Do we sepend too much stopping terrorism?

No right Turn asks the question

I think the problem is the potential long term threat of terrorism.

1) I propose it is total, in as far as it could end human life one day (even though it is not that dangerous now) driving cars will never reach that point. this doesnt mean we overspend or dont overspend but it does mean terrorism can be considered much more serious than thecurrent number of deaths suggests.

2) Terrorism is to be feared in part because it is feared (as contadictory as that sounds). If someone droped a nuke in shanghai (or los angeles or whatever) - sure only 20 million might die, and sure that might be less than the amount of people who die of other causes in china that year, but your big problem is not that 20 million would die as a direct result of the blast - it is instead that China(or the USA) would go insane.No country could tolerate such an attack - in most cases democracy if it existed would be extinghished almost intantly as would any tolerance for reigemes that opposed them.

it is therefore in everyone's interests that the USA or China or anyone else is fairly careful about their vulnerability to terrorism.