Pre-emptive Strike . .

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
My choice would be Syd Barret and the Pink Floyd Construction Company . .

Nice to see you poking fun at a very serious issue.

Or is enforcement of our borders not considered an issue among the left?

I thought it was a good joke myself

And I agree with EZduzit, if they won't work why all the complaing about the wall? Especially by the people south of the boarder, don't tell me they object to the wall because they don't want us to waste our money building it.

You say "especially" people south of the border, but your argument really ONLY works for people who aren't taxpaying Americans, for those of us that ARE, wasting money on some stupid wall as a cheap stunt to keep voters happy is hardly what I'd call a good use of government money, that seems reason alone to oppose it.

But there is another component of the great wall of America as well (and something I think EVERYONE, north and south of the border, can appreciate), it seems very symbolic of what's wrong with the whole illegal immigration debate. We have a problem that needs some sort of solution, and instead of coming up with reasonable policies and enforcing them in a meaningful way, we adopt an isolationist, anti-immigration view and build a huge wall to keep everyone out. Obviously this isn't quite what's going on, but it sure looks bad. An open society who's very foundation is built on people who wanted to come here in search of a better life simply does not build walls around their country. If we have immigration problems, we solve them with reasoned debate and well thought out policies, building a wall sends the wrong message.

Now I know that conservatives don't usually go for nuanced views and subtle "messages", and I'm also aware that you COULD make arguments in favor oa wall, but like I said, I think the message we send is a VERY important part of this debate. Part of the issue is that anti-illegal immigration looks a lot like anti-immigration to a fair number of folks, so a lot of time and effort is wasted fighting among ourselves when almost all of us agree that ILLEGAL-immigration needs a solution. Perhaps you don't agree with touchy-feely messages, but enough people do that it's a real part of the issue, whether you believe in them or not.

Building a wall sends the wrong message? It sends the message that we mean business and we are going to do our best to enforce our laws, how is that the wrong message? Of course it's only part of the solution, but it's a start. We also need to enforce (and toughen where needed) the laws we have on the books. Surley you don't expect the illegals to just stop crossing unless we do something to deter them? Instead we give them amnesty? You want to talk about sending them the wrong message, well that's it.

This whole issue is about money. The people who employ them can keep wages/labor costs down and the Mexican's that come here can make much more money then they can at home. If I could sneak into Canada and make $100/hr instead of $10 hour the only thing that would stop me is a fence or some other type of punishment. You can also bet that I'd be willing to take a lot more crap from my employer for $100/hr and the employers just love that.

The illegals are stealing from the average American blue collar worker and when someone is stealing from you and your not smart enough to lock your doors... well, I guess you deserve what you get. Personally, I believe I'm smarter then that and judging by the number of people who support doing something about this issue, i think we're all smart enough to do something about it.

If we wait until we have "the perfect solution" we'll never get anything done about it.

Yeah, yeah, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and all that bullshit.

Here's the thing though, the gap between this wall and "the perfect solution" is big enough to drive a fleet of truck full of illegal immigrants though. It's a stupid idea that will NOT do anything to stop illegal immigration, and has the excellent byproduct of making us look like a bunch of anti-immigration xenophobes. Especially coupled as it is with NOT enforcing immigration labor laws. You want a real solution, that's it. All you have to do is enforce existing laws and the market for illegal labor will dry up, hugely decreasing the demand. As you said, the whole thing is about money...no great wall of America necessary.

You're not smart just because you are in favor of doing "something". The smart thing to do is to sit down and come up with an ACTUAL plan that has a chance of working, not just doing the first dumbass thing that comes into your mind because "it's better than nothing".

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tango
4000 years of hystory teach walls and fences never worked.

Depends on what the purpose of the wall is. If you think a wall or fence will keep 100% of the people out, i agree it never works. However if you think it can slow and stop a % of the 2-3 million a year that flow across our border every year and possibly deter terrorist groups from smuggling weapons across the border. Then I think it servers a purpose.

it is clear the current situation of doing nothing at all isnt working.

