$50 billion for intelligence

Posted By Thomas E. Ricks Friday, October 30, 2009 - 5:38 PM Share

That's what Dennis Blair says we are spending nowadays every year, and he should know. I am a bit surprised -- I'd been told once that we were spending close to half that just on satellites and their supporting infrastructure every year. But maybe non-intel parts of the government pick up some of the tab for that.

UPDATE: Reader Jesse Klempner points out that that this number cited by Blair isn't the whole shebang. "The release that you link to is for the NIP," says Klempner, whom some of you Beltway types may remember from the days when Marty Meehan roamed the halls of Congress. "The entire IC spend was disclosed by Blair which is $75B."

That $75 billion number sounds much closer to the mark.

Flickr user: aresauburn™

(5)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

TYRTAIOS

3:16 AM ET

October 31, 2009

More Than That

Intelligence collection is the World's second oldest profession Tom, but it has less morals than that other profession that is the oldest.

National spending on intel is divided between the National Intelligence Program (NIP - what we called the NFIP in my day), Tactical Intelligence and Related Activities (TIARA) which covers programs supporting the operating units of the armed forces, and the Joint Military Intelligence Program (JMIP), which covers programs, not necessarily tactical, but that are of concern to the DoD.

Admiral Blair is acknowledging only the $50 billion up front being spent - tucked away, there's additonal money that's classified.

DAVE-T

4:14 PM ET

October 31, 2009

How much goes to....

How much of that goes to Booze Allen, and their like?

JPWREL

4:15 PM ET

October 31, 2009

Intelligence is always

Intelligence is always useful, sometimes critical, but more often than not it adds to the plethora of confusion already confronting decisions makers. Intelligence usually being of a highly subjective nature is prone to being manipulated (Cheney/Bush), misused (Nixon), or incompetently utilized by commanders in the field (MacArthur).

John Keegan in his usual outstanding way (Intelligence in War-The Value and Limitations of What the Military Can Learn About the Enemy, c. 2004) discusses both the crucial importance and success of timely and accurate intelligence (Battle of the Atlantic) and what often amounts to a waste of potentially useful information by commanders who lack the attributes necessary to exploit special knowledge of their enemy.

After reading Keegan’s work one might wonder not only what we are buying with that $50+ billion Adm. Blair speaks of but also what use became of all that information? Perhaps there have been successes of impressive magnitude unbeknown to the general public worth every cent of these dollars. However, that chance seems somewhat remote since in this most unsecure nation any such intelligence victory would be readily leaked in order to puff up one institution or set of careers vs. another.

TYRTAIOS

5:51 PM ET

October 31, 2009

Get Me Some Intel !

In my guest house, I have two old venerable Soldiers, Willie and Joe, living as guests. Recently, over a canteen cup (they don't suck out of camelbacks) of the red. Willie said, "Tyrtaios (not my real name), me and Joe was rememberen' crawlen' threw da mud wanten' to know what was 20 feet in front of us'ens. We never gave a rat's ass what the Kremlin was a thinken'."

My bet? The average Marine in the south of Afghanistan right now still depends on his eyes and ears and ain't getting a whole hell of a lot out of this 50 billion.

The bottom line? Get out there and get me some intelligence I can use. :)

6OGUREZ

2:00 AM ET

November 1, 2009

... subject to scapegoating

forgot to add that it's practitioners also make useful scapegoats.