The Trump Shutdown

[DC Tom]

50 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Not a tool handling bunch here, I take it. 

 

I have plenty of tools.  For wood, metal, masonry work.  Many of us do.

 

Far fewer of us have experience breaching field fortifications.  @The_Dude will claim so, but the closest he's got to combat engineering is playing "Polish mine detector," no doubt.

[The_Dude]

7 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

I have plenty of tools.  For wood, metal, masonry work.  Many of us do.

 

Far fewer of us have experience breaching field fortifications.  @The_Dude will claim so, but the closest he's got to combat engineering is playing "Polish mine detector," no doubt.

 

Ok, first off I never lie. I know you didn’t accuse me of lying, but you made me sound like a story teller which I am not. I’ve got some cool storie because I’ve got some cool scars and have done some seriously awesome stuff. 

 

Secondly, I did Iraq things. I’ve kicked in more than 1000 doors. I’ve blown some ***** up. I’ve accidently lit a Haj village on fire with a 203 flare. It was ***** hilarious. But I did not cross the Hindenburg Line. So scratch field fortifications. 

[DC Tom]

Sadly, he failed as a Polish mine detector.

[billsfan89]

5 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

I reject your argument as it works with the assumption that our government should be funded to or beyond current levels.

 

That's two different arguments. The person had said that a national sales tax would be able to produce at or near the current levels of funding needed to continue the current size of the government. I think any illustration of the math would state otherwise. 

[billsfan89]

Wouldn't a ladder and a rope make any wall ineffective? Even Trump said so himself that rope and ladder technology would fool even a 40 foot wall. I am all for border security. Its completely necessary for a country to maintain borders and there is a vested national security interest but why do people think a wall which could be circumvented in so many different ways be the answer? Why not spend money on more border patrol agents and other surveillance technologies such as drones and advanced motion detection? I think the idea that a wall is the only effective way to secure the border is just not based in reality. 

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, billsfan89 said:

Wouldn't a ladder and a rope make any wall ineffective? 

 

Not if it's a magic wall.  

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

Wouldn't a ladder and a rope make any wall ineffective? Even Trump said so himself that rope and ladder technology would fool even a 40 foot wall. I am all for border security. Its completely necessary for a country to maintain borders and there is a vested national security interest but why do people think a wall which could be circumvented in so many different ways be the answer? Why not spend money on more border patrol agents and other surveillance technologies such as drones and advanced motion detection? I think the idea that a wall is the only effective way to secure the border is just not based in reality. 

 

It needs to be all of those things you listed and a wall in certain areas. Why? A wall offers permanence, where advanced funding for tech and manpower can be stripped back at the next budget impasse. 

[BeginnersMind]

It’s a symbolic solution to go with a campaign promise. It’s not going to be that effective and doing nothing is also not effective. 

 

Exchanging Dreamer legislation for the wall would be such a win for...wait for it...the country. 

 

But it would cost Trump and the D leadership points so why would anyone put country first?

 

Peggy Noonan’s editorial today properly chastises both sides in this squabble. Grow the ***** up. 

[3rdnlng]

5 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

Wouldn't a ladder and a rope make any wall ineffective? Even Trump said so himself that rope and ladder technology would fool even a 40 foot wall. I am all for border security. Its completely necessary for a country to maintain borders and there is a vested national security interest but why do people think a wall which could be circumvented in so many different ways be the answer? Why not spend money on more border patrol agents and other surveillance technologies such as drones and advanced motion detection? I think the idea that a wall is the only effective way to secure the border is just not based in reality. 

The illegals are using different tactics by coming in caravans and trying to flood the border. With our laws as they are, we couldn't handle the influx without releasing them into our country with a promise to return for a hearing. While a wall may be breached by a few illegals, great numbers will not be able to invade us. The wall impedes their crossing the border and gives us the time to move border control to the area.

[billsfan89]

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

 

It needs to be all of those things you listed and a wall in certain areas. Why? A wall offers permanence, where advanced funding for tech and manpower can be stripped back at the next budget impasse. 

