5 ms·

"Either this is not true, or it is true and our enemy is inept. If we had a competent enemy who was trying to kill us, then there would be a lot more of us dead

by YooLi 16y ago

"Either this is not true, or it is true and our enemy is inept. If we had a competent enemy who was trying to kill us, then there would be a lot more of us dead." I don't think we all need to live in fear, but I don't think we should live oblivious to threats just because things don't blow up more often.

moron4hire 16y ago
Certainly, but we as a society are clearly not anywhere near a healthy attitude towards these things.
- mistermann 16y ago
  > but I don't think we should live oblivious to threats just because things don't blow up more often But how do you have so much certainty there are threats? To me, I just can't reconcile this assertion that there are terrorists out there intent on killing us with the fact that they never do, despite it being comically simple to do so. One might counter with the argument that the cargo plane bombs are an example of the ongoing threat. Perhaps, I will admit this is a possibility. But again, why are essentially all terrorist attacks never successful, when they would be so obviously easy on some of these large, soft targets? Perhaps these interceptions are something else? Impossible of course,
  - YooLi 16y ago
    I see by your last sentence where you're leaning so I'm probably wasting my time, but I'm replying anyway. :) I've never had my house robbed, but I still lock the doors and have an alarm system. No one on my street has been robbed, but I can't just assume this street won't ever get burgled because I know that it does happen. So, I'm careful to lock up, but I'm not so scared I have inch bars on the windows, a guard dog, a watchman on guard, etc. There is just enough of a deterrent that it is a hassle for someone looking for a quick and easy break-in.
    - mistermann 16y ago
      Right....a proper assessment and response to the risk. The question is, is our response to the supposed threat of terrorism proper? Your response to your threat is essentially cost free (except for the alarm I guess). The cost of the west's response to one terrorist attack is anything but free, it is measured in the Billions or Trillions, depending on how you look at it, not to mention the decrease in quality of life, lost productivity, etc. And you are correct in where I am leaning....the timing of "attacks" often seems a bit too convenient, ie: the recent debate in Europe over the level and manner of US airport security measures. To me, the theory that there are non-insignificant amounts of terrorists intent on attacking us, but these attacks have all (since we have had no successful attacks in the last ~ 10 years) been prevented by the security measures and organizations, is comical. So where does Occam's Razor lead you? :)

by YooLi 16y ago

moron4hire 16y ago

Certainly, but we as a society are clearly not anywhere near a healthy attitude towards these things.

mistermann 16y ago
> but I don't think we should live oblivious to threats just because things don't blow up more often But how do you have so much certainty there are threats? To me, I just can't reconcile this assertion that there are terrorists out there intent on killing us with the fact that they never do, despite it being comically simple to do so. One might counter with the argument that the cargo plane bombs are an example of the ongoing threat. Perhaps, I will admit this is a possibility. But again, why are essentially all terrorist attacks never successful, when they would be so obviously easy on some of these large, soft targets? Perhaps these interceptions are something else? Impossible of course,
- YooLi 16y ago
  I see by your last sentence where you're leaning so I'm probably wasting my time, but I'm replying anyway. :) I've never had my house robbed, but I still lock the doors and have an alarm system. No one on my street has been robbed, but I can't just assume this street won't ever get burgled because I know that it does happen. So, I'm careful to lock up, but I'm not so scared I have inch bars on the windows, a guard dog, a watchman on guard, etc. There is just enough of a deterrent that it is a hassle for someone looking for a quick and easy break-in.
  - mistermann 16y ago
    Right....a proper assessment and response to the risk. The question is, is our response to the supposed threat of terrorism proper? Your response to your threat is essentially cost free (except for the alarm I guess). The cost of the west's response to one terrorist attack is anything but free, it is measured in the Billions or Trillions, depending on how you look at it, not to mention the decrease in quality of life, lost productivity, etc. And you are correct in where I am leaning....the timing of "attacks" often seems a bit too convenient, ie: the recent debate in Europe over the level and manner of US airport security measures. To me, the theory that there are non-insignificant amounts of terrorists intent on attacking us, but these attacks have all (since we have had no successful attacks in the last ~ 10 years) been prevented by the security measures and organizations, is comical. So where does Occam's Razor lead you? :)