Try doing an exercise that is incredibly useful for those talking about terrorism--remove the word "terror" from what you're saying and see if your question rem

Try doing an exercise that is incredibly useful for those talking about terrorism--remove the word "terror" from what you're saying and see if your question remains reasonable. "And how do you plan to stop the next attack?" Suddenly the supreme vagueness of the question becomes apparent. After all, attacks in general provoke terror (at least for me--some random guy can rush at me on the street and I'll feel terror). So what attack are you talking about? By whom? The U.S. already has a framework to prevent "attacks" in general-- the CIA, the military, the police, the NSA, etc. Like with all security systems, it's a matter of calibrating them so they don't undermine our way of life. As a micro example -- I can prevent future (terror) attacks on myself by burying myself in a sealed metal casket. But my way of life would be seriously undermined. So how do I want to calibrate my safety vs. how I want to live? The exercise of removing the word "terror" is useful in almost all situations, because it actually makes things a little more accurate. For example, the "War on Terror" becomes the "War on ...". Which, as it panned out, more accurately describes the outcome.