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.
Wrong, he said point blank that Mexico will pay for the wall. He didn't say that Mexico would reimburse us or pay indirectly, he said Mexico will PAY for the wall. And where is that $100 billion coming from? Show some links supporting that.
Yes, he did say that but he did not say how they would do it, initially. What part of that aren't you guys getting? Since Mexico refused to pay for it up front he initiated a plan how they would do it involuntarily. I get so sick of repeating this over and over and yet the same questions and claims arise over and over by you and your fellow anti-wall people. Let's face it you guys just don't want a wall no matter who pays for it because of your personal agendas.
What plan, and if he has a plan why was he asking Congress for money???
We need the funds to get it started. Here is the long run plan. Why are you and yours so concerned about the wall and how it's funded anyway since it is needed for our national security? Hmm.
We need the funds to get it started. Here is the long run plan. Why are you and yours so concerned about the wall and how it's funded anyway since it is needed for our national security? Hmm.
So why has none of plan B been done? I do not consider the wall to be an issue of national security.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
Not that I like Trump being president (as thought my Status Entry doesn't give it away already), but the military securing the border would be less nonsensical than building the wall. Understand I'm not all that hot on the idea either, just that I find it much less bad than "the wall".
Symbols communicate meanings. The more physically robust that symbol's intended to be, the more strongly it promotes a message. In fact, that's why people often construct such physically robust symbols in the first place. It also makes the symbol more difficult (and hence more expensive) to tear down. The meaning it would communicate is "We are not an open country. We no longer want your tired, your poor, your huddled masses". This is especially true when there's no plans for a similar wall on the Canadian border.
Soldiers on the border, while still symbolic, are much less likely to remain in place than any of the type proposed is. That makes stationing soldiers along the border much less firmly symbolic a stance than a wall is. That also makes the symbolism of "Keep Out! We Don't Want You Here!" much less decisive than would a wall. The world may be irked at using the US Army to beef up our border, but the image of a wall would be disastrous to our international relations, especially within Latin America and more importantly our neighbor. The message to the world (especially in light of "making Mexico pay for that wall"): If the US doesn't give a damn about the dignity of their next door neighbor, how can we trust the US to care about the rest of the world in general?
Combined with my above post at the top of this page, this is why I'd rather have more soldiers on the border than "The Wall".
The dignity of our next door neighbor? WTH? How much dignity did Mexico show us by encouraging their citizens to invade our country illegally and steal from us and cry when we try to return them? A wall is a one time cost while stationing more personnel there is an ongoing expense. The wall is to assist the Border Patrol that we have already there to be able to do their jobs more effectively.
Did China lose their "image to the world" by building the Great Wall of China? Why would any country look at us as being evil for protecting our own borders especially since to date we have had at least 11 million foreigners invade our country illegally? It's only a 700 mile long wall anyway not the entire border. You guys make no sense at all.
So why has none of plan B been done? I do not consider the wall to be an issue of national security.
It will take time to implement it. Trump's only been in office for a year and a few months. He can't implement it all himself without congress cooperating and they have been bucking him all the way. We have had at least 11 million foreigners invade our country illegally from our southern border and many whom are terrorists, criminals and drug cartels but the wall isn't an issue of national security? Did I just enter the twilight zone?
It will take time to implement it. Trump's only been in office for a year and a few months. He can't implement it all himself without congress cooperating and they have been bucking him all the way. We have had at least 11 million foreigners invade our country illegally from our southern border and many whom are terrorists, criminals and drug cartels but the wall isn't an issue of national security? Did I just enter the twilight zone?
Really? WHO has bucked him? I mean, the R's have the executive and legislative branch, it doesn't get much better than that.
Are you saying he had an unreasonable plan with no support, so he was just saying stuff?
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
Trump ran on Mexico paying for that stupid wall, he really beat that horse to death and y'all ate it up at those rallies. Now when push come to shove, Mexico paying for it is nowhere to be found. How long have we existed without a stupid wall, let Trump pay for it and maybe Mexico will reimburse him .
That wasn't the only issue that Trump ran on and why he was elected. What's stupid about a wall that deters illegal entry effectively (already proven) and is cost effective no matter who pays for it? Read my numerous replies on this issue. Maybe it will educate you but I doubt it. You can't educate people who don't want the wall simply based on their own personal agendas none of which shows any regard for our national security.
Really? WHO has bucked him? I mean, the R's have the executive and legislative branch, it doesn't get much better than that.
Are you saying he had an unreasonable plan with no support, so he was just saying stuff?
Are you joking? The entire Democrat party in congress has bucked him and many of the GOP have also on this issue. His plan was not unreasonable it was congress that was. He even was willing to give them DACA in exchange for the wall and yet they still rejected the border security that we need.
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.
