I agree completely, but I have never seen a more articulate discussion of America's obsession with "security" than the recent opinion piece by James Carroll, recently published originally in the Boston Globe and subsequently in the IHT. The piece can be found here

Caroll focuses more on America's obsession with military power as a source of security, but I believe his observations apply equally to other facets of American society -- the misguided belief that societal disorders can be solved through the application of increased force (hence the huge prison population and the stubborn insistence on retaining the death penalty), the delusion that the answer to terrorism is to declare "war" on it, and of course, the elaborate government-funded security theatre carried out in airports, rail stations, shopping malls and other public places that is designed to create the appearance that the government is "doing something."

From Caroll's opinion piece:

"In this era, humans have been cut loose from ancient moorings of meaning and purpose. The context within which this condition is most manifest in the United States is the debate - or, more precisely, the lack thereof - over what is called "national security." The phrase is potent because it promises something that is impossible, since the human condition is by definition insecure. When candidates vie with one another over who is most qualified to be "commander in chief," and when they unanimously promise to strengthen military readiness, they together reinforce the dominant American myth - that an extravagant social investment of treasure and talent in armed power of the group offers members of the group escape from the existential dread that comes with life on a dangerous planet. That such investment only makes the planet more dangerous matters little, since the feeling of security, rather than actual security, is the goal of the entire project."