|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On December 31 2018 02:32 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2018 21:44 Jockmcplop wrote:
Does Trump seriously think that potential immigrants won't try because there's a wall there? That's insane. There;s a massive fucking sea in Europe that hasn't deterred anyone. THere's currently an emergency situation in the UK because of immigrants using shitty boats and getting stuck in the sea. Its just one more angle from which the whole wall thing seems badly conceived.
It should still narrow the points of entry and the US isn't exactly short on crafts that could escort or tow back the boats. Considering there already is something of a wall already, unless it was also insane back then, it's not so insane now to make a better one. Be that as it may, the truth is Trump had the best chance to start his wall project when Republicans controlled Congress, Senate and Presidency. Nothing was attempted until they lost the Congress. That tells me he's not so serious about the wall, despite making it pretty much his number one promise.
If you think that narrowing points of entry will discourage legitimate refugees. You are wrong. They wont.. because the alternative is still worse.
If you think it will stop other unsavory elements.. then you are severely disrespecting how enterprising traffickers are. They have mobile ramps, drones, air cannons, tunnel networks. A wall that makes them adjust a ramp size or have to shoot a little higher is a minor inconvenience.
It will inconvenience the process certainly. But not in any really meaningful way. You think while this clown show is going the bad guys are sitting there with their fingers crossed praying it doesnt get built ? They probably contingency'ed the shit out of it.
|
I will tell you what else Trump isn't serious about, the Syria Withdrawal!
https://www.wsj.com/articles/senator-says-trump-is-re-evaluating-quick-syria-withdrawal-11546194357
Yeah Trump is going to welch on this one too. Now that Trump lost McGurk and Mattis, he now doesn't have anyone to talk to to coordinate the pullout. Even if he wanted a rapid pullout to suck up to Erdogan, Trump doesn't have the staffing strength to execute on his insane whims. Who does Trump actually talk to in order to coordinate such a huge shift in policy? The new Secretary of Defense? Which Generals? Bolton? Miller? Pompeo? Everyone Trump actually talks to on a day to day basis is useless and could never get the Generals to go along with such an insane order. So now Trump will be left with a hobbled presence in Syria and a morally crippled occupation in Afghanistan (see all the Taliban cheers of victory when Trump announced his withdrawal, dooming all our claims of offering support to the Afghan government https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-pol-taliban-cheers-trump-decision-troop-withrawal-afghanistan-20181222-story.html).
Now don't get me wrong, this is a better outcome than what Trump tried to do. But this is far worse than if Trump just kept his stupid mouth shut and stuck to the talking points on that call with Erdogan https://www.apnews.com/ec2ed217357048ff998225a31534df12. Trump's incompetence and illiteracy lead to Mattis and McGurk resigning on principle, but his incompetence and illiteracy will also prevent a follow through on his stupid decisions.
|
A wall could work i think. Its definitly more difficult with wall then without wall.
European countrys are also building walls right now,though its more like fences,to help stop immigration.
There was the berlin wall during the cold war and in midievel times many citys had walls,a castle is basicly a big wall where you can live in. the vatican has a big wall and then there is off course the great wall of china. Mankind has a long history of building walls.
(The above without any judgement if this is good or bad btw).
|
On December 31 2018 05:42 pmh wrote:
A wall could work i think. Its definitly more difficult with wall then without wall.
European countrys are also building walls right now,though its more like fences,to help stop immigration.
There was the berlin wall during the cold war and in midievel times many citys had walls,a castle is basicly a big wall where you can live in. the vatican has a big wall and then there is off course the great wall of china. Mankind has a long history of building walls.
(The above without any judgement if this is good or bad btw). And those walls were guarded, or useless.
Is Trump going to pay for a guard every 100 meters on a wall that stretches for 3,200 Km?
|
On December 31 2018 05:42 pmh wrote:
A wall could work i think. Its definitly more difficult with wall then without wall.
European countrys are also building walls right now,though its more like fences,to help stop immigration.
There was the berlin wall during the cold war and in midievel times many citys had walls,a castle is basicly a big wall where you can live in. the vatican has a big wall and then there is off course the great wall of china. Mankind has a long history of building walls.
(The above without any judgement if this is good or bad btw).
Walls only work if somebody is there to watch it. If you think staffing a couple people 24/7 every mile(or whatever other method you want to use) is a good plan, sure, but a wall otherwise only deters somebody who didn't want to get over very badly anyways.
I guarantee you that I could get over most non-guarded fences/walls 15 feet high with just a couple trips to home Depot.
During this period over 100,000[6] people attempted to escape and over 5,000 people succeeded in escaping over the Wall, with an estimated death toll ranging from 136[8] to more than 200[9][6] in and around Berlin.
Straight from Wikipedia article on the Berlin Wall. And this is a guarded wall.
|
On December 31 2018 05:42 pmh wrote:
A wall could work i think. Its definitly more difficult with wall then without wall.
European countrys are also building walls right now,though its more like fences,to help stop immigration.
There was the berlin wall during the cold war and in midievel times many citys had walls,a castle is basicly a big wall where you can live in. the vatican has a big wall and then there is off course the great wall of china. Mankind has a long history of building walls.
