Do the Brainless Wonders in Congress Know What Happened on 9/11/01?

Do  they know that a mere 19 men who had infiltrated our country hijacked four  airliners and used them to destroy the World Trade Towers and damage the Pentagon?  Current Congressional  leaders are even more brainless than leaders in November, 1941, who thought the country could avoid World War II by being neutral.  They hadn't yet experienced an attack by an enemy.  Today's leaders have..

The  government didn't know of a potential terror threat when the  9/11 hijackers entered the country.    Today the government is more careful about who it allows in. Suspected  terrorists cannot come in at monitored points of entry.   They have to find entry points that aren't closely monitored such as along our southern border.   Coming in that way allows them to bring weapons and high explosives.  
s
Those who claim there isn't a crisis need to explain when the terror crisis that began  on 9/11 ended.   Americans didn't realize there was a  terror crisis until a plane hit the second tower. 

Our enemies haven't announced an end to their war.  Maybe they haven't attacked our homeland because they prefer to concentrate on defending their homeland.  Maybe our law enforcement agencies have been preventing their attacks.  Or maybe they are secretly preparing a surprise attack like the Germans did before the Battle of the Bulge  or the Viet Cong did before the 1968 Tet Offensive.    If they think they can mount a surprise attack, we may not know until it begins. 

Was ISIS Behind Syria Gas Attack?

Those who claim that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad  used poison gas against rebels need to consider the possibility that some members of his military are ISIS sympathizers.  Considering the reaction Assad generated when he previously used nerve gas, it seems unlikely he would use gas now.  He would be unlikely to receive any benefit from using gas.

ISIS could be the biggest potential beneficiary of  using gas because of the potential of an American response against Syria.  On the eve of World War II Germany created the appearance of  a Polish attack on a German radio station to justify  a German invasion of Poland.  ISIS could have had its operatives replace regular Syrian munitions with poison gas so that the Syrian government would appear to be responsible for using the gas.

I'm sure ISIS would love to get President Donald Trump to repeat President Barack Obama's huge blunder in Libya.  Obama created  a political vacuum in Libya by overthrowing the government without the presence of a viable replacement.   Terrorists quickly took advantage of the opportunity to operate in Libya.   ISIS gained supporters from those upset about American and European "imperialism".

Syrian rebels don't appear any more capable of controlling the country than Libyan rebels were at the time of the Western invasion.   American overthrow of the Syrian government would give ISIS an opportunity  to replace the geographic base it is losing in Iraq.

Westerners sometimes ask why people in the Middle East hate western nations so much.   The people of the Middle East resent Western intervention in their countries.  The areas that today are the site of countries with names like "Egypt", "Syria", "Iran" and "Iraq" were  the locations of the capitals of great empires when Europeans were too primitive to have governments.   ISIS and other terrorist organizations claim they can restore a Middle Eastern empire.

Those who claim Adolf Hitler didn't use poison gas in WWII ignore the gas chambers Hitler used to murder Jews. 

Will Obama Abandon Eastern Europe?

President Barack Obama's recent statement to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, for incoming President Vladimir Putin, that he would be more willing to give into Russian demands after the election indicates re-election of Obama could be a disaster for the United States. Obama's statement is particularly disturbing because it comes on the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

The Cuban Missile Crisis occurred because Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev thought President John Kennedy's mishandling of the Bay of Pigs and weak response to the Berlin Crisis of 1961 indicated Kennedy was indecisive and weak. Khrushchev thought the Soviet Union could take advantage of that perceived weakness to place nuclear missiles in Cuba.

Thinking about the Cuban Missile Crisis reminds me that I got a haircut on Friday, October 26, 1962. As I rode my bicycle home from Buff's Barber Shop late that afternoon I wondered if my school would still be there on Monday morning or if I would still be alive.

Russia's attitude to the missile defense system the U.S. has placed in Eastern Europe to protect against missiles from Iran implies Russia, or at least Putin, isn't convinced the Cold War is completely over. Or, maybe Putin wants the appearance of a conflict with the U.S. so he can use the threat of a foreign enemy to suppress freedom of speech in Russia.

The mistake many Americans made after World War II was in thinking that "communism" was the enemy instead of Russia. The Soviet Union was never anything more than a fancy name for the Russian Empire. To rephrase Marx, in Russia "socialism[communism] was the opiate of the people."

Many believe that Putin is not really confortable with democracy. Many Russians are complaining that he stole the recent election.

Putin probably is smart enough to realize he cannot afford a military invasion of Eastern Europe, but he may want to be able to intimidate East European governments into having closer relations with Russia, particularly in the economic area.

If Putin can get the U.S. to retreat from its promises to protect Eastern Europe from missile attack, he may think he can convince East European governments that America can't be relied on to protect them. He might then attempt to intimidate them into abandoning ties with the west in favor of a close relationship with Russia.

Such a threat could produce a major crisis that Obama would be incapable of handling because he isn't a leader.

Nikita Khrushchev decided to place missiles in Cuba because he misinterpreted President John Kennedy's inexperienced handling of the Bay of Pigs and the Berlin Crisis as weakness. Will Putin decide Obama is weak after Obama in effect has said that appeasing Putin is more important to Obama than doing what the American people want?

In the second presidential debate in 1976 President Gerald Ford in a slip of the tongue said, "there is no Soviet domination of eastern Europe, and there never will be under a Ford administration." He later said he meant to say that he wouldn't recognize such domination.

Obama cannot claim that his statement to Medvedev was a slip of the tongue without appearing incompetent.

In October, 1944, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill meet with Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin in Moscow and discussed the percentages agreement that accepted Soviet spheres of influence in southeastern Europe. After World War II ended Stalin expanded Soviet control well beyond the percentages suggested by Churchill by sending in groups to establish Soviet style dictatorships.

Churchill and American President Franklin Roosevelt had to give concessions to Stalin because they still needed Soviet help to defeat Germany. They believed they would need Soviet help to defeat Japan.

Obama has no such need for Russian support against foreign enemies. He has no need to appease Russia in eastern Europe.

Would Putin interpret an Obama "retreat" from eastern Europe as an opening to try to help Russia friendly groups in eastern Europe replace their governments with governments friendly to Russia, possibly by using questionable tactics? If that happened would some American politicians respond by trying to start a new McCarthy type era?

Former President Bill Clinton needs to remind Obama that reelection doesn't insure a full term of office. Clinton was impeached after being reelected and barely escaped removal from office. President Richard Nixon was forced to resign after a landslide victory because his supporters used questionable campaign tactics.

If Obama gives in to Putin and Putin takes advantage of him to create a major crisis, Obama could face impeachment. The charge wouldn't be corruption as was the case with Clinton and Nixon. The charge would be "giving aid and comfort to the enemy" (i.e., treason).