Introduction
Since ancient times, intelligence tactics and espionage have evolved and become more complex with the changing of the global landscape and culture. American intelligence, in particular, has seen many changes during its lifetime and continues to adjust to the vicissitudes of the nation—although, these changes have not always been the most effective. History implies that effective transformation rarely occurs during uneventful times. Instead, significant adjustments often result from some type of external disruption—a tragedy, catastrophic event or scandal that exposes the imperfections of the status quo. For example, World War II gave rise to the CIA with the creation of the National Security Act of 1947, the fall of the Soviet …show more content…
There are five methods in total known as the “INTS” and each holds their own strengths and weaknesses. GEOINT (Geospatial Intelligence), which consists of photography or snapshots taken by satellites or reconnaissance planes; MASINT (Measurement and Signature Intelligence), which tracks emissions or “signatures” issued by weapons such as missiles or nuclear warheads; SIGINT (Signals Intelligence), information derived from intercepted electronic communications such as phones, personal computers or radar; HUMINT (Human Intelligence or Espionage)—which is sometimes viewed as the world’s “second oldest profession” (Lowenthal, 2015, p.127), information obtained by recruiting foreign spies, interrogations, or covert foreign contacts; and finally, OSINT (Open-source Intelligence) information derived from public resources such as newspapers, television, social media and computer-based information (Lowenthal, 2015, …show more content…
Wippl (2014) argues that one of the primary changes for American espionage would be to cease referring to nations as friends and foes, and to instead begin to view them as an assortment of partners—each with varying degrees of cooperation (p.390). This ideal, while noble on Whippl’s part, may be a bit quixotic and unrealistic. His thoughts appear one-sided and make the assumption that the United States dictates who is a friend or foe. Moreover, this point of view fails to recognize how other nations view the United States. At present, the U.S. has varying and somewhat complicated relationships with many of the world’s nations and only a handful of legitimate allies. With countries that share similar culture and ideals with the U.S. such as the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, it is easier to foster effective partnerships and information sharing. However, for countries that do not share similar diplomatic ideals or possess opposing policy positions such as China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, the possibility of viewing them as anything other than a “frenemy” at best and adversary at worst, would be nothing short of fantastical at this point. As long as such cultural differences and opposing ideologies exist with certain countries that despise the U.S. and everything it
Since ancient times, intelligence tactics and espionage have evolved and become more complex with the changing of the global landscape and culture. American intelligence, in particular, has seen many changes during its lifetime and continues to adjust to the vicissitudes of the nation—although, these changes have not always been the most effective. History implies that effective transformation rarely occurs during uneventful times. Instead, significant adjustments often result from some type of external disruption—a tragedy, catastrophic event or scandal that exposes the imperfections of the status quo. For example, World War II gave rise to the CIA with the creation of the National Security Act of 1947, the fall of the Soviet …show more content…
There are five methods in total known as the “INTS” and each holds their own strengths and weaknesses. GEOINT (Geospatial Intelligence), which consists of photography or snapshots taken by satellites or reconnaissance planes; MASINT (Measurement and Signature Intelligence), which tracks emissions or “signatures” issued by weapons such as missiles or nuclear warheads; SIGINT (Signals Intelligence), information derived from intercepted electronic communications such as phones, personal computers or radar; HUMINT (Human Intelligence or Espionage)—which is sometimes viewed as the world’s “second oldest profession” (Lowenthal, 2015, p.127), information obtained by recruiting foreign spies, interrogations, or covert foreign contacts; and finally, OSINT (Open-source Intelligence) information derived from public resources such as newspapers, television, social media and computer-based information (Lowenthal, 2015, …show more content…
Wippl (2014) argues that one of the primary changes for American espionage would be to cease referring to nations as friends and foes, and to instead begin to view them as an assortment of partners—each with varying degrees of cooperation (p.390). This ideal, while noble on Whippl’s part, may be a bit quixotic and unrealistic. His thoughts appear one-sided and make the assumption that the United States dictates who is a friend or foe. Moreover, this point of view fails to recognize how other nations view the United States. At present, the U.S. has varying and somewhat complicated relationships with many of the world’s nations and only a handful of legitimate allies. With countries that share similar culture and ideals with the U.S. such as the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, it is easier to foster effective partnerships and information sharing. However, for countries that do not share similar diplomatic ideals or possess opposing policy positions such as China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, the possibility of viewing them as anything other than a “frenemy” at best and adversary at worst, would be nothing short of fantastical at this point. As long as such cultural differences and opposing ideologies exist with certain countries that despise the U.S. and everything it