What percentage of international passenger flights to or from Israel
do not go through Ben Gurion? Part of the Israeli security strategy is to route most potential threats through the same focused security apparatus. On a land border, that means building a wall (or "security fence") and moving the travelers through fewer gates. On a sea border, that means watching the whole thing closely and only allowing traffic through a few authorized harbor ports. For the air border, it means routing most travelers through one airport (viz. Ben Gurion).
The US couldn't route everyone through one airport. It's too big. So put one on each coast. That was just a pinch of hyperbole. The US could not practically do that. But neither could it install Ben Gurion levels of security in all of its international airports, because even with all the combat vets, there are too few Americans would would have the capability, competence, composure, and willingness to take the job. And for those who would, the cost of training would be enormous. Just one airport, like O'Hare, which served 78 million passengers last year, had more than 4 times the volume of Ben Gurion's 18 million. And you would have to increase security for every single international airport, or it wouldn't work.
Americans have a different mindset than Israelis. The nation was born from resistance to arbitrary and capricious colonial restrictions, and has never been surrounded by enemies on all sides. Our history has led many of us to deeply distrust our own corrupt governments and police. Here, "security guard" is a low-prestige job for losers, as embodied in the "mall cop" archetype. You might be able to install increased security in Boston or NYC, where recent history instills a greater sense of insecurity, but it is only a short drive away from the state whose motto is "live free or die", home to libertarian festivals where an amalgamation of activist goals is to one day openly carry firearms, while openly vaporizing marijuana, jaywalking topless to request public records, while recording police in the act of not hassling anyone.
The last time I traveled for work (to New Hampshire, actually) I got to witness the American airport security procedure for checking a firearm. My co-worker apparently never went anywhere without it. And that's a typical American thing. An incredibly large number of us are almost constantly armed. Legally. You can't stop someone 3 miles out from the airport at a checkpoint and say the car can't proceed with a weapon in it. The NRA would take that all the way to the Supreme Court and win.
Even the ineffectual security theater they put on in airports now induces hordes of Americans to prefer ground transport, rather than put up with it. And not only are Americans obsessed with their own freedom, but we are also a nation of bargain hunters. This is the country that gave Wal-Mart to the world, and exported many of its own manufacturing jobs to other countries. If we had to pay more for air travel just to get expensive real security instead of cheap placebo, the airlines would simply go bankrupt [more often than they already do].
So if you try to say "arrive 3 hours before departure or strip search" in most US airports, you will have a lot of empty terminals. For one, adding 3 hours to a flight between, for instance, Los Angeles and San Francisco is making that 3 hours in an airport plus an hour in the air plus another 30 minutes for luggage and ground transport versus just getting onto I-5 and driving for 6 hours. From Chicago to Louisville, to name a flight recently in the news, that would be a 5 hour drive compared to 4.5 hours between airports. Hell, last time I flew on my own dime, I drove two hours, to reach another airport with cheaper fares. The local airport actually runs ads on television, begging people not to do that.