Maybe we need a new fence?

[1DOWN4UP]

How much Heroin do you think was in those bags?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

The Berlin wall was intended to prevent enslaved people from leaving, not to protect what is allegedly a sovereign nation from having foreign invaders invade at will. Huge difference there.

Perhaps the Great Wall of China, developed to protect the society that erected it from foreign invaders, would be a better analogy.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Perhaps the Great Wall of China, developed to protect the society that erected it from foreign invaders, would be a better analogy.

In most regards, the analogy would be more correct. I would, however, point out that with modern technology, any system of defense would be far easier to operate and make effective rather than the Great Wall which depended on its own mass, human eyeballs, and communication at the speed of the foot of man or beast. The inequality between invader and defender is also much greater now than then. That said, I consider defending the border entirely possible and not doable at this point because those responsible or getting it done have financial and political incentives for not getting it done, much in the same fashion as the Upton Sinclair quote (OK, I am not an Upton Sinclair fan, but even a broken clock is right twice a day) that it is difficult to get a man to understand when his salary depends on his not understanding. I would expand this thought to include a wider package of position and incentives, but the principle stands.

 

[poptab]

The Berlin wall was intended to prevent enslaved people from leaving, not to protect what is allegedly a sovereign nation from having foreign invaders invade at will. Huge difference there.

I think its a waist of resources. And I don't see immigrants as invaders so the difference is not as big to me.

I think arguing for a fence is just asking for bigger government. So no thanks.

 

[bulletsmith]

I think its a waist of resources. And I don't see immigrants as invaders so the difference is not as big to me.

I think arguing for a fence is just asking for bigger government. So no thanks.

So any government is bad, always? I tend to believe that one of the roles of the gov. is to do the things that we can't do alone. Roads, Bridges, Military, and Border Security to name a few. I don't agree that the world should just be able to walk in at will.

 

[poptab]

So any government is bad, always? I tend to believe that one of the roles of the gov. is to do the things that we can't do alone. Roads, Bridges, Military, and Border Security to name a few. I don't agree that the world should just be able to walk in at will.

Yes.

Why do you think we need government for roads?

Is border security necessary? Why?

 

[bulletsmith]

Roads just being one example. I think we need government for roads because I can not afford to build one. And if we all get together to put our money together and build one, somebody would have to manage it. So we would likely form a sub group of all of us to handle the finances and construction of the road. To me, this sounds a lot like what our governments do on the local level with roads. Roads are necessary for commerce and defence.

Border security is always necessary, be it a national border or my own home. This question almost seems like a setup.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Yes.

Why do you think we need government for roads?

Is border security necessary? Why?

One of the few legitimate purposes of government is to protect us from foreign threats. Our porous border brings us economic problems which have been explored at length. It brings us a steady supply of people who kill more of our citizens annually than have been killed sum total in the Iraq/Afghanistan war. It brings in diseases unknown to us for a couple of generations in mutated form. It brings us damage and a lack of security for our citizens living near the border who absorb damage to their persons and property. It stands as an open door for terrorists of Middle Eastern descent who seem to have no problem getting Mexican consular ID.

On the other hand, we could keep government out of it, both in terms of enforcing the border and enforcing consequences on those who are harmed solving the problem with hot lead.

 

[oldpink]

Yes.

Why do you think we need government for roads?

Is border security necessary? Why?

How many lines are you dragging behind that boat of yours?

 

[Tactically Fat]

Hell, even the Canadian side deserves a good proper fence in my opinion.

In the recent past, it's been brought up that Canadian immigration policies may be worse for the USA as far as certain ne'er do wells wanting to come here. It was more of how, generally, Canadian culture is much more welcoming and tolerant of Muslims/Islam, especially in their large metropolitan areas. The theory was that it would me MUCH easier for the jihadis to get into Canada and then into the USA than the Central American countries based on how tolerant the prevailing culture is.

I'm not so sure that I wholly buy that argument, but I think it's one to consider.

 

[IndyDave1776]

In the recent past, it's been brought up that Canadian immigration policies may be worse for the USA as far as certain ne'er do wells wanting to come here. It was more of how, generally, Canadian culture is much more welcoming and tolerant of Muslims/Islam, especially in their large metropolitan areas. The theory was that it would me MUCH easier for the jihadis to get into Canada and then into the USA than the Central American countries based on how tolerant the prevailing culture is.

I'm not so sure that I wholly buy that argument, but I think it's one to consider.

This is like looking at your home and determining that you should focus all your efforts on the window the burglars generally use rather than the fact that some others are nearly as weak even though less traveled.

