Wall or No Wall?

Wall or No Wall?

  • Wall

    Votes: 93 50.5%
  • No Wall

    Votes: 91 49.5%

  • Total voters
    184
Oct 24, 2017
1,418
1,021
290
No to "The Wall", but yes to additional fencing to portions of the border where they are needed.

I think the whole problem we have now is that Trump loves calling it "The Wall", it's become more of an issue of what "The Wall" symbolizes than what he really means.
 
Last edited:
Likes: Joe T.

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
969
382
205
No to "The Wall", but yes to additional fencing to portions of the border where they are needed.

I think the whole problem we have now is that Trump loves calling it "The Wall", it's become more of an issue of what "The Wall" symbolizes than what he really means.
Right now the wall is additional fencing, at least going by Trump's tweets.
 

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
"No wall" unless the wall encircles the whole country. Walls on the land, over mountains and rivers, and walls in the sea. No visa's either since they're the #1 contributor to illegal immigration,.
Someone illegally overstaying their visa has already gone through the screening process and is in the system and therefore identifiable.

Someone illegally wandering over the border has not.
 
Likes: OSC
May 22, 2018
3,678
2,442
265
"No wall" unless the wall encircles the whole country. Walls on the land, over mountains and rivers, and walls in the sea. No visa's either since they're the #1 contributor to illegal immigration,.
Why stop there? We build a wall then those damn illegals are just gonna airdrop into the US! We need a dome. Better yet lets just burrow underground and completely isolate ourselves from the rest of the world. No contact. No immigrants. No outside interference for our glorious America.
Thats the safest way to maintain and protect the "American" way!



:ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:
Oct 3, 2004
1,369
847
1,290
Montreal, Quebec
I'm 100% for the wall, it must be built in order to have a well-rounded border security strategy.

Did anyone see Nancy making her case yesterday? She looked like a mess. She's stuck between a rock and a hard place and it shows. She's barely holding it together.

She's turning 79 next month, but that extremely unlikely possibility to become the first woman president was too much for her to pass up. Seen a few decent speeches about the wall/border security funding from Congress, think Dan Crenshaw's might be my favorite:

 
Likes: Teletraan1
May 22, 2018
3,678
2,442
265
She's turning 79 next month, but that extremely unlikely possibility to become the first woman president was too much for her to pass up. Seen a few decent speeches about the wall/border security funding from Congress, think Dan Crenshaw's might be my favorite:

Man I really wish that guy wasn't such a dick. He seemed like a cool enough guy at first glance so I thought I had actually found a Republican that I liked, but its been nothing but downhill since that moment.
 
Likes: JareBear
Feb 21, 2018
3,104
2,072
300
Israel began construction of an upgraded security barrier along the Gaza Strip border last week, the Defense Ministry announced on Sunday.

“On Thursday, we began working on the final component of the barrier project along the Gaza border,” said Brig.-Gen. Eran Ophir, head of the army’s fence-building project. “The barrier is unique and especially suited to threats from the Gaza Strip and will provide a maximum response to prevent entry into Israeli territory.”
“At the end of last week, we began the construction of the barrier on the Gaza border,” Prime Minister and Defense Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at the start of Sunday’s cabinet meeting. “The barrier will prevent the infiltration of terrorists from Gaza into our territory. Those in Gaza have to understand that if they do not keep quiet, we will not hesitate to act.”
The fence along the Egyptian border, which is similar to the one being built along the Gaza border, has slashed almost completely the number of illegal African migrants arriving in Israel. The number of infiltrations from the Sinai dropped from 14,669 in 2010, to 213 in 2015, and to 14 in 2016. Since completing the raising of the height of the fence from five meters to eight meters along a 17-kilometer stretch, there have been no infiltrations from Sinai.
If Israel can do it why cant the USA? Or is everyone afraid of all the success a wall will bring. Look at the numbers, from 14669 infiltration's in 2010 to 0 in 2018.
 
Last edited:
Oct 3, 2004
1,369
847
1,290
Montreal, Quebec
Man I really wish that guy wasn't such a dick. He seemed like a cool enough guy at first glance so I thought I had actually found a Republican that I liked, but its been nothing but downhill since that moment.
What soured your opinion of him? Maybe it's just easier for me to look past politicians' views because the idea of attaching myself to any political party is counterintuitive, regardless of how closely I may align with them. If I run into someone like McConnell or Pelosi at the grocery store I'm not going to launch into a hateful diatribe because of their voting record... but I might if I catch them trying to pass through the "10 items or less" checkout counter with a stacked shopping cart. :D
 
Jan 11, 2016
643
225
240
A fence is fine. More border security is fine. A proper wall is stupid and pointless. And any effort to crack down on border security ought to be accompanied by I'm migration reform that offers productive immigrants a path to legal residency.
 