Well here's a third alternative, doing something smart that actually has a chance of working. I know having more than two choices is confusing to a lot of people, but in this case the two choices people seem to think we're stuck with both suck, so I think a third one might be necessary.

By the way, this whole terrorist threat idea is not really based on reality and clear thinking...terrorists aren't poor Mexicans looking for work, not matter how much you lock up the Mexican border, they can just haul their terrorist asses up to Canada and cross the far less defended border there.

 

[CaptnKirk]

And meanwhile the Texas Land-Grab proceeds, taking over property from the Mexican Border through the middle of Texas
all the way to the Oklahoma Border for the Trans-Texas Corridor.
A high speed right of way for trucks and trains (toll road - cars included) to move products (and stowaways) to the North.
Biggest contract holder - CINTAS, a mexican owned company.
Eventually, when completed, it will expend all the way to the Canadian Border.
First inspection stop for checking weigh and cargo - Kansas City area.
Yeah, that fence & wall will really be a great help.

 

[Craig234]

Why isn't that corridor getting more press from either party? How much of it is trying to grab money out of the pockets of the blue-state coastal shipping and put it inthe pockets of republican middle states like Texas and Kansas?

 

[CaptnKirk]

Originally posted by: Craig234
Why isn't that corridor getting more press from either party? How much of it is trying to grab money out of the pockets of the blue-state coastal shipping and put it inthe pockets of republican middle states like Texas and Kansas?

Factor in the Ports and Port Security - the ships will unload in Mexican ports, truckloads and pantloads of things and people headin' North for dispersion.
Less Union Labor in the Ports, security lax and unenforced, not checked until it's smack-dab in the center of the US of A.
Who's scamming who over Homeland Security and Mexican Radio (Wall of VooDoo)

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Tango
4000 years of hystory teach walls and fences never worked.

I don't know the walls keeping my house up seem to work just fine.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: eilute

Originally posted by: Tango
4000 years of hystory teach walls and fences never worked.

That is a very good point. I was not aware of that though. Somehow I doubt that the government will look back on history before they procede.

Actually, walls worked great until technology made them obsolete. This wall should be fine considering the level of technology we're up against with this particular enemy.

The Wall of Adrian didn't prevent the collapse of the Roman Empire, just as The Chinese Great Wall didn't eventually prevent the Mongols from taking over the Chinese Empire. The great walls of Troy or Costantinopolis didn't stop them from collapting at some point. The maginot line didn't stop the germans and the Wall in Berlin couldn't stop ideas and ideals that eventually undermined it and made it crumble. The wall is Israel is not working and this wall on the Mexican border will not work either.

There are forces much stronger than any technology you can think of. Change the social and historical shifts causing the need for the wall, and you will not need the wall in fis=rst place. If you don't ask yourself what are you trying to prevent with your wall, and act on those causes, no wall you can build will solve the problem.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tango
4000 years of hystory teach walls and fences never worked.

Depends on what the purpose of the wall is. If you think a wall or fence will keep 100% of the people out, i agree it never works. However if you think it can slow and stop a % of the 2-3 million a year that flow across our border every year and possibly deter terrorist groups from smuggling weapons across the border. Then I think it servers a purpose.

it is clear the current situation of doing nothing at all isnt working.

Will make the process longer. Will it change the final outcome? No.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tango
4000 years of hystory teach walls and fences never worked.

Depends on what the purpose of the wall is. If you think a wall or fence will keep 100% of the people out, i agree it never works. However if you think it can slow and stop a % of the 2-3 million a year that flow across our border every year and possibly deter terrorist groups from smuggling weapons across the border. Then I think it servers a purpose.

it is clear the current situation of doing nothing at all isnt working.

Well here's a third alternative, doing something smart that actually has a chance of working. I know having more than two choices is confusing to a lot of people, but in this case the two choices people seem to think we're stuck with both suck, so I think a third one might be necessary.