 

But if the permanence is ineffective (and comes at the costs of the environment and at the cost of citizens losing their land among other costs) what good does the permanence offer? People can dig under a wall, ladders and ropes can be left on the Mexico side (which America can do very little about,) and the wall in certain areas can be damaged. I just don't see what impact a wall could have other than symbolism. From a tatics stand point I don't see what value it actually serves. 

 

I would also disagree that it even offers permanence. You have to maintain a wall in case it gets damaged or weathered. So if the funding goes down the wall becomes less impactful too. 

[BeginnersMind]

8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

It needs to be all of those things you listed and a wall in certain areas. Why? A wall offers permanence, where advanced funding for tech and manpower can be stripped back at the next budget impasse. 

 

The wall provides an obstacle. Nothing more. It’s better than nothing but it’s relatively nothing to a group of motivated people. 

 

Build the wall. Whatever. Just get the ***** past this. 

 

[billsfan89]

Just now, 3rdnlng said:

The illegals are using different tactics by coming in caravans and trying to flood the border. With our laws as they are, we couldn't handle the influx without releasing them into our country with a promise to return for a hearing. While a wall may be breached by a few illegals, great numbers will not be able to invade us. The wall impedes their crossing the border and gives us the time to move border control to the area.

 

Ports of entry do not have a wall. People who come in caravans to try and gain refugee status go through legal ports of entry such as border crossings. So the idea that it could prevent migrant caravans is also just not based in reality. 

[3rdnlng]

2 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

It’s a symbolic solution to go with a campaign promise. It’s not going to be that effective and doing nothing is also not effective. 

 

Exchanging Dreamer legislation for the wall would be such a win for...wait for it...the country. 

 

But it would cost Trump and the D leadership points so why would anyone put country first?

 

Peggy Noonan’s editorial today properly chastises both sides in this squabble. Grow the ***** up. 

Seriously? We had a deal a year or so ago that included a DACA fix. When a federal judge foolishly ruled against Trump he lost all his leverage and the dems ran away from the deal.

[BeginnersMind]

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

Seriously? We had a deal a year or so ago that included a DACA fix. When a federal judge foolishly ruled against Trump he lost all his leverage and the dems ran away from the deal.

 

Congress can pass legislation for both better Dreamer legislation and also fund the wall. Courts aren’t going to be an issue. 

 

Or the Dems can get something else in exchange for the wall. I’m not making the deal. Just saying the adults on both sides need to make the deal. 

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

But if the permanence is ineffective (and comes at the costs of the environment and at the cost of citizens losing their land among other costs) what good does the permanence offer?

 

The bolded is not an accurate statement, and is influencing the rest of your train of thought (in this post). The wall is very effective at deterrence and driving the flow of smugglers/traffickers towards easier to patrol/cover areas. It's a big border, takes a long time to go from station to station in some of the most heavily trafficked areas. A wall strategically placed can cut the response time down to minutes rather than hours. 

 

If there's no wall, and you attempt to do the same with just manpower and technology, that can go away and those lanes will open right back up. 

 

That's why you need all three. 

 

4 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

People can dig under a wall, ladders and ropes can be left on the Mexico side (which America can do very little about,) and the wall in certain areas can be damaged. I just don't see what impact a wall could have other than symbolism. From a tatics stand point I don't see what value it actually serves. 

 

Nothing is perfect, but it's not that easy. Cutting through steel will create noise/sparks that can be seen (and responded to) quite easily. Ropes/ladders are ineffective against certain designs. Digging tunnels, not to mention keeping them open, takes time and with cameras / drone coverage on the border can be spotted and dealt with. 

 

The tactical advantages to a wall are described above and come not from my imagination but from people who actually do the work on the ground. 

 

8 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

I would also disagree that it even offers permanence. You have to maintain a wall in case it gets damaged or weathered. So if the funding goes down the wall becomes less impactful too. 

 

This is not accurate. 

