8 ms·

- Terrorism is not a problem at all! - Instead of fixing the real issues this country has: poverty, homelessness, joblessness, hunger, drug abuse, health care

by readhn 10y ago

- Terrorism is not a problem at all! - Instead of fixing the real issues this country has: poverty, homelessness, joblessness, hunger, drug abuse, health care accessibility, affordable housing accessibility - we prefer to look for a boogeymen outside of the country. Around 500-1000 Homeless Americans die from hypothermia per year, 2000-4000 Americans die per year from hunger, 35000 people on average die from drug over dose, over 500,000 people die from heart desease so in the last 15 years we lost just to these causes - around 8million people! According to a September 2016 study by Alex Nowrasteh at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, some 3,024 Americans died from 1975 through 2015 due to foreign-born terrorism. That number includes the 9/11 terrorist attacks (2,983 people) and averages nearly 74 Americans per year. 8million+ people dead vs. 3000? So where are the real issues? Why do we allow the government propaganda machine to fool us?

Mo3 10y ago
Because ego and thus hatred against perceived differences that assists mental seperation is so very deeply ingrained in your culture. Just look and see. It really is the root cause of all suffering, the concept of "I". It is what allows for illusions like "I have rights" or "they are attacking us" and everything that comes after it: Very, very naive and subjective perception that is regarded as absolute truth and even defended to great lengths.
- readhn 10y ago
  "You are your own worst enemy". Only later in life we realize how true it is.
  - Mo3 10y ago
    Most never do realize, it seems.
- tunap 10y ago
  Us vs them Home team vs visitors Republicans vs Democrats Christians vs Muslims Protestants vs Catholics Hutus vs Tutsis Walmart vs Target It's adverserial programming 101. Is xenophobia really surprising given how many divisions our cultures cling to?
leereeves 10y ago
How many Americans does ISIS want to kill? How many would they kill if they weren't prevented from doing so?
- tptacek 10y ago
  I'm not sure it's reasonable to stipulate that the surveillance we conduct actually deters ISIS. I think the answer to your question is "statistically, not many". The Brits had special golf rules drawn up for playing through the Blitz. We need to grow up.
  - leereeves 10y ago
    > I'm not sure it's reasonable to stipulate that the surveillance we conduct actually deters ISIS. I'd say its a reasonable assumption. ISIS's goal is to actually succeed, not to get caught by surveillance before an attack. > We need to grow up. And stop trying to prevent terrorism? That's not growing up. While the Brits were playing golf during the Blitz, they were also investing vast amounts of money and lives into shooting down German planes.
    - tptacek 10y ago
      The comparison you're drawing is between the RAF and the harassment of Muslims in the US. Lord only knows what the other leg of your Manhattan Project metaphor would be! later edit In case this actually needs to be said: in the course of prosecuting a war against terrorism (itself a spectacularly bad idea, lending itself as it does to a perpetual state of war), we've invaded and more or less conquered Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, and are in what any reasonable person would call a state of war with Syria and Yemen. You can look at a map of west Asia to see what that adds up to.
      - leereeves 10y ago
        I'm not drawing a comparison to harassment of Muslims. I've had similar experiences and I'm not a Muslim and CBP would have no reason to believe I was. And I resent you trying to use claims of racism to derail a discussion about reasonable precautions.
NotHereNotThere 10y ago
I always have a hard time interpreting these statistics. I understand the numbers of terrorist-related deaths versus non-terrorist one are staggering as displayed above, but if we stopped funding these security measures at airports (scanners, staff, etc), what could the number go up to? Are these 3000 deaths so low because of the security measures? If we were to remove/loosen security measures at airports, how could we even estimate the impact in number of terrorist-related deaths? Are these fears of possible ramp-up of terrorist attacks (if security measures are loosened) unfounded?
- thinkmilitant 10y ago
  To my mind, it is not about funding or not funding security at airports/borders/etc. It's about if terrorism poses enough of a threat to be worth compromising our standards of governance. We can fund and support security in these zones without suspending our civil liberties and we should.
  - throwaway9475 10y ago
    Moreover, it's not actually about fighting terrorism. I'm sure some individual TSA agents (the ones who don't get their jollies from groping ten-year-old boys [1] believe they're doing the Lord's work, but most of this policy is just about keeping people's necks under a boot and harassing minorities. People fleeing war-torn countries with suitcases are not going to fly planes into the World Trade Center, as certain media outlets or politicians would have you believe, but we keep enacting policy like that. Not because those in power actually believe it, but because they simply hate Muslims. They hate people whose religion is different, whose skin color is different, whose gender is different, whose sexuality is different. [1] http://reason.com/blog/2017/03/29/tsa-punishes-boy-who-left-laptop-in-his http://reason.com/blog/2017/03/29/tsa-punishes-boy-who-left-...
