US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by Platapus

It appeared that Trump lied

You mean that man who said he'd tell people whatever they wanted to hear to get elected? Surely not!

[August]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Fabricating that national emergency?

Ask the families of Sabrina Starr, Ronald da Silva, Ingrid Lake, Tessa Tranchant, Sarah Root, Shayley Estes, Drew Rosenberg or Grant Ronnebeck to name just a small few who might have an opinion on that idea.

[u crank]

It boggles my mind that people circumvent the reality of the situation by arguing over who will pay for the wall/barrier/fence. The fact is the thing has not been built and no money has been allocated for it so nobody knows who will pay for it.

Instead of a discussion about who will pay for it, the discussion should be about the reality of foreign nationals freely crossing the boarder of a sovereign state. If you are ok with that, say so. If not, what is the answer?

[Buddahaid]

Small few is right compared to the national violent crime statistics. A wall is not the answer, it's a monument to fear and stupidity.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

A wall is not the answer, it's a monument to fear and stupidity.

And the answer is.....

[August]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Small few is right compared to the national violent crime statistics. A wall is not the answer, it's a monument to fear and stupidity.

Stop kidding yourself. That's just a small few examples that I took the time to look up. There are many many more victims of illegal immigration but I guess to you they're acceptable losses just as long as it sticks it to Donald Trump right? Because after all the Democrats were supposedly in favor of border security (at least they gave it lip service) right up until he started advocating it, then suddenly its "immoral".

[em2nought]

If we build the wall on the Mexican side, with Mexican labor, I think that go fund me should just about cover it.


Or maybe Trump should make all asset forfeitures go to paying for the wall instead of buying new APCs for Barney Fife?

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by August

Stop kidding yourself. That's just a small few examples that I took the time to look up. There are many many more victims of illegal immigration but I guess to you they're acceptable losses just as long as it sticks it to Donald Trump right? Because after all the Democrats were supposedly in favor of border security (at least they gave it lip service) right up until he started advocating it, then suddenly its "immoral".

Stop kidding yourself. I'm not against border security, I'm against building a huge static structure that will still need to be manned and defended.

[August]

Originally Posted by em2nought

Or maybe Trump should make all asset forfeitures go to paying for the wall instead of buying new APCs for Barney Fife?

That's not a bad idea. Maybe they can start with the criminal Clinton Foundation eh?

[mapuc]

About this wall.

Most of us if not everyone is thinking political or human.

Have any of us(I didn't until I read about this)ever thought about the animal who take the tour from south to north or viceversa ?

A wall the size Trump wants would prevent those animals entering their areas.

Markus

[Jimbuna]

Well there could be a way around the current impasse.

US President Donald Trump has said he could declare a national emergency to build a US-Mexico border wall without the approval of Congress.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46763940

Meanwhile, another top official resigns.

Department of Defence chief of staff Kevin Sweeney has resigned, a month after the Defence Secretary James Mattis announced his departure.

Rear Admiral Sweeney said in a statement that "the time is right to return to the private sector".

He is now the third senior Pentagon official to announce his resignation since President Donald Trump announced US forces would leave Syria.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46773138

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

I'm not against border security, I'm against building a huge static structure that will still need to be manned and defended.

I think you should explain how that makes sense. An analogy would be a prison. The high walls and other barriers are there for a purpose. Yes there are guards but without the walls what would happen?

There are a variety of reasons why people on the left oppose any kind of physical barrier on the border. This guy suggests one glaring possibility.

The reason a secure border wall has not been — and may not be — built is not apprehension that it would not work, but rather real fear that it would work only too well.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/...migrant-lives/

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by u crank

I think you should explain how that makes sense. An analogy would be a prison. The high walls and other barriers are there for a purpose. Yes there are guards but without the walls what would happen?

People have tunneled out of prisons and even climbed over the walls to escape. With border wall, it will be much easier to do both of the above since there simply is not enough manpower to guard the entire length of the border. Tunnels will be even more harder to prevent as they can be started out of sight on the Mexican side.


The wall won't work.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Dowly

People have tunneled out of prisons and even climbed over the walls to escape.

The frequency of escapes from max security prisons is rare. Most escapes take place at minimum security lockups. Prisoners mostly just walk out and most are recaptured. If the percentage of illegal immigration was on the level of max security prisons escapes, illegal immigration via the southern border would be dramatically reduced to practically zero.

With border wall, it will be much easier to do both of the above since there simply is not enough manpower to guard the entire length of the border. Tunnels will be even more harder to prevent as they can be started out of sight on the Mexican side.

Are you suggesting that digging tunnels under a patrolled and monitored section of wall would go undetected. It would be pretty dumb to invest billions of dollars to build a wall/barrier/fence and not have ways to prevent people from climbing over or digging under it. Hamas has been digging tunnels for years and although some have been used successfully most are discovered and destroyed. Tunnels require much labor and money. They also provide a single exit with which to catch border violators. Tunnels would be easily detected by drones, satellite images and listening devices. If the total number of illegal immigrants crossing US/Mexican border have to do so through tunnels....


Tunnels won't work.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by u crank

Are you suggesting that digging tunnels under a patrolled and monitored section of wall would go undetected.

No, that is not what I said at all. I specifically said the border is too long and undermanned. Tunnels can be and are being dug anywhere along the border.

It would be pretty dumb to invest billions of dollars to build a wall/barrier/fence and not have ways to prevent people from climbing over or digging under it.

Yes, it would be stupid, something this administration excels at. Perhaps it would be wise to first get the border manned and the technology there to make any sense to build a wall that on its own does very lttle.


Getting people and goods across the border is a big business. Do you really think they'll just stop because there's a wall in the way? Just this year last year(?) they found a tunnel dug at the depth of ~30 meters. That would go right under Trump's wall and probably can bypass monitoring equipment as well.