6 ms·

Exclusive: Inside the Military's Secret Undercover Army

79 points by graderjs 5y ago

sig-reduction 5y ago
To put that 60k people number in perspective, FBI has 35k employees including administrative support staff.
nabla9 5y ago
>the status of the Geneva Conventions—were a soldier operating under false identity to be captured by an enemy This is not too problematic. Geneva convention and Hauge regulations are clear. They don't get the protection of Geneva conventions like troops normally are. They are spies or saboteurs. In Russia KGB and now FSB have always been a military service. Captured KGB/FSB officers (in civilian clothing) are not treated as captured military.
- tokai 5y ago
  I guess they mean it's problematic for their soldiers. For the people capturing them, it makes things a lot easier as you write.
projectileboy 5y ago
Forgive me if I’m being obtuse, but I feel like this piece is written in such a sensationalistic fashion that I can’t understand what the real story is..? All the various branches of US intelligence and military have clandestine operations.. is that supposed to be shocking?
- madengr 5y ago
  See the first comment below the article.
- graderjs 5y ago
  The size of it, how it's off the books and outside of oversight.
- whoknew1122 5y ago
  For me, it's not the fact it exists that is shocking. It's the fact that it exists outside of any oversight and apparently without any consideration of US or foreign law. I know the US has played fast and loose with the Geneva Conventions for a long time now. But the more the US flaunts internal laws and norms on war, the more likely aggressors are going to put them aside and we're back to the savagery of World War I -- except now we have deadlier conventional and biological/chemical weapons.
  - Cthulhu_ 5y ago
    Aggressors like what? The US has military superiority and distance to the other super powers, and it would not be in any of their interests to start a war - let alone one on moral grounds, which are flexible at best for all superpowers.
    - Joker_vD 5y ago
      Like Great Britain, I imagine? Sending your special forces to another country with the specific task of killing their head of state is an act of aggression... but then again, if you're a permanent member of the UNSC, it doesn't matter much.
    - RobRivera 5y ago
      fun fact, ww1 was started at a time of high economic interdependence among world powers
  - leroy_masochist 5y ago
    These programs are directed by the Executive Branch with Legislative Branch oversight and potential Judicial Branch review. Not sure what any of these programs have to do with GC violations or laws/norms of war? Literally every major industrialized country has clandestine programs and this business predates the GCs by millennia ("the world's second-oldest profession, distinguished from the oldest one by its relative lack of ethics or morals").
    - graderjs 5y ago
- 3327 5y ago
  Its business insider. They are a glorified clickbait outlet that so happens to have a good name. To name a few other BS outlets that once had a good reputation: Forbes Cnn Inc. venturebeat Mashable The list goes on...
  - thegreatpeter 5y ago
    You forgot fox news
  - charlesmunger7 5y ago
    I was recently wondering what I'd need to do to browse HN minus the news sites
    - boomboomsubban 5y ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/classic https://news.ycombinator.com/classic Though I can't recall what the exact changes are, this post doesn't show up at least.
  - boomboomsubban 5y ago
    It's Newsweek, not that I really consider their reputation much better.
- tgflynn 5y ago
  What I found most surprising was the number of people involved. 60000 people involved in clandestine special ops ? The entire FBI only employs 35000.
  - ARandomerDude 5y ago
    Define "involved" though. Military operations have extremely long logistics tails compared to civilian law enforcement, thus inflating the personnel on the books.
    - MichaelMcG 5y ago
