Critiquing the boarder wall for ( Br John . )

This is a debate about if building a wall along the entire border of Mexico and The United States is the best way to keep someone from illegally crossing the border and is it worth the cost and damage to the environment and ecology. We are not debating immigration policy. An illegal immigrant is anyone who is in a country illegally. Period. Someone who is granted asylum is here legally so they are not an illegal immigrant. We are not debating asylum policy. We are debating if Trump's Big Beautiful Wall is a good or bad idea. Please. Make topics for all the other related issues.

Coming in through an airport legally (and subsequently overstaying) is not as much a risk, because at least the Gov knows who you are and some basic information enough to have let the person in. It's a different problem. The question seems to be more about is the wall worth it, and will it work at undetected border crossings. Sailing a boat is easier to detect, but I think the idea of a wall is to make it harder enough that detection can more easily occur... rather then build it and hope it solves everything. Detection is not so much about stopping, but interception.... things like this are about information first, then application of law second. Its not some Orwellian ham fist. Though it could become that... if irrational minds create ideological division out of every little attempt at solving complex problems, or if people trust too much in propoganda. Lucky our society is increasing access to communications and IT.. so it's more a risk of irrational emotionalism misrepresenting reality then secret government conspiracies these days IMO.

I wonder if there might be certain segments of territory where a wall could be useful

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfWRDWYvMjo

It blows my mind that people care so much about illegal immigration when the existential threat of climate change is looming over our heads.

We are in for a shit storm if we don't start attempting to mitigate the ruin this could bring upon us.
We have like 20 more years before we are screwed if it isn't too late already.
Seriously.

Here is a small example of what could result from our apathy.
A couple of degrees warmer and a majority of grain crops will not be able to grow.
I'm talking roughly 60% of all grain crops.
All it takes is a tiny bit of global temperature variation, just a few degrees shifted one way or another.
Think about the implications of that!
The majority of the population of the world relies on grain crops as a dietary staple.
So, go figure.

Not to mention the wall ain't gonna stop anything, it is just a partial wall, only going over stretches of territory with no natural barrier, people will still find ways in if they are desperate enough.
Yes, Illegal Immigration is an issue, but this isn't the Qin Dynasty of Ancient China, we have far bigger issues to worry about than a fucking wall.
Yes, we need some serious immigration reform, but the wall is not the answer or even an effective solution at that.
Seriously, that's like the solution a toddler would come up with to the immigration issue. It's ridiculous.

CaesarEJW wrote: Seriously, that's like the solution a toddler would come up with to the immigration issue. It's ridiculous.

Only if the toddler thinks its the extent of the solution..
Complex problems usually have multi-faceted solutions and I expect any wall is part of a solution other then the entirety if it.

Adder wrote:

CaesarEJW wrote: Seriously, that's like the solution a toddler would come up with to the immigration issue. It's ridiculous.

Only if the toddler thinks its the extent of the solution..
Complex problems usually have multi-faceted solutions and I expect any wall is part of a solution other then the entirety if it.

I agree completely. Complex issues require complex answers.

Yes I know the wall seems a little much , but it's a start . If the politicians on both sides of the aisle would stop pounding sand then maybe we would get somewhere with the immigration Reformation but that will be a while a way . Someone had a good point about people over staying there visa , well at the least we know who they are , why they came and can be held accountable for any crimes they commit unlike undocumented illegal immigrants we know nothing or little to nothing about . The wall is meant not to be an all in one solution but to slow them down as much as possible to where boarder patrol can handle it . Yes you can use large latters but it will still slow them down and make it to where there can be less of them coming in at once .

Here in AZ it's always been a hotbed topic. Whether it's water stations out in the desert to help with the decline of deaths in the summer's heat to Border Patrol issues to tunnels, trucks crossing in the dead of night on no road areas, etc...

There is no exact answer. Some have said it's politics vs Cartel Money vs Human Rights vs US sovereignty, etc...

It's not going to be resolved overnight, no clear answers as of yet. Every time they discover a way to stop one way to enter, a few more pop up somewhere... sad to say.

Malicious wrote: Yes I know the wall seems a little much , but it's a start . If the politicians on both sides of the aisle would stop pounding sand then maybe we would get somewhere with the immigration Reformation but that will be a while a way . Someone had a good point about people over staying there visa , well at the least we know who they are , why they came and can be held accountable for any crimes they commit unlike undocumented illegal immigrants we know nothing or little to nothing about . The wall is meant not to be an all in one solution but to slow them down as much as possible to where boarder patrol can handle it . Yes you can use large latters but it will still slow them down and make it to where there can be less of them coming in at once .

