Oregon shooting

[Greenday]

My point is, basically: the US have been willing and able to go to ridiculous lengths in combating a largely imagined, external threat.

I don't even know how to respond to this. This statement is so ridiculous I can't even come up with an argument for this.

Nope. The NSA has effectively done nothing. The vast majority of terrorist plots uncovered / prevented since 9/11 have been by existing measures and authorities ( local police, FBI, citizen tips, etc ).

It's amazing how people can make these statements without thinking maybe, JUST maybe, government organizations are really damn good at keep stuff secret and it's in the public's best interest that they don't start panics among the civilian population by telling them just how many terrorist plots they've stopped over the years.

Nope, you're right, we've spent billions and billions on this and after all this time, no one has decided to determine on a yearly basis how much funding each organization gets based on the previous year's work and they've continued to fund these organizations that have "effectively done nothing". That totally sounds more likely.

[Gravekeeper]

I don't even know how to respond to this. This statement is so ridiculous I can't even come up with an argument for this.

No, go ahead, please. Try and prove his statement wrong.

It's amazing how people can make these statements without thinking maybe, JUST maybe, government organizations are really damn good at keep stuff secret and it's in the public's best interest that they don't start panics among the civilian population by telling them just how many terrorist plots they've stopped over the years.

A) I research the shit out of everything which you should know by now.

B) Are you fucking serious?

If they stopped something they would be parading it all over the news 24/7 for DAYS. The NSA director testified before congress and grossly inflated how effective the agency was. They are desperate to be seen as doing something useful to justify all of this.

They parade even the slightest threat in front of you like its the end of the god damn world day in and day out. Half your news cycle is how much shit wants to kill you and how it will kill you. Everything is a god damn threat all the time.

Causing a panic is the entire point.

What is up with you lately, dude?

Nope, you're right, we've spent billions and billions on this and after all this time, no one has decided to determine on a yearly basis how much funding each organization gets based on the previous year's work and they've continued to fund these organizations that have "effectively done nothing". That totally sounds more likely.

Have you not met Congress? Wasting money on shit you don't need is sort of half their job description. The other half is failing to accomplish anything resembling governing.

[Greenday]

No, go ahead, please. Try and prove his statement wrong.

Someone saying that terrorism a largely imagined threat when terrorist attacks happen regularly around the world (or attacks are stopped) and given the ISIS threat? There's just no need to dissect it. You don't follow world events if you make statements like that.

If they stopped something they would be parading it all over the news 24/7 for DAYS. The NSA director testified before congress and grossly inflated how effective the agency was. They are desperate to be seen as doing something useful to justify all of this.

They parade even the slightest threat in front of you like its the end of the god damn world day in and day out. Half your news cycle is how much shit wants to kill you and how it will kill you. Everything is a god damn threat all the time.

No, they wouldn't. Society needs to function and if they reported every single thing they stopped, people would freak the hell out. People overreact as it is to the current threat. And I know you research stuff, but if it's classified, the only way your research is going to turn up anything is through espionage and since you aren't a spy (I hope cause that'd cause a lot of paperwork), you won't turn up the stuff they REALLY want to hide. It's the whole purpose of need-to-know.

Have you not met Congress? Wasting money on shit you don't need is sort of half their job description. The other half is failing to accomplish anything resembling governing.

I don't disagree with this. Congress blows. And given how much of a half-assed job they do in general, do you really think it's the congressmen and congresswomen who analyze all the performance metrics of every government organization or do they leave it up to other people to figure out that stuff?

[protege]

If they stopped something they would be parading it all over the news 24/7 for DAYS. The NSA director testified before congress and grossly inflated how effective the agency was. They are desperate to be seen as doing something useful to justify all of this.

That's exactly what they'd do. They'd use even a minor event to justify the massive game of "touchy-feely" that happens at every airport in the US. Odd, because you can get on a train in Grand Central Terminal...which is packed 24/7...and you're not subjected to anything other than seeing a couple of uniformed cops sitting at a desk near the tracks.

Again, the NSA/TSA is all about the *illusion* of security. They haven't done jack shit until now, and like GK said, the director stated that fact to Congress.

They parade even the slightest threat in front of you like its the end of the god damn world day in and day out. Half your news cycle is how much shit wants to kill you and how it will kill you. Everything is a god damn threat all the time.