138

Member
Sep 1, 2015
443
209
290
So, this is an interesting potential scenario.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ergency-pelosi-can-jam-republicans-heres-how/

Under the National Emergencies Act, or NEA, both chambers of Congress can pass a resolutionterminating any presidentially declared national emergency.

Elizabeth Goitein, who has researched this topic extensively for the Brennan Center for Justice, tells me that if Pelosi exercises this option, it will ultimately require the Senate to vote on it in some form as well. The NEA stipulates that if one chamber (Pelosi’s House) passes such a resolution, which it easily could do, the other (McConnell’s Senate) must act on it within a very short time period — forcing GOP senators to choose whether to support it.
...
Republicans themselves have let it be known that they fear this scenario. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), an adviser to McConnell, has said that a Senate vote on any Trump-declared national emergency would be inevitable, and McConnell has told Trump that Congress might have to act in such a fashion. Both of these appear to be references to a scenario like the one outlined above.

Both men have also said this would deeply divide Republicans. One unnamed Republican senator even told the Washington Examiner that Trump would suffer major defections in such a vote.
 

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
969
382
205
She's turning 79 next month, but that extremely unlikely possibility to become the first woman president was too much for her to pass up.
79? That's near the maximum life expectancy in america.

I think the first female president will likely be younger than that.
 

wzy

Member
Dec 29, 2018
68
49
150
I don't really care about the wall. I'd rather we didn't have one, and I think the borders ought to be open to all.

Here's the thing though: if Democrats succeed in opening the border, that will be the end of the conversation. Period. Full stop. Not another word about it for the rest of eternity, because they don't give a shit--they're fine with the status quo of everyone being paid a little bit differently based on where they're from, especially if we're talking about their maids and groundskeepers. Americans get their minimum wage, but it's fine for Mexicans and Chinese and Indians to work for dirt. They don't mind in the slightest that this dynamic obviously makes a minimum wage impossible in the long term--rather, it provides ample opportunity for piety and posturing. "What's the matter? You don't want India to have freedom? You hate multiculturalism, huh? Augh!" They don't mind the basic structural instability of capitalism, and for all the accusations of "crazed leftists" taking over the party they don't really even believe in it. They just assume Keynesian countervailing forces and financialization will fix everything in perpetuity. Which of course is ludicrous--if it were true, we wouldn't be in crisis today.

The wall, at least, is one kind of answer. I mean, it won't work, but I like where Trump's head is at. It's a solution that at least acknowledges the fundamental issue of our generation, which is that there are winners and losers in globalization and the winners are the ones who have something worth exporting. In the United States that export is t-bills, and keeping that system whole requires violence and oppression of a scale so enormous its hard for anyone to fully comprehend. Why are the Democrats fine with this? Right, because they don't give a shit. Bomb Syria and return to 1. Everyone said that the new world order was going to be that Americans did computer jobs and managed all the actual work taking place overseas, and they'd make up for declining wages with the power of the dollar and cheap imports. Anyone could have seen that this was not how things would play out, but the alternative was socialism so... send in the marines? Whatever. The point is, you've got one side that proposes monstrous solutions to monstrous problems, and the other side that vastly prefers monstrous problems to actual leftism.

Manufacturing is gone, and its not coming back, and if it were a feasible answer to modern economic collapse it wouldn't have gone away in the first place. The wall isn't going to change that fact unless you build it around China, so not much to be optimistic about in that case. But at least its kind of a public works program. And it shows that voters won't tolerate politicians who want to have some other kind of conversation, which is encouraging. It'll give us a reason to have a big party when we tear it down later, so there's that too.
 
Last edited:
Feb 21, 2018
3,104
2,072
300
5.7 billion is nothing its a pittance. Just beef up the border security and build the wall. I don't even understand why this is controversial.

Its all identity politics and voter pandering. What are the Democrats afraid of? That the wall is going to actually curb illegal immigration. AOC just came out with her 10 year plan that would cost 100's of billions if not trillions of dollars, but 5.7 billion is too much?
 
