the Officer or NCO should have their troops tested on a basic, moderate and advanced level of knowledge relative to their position. Their performance should dictate their majority score. That means lots of tests and by necessity lot of training. Decrease the gap of the regular army and rangers. This is not to say we are trying to make an army of elite infantry. Just close the gap.Which the additional training would help with. Do away with the so called "warrior leader course" in the Army and bring back actual real life mentoring. Tests to see if a SPC is ready for leadership could be done after several dedicated mentors have had a chance to handle the young troop and give them control of small duties. I don't think this the end all be all list here. But I do think this is a step in the right direction.

  • LauraKinCA

    @dmalert  @hjw1dr  @RedWanderer  This is the one..

  • hjw1dr

    @dmalert  @LauraKinCA  @RedWanderer  I'll fill yu in over at the Other thread. :)

  • dmalert

    @LauraKinCA  @hjw1dr  @RedWanderer sure

  • dmalert

    @hjw1dr  @LauraKinCA  @RedWanderer Sick today?  Feel better