RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://amgreatness.com/2024/01/22/2024-americas-year-of-living-dangerously/

Lame-duck presidencies, especially in the last six months of their final term, in general can offer opportunities for America’s enemies to take advantage of a perceived vacuum as one government transitions to the next.

But these normal changeover months are especially dangerous when a perceived weak or appeasing lame-duck president is likely to be replaced by a strong deterrent successor that will likely serve as a corrective to his disastrous policies.

James Buchannan (1857-1861), a northern but pro-South president, was a particularly anemic chief executive. He had done little if anything to try to deal with the growing rift between North and South, especially the furor over the Dred Scott decision and Bloody Kansas. Even when warned, Buchannan did little to beef up the U.S. Army or increase its weapon stockpiles to deter any potential secessionist state.

After Buchannan declined to run for a second term, the South understood that the abolitionist and anti-slavery Republican candidate Abraham Lincoln might well be elected in 1860—given the North/South split within the Democratic Party. And they understood that President Lincoln might well use force to stop secession.

Therefore, in the waning days of the Buchannan administration, after Lincoln’s victory, seven southern states seceded during the presidential transition, a confused North reacted little, more would follow, and a terrible Civil War became inevitable.

During the waning days of the crippled second term of Richard Nixon in summer 1974, communist North Vietnam saw a once deterrent president fatally weakened by Watergate. It was encouraged by a renewed antiwar movement, a likely soon anti-war Congress, and the next president, Gerald Ford—a probable caretaker soon to be replaced by an anti-war Democrat. And so in late 1974 and 1975, the communists renounced ignored peace accords, judged correctly that the directionless US would not help South Vietnam stop a massive invasion from the North, and thereby won the 12-year-long war.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/traumatic-brain-injuries-iran-militias-ad061562?mod=opinion_lead_pos3

Iranian-backed militias launched another missile and rocket barrage at U.S. forces in Iraq on Saturday, and several Americans may have been injured. Will Iran pay any price for this latest assault?

U.S. Central Command said in a statement that “most of the missiles were intercepted by the [al-Assad Airbase] air defense systems while others impacted on the base. Damage assessments are ongoing.” It added that “a number of U.S. personnel are undergoing evaluation for traumatic brain injuries. At least one Iraqi service member was wounded.”

This appears to be one of the largest of the 140 or so attacks by Iranian-backed militias since Oct. 7 against the U.S. in Iraq and Syria. The U.S. has responded a few times against the militias inside Iraq and Syria, as it has against the Houthi militia targeting commercial ships and U.S. naval assets in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. The attempt to restore deterrence hasn’t worked.

That may be because the instigator of all this is Iran. None of these militias would stage these attacks without knowing they have the support of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. If Iran thinks the U.S. won’t put Tehran’s military or commercial assets at risk, it has no incentive to stop the militias from attacking American targets.

The U.S. Commander in Chief is supposed to protect U.S. troops from having to risk “traumatic brain injuries” from enemy assault. Where is President Biden?