About this wall

[OKTexas]

The commies won't fund the manpower to do that either. Their border security talk is all bullshit, they have no interest in securing the border. Personally I don't think you have a clue what it takes to secure a 2000 mile border. I'm assuming you have no military experience.

.

By commies you mean Trumps opposition? Perhaps it’s easier to get them along with funding those sort of actions?

And it will leave you with some depth in the fight too, in this case depth isn’t actual depth on the battlefield but rather more complex.

Let’s say you can cut down most immigration from the border, focusing on the worst elements and also start shutting down other means of intrusion with the same funding?

More flexibility and more bang for the buck. The wall keeps getting such high attention. Just because it’s that, a wall, an object you can measure and understand.

No I mean opposition to America. You can't allow poverty to to push into a country unencumbered and expect to maintain the strength and prosperity of a nation. It's a drain on every resource a country has.

.

Now this is an issue!
And quite a dilemma. How to cope with a neighboring country - not hostile in any sense - but with a significant lesser standard of living.

Having the control over the situation isn’t a bad move at all.

Ya think? LMAO

.

Also, a wall isn’t a sustainable solution. Will is eventually going to beat class. So you need a much deeper and comprehensive plan in the long run anyway.

Ya think? You've basically said the same damn thing the last three posts, anything new?

.

 

[ErikViking]

"Nobody has the intention of building a wall." - GDR head of state Walter Ulbricht, East Berlin, June 15th 1961


A few month later, in August 1961 he thanked the labour force for erecting this wall.


It’s purpose; protecting eastern Germany from western spies, insurgents and intrusion of undesirable elements.


A wall is always going to have two sides. Perhaps the actual, acute need for a wall, in reality, isn’t that desperate? More like a political trophy of some kind?

Eeverywhere a barrier is erected along the southern border, as proven by Arizona, illegal immigration / illegal border crossings go down 95%.

Why do snowflakes and illegals advocate, aid, and abet illegal immigration / non-enforcement of existing US immigration law?

I have no idea. Perhaps things aren’t black/white. My interest here is why the concept of building a wall is so important. First I thought this was only about people with the desire to raise the wall. But it seems equally important for those against it. It’s not a lot of money we are talking about. In any other circumstances you would get funding if a large enough group demanded it. In this case no, this wall represents something else.

I guess it’s way to attached to the election. It’s way out of proportion. Fortify where needed, agile and cost effective where doable. This is not even on the table - just wall - or no wall. No one gets in or everyone does. Very exreme.

My interest here is why the concept of building a wall is so important.

Because in areas where there is no wall, illegal aliens can freely stream across the border.

Then build a wall there. You will stem that stream. Step by step. Also you will have the ability to asses every inch of the border. What is needed where is going to be obvious. And when the in flow is acceptable, well the job is done.

 

[ErikViking]

By commies you mean Trumps opposition? Perhaps it’s easier to get them along with funding those sort of actions?

And it will leave you with some depth in the fight too, in this case depth isn’t actual depth on the battlefield but rather more complex.

Let’s say you can cut down most immigration from the border, focusing on the worst elements and also start shutting down other means of intrusion with the same funding?

More flexibility and more bang for the buck. The wall keeps getting such high attention. Just because it’s that, a wall, an object you can measure and understand.

No I mean opposition to America. You can't allow poverty to to push into a country unencumbered and expect to maintain the strength and prosperity of a nation. It's a drain on every resource a country has.

.

Now this is an issue!
And quite a dilemma. How to cope with a neighboring country - not hostile in any sense - but with a significant lesser standard of living.

Having the control over the situation isn’t a bad move at all.

Ya think? LMAO

.

Also, a wall isn’t a sustainable solution. Will is eventually going to beat class. So you need a much deeper and comprehensive plan in the long run anyway.

Ya think? You've basically said the same damn thing the last three posts, anything new?

.

Maybe not, we might be in agreement?

 

[ErikViking]

By commies you mean Trumps opposition? Perhaps it’s easier to get them along with funding those sort of actions?