      To add to this, the article mentions that half of the alleged 60k are SOF (~30k). This includes units like the 75th Ranger Regiment, most likely the largest SOF organization. According to a quick glance at their Wiki task org, 14 of the 27 COs exist in either a support, command, or training capacity. This roughly breaks down to 50% of the entire Regiment, and the 75th should (in theory) have the highest ratio of trigger pullers to support personnel within the SOF world. Additionally, most of these SOF organizations have other (more conventional) mission sets they would be supporting at the same time. It can also be assumed that less than half of an organization's personnel are deployed at any given time, while the remaining personnel remain stateside retraining and preparing for their rotation--leaving a relatively small percentage of the alleged 30k SOF personnel actively participating in clandestine operations.
      - ARandomerDude 5y ago
        Very informed comment – wish I could upvote twice. Well done!
- DennisP 5y ago
  I'm not so concerned about them doing it on foreign soil, but I do find it kinda disturbing that they're doing it domestically.
- sam_4675 5y ago
  I agree. Over hyped click bait. The "secret forces" they identify are special forces (of course, what would you expect?), civilian consultants (same) and those who "search for high-value targets and collect what is called "publicly accessible information"—or even engage in campaigns to influence and manipulate social media"( i.e., military staff surfing the public web as anonymously as possible). Article admits that only the real spies use fake IDs and then only during a mission: "Most signature reduction soldiers travel under real names, exchanging operational identities only once on the ground where they operate,". Also some of this sounds like disinformation, e.g., re ability to manipulate enemies databases to get through security. Sounds like noise to freak opponents out.
  - graderjs 5y ago
    It might not be notable if you're familiar with the scale of it and the secrecy through your own experience, but that's not really the main audience of Newsweek. I think a majority of regular people this would be newsworthy and interesting. I agree some of it could be disinfo. I wonder how representative the 60k estimate is of the true size of people whose main full-time work is mostly in SAPs / black budget programs, not just these seemingly "operationally focused" ones.
jl2718 5y ago
We know how to win the war. That is easy. The hard part is knowing which side to fight for.
- robert_foss 5y ago
  Maybe neither would be good. All playgrounds don't need more bullies.
rascul 5y ago
How am I supposed to verify any of this? I'm not inclined to believe any news article on faith alone.
- gccs 5y ago
  You arent. You are supposed to defer sense making to authority and not think for yourself.
- nabla9 5y ago
  The fact that you can't verify it should be shocking.
- anon_tor_12345 5y ago
  https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Defense+Clandestine+Service https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Defense+Clandestine+Service or any of the other capitalized 3 letter agencies
kingsuper20 5y ago
It just looks like human nature to me. It's fun (and good for a career) to set up 'cybercommands' and looking-through-keyhole departments with a large logistical tail. Secrety organizations are easier to fund and harder to shutdown. I'd say that you are simply seeing the natural result of a top-heavy military with less to do than meets the eye. Feature creep is a thing, especially in a growth industry. Ideally, the various factions that run an increasingly imperial government each have their own intelligence services or even multiple ones that are controlled via competition.
ciconeniba 5y ago
As someone who has been working in this area as a don't show don't tell fashion, i have the feeling this would be unprecedented in the sheer amount of size this apply
philwelch 5y ago
This particular incarnation of Newsweek relaunched in 2014 with an “exclusive” falsely identifying an elderly engineer named Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto as Bitcoin inventor Satoshi Nakamoto. Keep that in mind as you judge the credibility of Newsweek’s “exclusive” reports.