Causing a panic is the entire point.

Again, that's what they do. Why is it that the "threat level" in the US goes up a level or two before every major holiday...and then nothing happens? Again, it's because the media feeds on this shit to keep viewers. They WANT us panicking.

A perfect example of this, at least locally, is how everyone freaks the hell out when snow is mentioned in any newscast. Perfectly clear roads turn into parking lots, and there's a run on TP at every grocery store in town.

[Greenday]

That's exactly what they'd do. They'd use even a minor event to justify the massive game of "touchy-feely" that happens at every airport in the US. Odd, because you can get on a train in Grand Central Terminal...which is packed 24/7...and you're not subjected to anything other than seeing a couple of uniformed cops sitting at a desk near the tracks.

This is funny since most people going through security in airports don't get patted down. You only get a pat down if you opt out of the scanner or if the scanner picks up on something (Which could easily be avoided if when they say take everything out of your pockets, you take EVERYTHING out of your pockets. The amount of people I've watched go through and then act like they thought that didn't include spare change/wallets/cell phones/etc. is astounding. Though since most of us are from CS, people not following rules shouldn't be a surprise.).

Again, that's what they do. Why is it that the "threat level" in the US goes up a level or two before every major holiday...and then nothing happens? Again, it's because the media feeds on this shit to keep viewers. They WANT us panicking.

A perfect example of this, at least locally, is how everyone freaks the hell out when snow is mentioned in any newscast. Perfectly clear roads turn into parking lots, and there's a run on TP at every grocery store in town.

It's multiple reasons. Holidays draw extra attention cause the terrorists like to screw with us. When I was in Afghanistan, it was obvious when things would heat up: the spring, July 4th, Memorial Day, Christmas, New Years, etc. They are supposed to be days where we can relax and enjoy ourselves and if they threaten us on those days, it takes away from our enjoyment. It's a morale game and if they can annoy us on days where we are supposed to be happy, mission accomplished. That's why chatter always picks up around those days. If terrorist acts are stopped because we've picked up on them and they choose not to act, that doesn't mean there weren't plans in the first place.

And predicting weather is drastically difference from gathering intelligence on terrorist groups.

[Hyena Dandy]

Nobody, to my knowledge, is trying to argue that terrorists don't exist. The argument is about whether or not the NSA is effective in stopping them, considering that all the ones that we have stopped, almost universlaly, have been stopped by things like people calling in tips, or local departments - People who exist outside of all these additional steps that we've piled on.

When the head of the NSA goes in front of congress and lists all these things that existing measures would have been effected for, you're saying that, effectively, he was lying under oath.

Sure, panic occurs. If the threat is not fulfilled, but made public. Or if it is fulfilled. But "We got someone!" doesn't exactly instill terror in me. The bigger problem is when you DON'T know if criminals are about.

I don't exactly trust the fact that Congress did something to mean that, therefore, it was the right thing to do. They do, after all, keep building military equipment that the army has asked them to stop building.

Honestly, Greenday, your argument is totally circular. In a discussion of whether or not the United States is spending too much money on this, your justification for why you're right is

"Of course we're not spending too much money. LOOK HOW MUCH MONEY WE'RE SPENDING!"

That's not evidence it WORKS. All the evidence that we have points towards the threat of international terrorism being overblown - NOT NONEXISTENT, OVERBLOWN - And that this is all security theater. And your argument is that while all the evidence says that, there is secretly evidence that no-one, not even Congress, knows about that shows it's working.

You can't have a policy debate when someone else has constructed their argument to be impossible to disprove. It's one thing if you want to say you believe in God or Gods or whatever supernatural things there are, and base that on "Well, you can't disprove it. I will keep believing." It's another if you want to spend millions of dollars of the national budget, on something that can't be proven or disproven. In this case, the existence of the many terrorist attacks that no-one will ever admit exists or talks about, but you are positive must have happened, purely because we are throwing money at trying to prevent it.

The fact that all the evidence points towards you being wrong, DOESN'T PROVE YOU RIGHT.

[Canarr]

It's amazing how people can make these statements without thinking maybe, JUST maybe, government organizations are really damn good at keep stuff secret and it's in the public's best interest that they don't start panics among the civilian population by telling them just how many terrorist plots they've stopped over the years.