- slifin 10y ago
  I guess look at the numbers before the security measures were introduced
- Broken_Hippo 10y ago
galtwho 10y ago
>> Why do we allow the government propaganda machine to fool us? my current working theory is that US citizens have helped their Govt hone the tactics earlier. The propaganda machine was then turned at other countries( US enemies and even allies) And US citizens fully supported it then and even now.
phd514 10y ago
There are plenty of legitimate complaints to be made about our current situation, but this line of argumentation isn't one of them. The whole idea that the number of deaths from a particular cause determines precisely the degree of threat from that cause is silly. Swimming pool drownings kill many times more people per year than terrorists did on 9/11 but it's perfectly appropriate that there's no war on swimming pools but a war against terrorists.
- jhbadger 10y ago
  What other measurement of threat can there be? When something as statistically insignificant as terrorism is given far more resources than serious issues killing millions (as many health issues do), it is obvious that threat management isn't the real reason for the attention.
- tunap 10y ago
  Any parent who doesn't teach their children to swim is asking for terror, IMO. Majority of drownings are absolutely avoidable. Even more strawman fodder: Influenza related deaths spiked to over 40k(50k?) in 2000 & 2004. I don't blame the previously worst President in modern times, although I wish I could.
- Sir_Cmpwn 10y ago
  That's not true. If swimming pool drownings were a comparible threat to readhn's examples then we would of course work on fixing it, by introducing programs to help teach people about safety around pools and such.
yeukhon 10y ago
I don't disagree some of the TSA searching doesn't necessarily decrease the chance of successful attack, and that the searching methodology isn't necessarily comprehensive. But I felt bringing death caused by other problems (homeless or even reckless driving) is a strawman. First, terrorism IS a problem, both domestic and foreign. So whether we have more people dying because of hunger or not, isn't going to affect the searching policy in airport. We have to discuss death by drunk driving and death by terrorism separately. Is government prioritizing homeless issues? That's different from is TSA search effective. They are two completely different issues.
- tunap 10y ago
  Absoluely, there are credible threats, LE & intelligence are tasked with mitigation & prevention for just causes. However, checks & balances of power are supposed to curtail gross violations of citizens' inalienable rights and policy makers' self-interest. Those C&Bs have been underminded and eroded by legal bribery, aka lobbying, and revolving doors between industry/guv. Profit motive seems to be more of a driving force than fear when you look into policy makers' financial statements. At first glance, Chertoff seems to be the poster child of "confict of interest", but he is the new norm, just one of the many who abuse their stations.
HillaryBriss 10y ago
many people fear death by random, terrorist acts more than they fear death by any of the causes you mention because they feel they exert some control over those causes, but not over terrorist acts. many people believe terrorist acts are hard to understand, predict and avoid. and, aside from that, many people really really really hate the notion that a terrorist, often from a foreign country, can kill people in their own territory, a place they consider "safe". people find this particularly disturbing because of the direct human malevolence involved. people are one of the scariest things people can face. when we simply reduce these types of deaths into counts, we lose some of that human perspective and what makes people live their lives in fear and anger.
dreamcompiler 10y ago
> we prefer to look for a boogeymen outside of the country. Looks to me like we're looking for bogeymen inside our country. This is what countries suffering hard times with poor leaders do when the real outside enemies are hard to find or don't actually exist.
- readhn 10y ago
  well the way they make it look now the boogeymen can be anywhere! In your garage, in my kitchen, or in the picture gallery on that kids iPhone... Let us have a look.. this is for you own security, of course... We forget that we hired these people to run the government, when was the last time we fired someone? I think its about time.
erikpukinskis 10y ago
The Joker explained it well. People are not afraid of violence, we habituate to it very easily and it's everywhere. They are afraid of unpredictable violence. That homeless guy is going to die of hypothermia from being out in the rain? Makes sense. He should try to get out of the rain. Thousands of women are killed by their ex-boyfriends every year? Makes sense, some guys are crazy. Good thing I don't date guys like that. Someone might bring a gun into Starbucks and shoot random people? Good lord what is the world coming to! Take all the guns away! Islam! It's those creepy loners again!
- theseatoms 10y ago
  You're describing the common psychological stance very well. But are you advocating that we continue to think/feel this way?