And it will leave you with some depth in the fight too, in this case depth isn’t actual depth on the battlefield but rather more complex.

Let’s say you can cut down most immigration from the border, focusing on the worst elements and also start shutting down other means of intrusion with the same funding?

More flexibility and more bang for the buck. The wall keeps getting such high attention. Just because it’s that, a wall, an object you can measure and understand.

No I mean opposition to America. You can't allow poverty to to push into a country unencumbered and expect to maintain the strength and prosperity of a nation. It's a drain on every resource a country has.

.

Now this is an issue!
And quite a dilemma. How to cope with a neighboring country - not hostile in any sense - but with a significant lesser standard of living.

Having the control over the situation isn’t a bad move at all.

Ya think? LMAO

.

I also think that takes a multi dimensional effort. Well beyond “all wall” or “no wall”.

Ya think?

.

What the hell of a question is that any way? No, I don’t think - it’s the way it is.

 

[ErikViking]

Barriers erected eliminates 95% of illegal crossing.

If erected over a decade ago there would not be 20+ million illegals in the US, millions of unidentified illegals in the US.

If borders were used to force migrants into using known legal ports of entry where proper thorough processing could have been completed, the massive problem with allowing criminal illegals like MS-13 Gang members, criminals escaping prosecution in their own country, and more could have been prevented or at least greatly reduced.

The TRUTH is Dr.ocrats only believe in 1 form of 'alternate' immigration and that is to give AMNESTY to all of the millions of illegals they have allowed, aided, and abetted illegally entering the US.

Once that is accomplished they will STILL not support securing our borders and controlling who comes into the country. Just like The last time Amnesty was granted, nothing was done to stop illegal immigration. The process just began all over again.

I appreciate the frustration. No joke.

 

[easyt65]

And your cranked up rethoric about invaders - give it a break. We’re talking about knocked out civilians. If you were facing a real invasion - the blood would be flowing in the other end of the court.

4,000 violent / criminal illegals forced their way into Mexico, forced their way physically past Mexican police and the Mexican military.

Upon reaching the US border they began tearing down US border barriers and illegally attempted to scale US border fencing rather than comply with existing US law by entering through legal ports of entry. When US Border Patrol Agents engaged them to stop them from destroying US property, violating US laws, and forcing their daily physically illegally into the United States these violent criminal illegals physically attacked / assaulted the BPAs.

You claim this is NOT an invasion.



If a group of 4,000 unidentified foreigners approached a US Military Base's walls, attempted to tear down those walls / barriers, attempted to scale those walls, and attacked US military troops when confronted it worst definitely be considered an ATTACK and / or INVASION, and lethal force, if necessary, would be used to repel that attack.

If criminals scaled your residence wall and attempted to break into your home though windows and other means than through your DOORS, and tried to attack you when confronted in an attempt to force their way in would you call it a 'migration'? Would you call it anything but a 'Home INVASION', 'BREAKING AND ENTERING', an ATTACK on your home?

Would you slow them to enter and justify their actions as ok because they just want a better life....

...it would you call the cops and demand they be dragged away in cuffs ... Or would you hesitate to use your own firearm to blow these criminal invaders breaking into your home in order to protect your family?

Snowflakes attempt to prevent the comparison just described.

The US is our home. Criminal, violent illegals are destroying walls, attacking law enforcement agents, and attempting to force their way into our 'home', and Democrats ate fighting for the idea that we do not have a right to protect our sovereignty, to lock our doors / keep them out (secure our borders), and protect our family (protect American citizens) from them.

It's just that simple...

 

[ErikViking]

And your cranked up rethoric about invaders - give it a break. We’re talking about knocked out civilians. If you were facing a real invasion - the blood would be flowing in the other end of the court.

4,000 violent / criminal illegals forced their way into Mexico, forced their way physically past Mexican police and the Mexican military.