Aug 3, 2010
20,819
2,879
675
In a cave outside of Whooville.
5.7 billion is nothing its a pittance. Just beef up the border security and build the wall. I don't even understand why this is controversial.

Its all identity politics and voter pandering. What are the Democrats afraid of? That the wall is going to actually curb illegal immigration. AOC just came out with her 10 year plan that would cost 100's of billions if not trillions of dollars, but 5.7 billion is too much?
It is strange when I see people saying that the wall is immoral and the money should go to other types of border security.

If they both achieve the same thing (less illegals setting foot in the country) how is one immoral and the other isn't? It's like people who are against it aren't all claiming to be against controlling illegal immigration, they just want to make sure the solution comes from their political team.
 
Last edited:

Woo-Fu

incest on the subway
Jan 2, 2007
13,356
382
1,120
If Israel can do it why cant the USA? Or is everyone afraid of all the success a wall will bring. Look at the numbers, from 14669 infiltration's in 2010 to 0 in 2018.
When we have guerillas crossing back and forth over a border a wall makes sense as a detection/early warning point. Maybe you're thinking terrorists? Most of those come in via Canada, by plane/boat, or are homegrown. A wall down south isn't going to even factor into their plans.

And the stats are stupid. How do you count an infiltrator you didn't detect? Think about that one for awhile.

If you really want to slow down the immigrants coming in from the south you don't need a wall, you need pillboxes with machineguns. The answer isn't to make the trip marginally more difficult, the answer is to make the job far more hazardous for the crews delivering the people. The coyotes start getting killed they might find a new line of work.
 
Last edited:
Feb 21, 2018
3,104
2,072
300
When we have guerillas crossing back and forth over a border a wall makes sense as a detection/early warning point. Maybe you're thinking terrorists? Most of those come in via Canada, by plane/boat, or are homegrown. A wall down south isn't going to even factor into their plans.

And the stats are stupid. How do you count an infiltrator you didn't detect? Think about that one for awhile.

If you really want to slow down the immigrants coming in from the south you don't need a wall, you need pillboxes with machineguns. The answer isn't to make the trip marginally more difficult, the answer is to make the job far more hazardous for the crews delivering the people. The coyotes start getting killed they might find a new line of work.
I agree that it can't be picnic and rainbows for those trying to cross the border, but throw out all the stats you want doesn't change the fact that Walls work and will reduce infiltration's. Shit on Israeli stats if you want but I will trust their numbers and even if it isn't 0, well they still brought it down from 15K to probably less than 1000. Either way you slice it thats a success and positive.

77 countries around the world have built walls/fences. If it was a total waste then why would these countries which are not as rich/powerful as the US do it? For shits and giggles? waste money? No because Walls work period. And the cost is a measly 5.7 billion.

Its clearly political and thats all. Dems know that if Trump builds his wall 2020 is his because he can say he got the wall built and the economy is booming. Dems even supported the Wall before Trump! Dems just don't want to give Trump a win.

I am wondering what is the negative of building the wall? What bad can happen? The worst is you spent money the boder patrol is asking for and you have an eyesore on your border. 5.7 billion is nothing, thats like 10% of the Foreign aid budget, which is 1% of the US budget. So thats like .01% of the US budget. Imagine I told you you could build a fence with you neighbor for 10 cents why wouldn't you put up a fence.
 

Woo-Fu

incest on the subway
Jan 2, 2007
13,356
382
1,120
I agree that it can't be picnic and rainbows for those trying to cross the border, but throw out all the stats you want doesn't change the fact that Walls work and will reduce infiltration's. Shit on Israeli stats if you want but I will trust their numbers and even if it isn't 0, well they still brought it down from 15K to probably less than 1000. Either way you slice it thats a success and positive.

77 countries around the world have built walls/fences. If it was a total waste then why would these countries which are not as rich/powerful as the US do it? For shits and giggles? waste money? No because Walls work period. And the cost is a measly 5.7 billion.

Its clearly political and thats all. Dems know that if Trump builds his wall 2020 is his because he can say he got the wall built and the economy is booming. Dems even supported the Wall before Trump! Dems just don't want to give Trump a win.

