Signal failures

These are failures to stop without an authority to do so.  The term is used to describe what can happen with trains.  For example, if a train doesn't stop when it should, there probably will be a train wreck.

The term "signal failure" has also been used in reference to events.  I'm a little fuzzy on it because I haven't seen the term used lately.  What I think it means in international events is a failure to recognize danger and heedlessly continuing as if nothing was wrong.

On that last post, I'd say that the bombing of the USS Cole was a signal failure event for the US government.  The signal event spanned two administrations.  The outgoing Clinton administration and the incoming Bush administration both failed to address the event as one of great consequence.  As a result, we saw the 9-11 event.  This was a systemic failure.  It wasn't a partisan failure.  Both parties failed us.  The elites that are running this country failed to realize that the bombing of one of our most advanced ships was an event that could not be ignored.  But it was.

This heedlessness has been building since Vietnam.  The outcome of the war in Vietnam proved one thing if it proved anything at all---- that the US could be beaten in a protracted guerrilla war.  This country will not stick to war like this long enough to get results.  The terrorists of this world took notes and we will see this pattern again and again until such time that this country finally gets it and wins this kind of war decisively.

What I'm saying is that a large terrorist event is now far more likely than before Obama was elected.  But Obama is just part of a pattern, as Bush was.  Nobody is seeing it, that why there is a big danger here.  They're all thinking it's the "other guys", but there's plenty of blame to go around.  There's no accountability in DC, and they are definitely not interested in bringing any of that in.