Upon reaching the US border they began tearing down US border barriers and illegally attempted to scale US border fencing rather than comply with existing US law by entering through legal ports of entry. When US Border Patrol Agents engaged them to stop them from destroying US property, violating US laws, and forcing their daily physically illegally into the United States these violent criminal illegals physically attacked / assaulted the BPAs.

You claim this is NOT an invasion.



If a group of 4,000 unidentified foreigners approached a US Military Base's walls, attempted to tear down those walls / barriers, attempted to scale those walls, and attacked US military troops when confronted it worst definitely be considered an ATTACK and / or INVASION, and lethal force, if necessary, would be used to repel that attack.

If criminals scaled your residence wall and attempted to break into your home though windows and other means than through your DOORS, and tried to attack you when confronted in an attempt to force their way in would you call it a 'migration'? Would you call it anything but a 'Home INVASION', 'BREAKING AND ENTERING', an ATTACK on your home?

Would you slow them to enter and justify their actions as ok because they just want a better life....

...it would you call the cops and demand they be dragged away in cuffs ... Or would you hesitate to use your own firearm to blow these criminal invaders breaking into your home in order to protect your family?

Snowflakes attempt to prevent the comparison just described.

The US is our home. Criminal, violent illegals are destroying walls, attacking law enforcement agents, and attempting to force their way into our 'home', and Democrats ate fighting for the idea that we do not have a right to protect our sovereignty, to lock our doors / keep them out (secure our borders), and protect our family (protect American citizens) from them.

It's just that simple...

As I said - frustrating. This isn’t an invasion. Let’s keep things separated and a cool mind. Every single criminal act is a failure. And we are going to have a lot of them. It’s inevitable.

That doesn’t mean we have to surrender- rather to find the best remedy. In all aspects. The answer won’t be able to express in a sentence or in a raged post online.

My comcern here is that of “the wall” has become more important than it really is. (Although the objection to the wall is equally one eyed)

A middle ground is in desperate need to be found.

Edit: it seems more important to have Trump “winning” or “loosing” while the truth is that it isn’t important at all. What is on stake is if you, as a nation is winning or loosing.

 

[OKTexas]

No I mean opposition to America. You can't allow poverty to to push into a country unencumbered and expect to maintain the strength and prosperity of a nation. It's a drain on every resource a country has.

.

Now this is an issue!
And quite a dilemma. How to cope with a neighboring country - not hostile in any sense - but with a significant lesser standard of living.

Having the control over the situation isn’t a bad move at all.

Ya think? LMAO

.

I also think that takes a multi dimensional effort. Well beyond “all wall” or “no wall”.

Ya think?

.

What the hell of a question is that any way? No, I don’t think - it’s the way it is.

So you're disagreeing with your own statement, I was agreeing with you. LMAO

.

 

[ErikViking]

Now this is an issue!
And quite a dilemma. How to cope with a neighboring country - not hostile in any sense - but with a significant lesser standard of living.

Having the control over the situation isn’t a bad move at all.

Ya think? LMAO

.

I also think that takes a multi dimensional effort. Well beyond “all wall” or “no wall”.

Ya think?

.

What the hell of a question is that any way? No, I don’t think - it’s the way it is.

So you're disagreeing with your own statement, I was agreeing with you. LMAO

.

Yeah I know - just wrapped your question twice - it’s sort of... well “ya think?” A very subtle phrase like patting the head of someone (child). I hate it!

 

[easyt65]

And your cranked up rethoric about invaders - give it a break. We’re talking about knocked out civilians. If you were facing a real invasion - the blood would be flowing in the other end of the court.

4,000 violent / criminal illegals forced their way into Mexico, forced their way physically past Mexican police and the Mexican military.

Upon reaching the US border they began tearing down US border barriers and illegally attempted to scale US border fencing rather than comply with existing US law by entering through legal ports of entry. When US Border Patrol Agents engaged them to stop them from destroying US property, violating US laws, and forcing their daily physically illegally into the United States these violent criminal illegals physically attacked / assaulted the BPAs.

You claim this is NOT an invasion.



If a group of 4,000 unidentified foreigners approached a US Military Base's walls, attempted to tear down those walls / barriers, attempted to scale those walls, and attacked US military troops when confronted it worst definitely be considered an ATTACK and / or INVASION, and lethal force, if necessary, would be used to repel that attack.

If criminals scaled your residence wall and attempted to break into your home though windows and other means than through your DOORS, and tried to attack you when confronted in an attempt to force their way in would you call it a 'migration'? Would you call it anything but a 'Home INVASION', 'BREAKING AND ENTERING', an ATTACK on your home?

Would you slow them to enter and justify their actions as ok because they just want a better life....

...it would you call the cops and demand they be dragged away in cuffs ... Or would you hesitate to use your own firearm to blow these criminal invaders breaking into your home in order to protect your family?

Snowflakes attempt to prevent the comparison just described.

The US is our home. Criminal, violent illegals are destroying walls, attacking law enforcement agents, and attempting to force their way into our 'home', and Democrats ate fighting for the idea that we do not have a right to protect our sovereignty, to lock our doors / keep them out (secure our borders), and protect our family (protect American citizens) from them.

It's just that simple...

As I said - frustrating. This isn’t an invasion. Let’s keep things separated and a cool mind. Every single criminal act is a failure. And we are going to have a lot of them. It’s inevitable.

That doesn’t mean we have to surrender- rather to find the best remedy. In all aspects. The answer won’t be able to express in a sentence or in a raged post online.

My comcern here is that of “the wall” has become more important than it really is. (Although the objection to the wall is equally one eyed)

A middle ground is in desperate need to be found.

Edit: it seems more important to have Trump “winning” or “loosing” while the truth is that it isn’t important at all. What is on stake is if you, as a nation is winning or loosing.

Again, you don't call violent illegals tearing down walls, attacking US law enforcement, and forcing their way into the US an 'invasion'.

I suppose you define an 'invasion' ONLY as 1 nation or entity military invading another.

That is ignorant...but we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[task0778]

" A middle ground is in desperate need to be found. "

Problem is, Trump is playing to his base and Schumer/Pelosi are playing to theirs and neither base wants to accept a middle ground compromise. What we have here is a race to the bottom where the majority of the people who are not in either base do not like what's going on and the dissatisfaction with the politicos in Washington is increasing big time. What we need IMHO is a 'Throw the Bums OUT' party where every single incumbent loses their job. The political power struggle is strangling our gov't and impeding the way forward to find workable solutions to the host of fairly big problems we are facing.

 

[basquebromance]

why is the world so cold? how did we get so cold?

we must love each other instead of building walls, my friends!

 

[ErikViking]

And your cranked up rethoric about invaders - give it a break. We’re talking about knocked out civilians. If you were facing a real invasion - the blood would be flowing in the other end of the court.

4,000 violent / criminal illegals forced their way into Mexico, forced their way physically past Mexican police and the Mexican military.

Upon reaching the US border they began tearing down US border barriers and illegally attempted to scale US border fencing rather than comply with existing US law by entering through legal ports of entry. When US Border Patrol Agents engaged them to stop them from destroying US property, violating US laws, and forcing their daily physically illegally into the United States these violent criminal illegals physically attacked / assaulted the BPAs.

You claim this is NOT an invasion.



If a group of 4,000 unidentified foreigners approached a US Military Base's walls, attempted to tear down those walls / barriers, attempted to scale those walls, and attacked US military troops when confronted it worst definitely be considered an ATTACK and / or INVASION, and lethal force, if necessary, would be used to repel that attack.

If criminals scaled your residence wall and attempted to break into your home though windows and other means than through your DOORS, and tried to attack you when confronted in an attempt to force their way in would you call it a 'migration'? Would you call it anything but a 'Home INVASION', 'BREAKING AND ENTERING', an ATTACK on your home?

Would you slow them to enter and justify their actions as ok because they just want a better life....

