i agree that life is complicated. but, at the same time, i think there are more similarities than differences in the attacks so far. for example, i understand

i agree that life is complicated. but, at the same time, i think there are more similarities than differences in the attacks so far. for example, i understand that engineers are way over-represented amongst bombers. i have no idea what that means, but if it's not some strange statistical fluke then it's evidence that there is some commonality. and i don't disagree with what you're saying about lunatics jumping on a bandwagon. as far as i'm concerned that's quite possible - but that doesn't mean you can't ask questions about what makes bandwagons work. for example, completely random thought: if the usa became much more of a federation, and emphasised the role of central government much less, then perhaps "america" as a target becomes less attractive (much like people don't try to "attack europe" to anything like the same degree - and when it does happen it's interpreted largely as an attack on american allies). maybe the above are really stupid ideas. it wouldn't surprise me - i thought of them in 5 minutes. but i am seriously starting to worry that no-one at all is brainstorimg about this where it matters. another example, that got me a pile of downvotes in another thread, is american funding of israel. the usa pays a huge amount to israel and seems to be getting pretty poor value for money: the us president asks them to do something and they just laugh in his face. again this seems to be entrenched ideas (big government if you like) resisting market forces - wouldn't you get more security per dollar spending that money on better airport screening? i'm rambling and drifting off topic here, but my more general point is that "america" doesn't seem to be thinking much at all. and i think there should be a lot more thinking - that includes but is in no way limited to the minds of terrorists.... edit: and to put that in perspective, i don't think it's sufficient to just bullshit (as i have done above). spend some money and study the problem. can't some kind of science be used here rather than the "armchair discussions" you mention? this is why i avoided putting forward ideas earlier in this thread - because i don't know the answers. what worries me is people are not looking for answers because they're not even bothering to ask questions, and/or they don't think answers can be found. if as much effort was put into the minds of terrorists as was put into the minds of consumers.... why is selling us crap that we don't need a science, but saving the world just a big debate?