(The above without any judgement if this is good or bad btw).
The wall isn't the problem, it's staffing it. Has anyone done the numbers on the number of people you'd need to permanently watch every few hundred meters of wall to make sure there's no significant gaps someone can get through? How much would that cost?
The reason the stupid wall hasn't gotten off the ground is that it's ludicrously expensive and, to be actually effective, would add a massive addition to the US budget ongoing in perpetuity, and that's before you factor in maintenance costs.
The bigger the thing you make, the more it costs to keep it operable and effective.
|
United States43959 Posts
That and the wall doesn’t stop planes, which is how people enter the US. They really need a dome.
|
United States24770 Posts
I'm not advocating for more wall, but can't you use modern technology to let a computer monitor the wall so you can let a reduced number of people spread out rather than having to put teams every few hundred meters? In the long run it must be cheaper to put a camera system every few hundred meters and link it up to a network than guards.
|
United States43959 Posts
You’d still need to have command posts stationed along it to react to the crossings. Say one every 20 miles. Plus a road. Plus a series of towns to support the staff.
|
On December 31 2018 07:22 micronesia wrote:
I'm not advocating for more wall, but can't you use modern technology to let a computer monitor the wall so you can let a reduced number of people spread out rather than having to put teams every few hundred meters? In the long run it must be cheaper to put a camera system every few hundred meters and link it up to a network than guards.
I think those cameras will greatly improve the accuracy of statistics about the number of illegal border crossings.
|
On December 31 2018 07:36 mahrgell wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2018 07:22 micronesia wrote:
I'm not advocating for more wall, but can't you use modern technology to let a computer monitor the wall so you can let a reduced number of people spread out rather than having to put teams every few hundred meters? In the long run it must be cheaper to put a camera system every few hundred meters and link it up to a network than guards. I think those cameras will greatly improve the accuracy of statistics about the number of illegal border crossings.
Then Trump would most likely be against their instalment. Can't have the American public know the truth about how few there really are (unless he tried to spin the meager numbers as a result of the wall being there in the first place)
|
Until there's a way for the wall to psychically anticipate which lawful temporary immigrants are overstaying their visas, its impact on overall illegal immigration will be...less than Trump assumes, to put it politely.
|
Why are you guys talking about the wall? The wall doesn't matter. What one should talk about is who will blink first. Trump will completely shut down the government until the democrats give him a win. And the democrats, who are all pre-selected by donors to be weak, are worried about the country more than about if they lose to Trump or not.
|
Nobody is giving Trump shit.
|
What if Trump shuts down the government until he leaves office? BTW, Trump hasn't been forced to veto anything yet. So why not blame GOP congress?
It is also amazing that Trump is threatening to veto any bill that would fund the government because he is determined to break his own campaign promise; that Mexico will pay for the wall.
It is so puzzling...
I also don't get why this is not exactly what the democrats write down: No US funding for the wall because Mexico will pay for it and Trump will negotiate the money from them at a later date. Just put that down in writing and then force Trump to veto Mexico paying for the wall. Then manipulate the media so that it says "Trump Veto's Mexico-will-pay-for-the-wall spending bill, continuing a government shutdown that costs the taxpayer millions every day".
|
United States24770 Posts
Can't congress use a supermajority to pass a clean CR or something and bypass Trump? I don't think Trump by himself can continuously keep the government closed.
|
Will GOP impeach Trump over this issue (ignoring all the 17+ other ones) before Dems will find a way to sneak in money in a funding bill Trump will accept so Trump can tell his base he secured the money while Dems can still claim to their base that they didn't?
|
On December 31 2018 10:03 TheTenthDoc wrote:
Until there's a way for the wall to psychically anticipate which lawful temporary immigrants are overstaying their visas, its impact on overall illegal immigration will be...less than Trump assumes, to put it politely.
This is obviously true to anyone who has thought about immigration before. The overwhelming majority of immigrants come into the country lawfully via planes, cars, and boats. Some illegally enter via trucks. But the wall would catch none of these things. The interesting thing is that the various Trump spinners are having to concede to this reality as Trump's shutdown hurts more and more people. Lindsay is starting to break.
+ Show Spoiler +
Sen. Lindsey Graham: "The wall has become a metaphor for border security"
Of course more wall would do nothing. If it was useful it would have been built during the wall building sprees of Bush2 and Obama and even the Trump administration. It was always a sinister metaphor for more harshness and cruelty.
|
On December 31 2018 11:44 micronesia wrote:
Can't congress use a supermajority to pass a clean CR or something and bypass Trump? I don't think Trump by himself can continuously keep the government closed.
The Dems in the House will pass a bill which the Senate can swallow, the Senate will pass it, and then it will sit on Trump's desk. He may or may not be stupid enough to refuse to sign it or veto it. My guess is that he'll try to paint it as a victory because ICE or DHS receives funds (in the usual course of business) or some nonsense like that.
|
United States43959 Posts
Trump can declare anything a victory. His opponents wouldn't believe him if he said that 1+1 is 2 and his supporters get all their news from his twitter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