...it would you call the cops and demand they be dragged away in cuffs ... Or would you hesitate to use your own firearm to blow these criminal invaders breaking into your home in order to protect your family?

Snowflakes attempt to prevent the comparison just described.

The US is our home. Criminal, violent illegals are destroying walls, attacking law enforcement agents, and attempting to force their way into our 'home', and Democrats ate fighting for the idea that we do not have a right to protect our sovereignty, to lock our doors / keep them out (secure our borders), and protect our family (protect American citizens) from them.

It's just that simple...

As I said - frustrating. This isn’t an invasion. Let’s keep things separated and a cool mind. Every single criminal act is a failure. And we are going to have a lot of them. It’s inevitable.

That doesn’t mean we have to surrender- rather to find the best remedy. In all aspects. The answer won’t be able to express in a sentence or in a raged post online.

My comcern here is that of “the wall” has become more important than it really is. (Although the objection to the wall is equally one eyed)

A middle ground is in desperate need to be found.

Edit: it seems more important to have Trump “winning” or “loosing” while the truth is that it isn’t important at all. What is on stake is if you, as a nation is winning or loosing.

Again, you don't call violent illegals tearing down walls, attacking US law enforcement, and forcing their way into the US an 'invasion'.

I suppose you define an 'invasion' ONLY as 1 nation or entity military invading another.

That is ignorant...but we will just have to agree to disagree.

Actually I could under normal circumstances agree with the statement. But as of now, with the polarity I try to use words carefully.

I was thinking about this:
Let’s say you have 100% resources. You spend all of it in a 95% effective wall. The remaining 5% would constitute the most rough and hard core people. The least desirable.
If you were to adjust your resources so that the effort on the border was only a 80% success but you could weed out those 5% would it be worth it?

 

[easyt65]

" A middle ground is in desperate need to be found. "

Problem is, Trump is playing to his base and Schumer/Pelosi are playing to theirs and neither base wants to accept a middle ground compromise. What we have here is a race to the bottom where the majority of the people who are not in either base do not like what's going on and the dissatisfaction with the politicos in Washington is increasing big time. What we need IMHO is a 'Throw the Bums OUT' party where every single incumbent loses their job. The political power struggle is strangling our gov't and impeding the way forward to find workable solutions to the host of fairly big problems we are facing.

BS. Trump asked for $10 Billion....then $5 Billion....Schumer countered with NNOTHING, choosing instead to declare 100% commitment to not ensuring our sovereignty, to open borders, to non-enforcement of existing US immigration law, to 1500 unidentified illegals per day crossing into the US, to continuing to call for the abolishment of ICE, to continuing to support federal law-violating violent illegal-protecting Sanctuary Cities.

 

[easyt65]

And your cranked up rethoric about invaders - give it a break. We’re talking about knocked out civilians. If you were facing a real invasion - the blood would be flowing in the other end of the court.

4,000 violent / criminal illegals forced their way into Mexico, forced their way physically past Mexican police and the Mexican military.

Upon reaching the US border they began tearing down US border barriers and illegally attempted to scale US border fencing rather than comply with existing US law by entering through legal ports of entry. When US Border Patrol Agents engaged them to stop them from destroying US property, violating US laws, and forcing their daily physically illegally into the United States these violent criminal illegals physically attacked / assaulted the BPAs.

You claim this is NOT an invasion.



If a group of 4,000 unidentified foreigners approached a US Military Base's walls, attempted to tear down those walls / barriers, attempted to scale those walls, and attacked US military troops when confronted it worst definitely be considered an ATTACK and / or INVASION, and lethal force, if necessary, would be used to repel that attack.

If criminals scaled your residence wall and attempted to break into your home though windows and other means than through your DOORS, and tried to attack you when confronted in an attempt to force their way in would you call it a 'migration'? Would you call it anything but a 'Home INVASION', 'BREAKING AND ENTERING', an ATTACK on your home?

Would you slow them to enter and justify their actions as ok because they just want a better life....

...it would you call the cops and demand they be dragged away in cuffs ... Or would you hesitate to use your own firearm to blow these criminal invaders breaking into your home in order to protect your family?

Snowflakes attempt to prevent the comparison just described.

The US is our home. Criminal, violent illegals are destroying walls, attacking law enforcement agents, and attempting to force their way into our 'home', and Democrats ate fighting for the idea that we do not have a right to protect our sovereignty, to lock our doors / keep them out (secure our borders), and protect our family (protect American citizens) from them.

It's just that simple...

As I said - frustrating. This isn’t an invasion. Let’s keep things separated and a cool mind. Every single criminal act is a failure. And we are going to have a lot of them. It’s inevitable.

That doesn’t mean we have to surrender- rather to find the best remedy. In all aspects. The answer won’t be able to express in a sentence or in a raged post online.

My comcern here is that of “the wall” has become more important than it really is. (Although the objection to the wall is equally one eyed)

A middle ground is in desperate need to be found.

Edit: it seems more important to have Trump “winning” or “loosing” while the truth is that it isn’t important at all. What is on stake is if you, as a nation is winning or loosing.

Again, you don't call violent illegals tearing down walls, attacking US law enforcement, and forcing their way into the US an 'invasion'.

I suppose you define an 'invasion' ONLY as 1 nation or entity military invading another.

That is ignorant...but we will just have to agree to disagree.

Actually I could under normal circumstances agree with the statement. But as of now, with the polarity I try to use words carefully.

I was thinking about this:
Let’s say you have 100% resources. You spend all of it in a 95% effective wall. The remaining 5% would constitute the most rough and hard core people. The least desirable.
If you were to adjust your resources so that the effort on the border was only a 80% success but you could weed out those 5% would it be worth it?

WTF?

A wall deters 95% of illegal immigration, leaving 5% that is easily covered by existing - even less - Border Security.

A wall takes the place of many required BPAs, hundreds of nan hours, much if those resources being used now.

95% of migrants / illegals are forced through legal ports of entry....

 

[OKTexas]

Ya think? LMAO

.

I also think that takes a multi dimensional effort. Well beyond “all wall” or “no wall”.

Ya think?

.

What the hell of a question is that any way? No, I don’t think - it’s the way it is.

So you're disagreeing with your own statement, I was agreeing with you. LMAO

.

Yeah I know - just wrapped your question twice - it’s sort of... well “ya think?” A very subtle phrase like patting the head of someone (child). I hate it!

Yeah, it's a bit condescending, but well deserved for someone who obviously hasn't thought things trough, done the research and has no idea what reality is on the ground. I'd honestly like to see how your little country would absorb 3 million illegals who have a culture 100% the polar opposite of yours. The US allows about 1.4 million legal immigrants a year.

.

 

[ErikViking]

And your cranked up rethoric about invaders - give it a break. We’re talking about knocked out civilians. If you were facing a real invasion - the blood would be flowing in the other end of the court.

4,000 violent / criminal illegals forced their way into Mexico, forced their way physically past Mexican police and the Mexican military.

Upon reaching the US border they began tearing down US border barriers and illegally attempted to scale US border fencing rather than comply with existing US law by entering through legal ports of entry. When US Border Patrol Agents engaged them to stop them from destroying US property, violating US laws, and forcing their daily physically illegally into the United States these violent criminal illegals physically attacked / assaulted the BPAs.

You claim this is NOT an invasion.



If a group of 4,000 unidentified foreigners approached a US Military Base's walls, attempted to tear down those walls / barriers, attempted to scale those walls, and attacked US military troops when confronted it worst definitely be considered an ATTACK and / or INVASION, and lethal force, if necessary, would be used to repel that attack.

If criminals scaled your residence wall and attempted to break into your home though windows and other means than through your DOORS, and tried to attack you when confronted in an attempt to force their way in would you call it a 'migration'? Would you call it anything but a 'Home INVASION', 'BREAKING AND ENTERING', an ATTACK on your home?

Would you slow them to enter and justify their actions as ok because they just want a better life....

...it would you call the cops and demand they be dragged away in cuffs ... Or would you hesitate to use your own firearm to blow these criminal invaders breaking into your home in order to protect your family?

Snowflakes attempt to prevent the comparison just described.

The US is our home. Criminal, violent illegals are destroying walls, attacking law enforcement agents, and attempting to force their way into our 'home', and Democrats ate fighting for the idea that we do not have a right to protect our sovereignty, to lock our doors / keep them out (secure our borders), and protect our family (protect American citizens) from them.

It's just that simple...

As I said - frustrating. This isn’t an invasion. Let’s keep things separated and a cool mind. Every single criminal act is a failure. And we are going to have a lot of them. It’s inevitable.

That doesn’t mean we have to surrender- rather to find the best remedy. In all aspects. The answer won’t be able to express in a sentence or in a raged post online.

My comcern here is that of “the wall” has become more important than it really is. (Although the objection to the wall is equally one eyed)

A middle ground is in desperate need to be found.

Edit: it seems more important to have Trump “winning” or “loosing” while the truth is that it isn’t important at all. What is on stake is if you, as a nation is winning or loosing.

Again, you don't call violent illegals tearing down walls, attacking US law enforcement, and forcing their way into the US an 'invasion'.

I suppose you define an 'invasion' ONLY as 1 nation or entity military invading another.

That is ignorant...but we will just have to agree to disagree.

Actually I could under normal circumstances agree with the statement. But as of now, with the polarity I try to use words carefully.

I was thinking about this:
Let’s say you have 100% resources. You spend all of it in a 95% effective wall. The remaining 5% would constitute the most rough and hard core people. The least desirable.
If you were to adjust your resources so that the effort on the border was only a 80% success but you could weed out those 5% would it be worth it?

WTF?

A wall deters 95% of illegal immigration, leaving 5% that is easily covered by existing - even less - Border Security.

A wall takes the place of many required BPAs, hundreds of nan hours, much if those resources being used now.

95% of migrants / illegals are forced through legal ports of entry....

I’m not going to be able to explain what mean. Not your fault, and not really on topic either.

Do you think ”the wall” had gained too much (positive or negative) focus? That it’s become a creature of its own, so to speak?

 

[ErikViking]

I also think that takes a multi dimensional effort. Well beyond “all wall” or “no wall”.

Ya think?

.

What the hell of a question is that any way? No, I don’t think - it’s the way it is.

So you're disagreeing with your own statement, I was agreeing with you. LMAO

.

Yeah I know - just wrapped your question twice - it’s sort of... well “ya think?” A very subtle phrase like patting the head of someone (child). I hate it!

Yeah, it's a bit condescending, but well deserved for someone who obviously hasn't thought things trough, done the research and has no idea what reality is on the ground. I'd honestly like to see how your little country would absorb 3 million illegals who have a culture 100% the polar opposite of yours. The US allows about 1.4 million legal immigrants a year.

.

It’s well thought through, you only have to adopt a new dimension to your line of thinking.

And you can’t compare the countries in that aspect. You are the ones in luck, believe me.

And I still only question this wall, what it really represents. Eye opener though is that it seems that a lot of people want the wall for the exact same reason a lot of people doesn’t: spite.

 

[ErikViking]

Actually Ergodon informed the US ISIS had been reduced to 1% of Syrian territory. US Intel confirmed that. Bolton confirmed that. Mattis confirmed that. Specian Envoy Jeffrey confirmed that.

So how did the President not know what the situation was in the ground in Syria?

The FACT is the President did not make an uninformed decision to pull out but instead made one not popular with those who supported the Nobel Peace Prize Winner committing an International War crime by invading Syria.

The other FACT is, demonstrated daily, is that snowflakes hate anything and everything the President does.

Democrats attacked the GOP President for not bringing US troops home despite Obama not only not doing so but also dragged the US into 2 wars to help terrotists, putting MORE troops in harm's way by invading Syria.

