Page 5 of 58 FirstFirst ... 345671555 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 1147

Thread: The Wall

  1. #81
    It's OVER 5,000! bravesnumberone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    17,031
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,314
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,977
    Thanked in
    2,003 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by zitothebrave View Post
    You're ignoring 100 years of Aviation. and this thing called tunnelling. I forget the stat but they said the majority of Cartel drug running goes through existing tunnels or to meme it



    Also you're going back in time with racism because no one is talking about building a wall with our Canadian border. Or securing our coasts. Basically this is like locking your front door but leaving your back door and windows wide open.

    The wall is like giving soldiers security blankets instead of body armor during war time.
    Not to mention, Russia.


  2. #82
    It's OVER 5,000! bravesnumberone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    17,031
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,314
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,977
    Thanked in
    2,003 Posts
    Maybe instead of building a Wall to keep Mexican immigrants out, Trump, the "master negotiator," should put them to work repairing/building the roads, bridges and rail lines he has promised.

  3. #83
    Clique Leader weso1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    [Omitted]
    Posts
    6,694
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,295
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,056
    Thanked in
    1,708 Posts
    If the wall does work, which I think it will, then it could possibly actually save the US money in the long run. You wouldn't need as much money spent on border patrol in areas where the wall is effective. In the end I think the total net costs of the wall after everything is taken into account would be pretty minimal. I also find it hard to believe that folks on the left are truly that concerned about the cost of the wall.
    thank you weso1!

  4. #84
    It's OVER 5,000! cajunrevenge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    uranus
    Posts
    25,147
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,484
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,792
    Thanked in
    2,710 Posts
    Pretty sure Trump said the wall was going to go underground too and use sensors of some kind to detect tunnels.
    "Donald Trump will serve a second term as president of the United States.

    It’s over."


    Little Thethe Nov 19, 2020.

  5. #85
    A Chip Off the Old Rock Julio3000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    15,038
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    6,273
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    9,790
    Thanked in
    5,155 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by weso1 View Post
    If the wall does work, which I think it will, then it could possibly actually save the US money in the long run. You wouldn't need as much money spent on border patrol in areas where the wall is effective. In the end I think the total net costs of the wall after everything is taken into account would be pretty minimal. I also find it hard to believe that folks on the left are truly that concerned about the cost of the wall.
    How do you figure that?

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Julio3000 For This Useful Post:

    goldfly (01-28-2017)

  7. #86
    I <3 Ron Paul + gilesfan sturg33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    52,587
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,018
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,096
    Thanked in
    5,758 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Julio3000 View Post
    How do you figure that?
    Because the left have never been concerned about the cost of anything?

    JOBS!

  8. #87
    Clique Leader weso1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    [Omitted]
    Posts
    6,694
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,295
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,056
    Thanked in
    1,708 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Julio3000 View Post
    How do you figure that?
    I just don't remember too many grumps when Obama spent hundreds of billions of dollars on his infrastructure programs many of which provided no return on investment. In my experience I haven't noticed leftists be that concerned with the cost of federal government programs. Plus it's a drop in the bucket relative to our current debt even based on worst case scenario.
    thank you weso1!

  9. #88
    Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is. jpx7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,903
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    47,591
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6,441
    Thanked in
    3,830 Posts
    "For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."

  10. #89
    Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is. jpx7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,903
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    47,591
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6,441
    Thanked in
    3,830 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    Whether or not a wall is the best solution to combat land-based immigration from Central and South America is worthy of thoughtful debate, but brainwashedly pretending there isn't a problem with a sizable number of illegals (many of whom are unaccompanied children thanks in part to the curiously revered DACA) crossing our Southern border is rather delusional.
    Or you could just be in favor of open-borders; and could thus be not pretending, but rather uncaring, about "a sizable number of illegals crossing our Southern border". I don't necessarily subscribe to that view, myself, but one doesn't have to be "delusional" to think "there isn't a problem".

    As someone who actually lives in a state that shares a substantial border with México Viejo, I think there are systemic issues that drive these immigration patterns, and those issues won't really be addressed or redressed by a physical barrier, however imposing; and I think, moreover, there are many better and less short-sighted solutions out there—some already articulated (and fairly obvious), and some that thoughtful investigation and discussion could reveal. But I take it you don't actually disagree on those points, even if you might disagree to some extent on what those exact solutions are.

    As someone who actually lives in a state that shares a substantially scenic and beautiful border region with our southern neighbors, I also have misgiving about detracting from that natural splendor with an ugly-ass cement monstrosity.
    "For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."