79 points by graderjs 5y ago

To put that 60k people number in perspective, FBI has 35k employees including administrative support staff.

>the status of the Geneva Conventions—were a soldier operating under false identity to be captured by an enemy This is not too problematic. Geneva convention and Hauge regulations are clear. They don't get the protection of Geneva conventions like troops normally are. They are spies or saboteurs. In Russia KGB and now FSB have always been a military service. Captured KGB/FSB officers (in civilian clothing) are not treated as captured military.

tokai 5y ago
I guess they mean it's problematic for their soldiers. For the people capturing them, it makes things a lot easier as you write.

projectileboy 5y ago

Forgive me if I’m being obtuse, but I feel like this piece is written in such a sensationalistic fashion that I can’t understand what the real story is..? All the various branches of US intelligence and military have clandestine operations.. is that supposed to be shocking?

madengr 5y ago
See the first comment below the article.
graderjs 5y ago
The size of it, how it's off the books and outside of oversight.
whoknew1122 5y ago
For me, it's not the fact it exists that is shocking. It's the fact that it exists outside of any oversight and apparently without any consideration of US or foreign law. I know the US has played fast and loose with the Geneva Conventions for a long time now. But the more the US flaunts internal laws and norms on war, the more likely aggressors are going to put them aside and we're back to the savagery of World War I -- except now we have deadlier conventional and biological/chemical weapons.
- Cthulhu_ 5y ago
  Aggressors like what? The US has military superiority and distance to the other super powers, and it would not be in any of their interests to start a war - let alone one on moral grounds, which are flexible at best for all superpowers.
  - Joker_vD 5y ago
    Like Great Britain, I imagine? Sending your special forces to another country with the specific task of killing their head of state is an act of aggression... but then again, if you're a permanent member of the UNSC, it doesn't matter much.
  - RobRivera 5y ago
    fun fact, ww1 was started at a time of high economic interdependence among world powers
- leroy_masochist 5y ago
  These programs are directed by the Executive Branch with Legislative Branch oversight and potential Judicial Branch review. Not sure what any of these programs have to do with GC violations or laws/norms of war? Literally every major industrialized country has clandestine programs and this business predates the GCs by millennia ("the world's second-oldest profession, distinguished from the oldest one by its relative lack of ethics or morals").
  - graderjs 5y ago
3327 5y ago
Its business insider. They are a glorified clickbait outlet that so happens to have a good name. To name a few other BS outlets that once had a good reputation: Forbes Cnn Inc. venturebeat Mashable The list goes on...
- thegreatpeter 5y ago
  You forgot fox news
- charlesmunger7 5y ago
  I was recently wondering what I'd need to do to browse HN minus the news sites
  - boomboomsubban 5y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/classic https://news.ycombinator.com/classic Though I can't recall what the exact changes are, this post doesn't show up at least.
- boomboomsubban 5y ago
  It's Newsweek, not that I really consider their reputation much better.
tgflynn 5y ago
What I found most surprising was the number of people involved. 60000 people involved in clandestine special ops ? The entire FBI only employs 35000.
- ARandomerDude 5y ago
  Define "involved" though. Military operations have extremely long logistics tails compared to civilian law enforcement, thus inflating the personnel on the books.
  - MichaelMcG 5y ago
    To add to this, the article mentions that half of the alleged 60k are SOF (~30k). This includes units like the 75th Ranger Regiment, most likely the largest SOF organization. According to a quick glance at their Wiki task org, 14 of the 27 COs exist in either a support, command, or training capacity. This roughly breaks down to 50% of the entire Regiment, and the 75th should (in theory) have the highest ratio of trigger pullers to support personnel within the SOF world. Additionally, most of these SOF organizations have other (more conventional) mission sets they would be supporting at the same time. It can also be assumed that less than half of an organization's personnel are deployed at any given time, while the remaining personnel remain stateside retraining and preparing for their rotation--leaving a relatively small percentage of the alleged 30k SOF personnel actively participating in clandestine operations.
    - ARandomerDude 5y ago
      Very informed comment – wish I could upvote twice. Well done!
DennisP 5y ago
I'm not so concerned about them doing it on foreign soil, but I do find it kinda disturbing that they're doing it domestically.
sam_4675 5y ago
I agree. Over hyped click bait. The "secret forces" they identify are special forces (of course, what would you expect?), civilian consultants (same) and those who "search for high-value targets and collect what is called "publicly accessible information"—or even engage in campaigns to influence and manipulate social media"( i.e., military staff surfing the public web as anonymously as possible). Article admits that only the real spies use fake IDs and then only during a mission: "Most signature reduction soldiers travel under real names, exchanging operational identities only once on the ground where they operate,". Also some of this sounds like disinformation, e.g., re ability to manipulate enemies databases to get through security. Sounds like noise to freak opponents out.
- graderjs 5y ago
  It might not be notable if you're familiar with the scale of it and the secrecy through your own experience, but that's not really the main audience of Newsweek. I think a majority of regular people this would be newsworthy and interesting. I agree some of it could be disinfo. I wonder how representative the 60k estimate is of the true size of people whose main full-time work is mostly in SAPs / black budget programs, not just these seemingly "operationally focused" ones.

jl2718 5y ago

We know how to win the war. That is easy. The hard part is knowing which side to fight for.

robert_foss 5y ago
Maybe neither would be good. All playgrounds don't need more bullies.

rascul 5y ago

How am I supposed to verify any of this? I'm not inclined to believe any news article on faith alone.

gccs 5y ago
You arent. You are supposed to defer sense making to authority and not think for yourself.
nabla9 5y ago
The fact that you can't verify it should be shocking.
anon_tor_12345 5y ago
https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Defense+Clandestine+Service https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Defense+Clandestine+Service or any of the other capitalized 3 letter agencies

kingsuper20 5y ago

It just looks like human nature to me. It's fun (and good for a career) to set up 'cybercommands' and looking-through-keyhole departments with a large logistical tail. Secrety organizations are easier to fund and harder to shutdown. I'd say that you are simply seeing the natural result of a top-heavy military with less to do than meets the eye. Feature creep is a thing, especially in a growth industry. Ideally, the various factions that run an increasingly imperial government each have their own intelligence services or even multiple ones that are controlled via competition.

ciconeniba 5y ago

As someone who has been working in this area as a don't show don't tell fashion, i have the feeling this would be unprecedented in the sheer amount of size this apply

philwelch 5y ago

This particular incarnation of Newsweek relaunched in 2014 with an “exclusive” falsely identifying an elderly engineer named Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto as Bitcoin inventor Satoshi Nakamoto. Keep that in mind as you judge the credibility of Newsweek’s “exclusive” reports.