RE:
Syrian army en route to Deir Ezzor
※→ Bleipriester, et al,
As I mentioned, the US is lacking (particularly in the military) both Human Intelligence (HUMINT) and Counterintelligence (CI). Nowhere
(in recent times) was this any more obvious then in Syria. Without the necessary ground intelligence on the actual ground truth, nearly three-quarters of the bombing sorties against DAESH/ISIS in early to mid-2015 were aborted and RTB
(returned to base).
This was a known flaw in the chain of military leadership and was remarked upon at length in the
Intelligence Community (IC) Study -- The Intelligence Community in the 21st Century, relative to the demands for intelligence support to military operations (SMO). This comment, from the study, demonstrates the pre-21st Century thoughts on the issue.
Finally,I would suggest with respect to the role of the DCI that we have an anomaly today. Military intelligence is declining in importance to our nation, but the control of the Department of Defense over the intelligence apparatus has increased substantially in the last dozen years or so.
ISIS couldn´t grow that strong without US support. No matter how many terrorist groups wer around, the tenor has been "Assad must go" until the Russians came. Since ISIS appeared to go down, the US suddenly became busy to fight ISIS and this only to support the SDF grabbing as much Syrian soil as possible.
.
(COMMENT)
Not to stray too far off topic, your perception, and the perception of many other, who are disappointed with the performance of US involvement in Syria, was driven by a series of forces.
√ There were those that wanted to promote democracy in Syria and oppose what they viewed as a despotic government. Any focus, resources and funding that went to any other project relative to Syria was simply being done at their expense. They thought they could make much better use of the allocations than any other project.
√ There were those that wanted to destabilize and topple the Assad Regime and Ba'athist Government. They saw the weakness of this government as reaching out and relying upon the Russian Federation; while at the same time, fermenting anti-Semitic/anti-Jewish sentiments throughout the region.
√ There were those that saw the hand of Syrian Intelligence as:
• Being responsible for the 1983 bombing of the USMC Barracks that killed more than 300 military and allied personnel in Beirut.
• Being in support the kidnapped and tortured Bill Buckley (an Army Officer and CIA Station Chief), who died in the hands of Hezbollah.
• Associating Syrian Intelligence as being a principle support mechanism behind Hezbollah; and facilitating Hezbollah operations that either were designed or likely to provoke or encourage and threat to the peace, breach of the peace, act of aggression; Jihadism, Deadly Fedayeen Action, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.
√ And then there were those that see any involvement at all with Arab League members as a potentially serious political-military risk. That the US should exempt itself from political entanglements and let the various Arab interests to fight out the battles themselves. The theory being that the more the radicals fight among themselves, the harder they fight among themselves and the more lethal the engagements are, the better off the US will be; with the opponents focused on each other and not on the US.
These are just big four of the several facets in the US that has the reach to effect US policy in the region. Among the others are:
√ Those that want to reduce the carnage and reestablish regional peace and stability.
√ Non-governmental agencies (NGOs) that want to resort peace for the purpose of cultural and human development projects.
√ There are Situational Predictors that want to exploit the potentials for war profiteering.
And within each of these, there are latent sub-facets and movements that have other hidden agendas. What you are describing is a single layer → just one from a palette of layers in which some are in disguise, some are invisible, some are not what they seem to be; and then some are transparent or frosted, or beveled prisms that shift to be whatever it is you want them to be --- the chameleons of political-military operations
(the most dangerous).
(There are dogs that have a bone in the fight. There are dogs that don't have a bone, but want to be in the fight. And there are dogs that simply don't care and rather watch the fight and maybe place their bets.)
Last but not least, there are criminal activities that are carried out on a large scale; with the money and contacts necessary to influence the government entities
(politicians and civil servants) that are for sale.
The idea that the President can just getup one morning and decide he is going to make a major shift in foreign policy or the military focus, is simply not reality.
Most Respectfully,
R
