With Its Huge Budgets And Resources Why is U.S. Intelligence So Ineffective?

Jed Babbin, Washington Times: Why is U.S. Intelligence so expensive and ineffective? 

China's test launch of hypersonic nuclear-capable weapons shouldn't have been a surprise 

On October 20, the Financial Times reported that two Chinese test launches of hypersonic nuclear-capable weapons “…stunned the Pentagon and US intelligence because China managed to demonstrate a brand new weapons capability.” 

That report was typical of too many others. Our intelligence community (“IC”) is perpetually surprised by events it has the job of predicting. 

There are far too many examples to catalog here, but a few demonstrate the problem. 

The IC was surprised by the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, by the 9-11 attacks, by the lack of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq after the 2003 invasion (after then-CIA director George Tenet told then-President Bush the case for proving Iraq had WMD was a “slam dunk’) and by the Taliban’s ability to take over of Afghanistan in only thirty days. 

The Chinese tests should have been no surprise. The U.S., Russia – and China, of course – have been developing hypersonic weapons for more than a decade. 

According to the Director of National Intelligence’s website, Congress appropriated $81.7 billion for the IC to spend in 2019 and $85.8 billion in 2020. That’s more than enough to pay for the resources to do the job. But from the track record of the IC, it’s clear we’re getting a lousy return on our investment. 

Why? Is the IC content with its long record of failures, is its political agenda more important than performing its mission or both?  

Read more ....  

WNU Editor: What has not helped has been the politicization of U.S. intelligence and its involvement in US politics, a sad reality that former President Trump realized in his term. The community's focus on meeting social and progressive goals rather than focusing on foreign threats and developments is a distraction that I am sure has not helped.