Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You know, for better or worse, people are allowed free speech. While that can lead to really great things, like change in government or new ideas, it also leads to this crap.
In the same way that running a for profit company and acting as the head of state of a country have very little in common, security for property or a relatively small plot of land (at the scale we're talking, it's small; I'm sure it's actually much larger than anywhere we all live) is not the same as border security for a country.
Status:
"Apparently the worst poster on CD"
(set 27 days ago)
27,646 posts, read 16,129,622 times
Reputation: 19065
Quote:
Originally Posted by skepticratic
You know, for better or worse, people are allowed free speech. While that can lead to really great things, like change in government or new ideas, it also leads to this crap.
In the same way that running a for profit company and acting as the head of state of a country have very little in common, security for property or a relatively small plot of land (at the scale we're talking, it's small; I'm sure it's actually much larger than anywhere we all live) is not the same as border security for a country.
That shouldn't be hard to get, yet here we are.
We have 162,760 people for every 1 mile of border with Mexico. 30 people per foot. Easy to fathom a secure border at that rate huh? You would like secure borders wouldnt you?
I bet you it takes less than a minute for someone to hop over that wall, if he/she so choose. If Trump wants to put up a wall because he doesn't want the Mexicans to see him sunbathing nude, that's one thing. But he insists the wall will deter illegals from crossing over, it won't. That's the point that you guys are missing.
My parents live in a 3 acre land and put up fence around the property, not to stop intruders because any yahoo can climb over a wall; but to stop the wild life from entering. The point is - a wall serves more purpose than to prevent people from coming in.
.
I agree.
Related, we must recall that when East Germany built a barrier along its border with West Germany, as well as the 'wall' around its section of Berlin, the East Germans explained to anyone that would listen that these barriers were built to keep West Germans out of the paradise of East Germany. Of course, it was all built to keep East Germans in place.
It does make me wonder if, say, in 2008 President Obama had proposed a 'wall' along the US/Mexico border, would there have been people herein claiming that said wall was for imprisoning US citizens? That it was the 'first step' in creating a type of East Germany? That once the wall was up, it would then be easy for Obama to close the airports to international flights? Then close off the ports? That a wall would also be someday built along the US/Canadian border?
Sounds crazy, but I rather bet some would have made the argument.
My objection to the wall is mainly due to its cost (we already have 770 miles of fencing, which I guess would have to be torn down), and the difficulty, as noted by another poster, of actually building such a wall along the Texas/Mexico border. There are plenty of ranchers that would be against such a 'taking' of their property, as well as infringing on their water rights to the Rio Grande. I also have not seen 'wall people' address the very large lake bordering Texas and Mexico (and a prime place for drug smuggling, as well as great fishing and hunting).
Even then, I doubt the wall would be as effective as some think. The Great Wall of China was not wholly effective in keeping out the barbarians of the North, nor was Hadrian's wall effective against the Scottish hordes so feared.
Oh please. I can see why neighbors are annoyed, but to compare walling off an estate to an entire border is silly. For those who live in the east, midwest, etc...of our country https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZWT...ature=youtu.be
There is no need to wall off the entire border just build the 700 miles of border wall on the most porous areas of our southern border that was already approved by congress.
Related, we must recall that when East Germany built a barrier along its border with West Germany, as well as the 'wall' around its section of Berlin, the East Germans explained to anyone that would listen that these barriers were built to keep West Germans out of the paradise of East Germany. Of course, it was all built to keep East Germans in place.
It does make me wonder if, say, in 2008 President Obama had proposed a 'wall' along the US/Mexico border, would there have been people herein claiming that said wall was for imprisoning US citizens? That it was the 'first step' in creating a type of East Germany? That once the wall was up, it would then be easy for Obama to close the airports to international flights? Then close off the ports? That a wall would also be someday built along the US/Canadian border?
Sounds crazy, but I rather bet some would have made the argument.
My objection to the wall is mainly due to its cost (we already have 770 miles of fencing, which I guess would have to be torn down), and the difficulty, as noted by another poster, of actually building such a wall along the Texas/Mexico border. There are plenty of ranchers that would be against such a 'taking' of their property, as well as infringing on their water rights to the Rio Grande. I also have not seen 'wall people' address the very large lake bordering Texas and Mexico (and a prime place for drug smuggling, as well as great fishing and hunting).
Even then, I doubt the wall would be as effective as some think. The Great Wall of China was not wholly effective in keeping out the barbarians of the North, nor was Hadrian's wall effective against the Scottish hordes so feared.
Unlike you I wouldn't put a price on our national security. Illegal aliens cost us $113 billion a year in taxes. I am sure the wall would pay for itself in no time. That doesn't even include those who are criminals and terrorists getting through our southern border. So, unless it is 100% effective we shouldn't build it?
Congress already approved 700 miles of wall along the most porous areas of our southern border. If it weren't feasible then why did they approve it? We aren't talking about our entire border. Read the link I posted on how a good, high wall would be a huge deterrant.
Immigrants are not specifically concerned with getting into Mark Zuckerburg's estate. They're poor and want a better life, not crazy. Tunneling under the wall if a personal estate is not going to give anybody a better life.
They aren't "immigrants" they are illegal aliens. No one is entitled to a better life by breaking laws. Ever heard of tunnel sensors?
Immigrants are not specifically concerned with getting into Mark Zuckerburg's estate. They're poor and want a better life, not crazy. Tunneling under the wall if a personal estate is not going to give anybody a better life.
Blatant lie here........
If you tunnel under the wall, so you can help yourself to the possessions of those who placed the wall in the first place, you have come to essentially steal from them, no different than a common thief that breaks and enters anyone's home.
Here's a brief lesson for misguided thought patterns such as yours.......
If you invite someone into your home, and treat them to dinner, and an entertaining evening, they are welcome, they are "visitors".
If they break in, and help themselves to my dinner, they are thieves.
If I invite someone to break into my neighbors home, tell them they should help themselves to their possessions, and actually condone, defend, and even facilitate that activity you are a progressive liberal.
If you've come to steal from a private estate, or from the tax payers and citizens of an entire nation, the concept is identical.
If you tunnel under the wall, so you can help yourself to the possessions of those who placed the wall in the first place, you have come to essentially steal from them, no different than a common thief that breaks and enters anyone's home.
Here's a brief lesson for misguided thought patterns such as yours.......
If you invite someone into your home, and treat them to dinner, and an entertaining evening, they are welcome, they are "visitors".
If they break in, and help themselves to my dinner, they are thieves.
If I invite someone to break into my neighbors home, tell them they should help themselves to their possessions, and actually condone, defend, and even facilitate that activity you are a progressive liberal.
If you've come to steal from a private estate, or from the tax payers and citizens of an entire nation, the concept is identical.
I wonder if he ha has had any special legislation drafted granting him the right to shoot down drones that fly near or over his property.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