 

If you cut the budget, and lose the man power and technology and there's no wall there it becomes unprotected/vulnerable. The wall stays and helps a strained CBP/DHS deal with the crisis better than they're able to today. 

7 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

Ports of entry do not have a wall. People who come in caravans to try and gain refugee status go through legal ports of entry such as border crossings. So the idea that it could prevent migrant caravans is also just not based in reality. 

 

... They absolutely have walls.

 

And gates.

[Buffalo_Gal]

14 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

But if the permanence is ineffective (and comes at the costs of the environment and at the cost of citizens losing their land among other costs) what good does the permanence offer? People can dig under a wall, ladders and ropes can be left on the Mexico side (which America can do very little about,) and the wall in certain areas can be damaged. I just don't see what impact a wall could have other than symbolism. From a tatics stand point I don't see what value it actually serves. 

 

I would also disagree that it even offers permanence. You have to maintain a wall in case it gets damaged or weathered. So if the funding goes down the wall becomes less impactful too. 

I know!! We should do nothing!! We should let 30, 40, 50 million illegals flood into our country! Let's just give up on the idea of a sovereign nation and have.... open borders!! What a marvelous idea. /sarc 

***** that *****. ?

It will NEVER be good enough for some people. A more concrete form of border security is necessary. Start with 200 miles of wall. Then build 300 miles of wall, then 1000 miles, etc, etc, until it is enough to slow the masses. And then reinforce the damn wall to keep out people who are not citizens of this country, when they for some reason feel they can jump in line past people who come to the United States legally and feel they are entitled to suck off the dollars of American largess. 

Edited January 11, 2019 by Buffalo_Gal

[BeginnersMind]

12 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Seriously? We had a deal a year or so ago that included a DACA fix. When a federal judge foolishly ruled against Trump he lost all his leverage and the dems ran away from the deal.

 

Congress can pass legislation for both better Dreamer legislation and also fund the wall. Courts aren’t going to be an issue. 

 

Or the Dems can get something else in exchange for the wall. I’m not making the deal. Just saying the adults on both sides need to make the deal. 

 

Here’s the Dem talking point. The President kept hundreds of thousands of Americans from their paychecks and was willing to keep them from getting paid to build an ineffective and wasteful wall. We put Americans back to work, and also have taken steps to care  for the American children of immigrants in this country, something the president was unwilling to do. Trump got his ineffective racist motivated wall. We got America back to work and a deal for American children. 

 

The Rep talking point. We kept the murderers and rapists and terrorists out of the country and fulfilled our promise. The Dems were willing to let them in and want to waste your money caring for illegal immigrant children to suck off the American welfare teat, which we oppose, but we have compassion for the children, and were willing to compromise to keep America safe. 

 

Woohoo. Everybody has their campaign talking points. The sun rises in the east tomorrow. 

Edited January 11, 2019 by BeginnersMind

[3rdnlng]

3 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

Ports of entry do not have a wall. People who come in caravans to try and gain refugee status go through legal ports of entry such as border crossings. So the idea that it could prevent migrant caravans is also just not based in reality. 

Ports of entry have barriers. Right now we have a temporary agreement with Mexico that they will keep the illegals in their country while they wait in line for their asylum hearings. A wall will funnel the illegals to a port of entry. The Border Patrol is solidly behind extending the wall, so maybe taking their advice is the prudent thing to do, eh?

[BeginnersMind]

11 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Cutting through steel will create noise/sparks that can be seen (and responded to) quite easily.

 

 

 

 

Please make it harder to refute your arguments.

 

6 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

I know!! We should do nothing!! We should let 30, 40, 50 million illegals flood into our country! Let's just give up on the idea of a sovereign nation and have.... open borders!! What a marvelous idea. /sarc 

 

1

 

Nice scary numbers! How about a jillion? 

Edited January 11, 2019 by BeginnersMind

[Kevbeau]

3 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Please make it harder to refute your arguments.

 

Still would like to know what sort of hand power tools you recommend. Just replaced my four board fence and I find that a sawzall is really struggling with the pressure treated posts.