I am wondering what is the negative of building the wall? What bad can happen? The worst is you spent money the boder patrol is asking for and you have an eyesore on your border. 5.7 billion is nothing, thats like 10% of the Foreign aid budget, which is 1% of the US budget. So thats like .01% of the US budget. Imagine I told you you could build a fence with you neighbor for 10 cents why wouldn't you put up a fence.
First, you completely ignored the difference between illegal immigrants and guerilla warfare/terrorists. I mean, if you're a Trump supporter those are probably all the same thing, I understand.

Second, just because a country does something doesn't mean they're doing it for the obvious reasons or that it is effective at those obvious reasons. At this point Trump doesn't want the wall the stop illegals, he wants it because he promised it and if he doesn't get it he'll lose support. It's just politics, not practicality.

The negative of the wall should be obvious, it costs a lot of fucking money that could be spent elsewhere, or---crazy thought---not spent at all. Put that money into infrastructure or education, where it might actually do something more worthwhile than appeasing Trump's base. Instead of trivializing the amount by comparing it to the entire budget be a bit more honest and talk about what you could buy with that money elsewhere. That's not even contesting the absurdly optimistic 5 billion figure, it'll be three times that, at least.
 
Last edited:
Feb 21, 2018
3,104
2,072
300
First, you completely ignored the difference between illegal immigrants and guerilla warfare/terrorists. I mean, if you're a Trump supporter those are probably all the same thing, I understand.

Second, just because a country does something doesn't mean they're doing it for the obvious reasons or that it is effective at those obvious reasons. At this point Trump doesn't want the wall the stop illegals, he wants it because he promised it and if he doesn't get it he'll lose support. It's just politics, not practicality.

The negative of the wall should be obvious, it costs a lot of fucking money that could be spent elsewhere, or---crazy thought---not spent at all. Put that money into infrastructure or education, where it might actually do something more worthwhile than appeasing Trump's base.
It doesn't cost a lot of money, he is asking for 5.7 billion. Like I said 50 billion is given in Foreign aid to countries like Afghanistan, Ehtopia, Egypt, Jordan, etc... That 50 billion represents 1% of the US budget. So 5.7 Billion is 10% of that 1% of the budget. Its the equivalent of it costing you 10 cents to put up a fence. What other negatives are there since the $$$ part is nonsense. Especially when AOC (someone who is against the wall full force) comes out with her Green Deal that would cost 100's of Trillions of dollars.

Can you provide any studies that show the wall won't be effective? Why do the border patrol want it? Why did Dems want it before Trump. Even if the Wall stops 10% its worth it, if it saves 10 lives its worth it.

There are 2 reasons why you argue against a wall and it has nothing to do with $$$. Either you don't want Trump to get any wins, or you want illegals to keep coming into the country along with sex traffickers and drug dealers.

And BTW the stats I was referencing are in regards to the fence between EGYPT and ISRAEL where ILLEGAL AFRICAN MIGRANTS infiltrations have gone to almost nothing. It isn't in regards to terrorists from Gaza or the West Bank (though you may notice that suicide bombings have all but disappeared from Israel since it built its wall). So we have a Wall/Fence built between Egypt and Israel that was meant to reduce illegal migrants from entering the country just like what is happening on the US southern border and it worked.
 
Last edited:
Likes: gunslikewhoa
Feb 9, 2019
36
27
70
First, you completely ignored the difference between illegal immigrants and guerilla warfare/terrorists. I mean, if you're a Trump supporter those are probably all the same thing, I understand.
All of them are people who have no business in the US.

Second, just because a country does something doesn't mean they're doing it for the obvious reasons or that it is effective at those obvious reasons. At this point Trump doesn't want the wall the stop illegals, he wants it because he promised it and if he doesn't get it he'll lose support. It's just politics, not practicality.
We have a mind reader over here. Watch out, guys.

The negative of the wall should be obvious, it costs a lot of fucking money that could be spent elsewhere, or---crazy thought---not spent at all. Put that money into infrastructure or education, where it might actually do something more worthwhile than appeasing Trump's base. Instead of trivializing the amount by comparing it to the entire budget be a bit more honest and talk about what you could buy with that money elsewhere. That's not even contesting the absurdly optimistic 5 billion figure, it'll be three times that, at least.
The federal government spends $70 billion a year on education. Another $20 billion goes to transportation. These figures don't include state or city spending. As somebody else pointed out, the cost of the wall would be around 1/10th of what we spend on foreign aid (that is money taken from US citizens and given to foreign nationals.)
 