by readhn 10y ago

Mo3 10y ago

Because ego and thus hatred against perceived differences that assists mental seperation is so very deeply ingrained in your culture. Just look and see. It really is the root cause of all suffering, the concept of "I". It is what allows for illusions like "I have rights" or "they are attacking us" and everything that comes after it: Very, very naive and subjective perception that is regarded as absolute truth and even defended to great lengths.

readhn 10y ago
"You are your own worst enemy". Only later in life we realize how true it is.
- Mo3 10y ago
  Most never do realize, it seems.
tunap 10y ago
Us vs them Home team vs visitors Republicans vs Democrats Christians vs Muslims Protestants vs Catholics Hutus vs Tutsis Walmart vs Target It's adverserial programming 101. Is xenophobia really surprising given how many divisions our cultures cling to?

leereeves 10y ago

How many Americans does ISIS want to kill? How many would they kill if they weren't prevented from doing so?

tptacek 10y ago
I'm not sure it's reasonable to stipulate that the surveillance we conduct actually deters ISIS. I think the answer to your question is "statistically, not many". The Brits had special golf rules drawn up for playing through the Blitz. We need to grow up.
- leereeves 10y ago
  > I'm not sure it's reasonable to stipulate that the surveillance we conduct actually deters ISIS. I'd say its a reasonable assumption. ISIS's goal is to actually succeed, not to get caught by surveillance before an attack. > We need to grow up. And stop trying to prevent terrorism? That's not growing up. While the Brits were playing golf during the Blitz, they were also investing vast amounts of money and lives into shooting down German planes.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    The comparison you're drawing is between the RAF and the harassment of Muslims in the US. Lord only knows what the other leg of your Manhattan Project metaphor would be! later edit In case this actually needs to be said: in the course of prosecuting a war against terrorism (itself a spectacularly bad idea, lending itself as it does to a perpetual state of war), we've invaded and more or less conquered Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, and are in what any reasonable person would call a state of war with Syria and Yemen. You can look at a map of west Asia to see what that adds up to.
    - leereeves 10y ago
      I'm not drawing a comparison to harassment of Muslims. I've had similar experiences and I'm not a Muslim and CBP would have no reason to believe I was. And I resent you trying to use claims of racism to derail a discussion about reasonable precautions.

NotHereNotThere 10y ago

I always have a hard time interpreting these statistics. I understand the numbers of terrorist-related deaths versus non-terrorist one are staggering as displayed above, but if we stopped funding these security measures at airports (scanners, staff, etc), what could the number go up to? Are these 3000 deaths so low because of the security measures? If we were to remove/loosen security measures at airports, how could we even estimate the impact in number of terrorist-related deaths? Are these fears of possible ramp-up of terrorist attacks (if security measures are loosened) unfounded?

thinkmilitant 10y ago
To my mind, it is not about funding or not funding security at airports/borders/etc. It's about if terrorism poses enough of a threat to be worth compromising our standards of governance. We can fund and support security in these zones without suspending our civil liberties and we should.
- throwaway9475 10y ago
  Moreover, it's not actually about fighting terrorism. I'm sure some individual TSA agents (the ones who don't get their jollies from groping ten-year-old boys [1] believe they're doing the Lord's work, but most of this policy is just about keeping people's necks under a boot and harassing minorities. People fleeing war-torn countries with suitcases are not going to fly planes into the World Trade Center, as certain media outlets or politicians would have you believe, but we keep enacting policy like that. Not because those in power actually believe it, but because they simply hate Muslims. They hate people whose religion is different, whose skin color is different, whose gender is different, whose sexuality is different. [1] http://reason.com/blog/2017/03/29/tsa-punishes-boy-who-left-laptop-in-his http://reason.com/blog/2017/03/29/tsa-punishes-boy-who-left-...
slifin 10y ago
I guess look at the numbers before the security measures were introduced
Broken_Hippo 10y ago

galtwho 10y ago

>> Why do we allow the government propaganda machine to fool us? my current working theory is that US citizens have helped their Govt hone the tactics earlier. The propaganda machine was then turned at other countries( US enemies and even allies) And US citizens fully supported it then and even now.

