I'm split brain on this. Our War on Terror has been a complete clown show, policy disaster, absolutely made things worse. And yet, I'm at a loss for why there

I'm split brain on this. Our War on Terror has been a complete clown show, policy disaster, absolutely made things worse. And yet, I'm at a loss for why there haven't been more attacks. Could it be true that "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" and programs like the drone strikes are actually effective? Are we decapitating terrorists org before they can become effective? Was putting Saudi govt's nuts in a vice sufficient to stop them from funding follow on efforts? Are our vassal states doing all the dirty work for us, taking all the hits? Surely someone, somewhere knows these answers. So here's my point: In any of the scenarios where some kind of mass surveillance of foreign actors is necessary or useful, I cannot imagine a system or regiment where that does not bleed into domestic surveillance. Which has been the whole argument from the beginning. Turf, jurisdictions, distinction between domestic and abroad, etc. If our counter terrorism has been completely moot, then ya, scrap the whole system. But if its actually been working, then I'm not ready to pull the plug without some kind of plan.