Jim Posted May 30, 2006 Author Posted May 30, 2006 These things are subject to opinion' date=' of course, and "more difficult" is a reasonable point. The main concern I have (which isn't necessarily directed at you) is that airport security is not something we should view in a mission-accomplished manner. The key ingredients of passenger and baggage screening, and the air marshall program, are in poor condition and not only aren't improving, but are giving us a false sense of security. We're better-protected from madmen and irate businessmen, but terrorist are neither of those. I'm an optimist, though, and I think you have to take these things in steps. Continued focus can lead to improvement. This was, IMO, the primary benefit of the 9/11 Commission Report, more than the specific recommendations it made.[/quote'] Oh, I completely agree that we should NEVER say mission accomplished about any type of security. When playing defense, you can't become complacent. Fortunately, we are not limited to defense and I do believe that some elements of offense helps account for our success. However, for the reasons I think we both agree, it is difficult to see a terrorist group investing resources in this particular type of attack. Box knifes and fake bombs probably only worked once. Of course, I wouldn't say this if I were in charge of airport security. I'd want people to stay hyper alert. My real fear is one of two scenarios: (i) border penetration followed by low tech strikes against soft targets in the heart land where security may not be as tight and (ii) WMDs. I doubt the WMD threat will every dissipate and, in fact, as Bascule's singularity nears (or as tech continues to ramp up along an exponential curve, even if not to a singularity), we will have a highly unstable situation. While we should remain free and vigilant, I also think it would not be wise for our enemies to underestimate our capabilities.
ecoli Posted May 30, 2006 Posted May 30, 2006 I'm more wary of number i, but especially because of the possibility of a combination of 1 and 2. It's just another reason why we should secure our Mexican boarder.
Jim Posted May 30, 2006 Author Posted May 30, 2006 I'm more wary of number i' date=' but especially because of the possibility of a combination of 1 and 2. It's just another reason why we should secure our Mexican boarder.[/quote'] Whatever we decide with respect to the number of immigrants we need in our workforce, there is no legitimate argument for the status quo.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now