Last edited:
Mar 3, 2014
1,950
515
305
First, you completely ignored the difference between illegal immigrants and guerilla warfare/terrorists. I mean, if you're a Trump supporter those are probably all the same thing, I understand.

Second, just because a country does something doesn't mean they're doing it for the obvious reasons or that it is effective at those obvious reasons. At this point Trump doesn't want the wall the stop illegals, he wants it because he promised it and if he doesn't get it he'll lose support. It's just politics, not practicality.

The negative of the wall should be obvious, it costs a lot of fucking money that could be spent elsewhere, or---crazy thought---not spent at all. Put that money into infrastructure or education, where it might actually do something more worthwhile than appeasing Trump's base. Instead of trivializing the amount by comparing it to the entire budget be a bit more honest and talk about what you could buy with that money elsewhere. That's not even contesting the absurdly optimistic 5 billion figure, it'll be three times that, at least.
Jesus. It's less than one percent of the (state and federal) education budget. The last time anybody fought half this much over spending 5.7 billion dollars was probably the 1950s. "It costs a lot of fucking money." I'd love to hear your take on the Green New Deal.
 
Last edited:
Likes: cryptoadam
Dec 18, 2010
8,114
775
660
51
washington d.c.
She's turning 79 next month, but that extremely unlikely possibility to become the first woman president was too much for her to pass up. Seen a few decent speeches about the wall/border security funding from Congress, think Dan Crenshaw's might be my favorite:

Mine as well. There’s no argument against the logic and common sense he presents. There’s really just a moral/feeling defense of whatever it subjectively represents to a given person. I’ve watched enough border control video and testimonials from the people that actually do the job that I’ve been convinced for a long time now.

It reminds me of being stationed in Germany during the Cold War. There had been several bombings of night clubs targeted at American soldiers, and in turn security was beefed up on all posts. We were issued live ammunition at gate guard ( normally had unloaded weapons ) and did thorough searches of all cars entering the post. We also had shifts of roving guards patrolling the entire fence line, normally there were none. You identify a problem and you take pragmatic steps to minimize the risk of infiltration.
 
Feb 21, 2018
3,104
2,072
300
This time six years ago, Israel completed its high-tech border fence with Egypt, marking the start of a transformation in the situation along this restive frontier.

With its network radars and cameras, the obstacle—dubbed “Hourglass” by the Israeli Defense Ministry—issues alerts to Israel Defense Forces units regarding suspicious movements.

The barrier has almost completely stopped the mass movement of illegal migration from Africa, Dr. Ofer Israeli, a geostrategist and international security policy expert told JNS.
So again to be clear. Israel had a problem with Illegal African migrants entering its country from Egypt. Israel built a Fence/Wall whatever you want to call it, and in 6 years its stopped almost all illegal migration. This is exactly the situation in the US. Israel is 8 Million people and the size of Rhode Island or New Jersey. Don't tell me the US that has 300 Million people and the richest country in the world can't do what Israel did.
 
Jul 25, 2013
5,332
287
390
England
Why does it matter whether congress agrees a bill to fund the wall?

Surely Mexico just needs to fork over the cash and Trump can pay the contractors to get going.

Wouldn't it make more sense to get the money from Mexico first?
 
Feb 21, 2018
3,104
2,072
300
Anyone worried about the cost, well thanks to the Taylor Force Act, and other legislation, now the PA can be sued for their murder of Americans. So because of that the Palestinians are foregoing US aid. US was giving them 1 billion a year.

Thanks to Trump and his stance (and legislation) the wall will be paid for in 6 years by not sending money to Palestinians. He already cut 300 Million to UNWRA and another 300 Million or so that was used for pay to slay, thats over half a billion. Add in the billion for 2019 and thats 1.5 billion needed for the wall. Another year of Trump till 2020 we now at 2.5 billion. And WHEN Trump wins 2020 that will be 4 more years, 6.5 billion, wall is paid for.
 
Oct 3, 2004
1,369
847
1,290
Montreal, Quebec
Why does it matter whether congress agrees a bill to fund the wall?

Surely Mexico just needs to fork over the cash and Trump can pay the contractors to get going.

Wouldn't it make more sense to get the money from Mexico first?
If everyone in Congress used common sense this physical barrier would have been completed long before Trump decided to run for the 2016 presidential election, essentially rendering one of his campaign's strongest selling points moot. It would have already paid for itself, too (monetary cost of dealing with millions of illegal border crossings > physical barriers).

Congress can choose to use El Chapo's seized fortune and pay for that barrier without spending an American penny, all they have to do is vote for a bill that's already written. Last I checked there were 24 co-sponsors, none of them Democrats even though at least half a dozen have broken away from Pelosi and Schumer's hard-line "no" stance in recent interviews. It's loyalty to party above country, clear as can be for all to see. Does the "fight fire with fire" strategy make sense when you previously made the case that fire was detrimental to the country?

You may dislike or even hate Trump/the GOP, but supporting the Democrats on this particular position encourages representatives in Congress to continue pushing common sense aside. Physical barriers work at mitigating illegal border crossings, simple as that, especially when accompanied by border patrol and cameras. Go tell California's government officials to tear down the San Diego border barrier and see what kind of response they give you. Pelosi wouldn't dare support tearing down that wall/fence/"immorality."
 
Last edited:
Likes: cryptoadam
Jul 25, 2013
5,332
287
390
England
That's an extremely long winded way of not confirming when Mexico will pay for the wall, isn't it?

Surely if Trump wants to get this thing done to save money and lives, he need simply sidestep the fereigner loving, unpatriotic, barely human democrats, and collect the money from Mexico.
 
Feb 21, 2018
3,104
2,072
300
That's an extremely long winded way of not confirming when Mexico will pay for the wall, isn't it?

Surely if Trump wants to get this thing done to save money and lives, he need simply sidestep the fereigner loving, unpatriotic, barely human democrats, and collect the money from Mexico.
I already showed you that the wall is will be paid for by the savings from Trump and other legislation passed. 1.5 Billion is already saved by end of 2019, and 4.5 years later the entire 5.7 Billion will be payed for. Thanks to Trump and other Reuplican stance on Palestinian terrorism the Palestinians have decided they don't want 1 Billion $$$ in aid from the USA. So there is your Wall money. So stop obfuscating and let him build his wall he already saved you the American people the money needed.

I would suggest Trump sign an EO for 100% tax any on non commercial wire's from the US to Mexico, that would probably pay for the wall too.
 
Jul 25, 2013
5,332
287
390
England
Isn't that yet another way of saying Mexico will not pay for the wall and that the wall will be paid for by African tax payers?

Surely the simplest way to get this done is to ignore the baby killing, Islam loving dems who are the real racists and just collect the money from Mexico.

I imagine that if Trump told the truth in the first place and told people that he needed sjws, women and people who listen to rap music to actually get this done, we'd all have known from the beginning that he was just selling us all some oversimplified dream.
 
Last edited:
Oct 3, 2004
1,369
847
1,290
Montreal, Quebec
That's an extremely long winded way of not confirming when Mexico will pay for the wall, isn't it?
What you view as extremely long-winded I view as three brief paragraphs.

If you want me to be blunt: You took a campaign promise at face value and are upset it isn't being delivered as such. That being the case, I'd hate to hear your opinion of Obama or any other former president.
 
Feb 25, 2017
280
269
210
Thought this was an interesting take from a Republican about the wall. He's not for it and explains why.

Also here's an article on some alternative technology using fiber optics.

https://amp.businessinsider.com/fiber-optic-sensing-technology-vs-border-wall-2019-2
It should be stated(again), the issue is not whether border agents don't know where the points of vulnerabilities are or who is crossing. It's the outdated asylum laws that mandate that anyone who set foot in American soil needs to be adjudicated (go in front of a judge). The wall is mostly meant to funnel illegal immigrants into port of entries, where they can be process and denied entry faster.

Technology is meant to augment security, technology will never replace it. A camera, drone, fiber optics will never stop anyone from doing anything illegal. Security agents along with a wall that direct people where to go is the proper way of fixing the border security situation.
 
Oct 2, 2018
329
815
210
Surely the only argument against the wall would be that it would be way too expensive or that it is a waste of money?

A lot of times I see people online talking about it as if it's somehow this great evil thing to keep people out of America.

Folks, have you ever entered the US as an EU citizen married to a non-EU citizen? Just going as a a tourist it's ridiculous.
It's not like we are all jumping on flights on a whim and met with "welcome to America" but people from south of your borders are unfairly blocked from entry.

I wonder how many of you know that there are airports in Europe where access to the damn terminal and restaurants beside the departure gates etc is blocked off to people not flying to the US until the US boarding passes have been checked and their flights are boarded.

So, you know, most countries in the world have barriers to entry. You aren't just strolling off a flight and into Japan or the UK or Morocco or Australia. They'll stop you and they'll check your stuff and make sure you aren't messing about.

Yet when it's suggested that a barrier be put up along the US southern border people are losing their damn minds like it's some unheard of thing to block people from just wandering into your country.

The only real argument against it that I can see is that it will cost too much and will not function as intended compared to cost.
 
Dec 7, 2018
67
33
160
How much would it cost to build, compared to everything else we spend money on?

I'm absolutely for it, cause i can't imagine the cost being more then whatever else we spent money on, or programs were continuously pumping money into now.
 
Last edited:
Aug 21, 2018
177
58
165
Surely the only argument against the wall would be that it would be way too expensive or that it is a waste of money?

A lot of times I see people online talking about it as if it's somehow this great evil thing to keep people out of America.

Folks, have you ever entered the US as an EU citizen married to a non-EU citizen? Just going as a a tourist it's ridiculous.
It's not like we are all jumping on flights on a whim and met with "welcome to America" but people from south of your borders are unfairly blocked from entry.

I wonder how many of you know that there are airports in Europe where access to the damn terminal and restaurants beside the departure gates etc is blocked off to people not flying to the US until the US boarding passes have been checked and their flights are boarded.

So, you know, most countries in the world have barriers to entry. You aren't just strolling off a flight and into Japan or the UK or Morocco or Australia. They'll stop you and they'll check your stuff and make sure you aren't messing about.

Yet when it's suggested that a barrier be put up along the US southern border people are losing their damn minds like it's some unheard of thing to block people from just wandering into your country.

The only real argument against it that I can see is that it will cost too much and will not function as intended compared to cost.
Isn't that the point of a wall? Keep unwanted people out? If it is evil then so be it.
 
Feb 21, 2018
3,104
2,072
300
Surely the only argument against the wall would be that it would be way too expensive or that it is a waste of money?

A lot of times I see people online talking about it as if it's somehow this great evil thing to keep people out of America.

Folks, have you ever entered the US as an EU citizen married to a non-EU citizen? Just going as a a tourist it's ridiculous.
It's not like we are all jumping on flights on a whim and met with "welcome to America" but people from south of your borders are unfairly blocked from entry.

I wonder how many of you know that there are airports in Europe where access to the damn terminal and restaurants beside the departure gates etc is blocked off to people not flying to the US until the US boarding passes have been checked and their flights are boarded.

So, you know, most countries in the world have barriers to entry. You aren't just strolling off a flight and into Japan or the UK or Morocco or Australia. They'll stop you and they'll check your stuff and make sure you aren't messing about.

Yet when it's suggested that a barrier be put up along the US southern border people are losing their damn minds like it's some unheard of thing to block people from just wandering into your country.

The only real argument against it that I can see is that it will cost too much and will not function as intended compared to cost.
The cost is BS. Trump wants 5.7 billion, thats 10% of the Foreign aid the US gives out. Which is 1% of the US budget. We are talking .1% of the US budget. Cost is a deflection tactic. Also I showed that thanks to Trump, the Palestinians have foregone 1 billion in aid a year. So by 2019 Trump has already save 2.5 Billion, nearly half the cost of the wall.

Money isn't the issue.

The issue is that Dems don't want Trump to get a win. If he builds the wall, add it into the economy and low employment for minorities, its game over in 2020.

Second is that Dems and leftist think that everyone has the right to come to America full stop. There is no "illegal" immigration, everyone who wants to go their has the right to go to the USA. There is no US border. Non citizens have more rights than citizens basically.

Walls work. Israel built a Wall along its border with Egypt and African migrants dropped from like 15K to 0 in 6 years. 77 countries have built walls. So lefties can't use facts or logic to argue their position all they have left is emotion. The wall is racist thats all they got left to say.
 
Jan 12, 2009
16,171
1,447
835
Thought this was an interesting take from a Republican about the wall. He's not for it and explains why.

Also here's an article on some alternative technology using fiber optics.

https://amp.businessinsider.com/fiber-optic-sensing-technology-vs-border-wall-2019-2
Makes sense.

Don't really need more fencing on its own merits. You get greater results and return for the money focusing on technology. Why not both? Because you only need one (in his district anyway).
 
Last edited: