4 ms·
Regardless of how you feel about the US IC, I think the systematic dismantling of the national infrastructure and capacity to govern is, to put it mildly, a ser
by jxf 1y ago
Regardless of how you feel about the US IC, I think the systematic dismantling of the national infrastructure and capacity to govern is, to put it mildly, a serious problem.
- 0x5FC3 1y agoHow much is a foreign intelligence service tied to nation's capacity to govern?
- nine_k 1y agoAverting threats from abroad is sort of important. E.g. a more capable foreign intelligence organization could have averted 9/11, and with it, an avalanche of changes in the way US citizens live and are governed.
- 0x5FC3 1y agoI agree, but the CIA is quite out of line, quite a lot of times. Specifically in its current iteration, I do not see the agency being high up in the absolute requirement for the capacity to govern.
- margalabargala 1y agoWhat things has the CIA done in the last quarter century that you object to as being out of line?
- 0x5FC3 1y agoWe will probably have to wait another quarter century for them to be public.
- margalabargala 1y agoOkay, so then when you were talking about your problems with the CIA "Specifically in its current iteration", you were talking about what exactly?
- 0x5FC3 1y agoThe behemoth it has become after years of toppling govts, slinging drugs, the MKs, etc., without any real repercussions.
- pphysch 1y ago[flagged]
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> To some extent, the CIA (unintentionally?) aided and abetted the 9/11 terrorist attacks This is unsubstantiated. If you dissolved the CIA at the end of the Cold War, chances are 9/11 still happens.
- pphysch 1y agoI think if the US had an intelligence strategy priotized around protecting the homeland rather than interfering in distant lands, it is highly unlikely that 9/11 would have succeeded. Keep in mind 9/11 was a godsend for the latter strategy. PNAC was begging for a new Pearl Harbor to increase defense/IC spending just months before it happened.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> if the US had an intelligence strategy priotized around protecting the homeland rather than interfering in distant lands, it is highly unlikely that 9/11 would have succeeded Sure. That still doesn’t implicate the CIA in a domestic intelligence failure. The CIA didn’t aid and abet 9/11—I frankly thought this nonsense died a decade ago.
- BWStearns 1y ago> Some 9/11 attackers were CIA assets and protected from FBI/police scrutiny as such Citation seriously needed. This is untrue unless the words you are using are not to be understood in any sense common to English speakers. The most generous fact based interpretation I can give it is that Saudi financiers were underscrutinized for political reasons, resulting in missed opportunities to stop the attacks. The actual attackers were not CIA nor FBI assets.
- pphysch 1y ago> The most generous fact based interpretation I can give it is that Saudi financiers were underscrutinized for political reasons, resulting in missed opportunities to stop the attacks. We more or less agree. "Asset" does not mean card-carrying CIA agent.
- cycomanic 1y agoTorture, black prison sites, lied to Congress? How is that even a question?
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> but the CIA is quite out of line, quite a lot of times More than other intelligence agencies? Extant or historical? Intelligence is messy. Here. And among our enemies. We have to contain that messiness domestically, to keep it from consuming us. In that way, it's analogous to our immune system. And just like our immune system, turning it off means all the other out-of-line elements around the world now have easy pickings over you. The CIA has been more destructive than other modern agencies because it's far reaching. It's not more evil than other ICs. Just more capable. I'm not thrilled to learn who occupies that vacuum if the CIA goes away; almost by definition, it won't be anyone benevolent.
- int_19h 1y agoOr it could have sit on that information in full knowledge that something like 9/11 would enable an avalanche of changes in the way US citizens are governed that increase the power of said foreign intelligence organization...
- standardUser 1y agoThat depends on the degree to which a nation is entangled in foreign trade and security and the threat it faces from foreign aggressors. The US of course being one the the most integrated, most meddling and most targeted nations in the world.
- scarecrowbob 1y agoI suppose that position comes down to weather you feel like these folks are representing you or you feel like they govern you. Having read a couple of popular histories of the CIA and knowing how they thought about how folks like me live in the world, it is easy to understand that they are decidedly not acting in my interests. If you find the interests of the US power to align with your own, that's probably pretty normal for US citizens. But even just looking at Paperclip and Phoenix, I'd be sad to be aligned with either of those crimes, and that's not even looking at the horrible outcomes of their work in Guatemala, Indonesia, Laos, Cambodia, etc. The CIA is a pretty handy thing I suppose, as it's existence has convinced me that the US gov neither has my interests in mind nor represents me in any meaningful fashion. Given the fact I think that they have done an immense amount of harm in the world, that fact has made my conscience much lighter.
- anonymousiam 1y agoHow big is "big enough"? All aspects of the US Federal Government have grown enormously within my lifetime, and there have been very few cutbacks. Often times, an organization is less effective when it is bigger. You have the "too many cooks" issue, and the "need for consensus" issue, both of which become more of a problem with growth.
- Muromec 1y agoWell, maybe US will decompose into a bunch of indent states with actually functioning politcs, maybe thats the plan
- kulahan 1y agoWhat an excellent outcome for China et al.
- ykonstant 1y agoYup, as they say, get divided and prosper. Hmm...
- anticodon 1y agoThat's what US is openly planning against all other countries in the world. Divide every country into dozens tiny "independent" countries with puppet "democratic" governments obliging every decision from USA. There are maps of this new world regularly published by US think tanks.
- Muromec 1y agoCan't be that bad of an idea, right?
- anticodon 1y agoIt's good for the US, where it will have absolute hegemony. Bad for all the other countries that will be too small to defend their own interests. Also this scheme will inevitably start hundreds of new wars all around the world. Again, good for US, bad for everyone else.
- pjc50 1y ago"Yankees, Confederacy, California, Texas, and None Of The Above" would probably reflect the political and population-geography splits of the US better than the current situation. Would be very messy getting there though.
- lotharcable 1y agoDon't worry. If CIA ends up hurting for money they can go back to using Israel to sell weapons to Iran and selling cocaine to intercity youth. Like the good old days.
- jbm 1y agoI'm sure the "all conspiracies are without basis / nothing ever happens / I'm not organized so no one else is" crowd is pretending Iran Contra never happened as they downvote you.
- msgodel 1y agoI think the construction of it has proven to be a serious problem and if we can't dismantle it in an orderly way then it needs to just be torched.