  11. #90
    Co-Owner, BravesCenter
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    10,516
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,345
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4,305
    Thanked in
    2,446 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jpx7 View Post
    Or you could just be in favor of open-borders; and could thus be not pretending, but rather uncaring, about "a sizable number of illegals crossing our Southern border". I don't necessarily subscribe to that view, myself, but one doesn't have to be "delusional" to think "there isn't a problem".

    As someone who actually lives in a state that shares a substantial border with México Viejo, I think there are systemic issues that drive these immigration patterns, and those issues won't really be addressed or redressed by a physical barrier, however imposing; and I think, moreover, there are many better and less short-sighted solutions out there—some already articulated (and fairly obvious), and some that thoughtful investigation and discussion could reveal. But I take it you don't actually disagree on those points, even if you might disagree to some extent on what those exact solutions are.

    As someone who actually lives in a state that shares a substantially scenic and beautiful border region with our southern neighbors, I also have misgiving about detracting from that natural splendor with an ugly-ass cement monstrosity.
    I used to very much believe that the Schengen Agreement was the greatest thing since sliced bread (and was, additionally, very pro-Euro in that respect), but would posit what transpired as its member states too rapidly expanded as a marquee example of why open-borders are, more often than not, a risky proposition. In Europe, problematic symptoms presented almost immediately; brain drain out of the East into the West, Roma population congressing in wealthy metropoles like Paris, cross-jurisdictional red tape galore. Of course, Western Europe initially thrived off of the influx of cheap (and talented) labor and the East was content with a new streams of revenue, primarily related to real estate. The hope was that this kind of mutual back-scratching would evolve, over time, into a better, more 'level' Europe.

    The problem is that the playing field never equalized. At the end of the day, it's still vastly more preferable to live in France than in Slovakia in general terms of quality of life. Plus, on top of that component of the Schengen philosophy faltering, sprinkle in the global financial crisis and its subsequent finger-pointing and austerity measures/protestations, as well as Syrian refugee crisis, for good measure. It's a mess - but the population displacement has already occurred, for better or worse. And now, taking Greece as a prime example, an open-border mentality has created a situation where one country has suffered from so much emigration that it's fallen into a hole that will take generations to crawl out of.

    Is the 'arrangement' we've had, to date, with Mexico really so different?

    With respect to open-borders in North America, it wouldn't take much to persuade me to open the border between the United States and Canada. The standard of living between the two countries is highly comparable and you aren't likely to see much of an exodus in either direction. Mexico is a different story. To your point, we've talked about "making Mexico better" for years, but the situation doesn't seem to have improved, even an iota, over the past decade. Meanwhile, it's clear that our system has been strained (and, sure, I do believe that rhetoric like "taxed" ... "on the brink" ... "overran" is perhaps a bit much) by the influx of illegals from the South. And of course there's the drugs.

    So, to come full circle, I'd still likely use the same phraseology toward an individual who subscribes to an open-borders belief system as it pertains to Mexico and the United States. Delusional not from being willfully ignorant of the repercussions of unbridled Mexican immigration into the US, but delusional in thinking that an open-borders philosophy is any sort of real solution here for either of the two countries. Maybe I'm too grounded in the political/economic realities. I can certainly appreciate the anthropological, globalist approach that is rooted in an open-borders mindset ... but this is a different case.

    Hell, I'd even be somewhat comfortable making the argument that putting up a wall (or, for the sake of debate, making the border airtight) is actually likely to be more beneficial for Mexico and Central/South America than for America in the long-haul. It is a solution that could actually make open-borders a reality more expeditiously than whatever it is that's happening now.
    Last edited by Hawk; 01-27-2017 at 09:22 PM.

  12. #91
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,579
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    I used to very much believe that the Schengen Agreement was the greatest thing since sliced bread (and was, additionally, very pro-Euro in that respect), but would posit what transpired as its member states too rapidly expanded as a marquee example of why open-borders are, more often than not, a risky proposition. In Europe, problematic symptoms presented almost immediately; brain drain out of the East into the West, Roma population congressing in wealthy metropoles like Paris, cross-jurisdictional red tape galore. Of course, Western Europe initially thrived off of the influx of cheap (and talented) labor and the East was content with a new streams of revenue, primarily related to real estate. The hope was that this kind of mutual back-scratching would evolve, over time, into a better, more 'level' Europe.

    The problem is that the playing field never equalized. At the end of the day, it's still vastly more preferable to live in France than in Slovakia in general terms of quality of life. Plus, on top of that component of the Schengen philosophy faltering, sprinkle in the global financial crisis and its subsequent finger-pointing and austerity measures/protestations, as well as Syrian refugee crisis, for good measure. It's a mess - but the population displacement has already occurred, for better or worse. And now, taking Greece as a prime example, an open-border mentality has created a situation where one country has suffered from so much emigration that it's fallen into a hole that will take generations to crawl out of.

