We need lawyers to conduct surveillance in a war zone ?
No, we don't. This article is a hit piece... They focus on the one case where the intel community chose to tap hubs in the US, which is domestic surveillance and requires a warrant, as it always has and should since espionage agencies are forbidden by numerous laws from collecting domestic intelligence. Why they did not choose to monitor transmissions locally or alternately through one of our allies (Britain) hubs as is typically done in such situations is the question that should be focused on, but is instead totally avoided.
No you do not need lawyers - but they run the war. You can not take a dump in Iraq with out legal approval.
Hell NO!