phd514 10y ago

There are plenty of legitimate complaints to be made about our current situation, but this line of argumentation isn't one of them. The whole idea that the number of deaths from a particular cause determines precisely the degree of threat from that cause is silly. Swimming pool drownings kill many times more people per year than terrorists did on 9/11 but it's perfectly appropriate that there's no war on swimming pools but a war against terrorists.

jhbadger 10y ago
What other measurement of threat can there be? When something as statistically insignificant as terrorism is given far more resources than serious issues killing millions (as many health issues do), it is obvious that threat management isn't the real reason for the attention.
tunap 10y ago
Any parent who doesn't teach their children to swim is asking for terror, IMO. Majority of drownings are absolutely avoidable. Even more strawman fodder: Influenza related deaths spiked to over 40k(50k?) in 2000 & 2004. I don't blame the previously worst President in modern times, although I wish I could.
Sir_Cmpwn 10y ago
That's not true. If swimming pool drownings were a comparible threat to readhn's examples then we would of course work on fixing it, by introducing programs to help teach people about safety around pools and such.

yeukhon 10y ago

I don't disagree some of the TSA searching doesn't necessarily decrease the chance of successful attack, and that the searching methodology isn't necessarily comprehensive. But I felt bringing death caused by other problems (homeless or even reckless driving) is a strawman. First, terrorism IS a problem, both domestic and foreign. So whether we have more people dying because of hunger or not, isn't going to affect the searching policy in airport. We have to discuss death by drunk driving and death by terrorism separately. Is government prioritizing homeless issues? That's different from is TSA search effective. They are two completely different issues.

tunap 10y ago
Absoluely, there are credible threats, LE & intelligence are tasked with mitigation & prevention for just causes. However, checks & balances of power are supposed to curtail gross violations of citizens' inalienable rights and policy makers' self-interest. Those C&Bs have been underminded and eroded by legal bribery, aka lobbying, and revolving doors between industry/guv. Profit motive seems to be more of a driving force than fear when you look into policy makers' financial statements. At first glance, Chertoff seems to be the poster child of "confict of interest", but he is the new norm, just one of the many who abuse their stations.

HillaryBriss 10y ago

many people fear death by random, terrorist acts more than they fear death by any of the causes you mention because they feel they exert some control over those causes, but not over terrorist acts. many people believe terrorist acts are hard to understand, predict and avoid. and, aside from that, many people really really really hate the notion that a terrorist, often from a foreign country, can kill people in their own territory, a place they consider "safe". people find this particularly disturbing because of the direct human malevolence involved. people are one of the scariest things people can face. when we simply reduce these types of deaths into counts, we lose some of that human perspective and what makes people live their lives in fear and anger.

dreamcompiler 10y ago

> we prefer to look for a boogeymen outside of the country. Looks to me like we're looking for bogeymen inside our country. This is what countries suffering hard times with poor leaders do when the real outside enemies are hard to find or don't actually exist.

readhn 10y ago
well the way they make it look now the boogeymen can be anywhere! In your garage, in my kitchen, or in the picture gallery on that kids iPhone... Let us have a look.. this is for you own security, of course... We forget that we hired these people to run the government, when was the last time we fired someone? I think its about time.

erikpukinskis 10y ago

The Joker explained it well. People are not afraid of violence, we habituate to it very easily and it's everywhere. They are afraid of unpredictable violence. That homeless guy is going to die of hypothermia from being out in the rain? Makes sense. He should try to get out of the rain. Thousands of women are killed by their ex-boyfriends every year? Makes sense, some guys are crazy. Good thing I don't date guys like that. Someone might bring a gun into Starbucks and shoot random people? Good lord what is the world coming to! Take all the guns away! Islam! It's those creepy loners again!

theseatoms 10y ago
You're describing the common psychological stance very well. But are you advocating that we continue to think/feel this way?