    Is the 'arrangement' we've had, to date, with Mexico really so different?

    With respect to open-borders in North America, it wouldn't take much to persuade me to open the border between the United States and Canada. The standard of living between the two countries is highly comparable and you aren't likely to see much of an exodus in either direction. Mexico is a different story. To your point, we've talked about "making Mexico better" for years, but the situation doesn't seem to have improved, even an iota, over the past decade. Meanwhile, it's clear that our system has been strained (and, sure, I do believe that rhetoric like "taxed" ... "on the brink" ... "overran" is perhaps a bit much) by the influx of illegals from the South. And of course there's the drugs.

    So, to come full circle, I'd still likely use the same phraseology toward an individual who subscribes to an open-borders belief system as it pertains to Mexico and the United States. Delusional not from being willfully ignorant of the repercussions of unbridled Mexican immigration into the US, but delusional in thinking that an open-borders philosophy is any sort of real solution here for either of the two countries. Maybe I'm too grounded in the political/economic realities. I can certainly appreciate the anthropological, globalist approach that is rooted in an open-borders mindset ... but this is a different case.

    Hell, I'd even be somewhat comfortable making the argument that putting up a wall (or, for the sake of debate, making the border airtight) is actually likely to be more beneficial for Mexico and Central/South America than for America in the long-haul. It is a solution that could actually make open-borders a reality more expeditiously than whatever it is that's happening now.
    Mic drop.

    Great post.
    Natural Immunity Croc

  13. #92
    Still Playing the Waiting Game DaneHill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Fredericksburg, VA
    Posts
    914
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,184
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    571
    Thanked in
    267 Posts
    The wall won't keep us any more or less safe. Bad guys will find a way in. They just know the wall will be there, so find another route. There will be "soft" spots in the wall that smugglers will access, and when those are found, new ones will be created. Tunnels have already been mentioned. Access by sea and by air. There's no element of surprise here. So more illegals will be found with rope and climbing gear. Pole vaulters will have it easy. Now if the wall had hidden booby traps all across it (ie. poison darts, mines, sand sharks, Graboids), then we're talking. For the unlucky ones who didn't hear about a wall, then I guess their bodies will be found lying next to it, dead of heatstroke and dehydration. Poor kids. The real winners will be the graffiti artists.

  14. #93
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,579
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DaneHill View Post
    The wall won't keep us any more or less safe. Bad guys will find a way in. They just know the wall will be there, so find another route. There will be "soft" spots in the wall that smugglers will access, and when those are found, new ones will be created. Tunnels have already been mentioned. Access by sea and by air. There's no element of surprise here. So more illegals will be found with rope and climbing gear. Pole vaulters will have it easy. Now if the wall had hidden booby traps all across it (ie. poison darts, mines, sand sharks, Graboids), then we're talking. For the unlucky ones who didn't hear about a wall, then I guess their bodies will be found lying next to it, dead of heatstroke and dehydration. Poor kids. The real winners will be the graffiti artists.
    First thoughts...funny post and great ending.

    Second thoughts ..i still can't comprehend how people can dismiss then additional security a wall brings. This is not exactly a new idea.

  15. #94
    Still Playing the Waiting Game DaneHill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Fredericksburg, VA
    Posts
    914
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,184
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    571
    Thanked in
    267 Posts
    Thethe, we're talking about a 2,000 mile long wall. How would you even guard that? I guess there can be guard shacks every few miles monitoring it. But people will still get through. Or bribe guards to let them through. Or kill guards who don't accept the bribes. I just see more ways that people can get over the wall then would stop them. Unless the point is "we just don't want to make it easy for them".

  16. #95
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,579
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DaneHill View Post
    Thethe, we're talking about a 2,000 mile long wall. How would you even guard that? I guess there can be guard shacks every few miles monitoring it. But people will still get through. Or bribe guards to let them through. Or kill guards who don't accept the bribes. I just see more ways that people can get over the wall then would stop them. Unless the point is "we just don't want to make it easy for them".
    How are people going to get over the gate? It's going to built in such a way that it wI'll be difficult to scale. It will be sealed aside form key entry points that will be heavily guarded. This is not rocket science. A wall is an upgrade cost that over time will make border security a cheaper expense. The problem with governmental budgetting i's that it's not forward looking enough. It's almost as if the government doesn't act like a going concern similar to how a for profit Corp is run. These leads to inefficient spending and short terms goals at the expense of the long term prosperity of the country.

  17. #96
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,579
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    Upfront cost*


    I hate posting on a phone....