You are not responding to anything I posted. I gave references.

The 2 Republican Senators and 25 Republican Representatives (from Texas) all voted against the wall. There are already barriers in place where the vast majority attempt to cross. Improving those that need it makes sense. There are hundreds of miles where there are plenty of dead bodies because there's only massive amounts of desert. [T]he longest contiguous unfenced stretch of border — more than 600 miles total — is in the middle of Texas. There's no major city here on either side of the border. Billions of dollars for miles and miles of a wall to destroy the environment where almost nobody attempts to cross and most of the few that do die along the way.

Why is that a good idea? Please read the articles I posted and refute them. See: https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/open-discussions/123483-critiquing-the-boarder-wall-for-br-john?start=0#348813 And See: https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/open-discussions/123483-critiquing-the-boarder-wall-for-br-john?start=0#348824

Malicious wrote: Yes I know the wall seems a little much , but it's a start . If the politicians on both sides of the aisle would stop pounding sand then maybe we would get somewhere with the immigration Reformation but that will be a while a way . Someone had a good point about people over staying there visa , well at the least we know who they are , why they came and can be held accountable for any crimes they commit unlike undocumented illegal immigrants we know nothing or little to nothing about . The wall is meant not to be an all in one solution but to slow them down as much as possible to where boarder patrol can handle it . Yes you can use large latters but it will still slow them down and make it to where there can be less of them coming in at once .

Dear Malicious,

Spending $10B as a "Start" is not a good idea. In fact it really isn't a solution at all. Any "fixed" defense can be strategically evaded. It's just like plugging 1 hole for computer viruses to go through. Once people who make the viruses see the plugged hole they will simply find another exploit or find a way to unplug the hole. The border wall did slow people down... for about as long as it took for people to see that they could simply cut through it. It's like proposing to build the great wall of china but missing the fact that the walls surrounding castles and kingdoms were often meant to slow down invaders and stop people from coming in on horses. You know... medieval attack strategies. However, if the wall was too long, an invasion force would simply come in at a less guarded point. No wall was ever impregnable. And the thicker the wall is the more it costs. Trump thinks this is a good idea because he likes construction and can probably make sure construction companies he knows gets a lot of the work and can give kickbacks for the contracts to Trump business entities. Remember Haliburton?

A better idea:

Contract Elon Musk to build an army of electric powered drones that can fly long distances and act like Roombas. Create several "bases" with charging stations that they can automatically dock at and power them with solar panels. Launch a few satellites that can double as internet providers for rural areas near the border. Have those satellites track people spotted by drones. Have small stations of border patrol along the border who can pick people up who are spotted. These drones could have several cameras each, including a camera attached to a telescope. You can also have hot air balloons tethered to each station equipped with an emergency parachute. There are many other things you can do without spending $10-20billion on a dumb wall that can't see anyone who makes a hole through it.

Oh ya immigrants can cut through a steel wall over a feet thick that sounds very capable of them . More drones is a good idea but still very costly and has it's down sides . The drones can be shot down or EMPs could be used . The drones can even be hacked ,heck if you shine a high powered Lazer at one it won't see anything . The wall is meant for corralling migrants to fixed points so they don't slip through the cracks , it's a start . Heck it would be better than spending 200+ billion on the illegal immigrants .

And just in case it wasn't clear.

when I said walls slowed down invaders, I mean they slowed down armies so that they could shoot or kill them as they entered. This only goes for people attacking in large numbers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hexTvbCilFU

It should also be obvious that castle walls weren't just designed to keep out invaders but archers' arrows, while giving the castle's archers higher ground so they could shoot farther than the enemy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3TddqkEoJ4

We also know that armies developed weapons and tactics to get over walls. One of them was essentially a structure that blocked arrows while they positioned it next to the wall, allowing the soldiers inside to simply cross over to the top. Of course the easiest way over the border wall just depends on where you want to cross. You could cut through it, tunnel under it, or you could just bring a ladder or two and lay whatever you want over top of the fence. Even if its electrified you can simply insulate the ladder with rubber.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOqXgO0MFbQ

A wall is truly weak and ineffective. It's only because Trump said it that his supporters think its a great idea.

Malicious wrote: Oh ya immigrants can cut through a steel wall over a feet thick that sounds very capable of them . More drones is a good idea but still very costly and has it's down sides . The drones can be shot down or EMPs could be used . The drones can even be hacked ,heck if you shine a high powered Lazer at one it won't see anything . The wall is meant for corralling migrants to fixed points so they don't slip through the cracks , it's a start . Heck it would be better than spending 200+ billion on the illegal immigrants .

um... how exactly would a wall corral anyone to fixed points? Explain that to us. We're not talking about your neighbors fence where you have to ask your neighbor so you can get the ball that landed in his yard. This is miles of wall that has ALREADY been cut through by smugglers within minutes using a $100 saw from Home Depot. Watch this video of Trump saying "you can cut through any wall" after reports of people cutting through his new border wall. Please watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCkIva2L-B0

The wall isn't there to stop them but to slow them down , if they cut through it or climb over it then it's slowing them down and allowing for a quicker response from the boarder patrol . By corralling them I mean if they don't have the ( tools ) to get past it then they will try to go to a spot where there is no wall aka corralling them to a spot that will be monitored better . Ya they could cut through it and we can repair it . They can use latters but it will slow them down allowing for them to be caught . Heck I vote for a type of DMZ like the one separating north and south Korea . We used similar tactics when gaining territory from Mexico , send people in then take the land . And no I'm not necessarily saying that is what's going on either . We need to make there countries better not make ours worse . We build up countries economies around the world but for what oil or strategical advantage ? We need to help there countries not for what we will get but to help there people .

The wall is antithetical to the doctrine of this order.

Jedi Believe

In the Force, and in the inherent worth of ALL LIFE within it.
In the SANCTITY OF THE HUMAN PERSON. WE OPPOSE the use of torture and CRUEL or UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT, INCLUDING the DEATH penalty.
In a society governed by laws GROUNDED IN REASON and COMPASSION, NOT in FEAR or PREJUDICE
In a society that DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF sexual orientation or circumstances of birth such as gender, ethnicity and NATIONAL ORIGIN.
In the ETHIC OF RECIPROCITY , and how moral concepts are not absolute but vary by culture, religion and over time.
In the positive influence of spiritual growth and awareness on society.
In the importance of freedom of conscience and SELF-DETERMINATION within religious,POLITICAL AND OTHER STRUCTURES.
In the separation of religion and government and the FREEDOMs OF speech, ASSOCIATION and expression.

https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/doctrine-of-the-order#JediBelieve

The wall is antithetical to the doctrine of this order.

It seems to me that the doctrine (possibly carefully and intentionally) does not say much about national interests. The "face value" purpose of "The Wall" is to safeguard the USA's people against all sorts of boogey men.

Whether that is what it actually achieves notwithstanding, I don't know that efforts taken to protect a particular group of people is, by default, against the doctrine.




Anyway, since you don't discriminate, can I have fifty bucks?

Everyone responding probably has good intentions. Some don't understand clearly what the discussion is about and what it's not.

An example would be debating the most humane way to execute someone. I'm against the Death Penalty. That's not the issue. Assuming someone is going to be executed, what is the most humane way to do so?

With me so far?

What we are discussing here is: assuming the goal is to keep someone from illegally (unauthorized) crossing the Mexico US border, a wall along the [entire] border is the best way. It's not if someone should be allowed to cross the border which is a different discussion.

james sand

You're clearly wrong. Unless you don't consider national interests to be part of "society" of which the doctrine speaks directly.

Br John
Your rank and slippery language makes it very clear that you know better than to promote values that go against the doctrine of the Jedi order.

" to keep someone from illegally (unauthorized) crossing the Mexico US border"

is in direct conflict with

"...a society that DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF ... ethnicity and NATIONAL ORIGIN."

KerouacsGhost wrote: Br John
Your rank and slippery language makes it very clear that you know better than to promote values that go against the doctrine of the Jedi order.

" to keep someone from illegally (unauthorized) crossing the Mexico US border"

is in direct conflict with

"...a society that DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF ... ethnicity and NATIONAL ORIGIN."

That is not, is not, what we are discussing. I'm not for the Death Penalty either, but if someone is going to be executed I can discuss the most humane way to do it.

What do you not understand about "Assuming the goal is to keep people from crossing a border ...." ?

It is not, is not, about if we should let them cross the border.