Human Nature Trumps Homeland Security 304
netbuzz writes "Security expert Bruce Schneier suggests this morning that 'there might not be a solution' to our post-9/11 penchant for making domestic anti-terrorism decisions based on the basic human desire to cover one's backside. He might be right. But shouldn't we at least try to figure out a better way? For example, wouldn't 'Commonsense Homeland Security' be a winning political banner, not a risky one? "
Not exactly. (Score:4, Informative)
Politicians who run on fear don't have any thing else.
Re:Causes, not symptoms (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Causes, not symptoms (Score:4, Informative)
>Check France, Holland, or Spain recently?
WRT sticking their noses in other people's business, both France and Spain have a long and bloody history of mucking about in (Islamic) north Africa on the one hand and squashing the Basque between them on the other. The Netherlands have their history in the east Indies, but I can't see that Holland is a big terrorist target these days. Random nut-cases aside, of course.Re:Causes, not symptoms (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Causes, not symptoms (Score:2, Informative)
An interesting take that minimizes religion as a driver:
http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/061218fa
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Did I miss something? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Causes, not symptoms (Score:4, Informative)
What makes you think OBL, Hezbollah, or any of the others are any different? Religion as a tool to manipulate the base goes back to the beginning.
*whoosh* (Score:4, Informative)
Re:It is a no-win situation (Score:1, Informative)
Scenario #3:
1. $PRESIDENT and $EXECUTIVE_BRANCH_POLITICIANS say "this is overblown, go back about your normal business"
2. No terrorist attacks happen.
3. People cheer that $PRESIDENT and $EXECUTIVE_BRANCH_POLITICIANS made the correct choice.
Scenario #4:
1. $PRESIDENT and $EXECUTIVE_BRANCH_POLITICIANS do everything that they can to prevent anything even resembling a terrorist attack
2. Terrorist attack happens, but is foiled.
3. People cheer that $PRESIDENT and $EXECUTIVE_BRANCH_POLITICIANS made the correct choice.
Scenario #5:
1. $PRESIDENT and $EXECUTIVE_BRANCH_POLITICIANS do everything that they can to prevent anything even resembling a terrorist attack
2. Terrorist attack happens anyway.
3. People howl that $PRESIDENT and $EXECUTIVE_BRANCH_POLITICIANS did nothing when they had the chance.
It seems you conveniently left out the ones where the administration makes the CORRECT choice. Perhaps you want to make the current administration seem better by claiming no matter people will be mad? Sorry, but you failed. Natalie Portman and hot grits.
Norwegian Nose(s) In Afghanistan/Iraq (Score:3, Informative)
No, we have not had bombings in Norway yet. However we have had attacks on the only Synagogue in Oslo by Pakistani militants. We have had attacks on our Jewish populace by Arab immigrants. And we have had the pleasure of hosting terrorists from North Africa that were involved in other European bomb attacks. If those people had not been arrested thanks to our Secret Service we might just have had our 9/11. Who knows.
Regardless, our nose is very much indeed in other peoples business.
We are active in Israel/Palestine, Sri Lanka, Guatemala etc. Remember the Oslo agreement that led to the Camp David signatures? Not loved by the Arab world. In Sri Lanka they burn our flags and effigy's of our Ambassador because we are trying to create peace. They do not want peace or our peacekeeping observer corps (troops). Did I mention the Muslims on Sri Lanka?
So you see there any number of reasons why Norway could be attacked.
Re:Causes, not symptoms (Score:2, Informative)