2 ms·

The US is in an extremely lucky geographical position; we're protected on the east and west by oceans, we only have one neighbor each to the north and south, an

The US is in an extremely lucky geographical position; we're protected on the east and west by oceans, we only have one neighbor each to the north and south, and both of those neighbors are friendly. But as a result, we don't really know the languages or customs of other nations around the world well enough to do espionage; we're really not great at Human Intelligence (or HumInt). But we are the more technologically advanced nation, and our Signals Intelligence (or SigInt) capabilities are the best on earth by a wide margin. (Interesting tangent: Russia is the opposite, and it's mainly geography and demographics that ingrained a KGB, HumInt tradition so deeply in their culture. The Russian state kept conquering different groups as it expanded across Asia and has had to manage a massive number cultures, many with their own languages, in order to avoid revolts). So, as much as I like the idea of being free to take my phone to another nation without my rigorous digital hygiene routine, I know that the US is never going to cast off its great defensive and offensive SigInt advantages. And I doubt this kind of case could ever make it past an appellate court, because every appellate judge knows that limiting Presidential power in any way immediately dashes any hopes of making it the running for a Supreme Court appointment.

kelnos 3y ago
> But as a result, we don't really know the languages or customs of other nations around the world well enough to do espionage Where do you get that idea? Pretty sure there are several three-letter agencies in the US that would disagree with that statement. Learning the language and customs of a foreign country to a deep enough level to fool even people looking for you into believing that you're a native doesn't seem like a remotely intractable problem.
- modriano 3y ago
  Looking back on my statement in your quote, I concede; it is literally incorrect. We are absolutely willing to spend the cost to make programs that generate skilled HumInt operators, attract or ensnare local sources, and maintain intel alliances that enable us to do HumInt espionage. Our military doctrine essentially requires that we develop pipelines that can enable us to churn out competent linguists in any language [0]. My point was more that this isn't a deep part of our culture (the way it is in Russia), rather I think we spun up a lot of these programs after the national security apparatus failed to stop 9/11 or divert us away from a pointless war in Iraq. Based on the instant collapse of the Afghan government without US troop support, I can only conclude that we lacked sufficient HumInt capacity to understand that context well enough to form an enduring strategy. So my point there is more that HumInt isn't one of our natural strengths, the way SigInt is. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pi5taR18uZ8&t=836s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pi5taR18uZ8&t=836s

kelnos 3y ago

> But as a result, we don't really know the languages or customs of other nations around the world well enough to do espionage Where do you get that idea? Pretty sure there are several three-letter agencies in the US that would disagree with that statement. Learning the language and customs of a foreign country to a deep enough level to fool even people looking for you into believing that you're a native doesn't seem like a remotely intractable problem.

modriano 3y ago
Looking back on my statement in your quote, I concede; it is literally incorrect. We are absolutely willing to spend the cost to make programs that generate skilled HumInt operators, attract or ensnare local sources, and maintain intel alliances that enable us to do HumInt espionage. Our military doctrine essentially requires that we develop pipelines that can enable us to churn out competent linguists in any language [0]. My point was more that this isn't a deep part of our culture (the way it is in Russia), rather I think we spun up a lot of these programs after the national security apparatus failed to stop 9/11 or divert us away from a pointless war in Iraq. Based on the instant collapse of the Afghan government without US troop support, I can only conclude that we lacked sufficient HumInt capacity to understand that context well enough to form an enduring strategy. So my point there is more that HumInt isn't one of our natural strengths, the way SigInt is. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pi5taR18uZ8&t=836s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pi5taR18uZ8&t=836s