http://defensetech.org/2006/05/31/homeland-security-cuts-for-nyc-dc/ The Future of the Military, Law Enforcement and National Security Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:29:34 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://defensetech.org/2006/05/31/homeland-security-cuts-for-nyc-dc/#comment-17081 Anonymous Thu, 07 Aug 2008 09:02:12 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=1908#comment-17081 "Disproportionally represented" by how much? NYC and DC should not have funding proportional to all other large cities. “Disproportionally represented” by how much?
NYC and DC should not have funding proportional to all other large cities.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2006/05/31/homeland-security-cuts-for-nyc-dc/#comment-130892 ??? Thu, 07 Aug 2008 09:02:12 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=1908#comment-130892 "Disproportionally represented" by how much? NYC and DC should not have funding proportional to all other large cities. “Disproportionally represented” by how much?
NYC and DC should not have funding proportional to all other large cities.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2006/05/31/homeland-security-cuts-for-nyc-dc/#comment-130889 Jason Thu, 01 Jun 2006 17:35:21 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=1908#comment-130889 We should really be looking more at the "systems" that affect our economy and lives more than the cities that are really symbolic targets. Transportation (Ports, rail, air), Information systems, Communication, Agriculture, Water, Energy, and on and on. Symbols are important, but not very when the electical grid gets shut down or ... use your imagination in thinking about the other "systems". We should really be looking more at the “systems” that affect our economy and lives more than the cities that are really symbolic targets. Transportation (Ports, rail, air), Information systems, Communication, Agriculture, Water, Energy, and on and on. Symbols are important, but not very when the electical grid gets shut down or … use your imagination in thinking about the other “systems”.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2006/05/31/homeland-security-cuts-for-nyc-dc/#comment-130888 eek Thu, 01 Jun 2006 14:30:44 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=1908#comment-130888 It just shows that the game is in securing votes with dollars, not in securing against the threat. And since there is no way to really guage the threat, you may as well put those dollars to some practicle use. It just shows that the game is in securing votes with dollars, not in securing against the threat. And since there is no way to really guage the threat, you may as well put those dollars to some practicle use.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2006/05/31/homeland-security-cuts-for-nyc-dc/#comment-130887 Harry Toor Thu, 01 Jun 2006 04:21:22 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=1908#comment-130887 OK here is what you do...you publish this list that becomes public that tells which cities recieve the least security funding from the governement. You might as well FedEx the list to the Pakistani/Afghan border. Besides that little thing, the United States is big...with many, many, many holes New York and DC make up two holes of our well many holes... OK here is what you do…you publish this list that becomes public that tells which cities recieve the least security funding from the governement.
You might as well FedEx the list to the Pakistani/Afghan border.
Besides that little thing, the United States is big…with many, many, many holes New York and DC make up two holes of our well many holes…

]]> http://defensetech.org/2006/05/31/homeland-security-cuts-for-nyc-dc/#comment-130886 T Wed, 31 May 2006 23:46:03 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=1908#comment-130886 Those two cities were disproportionately represented in past funding. Must we insist that any change that moves to instead improve defenses in places that have received attention, or even just moves to make the distribution more reasonable, is automatically stupid? The 9/11 terrorists were smart enough to choose the airports with the worst security screening records. Why do we assume they will be idiots and attack the most heavily defended cities, where it would be most difficult? Doesn't it make sense to concentrate on the softer targets, now that we have already spent billions on the obvious ones? Those two cities were disproportionately represented in past funding. Must we insist that any change that moves to instead improve defenses in places that have received attention, or even just moves to make the distribution more reasonable, is automatically stupid?
The 9/11 terrorists were smart enough to choose
the airports with the worst security screening
records. Why do we assume they will be idiots
and attack the most heavily defended cities,
where it would be most difficult? Doesn’t it
make sense to concentrate on the softer targets,
now that we have already spent billions on the
obvious ones?

]]>