Friday, August 11, 2006

Difficulty Fallowing His Logic

James Fallows writes long, interesting, well-quoted, and detailed pieces for The Atlantic that are so long that you fail to note all the contradictions in his logic.

His recent "Declaring Victory" is no exception. I don't have the energy to go through them, though like past articles of his that I've read, I'd love to for this one. But the time suck would be immense.

So let me settle for focusing on this gem of improbability about one of the bad effects on the war on terror that the war in Iraq is having, according to Fallows:


In fact, even today's amply funded NSA can watch only a limited number of sites. "Our overhead imagery is dedicated to force protection in Iraq and Afghanistan," I was told by a former intelligence official who would not let me use his name. He meant that the satellites are tied up following U.S. troops on patrol and in firefights to let them know who might be waiting in ambush.


Excuse me while I wipe the beer from my computer screen.

Literally hundreds of patrols, firefights, and convoys take place every day, and I am to believe that our expensive satellites that streak over the sky are being used for tactical purposes? Yeah, I wouldn't want my name used if I claimed that, too.

We have aircraft, helicopters, balloons, pole-mounted sensors, and lots of UAVs providing tactical overhead imagery. We are not tasking fast-moving satellites to support our troops in contact with the enemy. There is no way our satellites could be used for that purpose. I am to believe that we get NSA imagery to the platoon or company commander on patrol or in a firefight in time to make the next tactical decision? Or warn him about the ambush 30 meters to his front? Riiiight. Must be a former intelligence official for Doctor Evil, or something.

Another mythical diversion from the war on terror.

Really, I have come to expect little from Fallows. He surely delivers in this article.

UPDATE: Arthur K. writes to point out the really obvious error in Fallows' assertion:

NSA doesn't DO imaging sattellites. They're signals intelligence. NRO (National Reconnaissance Office) runs the optical spy satts.

I wonder if the "former intelligence official " was just jerking his chain?

One of the perils of ranting while dignified is temporarily in a blind trust is that one can overlook something. I should have spotted this one.