By the way, this whole terrorist threat idea is not really based on reality and clear thinking...terrorists aren't poor Mexicans looking for work, not matter how much you lock up the Mexican border, they can just haul their terrorist asses up to Canada and cross the far less defended border there.

I find it funny you try an underhanded insult by stating 3 options are confusing for some people, then fail to explain what 3rd option you think would work. But this is par for the course with you.

Sticking your head in the sand regarding terrorists possibly getting across the southern border is akin to thinking terrorists only want to fly somewhere and make a political statement on Sept 10th 2001.

When you have a border that has millions of people crossing it unchecked each year, it doesnt take a lot of imagination to think a few dozen terrorists can sneak across as well.

I also think we need to defend the northern border in the same regards to head off your usual tactic of claiming racism. People freely walk into MN from Canada with nobody to check who they are, what they are doing, and what their plans are when they come here.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tango
4000 years of hystory teach walls and fences never worked.

Depends on what the purpose of the wall is. If you think a wall or fence will keep 100% of the people out, i agree it never works. However if you think it can slow and stop a % of the 2-3 million a year that flow across our border every year and possibly deter terrorist groups from smuggling weapons across the border. Then I think it servers a purpose.

it is clear the current situation of doing nothing at all isnt working.

Will make the process longer. Will it change the final outcome? No.

Yes it will, what makes you think building a wall and defending it will allow the exact same free flow we have today?

I dont expect it to stop everybody, but I do expect it to slow them down big time and deter possible movements of equipment that can be used by terrorists.

 

[Moonbeam]

I do not see why we need a wall when we can demand legal presence in the US via every monetary transaction that takes place and for every job application. If you are not legal you can't spend, buy or work. Bu Bye illegals.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tango
4000 years of hystory teach walls and fences never worked.

Depends on what the purpose of the wall is. If you think a wall or fence will keep 100% of the people out, i agree it never works. However if you think it can slow and stop a % of the 2-3 million a year that flow across our border every year and possibly deter terrorist groups from smuggling weapons across the border. Then I think it servers a purpose.

it is clear the current situation of doing nothing at all isnt working.

Will make the process longer. Will it change the final outcome? No.

Yes it will, what makes you think building a wall and defending it will allow the exact same free flow we have today?

I dont expect it to stop everybody, but I do expect it to slow them down big time and deter possible movements of equipment that can be used by terrorists.

What makes me think it wouldn't change anything? Policy Analysis. And, if you happen not to believe analysts, centuries of history.

Major socio-economic shifts require major socio-economic policies to be countered. It's as simple as that. You need to play in the same field, not just pretend you can stop history from happening with a wall. Talk to any researcher on demographic and immigration policy and he/she would confirm this, and give you data on what was effective in preventing immigration or at least lowering the numbers. In NO case it was a security measure, it was always social or economic policy.

And the line about terrorists is just funny. Again, any researcher on security policy would laugh big time at the idea of a fence being a barrier to international terrorism. I actually saw both Robert Jarvis and Jack Snyder laugh hard on this very issue during a conference a few weeks ago.

Counter-terrorism is 99% intelligence, and 1% territorial control.

 

[alien42]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
My choice would be Syd Barret and the Pink Floyd Construction Company . .

Nice to see you poking fun at a very serious issue.

Or is enforcement of our borders not considered an issue among the left?

enforcement of our borders?

you have to be joking. terrorists do not come from mexico, most fly here legally. all the supplies they need however come through a poor excuse for a customs department via cargo ships. somehow in your world 1+1 does not equal 2.

 

[OrByte]

the ultimate irony being it will be mexicans that will be out there in the mountains and desert building the damn thing...

can't wait to see it on the news!

 

[LunarRay]

Lets see.... what technology might be needed to thwart the wall.... A ladder maybe.... or in some extreme cases a shovel or two... ummmmm a pole vault ... a ramp up and ramp down... a two ton truck ramming a hole in the wall..... ... maybe even false id to use the main gate and public transport...

 

[julianf]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
My choice would be Syd Barret and the Pink Floyd Construction Company . .

Nice to see you poking fun at a very serious issue.

Or is enforcement of our borders not considered an issue among the left?

I thought it was a good joke myself

And I agree with EZduzit, if they won't work why all the complaing about the wall? Especially by the people south of the boarder, don't tell me they object to the wall because they don't want us to waste our money building it.

You say "especially" people south of the border, but your argument really ONLY works for people who aren't taxpaying Americans, for those of us that ARE, wasting money on some stupid wall as a cheap stunt to keep voters happy is hardly what I'd call a good use of government money, that seems reason alone to oppose it.

But there is another component of the great wall of America as well (and something I think EVERYONE, north and south of the border, can appreciate), it seems very symbolic of what's wrong with the whole illegal immigration debate. We have a problem that needs some sort of solution, and instead of coming up with reasonable policies and enforcing them in a meaningful way, we adopt an isolationist, anti-immigration view and build a huge wall to keep everyone out. Obviously this isn't quite what's going on, but it sure looks bad. An open society who's very foundation is built on people who wanted to come here in search of a better life simply does not build walls around their country. If we have immigration problems, we solve them with reasoned debate and well thought out policies, building a wall sends the wrong message.

Now I know that conservatives don't usually go for nuanced views and subtle "messages", and I'm also aware that you COULD make arguments in favor oa wall, but like I said, I think the message we send is a VERY important part of this debate. Part of the issue is that anti-illegal immigration looks a lot like anti-immigration to a fair number of folks, so a lot of time and effort is wasted fighting among ourselves when almost all of us agree that ILLEGAL-immigration needs a solution. Perhaps you don't agree with touchy-feely messages, but enough people do that it's a real part of the issue, whether you believe in them or not.

Building a wall sends the wrong message? It sends the message that we mean business and we are going to do our best to enforce our laws, how is that the wrong message? Of course it's only part of the solution, but it's a start. We also need to enforce (and toughen where needed) the laws we have on the books. Surley you don't expect the illegals to just stop crossing unless we do something to deter them? Instead we give them amnesty? You want to talk about sending them the wrong message, well that's it.

This whole issue is about money. The people who employ them can keep wages/labor costs down and the Mexican's that come here can make much more money then they can at home. If I could sneak into Canada and make $100/hr instead of $10 hour the only thing that would stop me is a fence or some other type of punishment. You can also bet that I'd be willing to take a lot more crap from my employer for $100/hr and the employers just love that.

The illegals are stealing from the average American blue collar worker and when someone is stealing from you and your not smart enough to lock your doors... well, I guess you deserve what you get. Personally, I believe I'm smarter then that and judging by the number of people who support doing something about this issue, i think we're all smart enough to do something about it.

If we wait until we have "the perfect solution" we'll never get anything done about it.

Yeah, yeah, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and all that bullshit.

Here's the thing though, the gap between this wall and "the perfect solution" is big enough to drive a fleet of truck full of illegal immigrants though. It's a stupid idea that will NOT do anything to stop illegal immigration, and has the excellent byproduct of making us look like a bunch of anti-immigration xenophobes. Especially coupled as it is with NOT enforcing immigration labor laws. You want a real solution, that's it. All you have to do is enforce existing laws and the market for illegal labor will dry up, hugely decreasing the demand. As you said, the whole thing is about money...no great wall of America necessary.

You're not smart just because you are in favor of doing "something". The smart thing to do is to sit down and come up with an ACTUAL plan that has a chance of working, not just doing the first dumbass thing that comes into your mind because "it's better than nothing".

Yeah, if I could make them enforce the laws against illegal aliens working in this country I would, but I can't. Building a fence isn't going to make us look any stupider then sitting back and letting the Mexicans flood the country while we let educated people stand in line to come here.

LOL, after electing GWB president of the US not once, but twice, how much stupider can we look?? I'm too old to worry about "how things LOOK" anyway.

 

[droon]

Building a wall seems to be the last thing a country does, before it ceases to exist. Or don't you believe in the lessons of history?

 

[WHAMPOM]

hOW THE HELL did I post as DROON? This idiot site screwing up again? I had to logout and log in again to get my own nasty self back.

 

[CaptnKirk]

The official fence from hell

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
Lets see.... what technology might be needed to thwart the wall.... A ladder maybe.... or in some extreme cases a shovel or two... ummmmm a pole vault ... a ramp up and ramp down... a two ton truck ramming a hole in the wall..... ... maybe even false id to use the main gate and public transport...

Someone can kick the door of my house in, or break the window, but I still lock the doors when I leave. A lock will never keep the real crooks out (if they want in) but I think it keeps the honest people honest. Maybe a fence would do the same thing?

I know it's a shame to have to build a fence, but if the politicians won't do their job then it's time for a different strategy. At least talk of a fence opens the dialouge and forces the politicians to pick what side of the "fence they're on.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tango
4000 years of hystory teach walls and fences never worked.

Depends on what the purpose of the wall is. If you think a wall or fence will keep 100% of the people out, i agree it never works. However if you think it can slow and stop a % of the 2-3 million a year that flow across our border every year and possibly deter terrorist groups from smuggling weapons across the border. Then I think it servers a purpose.

it is clear the current situation of doing nothing at all isnt working.

Will make the process longer. Will it change the final outcome? No.

Yes it will, what makes you think building a wall and defending it will allow the exact same free flow we have today?

I dont expect it to stop everybody, but I do expect it to slow them down big time and deter possible movements of equipment that can be used by terrorists.

What makes me think it wouldn't change anything? Policy Analysis. And, if you happen not to believe analysts, centuries of history.

Major socio-economic shifts require major socio-economic policies to be countered. It's as simple as that. You need to play in the same field, not just pretend you can stop history from happening with a wall. Talk to any researcher on demographic and immigration policy and he/she would confirm this, and give you data on what was effective in preventing immigration or at least lowering the numbers. In NO case it was a security measure, it was always social or economic policy.

And the line about terrorists is just funny. Again, any researcher on security policy would laugh big time at the idea of a fence being a barrier to international terrorism. I actually saw both Robert Jarvis and Jack Snyder laugh hard on this very issue during a conference a few weeks ago.

Counter-terrorism is 99% intelligence, and 1% territorial control.

Oh yeah? Is that why our free flow and lack of checks on our border stopped those terrorists on 9-11? They can laugh all they want, the simple fact of having an unsecured border is a security hazard. I dont see banks with open vaults to the public do you? Why should our borders be completely open to anybody who wants to cross them. And yes, they can laugh and laugh until the day something happens and it is linked back to an open border. Then I am sure you and them will be the first to complain nothing was done to protect the border.

And I am not against immigration, I am agains ta free flow across our borders.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: droon
Building a wall seems to be the last thing a country does, before it ceases to exist. Or don't you believe in the lessons of history?

The difference between us and other nations who have recent built a wall, we are doing so to keep people out, where they were doing it to keep their people in.

 

[gotsmack]

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: eilute

Originally posted by: Tango
4000 years of hystory teach walls and fences never worked.

That is a very good point. I was not aware of that though. Somehow I doubt that the government will look back on history before they procede.

Actually, walls worked great until technology made them obsolete. This wall should be fine considering the level of technology we're up against with this particular enemy.

The Wall of Adrian didn't prevent the collapse of the Roman Empire, just as The Chinese Great Wall didn't eventually prevent the Mongols from taking over the Chinese Empire. The great walls of Troy or Costantinopolis didn't stop them from collapting at some point. The maginot line didn't stop the germans and the Wall in Berlin couldn't stop ideas and ideals that eventually undermined it and made it crumble. The wall is Israel is not working and this wall on the Mexican border will not work either.

There are forces much stronger than any technology you can think of. Change the social and historical shifts causing the need for the wall, and you will not need the wall in fis=rst place. If you don't ask yourself what are you trying to prevent with your wall, and act on those causes, no wall you can build will solve the problem.