Can you name one thing - just ONE - that government organizations are this damn good at? I mean, consider everything else they bumble through, or do half-assedly, or screw up completely; but that's the one thing they manage to do perfectly? Please.

I mean, just look at those spectacular success stories from the US training of rebels for Syria: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...pons-al-qaeda/


In a statement on Twitter, a man calling himself Abu Fahd al-Tunisi, a member of the al Qaeda-linked group, said “A strong slap for America… the new group from Division 30 that entered yesterday hands over all of its weapons to Jabhat al-Nusra after being granted safe passage,” the Telegraph reported.
“They handed over a very large amount of ammunition and medium weaponry and a number of pickups,” he added.
Another member of Jabhat al-Nusra, Abu Khattab al-Maqdisi, tweeted Division 30’s commander, Anas Ibrahim Obaid, told the terrorist group’s leaders he had tricked the coalition to get the weapons.
“He promised to issue a statement… repudiating Division 30, the coalition, and those who trained him,” he tweeted, according to the Telegraph. “And he also gave a large amount of weapons to Jabhat al-Nusra.”
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported that 75 Division 30 fighters had crossed into Syria from Turkey the day before the Tweets with “12 four-wheel vehicles equipped with machine guns and ammunition.”
U.S. Central Command confirmed about 70 graduates of the Syria “train and equip” program had re-entered Syria and were operating as New Syrian Forces alongside Syrian Kurds, Sunni Arab and other forces combating Islamic State militants, the Telegraph reported.
If the reports are true, this will be the second disaster at the hands of Jahbat al-Nusra to befall the much-criticized $500 million training program.
Last month the first group of fighters to re-enter Syria was attacked and routed by the organization, which stormed its headquarters and kidnapped and murdered some of the other members.
Last week, General Lloyd Austin, head of U.S. Central Command, told the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee there were as few as four or five program graduates still fighting inside Syria.

Four or five. A program, started December 2014, with a 500 million $ budget, produced four or five fighters for the Syrian rebels. Yes, the effectiveness here is Earth-shattering.

Also, as others have stated: this claim that the US government has stopped or foiled countless terrorist plots in secret to avoid scaring the population is ridiculous. If they had even ONE success story, they'd be blaring it all over the news. But they aren't, because there isn't one. But I guess accepting that would mean to admit that you've spent all that money, tortured all these people, for nothing - which I understand is hard to do.

Someone saying that terrorism a largely imagined threat when terrorist attacks happen regularly around the world (or attacks are stopped) and given the ISIS threat? There's just no need to dissect it. You don't follow world events if you make statements like that.

For Americans. A largely imagined threat for Americans. As GK pointed out, toddlers with guns kill more Americans than terrorists do - and that includes you own, home-grown, domestic terrorists. Yes, IS is certainly dangerous - if you're Syrian, or Iraq...ian?, but to Americans? Not really a threat. Or, at least not a credible one. And far, far less than tons of other things you'll happily ignore.

Not to mention, IS is grown beyond a "simple" terrorist group; they're practically their own country in all but name by now. In their conquered territory, they provide emergency services, repair the infrastructure, even build up a functioning healthcare system. These aren't some Al Qaida suicide bombers living in caves, and to view them as such vastly underestimates the dangers they pose for the region.

[protege]

Four or five. A program, started December 2014, with a 500 million $ budget, produced four or five fighters for the Syrian rebels. Yes, the effectiveness here is Earth-shattering.

$500 million to find 5 people? That's a pretty pathetic return on the investment if you ask me

[Greenday]

If they had even ONE success story, they'd be blaring it all over the news. But they aren't, because there isn't one.

...So basically what I've learned from multiple people posting this in this thread is a lot of people don't understand the whole classified thing. For those who don't know, it means keeping your mouth shut, even once it's over. The government has done this forever. If they blasted every single classified operation, they'd never accomplish anything as our enemies would get details of other's failures and learn from them.

[Tama]

I personally think that it is the need for the thing to remain classified, and also this little tidbit from Men in Black.

There's always an Arquillian Battle Cruiser, or a Corillian Death Ray, or an intergalactic plague that is about to wipe out all life on this miserable little planet, and the only way these people can get on with their happy lives is that they DO NOT KNOW ABOUT IT!

