I realize what was said was in jest, and in part reference to current politics.

However, I do think the map makes it a bit easier to see what looks like occasional inconsistencies in travel warning levels. For example
- Is Spain more dangerous than Portugal
- Is Luxembourg safer than all the countries surrounding it?
- Is Uzbekistan really safer than Denmark?

In general, I will look at a map like this - but even more importantly also read the warnings. So for example, if I open up the information for Denmark, I notice a recent travel advisory (September 2nd) that suggests a protest march of up to 3000 people may protest around the US embassy. OK, fine enough, but now that I know the specifics, but if the date isn't September 2nd or if I am not in that part of Copenhagen, then this is easy enough to avoid - so I won't let this particular travel warning level influence my plans. Even in places with more elevated levels, I still find it useful to read what is behind the warnings; and also read from more than one source (e.g. also UK foreign ministry or Australian or Canadian) to see if there is similar information.