  18. #97
    Boras' Client
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    4,001
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    368
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,204
    Thanked in
    847 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by thethe View Post
    Upfront cost*


    I hate posting on a phone....
    I hope your auto-correct is nicer to you than mine is to me.

  19. #98
    Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is. jpx7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,903
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    47,591
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6,441
    Thanked in
    3,830 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    I used to very much believe that the Schengen Agreement was the greatest thing since sliced bread (and was, additionally, very pro-Euro in that respect), but would posit what transpired as its member states too rapidly expanded as a marquee example of why open-borders are, more often than not, a risky proposition. In Europe, problematic symptoms presented almost immediately; brain drain out of the East into the West, Roma population congressing in wealthy metropoles like Paris, cross-jurisdictional red tape galore. Of course, Western Europe initially thrived off of the influx of cheap (and talented) labor and the East was content with a new streams of revenue, primarily related to real estate. The hope was that this kind of mutual back-scratching would evolve, over time, into a better, more 'level' Europe.

    The problem is that the playing field never equalized. At the end of the day, it's still vastly more preferable to live in France than in Slovakia in general terms of quality of life. Plus, on top of that component of the Schengen philosophy faltering, sprinkle in the global financial crisis and its subsequent finger-pointing and austerity measures/protestations, as well as Syrian refugee crisis, for good measure. It's a mess - but the population displacement has already occurred, for better or worse. And now, taking Greece as a prime example, an open-border mentality has created a situation where one country has suffered from so much emigration that it's fallen into a hole that will take generations to crawl out of.
    It might be "vastly more preferable to live in France than in Slovakia in general terms of quality of life" (debatable: I really like central Europe, and it depends on what part of France you're comparing), but it's also vastly more preferable to live in Slovakia (or Slovenia, for that matter) post-EU than pre-EU, in general terms of quality of life. I think that counts for something.

    (I also think the collapse in Greece owes its causes to much more than "so much emigration", but that's a conversation for another time.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    Is the 'arrangement' we've had, to date, with Mexico really so different?
    I think it is, because—even with NAFTA—the US and Mexico don't really participate in a common multi-state market with centralized authority and regulation in the way that Eurozone member nations interact.

    However, I do think the comparison you're drawing is fairly strong with respect to the "refugee crisis", which predates and extends far beyond the turmoil in Syra, and to which you circle back when mentioning the "influx of illegals from the South". And it's by no means a facile questions, so answers aren't really easy to come by on this score. My moral impulses, nonetheless, impel me towards the position that accepting refugees is the just and right response to refugees at your door; so I want to live in a country that is taking these people in, and not sending them back, as long as they have reason to seek refuge.

    Which leads us to:
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    To your point, we've talked about "making Mexico better" for years, but the situation doesn't seem to have improved, even an iota, over the past decade.
    We've talked about it, sure; but how much has seriously, earnestly, actually been done to attempt to improve the economic and social realities of Mexico? I would argue not much. And one real, positive step I think the US could take, which would benefit both nations—and which also addresses your "of course there's the drugs" concern—is to dramatically reconceive our legal posture towards so-held illicit drugs in the US. But no politician at the federal level seems to have the resolve and vertebrae to lead this effort.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    With respect to open-borders in North America, it wouldn't take much to persuade me to open the border between the United States and Canada. The standard of living between the two countries is highly comparable and you aren't likely to see much of an exodus in either direction.
    Might take a bit more to persuade the Canadians, at this point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    Hell, I'd even be somewhat comfortable making the argument that putting up a wall (or, for the sake of debate, making the border airtight) is actually likely to be more beneficial for Mexico and Central/South America than for America in the long-haul. It is a solution that could actually make open-borders a reality more expeditiously than whatever it is that's happening now.
    I'd like to see you flesh that assertion out, even if you're only "somewhat comfortable" making it. Is this a carrot/stick thing, where you think we've exhausted our supply of carrots?
    Last edited by jpx7; 01-28-2017 at 12:11 AM.
    "For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."

  20. #99
    if my thought dreams could be seen goldfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    21,084
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,365
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,337
    Thanked in
    2,262 Posts
    we don't have open borders like europe and most don't cross the southern border

    they fly in and overstay their visa
    "For there is always light, if only we are brave enough to see it. If only we are brave enough to be it." Amanda Gorman

    "When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"

  21. #100
    It's OVER 5,000! Runnin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    12,770
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,397
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,946
    Thanked in
    2,064 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by thethe View Post
    Second thoughts ..i still can't comprehend how people can dismiss then additional security a wall brings. This is not exactly a new idea.
    How does a wall on the Mexican border bring added security? The only thing coming across that border are a few fruit pickers and some coyotes.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •