Central Intelligence Scenarios
Abstract
As the United States wages a war on terror many people will argue that we are creating more terrorists. My hypothesis is that our tactics since September 11, 2001 are actually acting as a deterrent to future terroristic activity. Throughout this paper there are descriptions of how terrorist cells are disrupted by the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). This disruption of abilities is brought on by a number of agencies with the coordinated intelligence of the National Counter-Terrorism Center (NCTC) established through recommendations made in the 9/11 commission report. The establishment of a central intelligence pool to be analyzed by experts from all of the major agencies was a seismic shift that allowed forces to be directed properly. …show more content…
The goal was to create a joint center for operational planning and joint intelligence, staffed by personnel from the various agencies and partner organizations that include: Central Intelligence Agency(CIA); Department of Justice/Federal Bureau of Investigation(DOJ/FBI); Departments of State, Defense(DOD), and Homeland Security (DHS); and other entities that provide unique expertise such as the Departments of Energy, Treasury, Agriculture, Transportation, and Health and Human Services; Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and the U.S. Capitol Police. The mission released in November 2012 is: “Advance freedom for the benefit of the American people and the international community by helping to build and sustain a more democratic, secure, and prosperous world composed of well-governed states that respond to the needs of their people, reduce widespread poverty, and act responsibly within the international system.” The lack of a single organization coordinating counterterrorism intelligence had subjected the United States to a hard lesson, but with a central core of established experts from all over the intelligence and law enforcement fields produced what was once a weakness into overwhelming strength. With this organization established the sharing of data across agencies increased exponentially. By being the primary hub for analyzing and integrating …show more content…
has moved from a defensive posture to a more aggressive one. Previous to the attack the policy was one of deterrent; Uri Fisher cites (2007) a 2002 RAND report that stated, “Deterrence is both too limiting and too naïve to be applicable to the current war on terrorism” (p.1). The attacks lead to a re-defining of the issues and to establish new protocols that reorganized the U.S. Governments (USG) strategic national goals. According to LTC (Ret.) Morningstar (2009) as cited in the National Strategy for Combating Terrorism 2006; US counterterrorism strategy is built on four “Ds”: defeat, deny, diminish, and defend. It defeats “terrorist organizations of global reach” by attacking “their sanctuaries; leadership; command, control, and communications; material support; and finances” (p.18). With completion of 9/11 Commission report to Congress in 2004 a reallocation of funds also took place as national security became the number one priority. A policy of preemptive action began to form. This changed the face of counterterrorism as it brought the fight to the terrorist in their home countries; no more would the U.S. wait for an incident to happen before they acted. Furthermore the internal security and domestic defensive policies were strengthened and better funded, adding an additional layer for terrorists to navigate. According to LTC (Ret.) Morningstar (2009) an effective counterterrorism strategy will seek to undermine confidence
As the United States wages a war on terror many people will argue that we are creating more terrorists. My hypothesis is that our tactics since September 11, 2001 are actually acting as a deterrent to future terroristic activity. Throughout this paper there are descriptions of how terrorist cells are disrupted by the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). This disruption of abilities is brought on by a number of agencies with the coordinated intelligence of the National Counter-Terrorism Center (NCTC) established through recommendations made in the 9/11 commission report. The establishment of a central intelligence pool to be analyzed by experts from all of the major agencies was a seismic shift that allowed forces to be directed properly. …show more content…
The goal was to create a joint center for operational planning and joint intelligence, staffed by personnel from the various agencies and partner organizations that include: Central Intelligence Agency(CIA); Department of Justice/Federal Bureau of Investigation(DOJ/FBI); Departments of State, Defense(DOD), and Homeland Security (DHS); and other entities that provide unique expertise such as the Departments of Energy, Treasury, Agriculture, Transportation, and Health and Human Services; Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and the U.S. Capitol Police. The mission released in November 2012 is: “Advance freedom for the benefit of the American people and the international community by helping to build and sustain a more democratic, secure, and prosperous world composed of well-governed states that respond to the needs of their people, reduce widespread poverty, and act responsibly within the international system.” The lack of a single organization coordinating counterterrorism intelligence had subjected the United States to a hard lesson, but with a central core of established experts from all over the intelligence and law enforcement fields produced what was once a weakness into overwhelming strength. With this organization established the sharing of data across agencies increased exponentially. By being the primary hub for analyzing and integrating …show more content…
has moved from a defensive posture to a more aggressive one. Previous to the attack the policy was one of deterrent; Uri Fisher cites (2007) a 2002 RAND report that stated, “Deterrence is both too limiting and too naïve to be applicable to the current war on terrorism” (p.1). The attacks lead to a re-defining of the issues and to establish new protocols that reorganized the U.S. Governments (USG) strategic national goals. According to LTC (Ret.) Morningstar (2009) as cited in the National Strategy for Combating Terrorism 2006; US counterterrorism strategy is built on four “Ds”: defeat, deny, diminish, and defend. It defeats “terrorist organizations of global reach” by attacking “their sanctuaries; leadership; command, control, and communications; material support; and finances” (p.18). With completion of 9/11 Commission report to Congress in 2004 a reallocation of funds also took place as national security became the number one priority. A policy of preemptive action began to form. This changed the face of counterterrorism as it brought the fight to the terrorist in their home countries; no more would the U.S. wait for an incident to happen before they acted. Furthermore the internal security and domestic defensive policies were strengthened and better funded, adding an additional layer for terrorists to navigate. According to LTC (Ret.) Morningstar (2009) an effective counterterrorism strategy will seek to undermine confidence