If doing so shaves a few percent off the error rate that's saving innocent lives, but it's also becoming an essential part of a process that kills innocent people?
I'd prefer standing against the slaughter.
As software developers we should see the problem here with "premature optimization". It's an incredibly inefficient use of resources with limited success in addressing unplanned situations. Sounds a lot like the war in terror.
Have you seen the same thing sometimes turn later into remarkable prescience, correctly anticipating some future problem and solving it before it happens? I've seen that too.
Government and policy are rarely about certainty. They're generally and risks and probabilities, anticipated costs and expected values. That's the domain of statement and spies, and not for people who like clear certainties.
Why do you draw the line at "directly attacked"? We have laws that make it a crime to conspire to murder. I don't think it's unreasonable to go after people who are conspiring to attack the US or US citizens.
Thank goodness the world is just slightly too big to be manipulated into a two-party deadlock.