----- Original Message ----- From: "Damon Agretto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 9:25 AM Subject: Re: "Team B"
> > I have a book at home that is largely a response to a > Reagan administration's assessment of Soviet military > power. It was extremely critical of the estimates the > Reagan administration had for Soviet Military power. > However, hinsight is 20/20 and ultimately the truth > was actually somewhere between both extremes. > > For example, the book criticizes the projected design > of the "new Soviet Anti-aircraft gun system," calling > it a complete fiction and largely inspired by the West > German Gerphard system (which the illustration > resembled). The truth was that the Tunguska system, > which was designed as a replacement for the ZSU-23-4 > system largely resembled the Gephard, but in fact its > potential capabilities were far greater than what the > Reagan administration had projected (mounting 2 more > 30mm barrels, as well as an organic surface-to-air > missile system). > > The point is that the author who wrote the response > had an anti-Reagan bias, and therefore his material > was untrustworthy. The same danger can occur again in > this case. Don't let your bias get in the way of an > analysis, because they might just be right. > I have a buddy who was responsible for assessing the strategic assents of the USSR for the CIA during . He said that his analysis was merged with the analysis of the various service intelligence arms before it was presented. He said that they consistently ranked the threat far higher than he did. When he read their reports and asked to discuss their differences, they stonewalled him. After the USSR fell, he said that they were able to get a lot of information to assess things. He said that the actual risk was lower than his mid point, but within his range. The other agencies had his upper limit as their mid-point, and they were way over the top. His assessment is that he had no bias to produce any given report, while they were motivated to provide their generals and admirals the ammo they needed to get their programs funded. Its obviously not an impartial viewpoint, but it is consistent with the facts. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