 

[Baditude]

Here's a thought: Pull our personnel from oversea bases except the few critical ones, stop borrowing money to give to other countries. Reduce welfare to those that actually need it and limit the time. Only US citizens gets healthcare, welfare etc. hospitals only required to give life saving health services for those without insurance.

Illegal immigrants and families put in FEMA camps and forced to do cheap factory labor stuff like China does

Now you have the money and man power to secure the boarder

 

[rw02kr43]

Maybe if there was a real chance of something bad happening it might be a deterrent.

 

[poptab]

One of the few legitimate purposes of government is to protect us from foreign threats. Our porous border brings us economic problems which have been explored at length. It brings us a steady supply of people who kill more of our citizens annually than have been killed sum total in the Iraq/Afghanistan war. It brings in diseases unknown to us for a couple of generations in mutated form. It brings us damage and a lack of security for our citizens living near the border who absorb damage to their persons and property. It stands as an open door for terrorists of Middle Eastern descent who seem to have no problem getting Mexican consular ID.

On the other hand, we could keep government out of it, both in terms of enforcing the border and enforcing consequences on those who are harmed solving the problem with hot lead.

I'm not convinced that they cause economic harm. Obviously I don't condone any criminals or criminal behavior.

Even so I will always be opposed to any expansion of government on purely philosophical grounds.

I don't care how beneficial you claim a wall will be or gunning down violators like the above person hints at. It's morally and ethically wrong. The first is theft the second is murder.

 

[poptab]

How many lines are you dragging behind that boat of yours?

I do sometimes troll but what you quoted are honest questions. Maybe you should consider how you would answer them before you dismiss them.

 

[oldpink]

I do sometimes troll but what you quoted are honest questions. Maybe you should consider how you would answer them before you dismiss them.

Look, when I see a post from someone who openly says that we shouldn't even have a border at all, I'm giving that someone the benefit of the doubt by asking if he's trolling, because the alternative is that he has nothing at all between the ears.

 

[poptab]

Look, when I see a post from someone who openly says that we shouldn't even have a border at all, I'm giving that someone the benefit of the doubt by asking if he's trolling, because the alternative is that he has nothing at all between the ears.

I must be a miracle then.

 

[OutdoorDad]

So just what is the problem if not the border and if the solution is not a fence, then enlighten us as to what is?

The problem is that Mexico is on a fast track to becoming a failed state or a narco state. Economic opportunity is almost nonexistent and physical security for its citizens is pathetic. The problem, as I see it, is a failure of the Mexican government to provide for the basic needs and security of its citizens. If the roles were reversed, and I and my family were residents of Mexico, living next door to the wealthiest nation in the world, we would be relocating to the U.S. And no one would stop me. There are too many ways in semi legally (like overstaying a visa) and too much support in the community to identify and deport effectively.

The economic and humanitarian cost to try to secure the southern boarder is too high. Even if economically and technically feasible, a secure boarder would fail after a Somalia type collapse of the Mexican government. Keep in mind, Mexico isn't Cabo. Potable water isn't a "given" in many parts of their country. Angry, scared, desperate people are difficult to control or even influence. And the failure of Mexico becomes more likely every day.

A part of the solution lies in making narcotics trafficking a low profit endeavor. There are many ways to accomplish this. Some could take place on our side of the river, but much needs to be done on the southern shore of the rio grande.

The narco war lords who wield so much influence need to be dismantled. There are many ways to accomplish this. A fence isn't one of them. If you stationed a sharp shooter at the location in the video, they would still bring their product across. In subs, tunnels, airplanes, rockets, or just waiting until the shooter ran out of ammo, they would still come across.

When Mexico fails, a few climbers with backpacks will be a fond rememberance of easy times.

 

[Dead Duck]

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

 

[Zoub]

In the recent past, it's been brought up that Canadian immigration policies may be worse for the USA as far as certain ne'er do wells wanting to come here. It was more of how, generally, Canadian culture is much more welcoming and tolerant of Muslims/Islam, especially in their large metropolitan areas. The theory was that it would me MUCH easier for the jihadis to get into Canada and then into the USA than the Central American countries based on how tolerant the prevailing culture is.

I'm not so sure that I wholly buy that argument, but I think it's one to consider.

You don't have to buy it, but it's a fact and has been for at least 25 years. It's a hell of a lot easier to bring in a "Landed Canadian" then to bring that person from their true country of origin and it's always easier to land in Canada.

Even so, one of the few times I truly walked out of a meeting so I could claim having no knowledge, involved a conversation about bringing in an LC. The combination of laws, lawyers and unethical staff makes for good times.