Syria and Iraq are not good enough sources for you?
I know what you are thinking "Those countries already had problems".
But you have some circular thinking: because they were not able to stop terrorism, they had problems, because they had problems terrorism got much worse.
If Western countries stopped fighting terrorism it would get worse, at some point it would get so bad the countries would be at risk.
Obviously in the real world no one would let it get that bad. But how bad is acceptable to you? 3 bombings/truck rammings per year maybe? 50 would be too much I'm sure.
Do you have some place you would draw the line?
I draw it at zero, which means, you need to spend a ton of money.
Look at Israel: They have not had a bombing in ages, so obviously they can stop spending money on preventing it, right? They have a problem with knife and truck attacks and I'm sure they are working how to stop it.
Once they do stop it, people like you will ask "Why do we need to keep spending money on this?"
I heard a security professional once quip "We should let a few attacks get through, just so they don't cut our funding." It's a quip - but there is some truth to it.
I know what you are thinking "Those countries already had problems".
But you have some circular thinking: because they were not able to stop terrorism, they had problems, because they had problems terrorism got much worse.
If Western countries stopped fighting terrorism it would get worse, at some point it would get so bad the countries would be at risk.
Obviously in the real world no one would let it get that bad. But how bad is acceptable to you? 3 bombings/truck rammings per year maybe? 50 would be too much I'm sure.
Do you have some place you would draw the line?
I draw it at zero, which means, you need to spend a ton of money.
Look at Israel: They have not had a bombing in ages, so obviously they can stop spending money on preventing it, right? They have a problem with knife and truck attacks and I'm sure they are working how to stop it.
Once they do stop it, people like you will ask "Why do we need to keep spending money on this?"
I heard a security professional once quip "We should let a few attacks get through, just so they don't cut our funding." It's a quip - but there is some truth to it.