The Gates of Vienna.

and Mexico is a few GENERATIONS from being fixed because their legal system isn't that strong.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tango
4000 years of hystory teach walls and fences never worked.

Depends on what the purpose of the wall is. If you think a wall or fence will keep 100% of the people out, i agree it never works. However if you think it can slow and stop a % of the 2-3 million a year that flow across our border every year and possibly deter terrorist groups from smuggling weapons across the border. Then I think it servers a purpose.

it is clear the current situation of doing nothing at all isnt working.

Will make the process longer. Will it change the final outcome? No.

Yes it will, what makes you think building a wall and defending it will allow the exact same free flow we have today?

I dont expect it to stop everybody, but I do expect it to slow them down big time and deter possible movements of equipment that can be used by terrorists.

What makes me think it wouldn't change anything? Policy Analysis. And, if you happen not to believe analysts, centuries of history.

Major socio-economic shifts require major socio-economic policies to be countered. It's as simple as that. You need to play in the same field, not just pretend you can stop history from happening with a wall. Talk to any researcher on demographic and immigration policy and he/she would confirm this, and give you data on what was effective in preventing immigration or at least lowering the numbers. In NO case it was a security measure, it was always social or economic policy.

And the line about terrorists is just funny. Again, any researcher on security policy would laugh big time at the idea of a fence being a barrier to international terrorism. I actually saw both Robert Jarvis and Jack Snyder laugh hard on this very issue during a conference a few weeks ago.

Counter-terrorism is 99% intelligence, and 1% territorial control.

Oh yeah? Is that why our free flow and lack of checks on our border stopped those terrorists on 9-11? They can laugh all they want, the simple fact of having an unsecured border is a security hazard. I dont see banks with open vaults to the public do you? Why should our borders be completely open to anybody who wants to cross them. And yes, they can laugh and laugh until the day something happens and it is linked back to an open border. Then I am sure you and them will be the first to complain nothing was done to protect the border.

And I am not against immigration, I am agains ta free flow across our borders.

The would absolutely agree the US need to so something about national security. They would be zealous about it.

They just think the idea of doing so by building a wall is silly.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: gotsmack

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: eilute

Originally posted by: Tango
4000 years of hystory teach walls and fences never worked.

That is a very good point. I was not aware of that though. Somehow I doubt that the government will look back on history before they procede.

Actually, walls worked great until technology made them obsolete. This wall should be fine considering the level of technology we're up against with this particular enemy.

The Wall of Adrian didn't prevent the collapse of the Roman Empire, just as The Chinese Great Wall didn't eventually prevent the Mongols from taking over the Chinese Empire. The great walls of Troy or Costantinopolis didn't stop them from collapting at some point. The maginot line didn't stop the germans and the Wall in Berlin couldn't stop ideas and ideals that eventually undermined it and made it crumble. The wall is Israel is not working and this wall on the Mexican border will not work either.

There are forces much stronger than any technology you can think of. Change the social and historical shifts causing the need for the wall, and you will not need the wall in fis=rst place. If you don't ask yourself what are you trying to prevent with your wall, and act on those causes, no wall you can build will solve the problem.

The Gates of Vienna.

and Mexico is a few GENERATIONS from being fixed because their legal system isn't that strong.

The gates of Vienna didn't prevent a social process from happening, they just prevented an army from conquering a city and (possibly) a country.

The walls of Rome repelled many sieges. They couldn't prevent the crumble of the empire though, because it came from a socio-economic process, not a military threat. Barbarians conquered Rome, because Rome was ready to be conquered, no matter how tall its walls were.

Mexicans are flowing into the US because of both Mexico and US socio-economic conditions. Everybody focus on the mexican side of this process and ignore the US side. Bad mistake.

To solve this problem you must first understand where it originates. But exactly like Rome (and every other empire before and after it) the US is not able to aknowledge this anymore.

Nobody can stop history, and every macro data you look at will give you the same answer: the age of Asia is beginning. Immigration problems and big walls are just a footnote in a much larger global process nobody can stop.