Snowflakes attacked Trump for ordering troops out ... and just a few minutes ago a snowflake attacked him for not bringing them home fast enough.

Well you can’t be expected to post in the right thread every time!

 

[easyt65]

4,000 violent / criminal illegals forced their way into Mexico, forced their way physically past Mexican police and the Mexican military.

Upon reaching the US border they began tearing down US border barriers and illegally attempted to scale US border fencing rather than comply with existing US law by entering through legal ports of entry. When US Border Patrol Agents engaged them to stop them from destroying US property, violating US laws, and forcing their daily physically illegally into the United States these violent criminal illegals physically attacked / assaulted the BPAs.

You claim this is NOT an invasion.



If a group of 4,000 unidentified foreigners approached a US Military Base's walls, attempted to tear down those walls / barriers, attempted to scale those walls, and attacked US military troops when confronted it worst definitely be considered an ATTACK and / or INVASION, and lethal force, if necessary, would be used to repel that attack.

If criminals scaled your residence wall and attempted to break into your home though windows and other means than through your DOORS, and tried to attack you when confronted in an attempt to force their way in would you call it a 'migration'? Would you call it anything but a 'Home INVASION', 'BREAKING AND ENTERING', an ATTACK on your home?

Would you slow them to enter and justify their actions as ok because they just want a better life....

...it would you call the cops and demand they be dragged away in cuffs ... Or would you hesitate to use your own firearm to blow these criminal invaders breaking into your home in order to protect your family?

Snowflakes attempt to prevent the comparison just described.

The US is our home. Criminal, violent illegals are destroying walls, attacking law enforcement agents, and attempting to force their way into our 'home', and Democrats ate fighting for the idea that we do not have a right to protect our sovereignty, to lock our doors / keep them out (secure our borders), and protect our family (protect American citizens) from them.

It's just that simple...

As I said - frustrating. This isn’t an invasion. Let’s keep things separated and a cool mind. Every single criminal act is a failure. And we are going to have a lot of them. It’s inevitable.

That doesn’t mean we have to surrender- rather to find the best remedy. In all aspects. The answer won’t be able to express in a sentence or in a raged post online.

My comcern here is that of “the wall” has become more important than it really is. (Although the objection to the wall is equally one eyed)

A middle ground is in desperate need to be found.

Edit: it seems more important to have Trump “winning” or “loosing” while the truth is that it isn’t important at all. What is on stake is if you, as a nation is winning or loosing.

Again, you don't call violent illegals tearing down walls, attacking US law enforcement, and forcing their way into the US an 'invasion'.

I suppose you define an 'invasion' ONLY as 1 nation or entity military invading another.

That is ignorant...but we will just have to agree to disagree.

Actually I could under normal circumstances agree with the statement. But as of now, with the polarity I try to use words carefully.

I was thinking about this:
Let’s say you have 100% resources. You spend all of it in a 95% effective wall. The remaining 5% would constitute the most rough and hard core people. The least desirable.
If you were to adjust your resources so that the effort on the border was only a 80% success but you could weed out those 5% would it be worth it?

WTF?

A wall deters 95% of illegal immigration, leaving 5% that is easily covered by existing - even less - Border Security.

A wall takes the place of many required BPAs, hundreds of nan hours, much if those resources being used now.

95% of migrants / illegals are forced through legal ports of entry....

I’m not going to be able to explain what mean. Not your fault, and not really on topic either.

Do you think ”the wall” had gained too much (positive or negative) focus? That it’s become a creature of its own, so to speak?

No.

The Democrats supported and agreed to a wall over a decade ago. Democrats have instead supported illegal immigration for a decade. 20+ million illegals have entered this country illegally since then. An average 1500 more each day 'break in'.

Our border security has not been assessed yet.

Our border security has not been made a big enough issue.

The Democrats opposing our national sovereignty, supporting illegal immigration, and advocating non-enforcement of existing immigration law has not been made enough of an issue.

Ending illegal immigration has not been made a high enough priority.