[Aragarthiel]

You only get a pat down if you opt out of the scanner or if the scanner picks up on something

Actually not completely true. A couple of times when I flew as an unaccompanied minor and I had a family member escort me to the gate, we were actually pulled out of line before even reaching the scanners to get pat downs. No clue why.

With as much money as we spend on fighting terrorism, I wonder how much of it goes to false alarms based on bad information that the public never hears about. I'm 100% sure they happen but you never hear about it, so it's apparent the government is more worried about covering up its incompetence than its victories.

[Hyena Dandy]

No, we understand the concept. But saying "Well it's classified" is a TERRIBLE argument. You're arguin that they must be succeeding because we give them money. So if we gave them more money, would they be even more of a success?

Simply trusting that the evidence MUST exist, is assuming competence from Congress that is shocking. They suck on everything else, they make all these other decisions for purely political point-scoring. But on THIS, they MUST be making the right decision. Your argument is utterly baseless.

There are steps between a point-by-point breakdown of what happened, and saying "Yeah, we got this guy on that date." Honestly, if the terrorists do not know that one of their group has been arrested, they are too fucking incompetent for me to be scared of.

We don't even have them saying "We have managed great successes, but we can't go into too much detail." We have literally nothing. We have them going in front of congress and PRESENTING literally nothing. And you are arguing that this literally nothing is actually proof of how effective it is.

I personally think that it is the need for the thing to remain classified, and also this little tidbit from Men in Black.

Except, we totally DO know that terrorists exist. That is an extremely important difference.

Terrorists are not some force millions of times more powerful than humanity that could wipe the entire species out in an instant.

And in the world of Men in Black, no-one knows that the people fighting them exist either. The head of the Men in Black agency isn't going out and telling people "You need to keep giving me money to fight aliens." We also don't have groups other than the Men in Black regularly arresting aliens and stopping alien attacks.

Of course, that's because Men in Black is FICTIONAL. And thus needs an explanation for why all this can happen and we don't know. That's a narrative device, not some grand statement of morality. The reason no-one in MiB knows about that, isn't because of the fact that they'd panic. It's because if they did, such major information would sufficiently change the world, that it would be virtually unrecognizable, and thus require a substantial change. I would no longer be seeing myself in the story. I wouldn't empathize as well with the character played by Will Smith because he is not introduced to all these things. So maybe we shouldn't be taking national securityadvice from comedies about the Fresh Prince fighting bug monsters.

[Greenday]

You're arguin that they must be succeeding because we give them money.

I never once made this argument. I've pointed out that it's NOT as simple as just spending money...

[Hyena Dandy]

I never once made this argument. I've pointed out that it's NOT as simple as just spending money...

The only evidence you've given to back up your idea that they're really super effective and they just keep EVERYTHING they do classified, is that Congress keeps funding them. And that it wouldn't make sense for Congress to fund them, if they weren't successful.

Except that Congress is an institution which has repeatedly voted to repeal Obamacare, to no effect, and has attempted to do so in ways that include adding the repeal to a HIGHWAY REPAIR bill, and has repeatedly sunk millions into building military equipment that the armed forces have asked them to stop giving them...

You're putting way too much in the idea that they can't be voting to do this for purely self-promotional reasons.

[s_stabeler]

To be blunt, greenday, the issue is that if the government is granted whatever powers it wants, without having to justify them, then the USA will sleepwalk into becoming a totalitarian state. It's closer than you would think at the moment. (routine monitoring of the population- yes, the NSA are (allegedly) only looking for information on terrorist plots. Once the infrastructure is there, it is ridiculously easy to repurpose it to monitoring all opposition. Disappearing people- what else is Extraordinary Rendition? It was grabbing people and taking them to secret detention facilities. While none of them were american citizens, it is again, far too close to having the infrastructure behind a totalitarian state for comfort.)

And the only proof offered that it is actually necessary is "its' stopped terrorist plots! trust us, it really is necessary!"- more or less, you are saying "we have proof of what we are saying, but we refuse to provide it"- if you were in court for murder, and you said "I have proof that I could not have been the murderer, but I will not provide it, since it would allow the prosecution to figure out how I got it" then you would be (rightfully) ignored, since you refuse to provide said proof. How is the government demanding more and more powers without explaining why they are nessecary supposed to be any different?