10 ms·
Nope, most successfully stopped attacks are secret. Nobody would even know.
by giantg2 3y ago
Nope, most successfully stopped attacks are secret. Nobody would even know.
- Quekid5 3y agoThere are or should be at least (bound by national security related laws) oversight review committees and stats reporting... ... but of course it depends on the standard for what 'prevented' means. De-radicalized a potential terrorist, does that mean a terror attack was stopped/prevented. It's quite complicated in practice, alas.
- BLKNSLVR 3y agoI mean, aren't they quite busy radicalising the mentally ill just so they can then capture the mark in the process of following the plan they developed for them just so they bump up their 'terrorist plan foiled' stats?
- ofslidingfeet 3y agoNo they're not. If our bloated "national security" apparatus could possibly justify its existence, it would. The reason they keep such justification secret is because it doesn't exist. It has nothing to do with "sources and methods." It has nothing to do with "civil unrest." The reason we can't see the justification is because it doesn't exist.
- giantg2 3y agoThey don't tell you because they don't feel the need to justify it to you. They do tell some of it individuals with the proper clearances who hold some level of power over them (comittees etc). Here is a small list of the ones that were publicized. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsuccessful_terrorist_plots_in_the_United_States_post-9/11 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsuccessful_terrori...
- ofslidingfeet 3y agoLaughable. This list substantiates my point.
- giantg2 3y agoWhat is laughable about that list? It doesn't really speak to or against your point. You're not going to justify an entire national security system on a subset of one of its many functions.
- account42 3y ago> they don't feel the need to justify it to you Yes, that is the primary problem with spy agencies - that they don't feel accountable. They SHOULD be.
- giantg2 3y agoWhat does accountability look like for those agencies or other government agencies in general? How can we achieve that? The current paradigm is that agencies generally are accountable to congressional committees and the courts. I'm not sure how we would make them accountable to the public when there's very little accountability for elected representatives even.
- sargun 3y agoWhy would we keep them secret forever?
- giantg2 3y agoProbably not forever, but until the systems/methods they used become obsolete. You don't burn your intel collection mechanisms to publicize something that the public was never aware of in the fist place.
- coldtea 3y agoAre they? Sounds like a BS theory, promoted to make them sound secretly more competent than they are ("we're great and stop a lot of attacks, we just aren't telling you". Yeah, right). The truth is that even a minor succesfully stopped attack they'd advertise till the end of time, to score political and press points.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- giantg2 3y agoYou don't burn your methods and systems for some political points.
- coldtea 3y agoLOL, "methods and systems"... from the people who couldn't see the collapse of the USSR, 7/11, and countless others failures...
- giantg2 3y agoIt seems to me like you are trolling given your low effort and inflamatory responses. I didn't say they're perfect methods or systems. Intelligence operations have mixed outcones partially dependent on adversarial actions such as ops sec or counterintel. This isn't a new or unique phenomenon.