Skip to main content

View Diary: Odds of Dying by Terrorist Attack: 20,000,000 to 1 (246 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  we didn't beat oursevles up in Boston (0+ / 0-)

    The response seemed proportional to me. We got the people who did it and live returned to at least a semblance of normalcy in fairly short order. Still the number of dead doesn't tell the whole story of the costs of terrorism.  Again, I agree with the basic premise, that some have overhyped the threat and used this to justify disproportionate responses, but comparing terrorism to lightning, for example, is pretty silly.

    •  Odds of terror death in Boston 20,000,000/1, ergo (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dr Swig Mcjigger

      it's not worth our time to try to catch.....wait, let me get my Stats textbook out. Something's not right.

      "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

      by Inland on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 07:13:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What's your idea (8+ / 0-)

        for a solution?

        Is the current solution working?  How's it working for us? How's it working for the population of the Middle East?

        How about the long term costs?

        Or is it easier to just jump on the terrorism bandwagon and not worry about all of that?

        "Justice is a commodity"

        by joanneleon on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 07:48:27 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  No one is saying it is not worth the time to do (4+ / 0-)

        what we have always done:  look for leads, follow-up leads, track down bad guys.

        Police work.  We've always used it and it works.

        We don't need these massive databases.  Bush was warned in clear and specific term before 9/11 and we didn't have this huge database sweeping up the info of all Americans back then.

        It is a false choice to say "we must become an authoritarian state with full-time government monitoring of anyone for the first clue they are about the flip out, give up their lives, and throw in with the terrors" Versus "nothing."

        The argument is that these massive expenditures are massive overkill regarding the real, not overblown, issue that we face.  We can do something without overkill.

        "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

        by YucatanMan on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 11:18:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  No, not the point, Inland. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        CitizenOfEarth, Ryvr, quagmiremonkey

        Nobody is saying "it's not worth" trying to catch terrorists (criminals), except you.  If we put even 1/1,000 of this money on the GWOT to more FBI agents, more first responders, more renewable energy (instead of getting oil overseas) etc., then we'd be doing a lot better.  We would not be bankrupting the country.  We would not be polluting the world as much.  AND we would be preventing terrorism and catching the criminals, as has been shown in other countries which have taken this saner approach (Spain, UK).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site