Not 9/11, but not in the good way

I criticized both Kos and the POTUS last week about comparing New Orleans and 9/11 and, to a large degree I stand by that. 9/11 was something about which we had little credible warning, changed the way we perceived the world, was a tragic cost of thousands of lives and was a unique turning point in American history (and later histrionics). I don't think New Orleans is anything like that, although I think the body count will be higher and damage to the economy will be longer term and more serious.

Why mention this? Well, here's the link with 9/11 in my mind. It's now obvious we were wildly under prepared for this. This is bad for three reasons:

1) This shouldn't have been a surprise. I've been to NOLA and pretty much the first thing that occurs to you is "Jesus Christ, I below sea level. This doesn't seem wise". And yes, I know all about the Dutch and their country, in fact I'm a huge fan (and I'm heading there this afternoon). The Dutch are one thing we are not. Competent about water. When they build, they build for centuries. When we build we build for decades. Big difference. The problem here, after 9/11 we still can't handle disasters for which we should already be prepared.

2) The were no operant plans for emergency. Assume this was, in fact a surprise. Ignore the *should* statement above and assume for whatever reason, the levees broke. If you're a democrat, imagine a terrorist blew it up, if your a republican, blame protesting liberals trying to save the wetlands prevented the government from doing proper maintenance. And, if you're TJIC, well... imagine the incompetence of government stayed the just hand of the markets and it's the fault of collectivism. Whatever you chose. Before 9/11 this type of surprise was squarely in the charter of FEMA and I could lay the fault there, find the problem, correct it and do better next time. While I am for a very limited government, disasters natural and otherwise, are one of the few things I think are actually part of the government's duty to the electors. If it fails at that, there isn't much justification for it's existence in peacetime. But in this case we have not only FEMA but Homeland Security as well. We have 2 agencies with huge resources and DHS has been planning for responses to terrorist actions for 4 years! And they were clueless! Despite more resources, we are less prepared for a surprise or terrorist attack than we were 4 years ago. It's the only conclusion the data supports.

3)You read this far? Thanks! I am, btw, about to say something insensitive The third point is, if terrorists are planning another attack on US soil, they are watching the NOLA circus and cumming in their collective pants. They can't help but see a country full of soft targets. Easy, cheap ways of not only causing a panic, but extending the ensuing chaos. If I were a terrorist (or when they are on our side we call them CIA Field Agents), I'd be figuring how to take advantage of the chaos to really cause some damage. Make the post disaster a real horror. Set off bombs, shoot people etc. That way, next time there is a disaster, people will panic easier causing even more problems. It becomes a sort of terrorist, self-fulfilling prophecy. Natural disaster, assume terrorist response, panic, chaos! The response to NOLA has highlighted to people planning to do us harm that we haven't learned anything since 9/11 despite spending more money.

That's the harm I see here and that's why I am beginning to think that the NOLA Disaster is in fact in the 9/11 bin after all.