CONCENTRATION CAMPS

Forum rules
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.

Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source

Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.

Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.

Report when things come up.

Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.

Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
29again
Regent
Regent
Posts: 4288
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:56 pm

Unread post

There was supposed to be border security along with it. It is mentioned in the NPR article I posted.
Also, in 87, he EO the children of the adults he gave amnesty to to also be legalized. For some reason, the children weren't included in the original bill. So, Reagan made that right.
ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:34 pm From what I’m reading I can find that he gave amnesty to “ undocumented immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously with the penalty of a fine, back taxes due, and admission of guilt; candidates were required to prove that they were not guilty of crimes, that they were in the country before January 1, 1982, and that they possessed at least a minimal knowledge about U.S. history, government, and the English language“

But it made it illegal to hire an illegal immigrant, and it lowered crime by 5%


I don’t see which stipulation Democrats did not adhere to though. Is there something they did that went against what they said they would do?
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:18 pm There was a deal made in which Reagan would give amnesty to any/all illegals in the country, in return there would a secure border. Well, we got the amnesty, but we never did get the border secured. Reagan did not want to do the amnesty, but he did it in order to get the border secured, entirely.

I have a feeling that a lot of people have forgotten that, and think this is something new. It's not. There is supposed to be a secure border right NOW, we should have had it for +/- 30 years now.
ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:14 pm I wasn’t born for a substantial part of Reagan’s presidency... which deal was made with democrats in relation to the border that was not upheld?

Expand your thinking


It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.
Momto2boys973
Princess
Princess
Posts: 20108
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 5:32 pm

Unread post

She’s probably talking about the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, because I don’t know of any other.
It definitely doesn’t say what she claims it says. It basically gave sanctions for employers who hired illegal immigrants and offered some protections to already existing illegal immigrants into becoming legal. There were also provisions for seasonal illegal workers in agriculture. The thing about border security wasn’t really a separate part of it. It was implied that, as a consequence of making legal immigration easier, that illegal immigration will be less necessary and therefore border security will be better. But it wasn’t a “deal” as she claims.
ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:14 pm I wasn’t born for a substantial part of Reagan’s presidency... which deal was made with democrats in relation to the border that was not upheld?
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:03 pm There was a crisis at the border before Trump came along. It was handled in a very different way, one that did not follow our immigration laws.

Trump has offered more than once to work with the dems about DACA and the Dreamers, about asylum/amnesty, IF they would fund at least part of the wall. They refused. And Ryan pretty much refused to work with Trump on anything, so nothing happened with him. So, please, get something to help with the TDS and realize that there is a problem that has been there for a LONG time, and that someone is FINALLY doing something about it.

With those two facts in mind, the rest of your lecture is patronizing and self-serving. I remember the deal made with Reagan, the deal which the democrats never kept their part of, which was the beginning of the border crisis we have today. This crisis didn't happen in a mere 2 years, you know...
Momto2boys973 wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:43 am For starters, I would stop escalating the conflict. Everyone knows Trump is the one creating this “border crisis” as a way to egg on his followers and demand his wall. Isn’t it funny that there wasn’t a “border crisis” at the border until his wall was rejected? He throws his usual tantrums, he bullies, he shuts down the government and still he didn’t get his way and suddenly, what do you know? A convenient “border crisis” accelerates. You don’t need to be Niccolò Machiavelli to figure that one out...

So I probably wouldn’t have myself a “crisis” to fix, since I wouldn’t out my winded ego above the well being of my country and other human beings. But let’s pretend for arguments sake. For starters, I would follow International Law and follow the protocols for asylum seekers in an effective way. It was Trump’s tantrum demanding these asylum seekers stay in Mexico and be treated like criminals and “invaders” rather than following the law and processing their requests with the efficiency America is allegedly known for (I mean, even Mexican authorities, known for their inefficiency and bureaucracy did a better job...) that created the current problem. And it was what Trump wanted, really. I would approach Mexican authorities as equals to agree on a way to expedite the situation and make it as positive as possible for all parties involved. In other words, I would seek cooperation for the benefit of all, not bully them into doing what I want through threats and dropping the problem on their laps.

And then, if I had been as idiotic as Trump was to cause the situation that’s happening now... well, then I would have to admit my defeat in my “brilliant” plan to trick America into thinking that wall was an absolute necessity and I would have to provide proper, humane treatment to these human beings that don’t deserve to be treated like rabid dogs.I would then start properly processing the asylum requests according to the law, as I should’ve done since the beginning. I would deport those trying to cross illegally, and I would provide proper accommodations to unaccompanied minors. I would approach Congress with suggestions for dealing with this situation humanely, without putting America at risk. I’m sure that the Democrats would be more than willing to cooperate if we we’re trying to look for a positive solution. I would certainly not become a criminal myself by dehumanizing, vilifying, demeaning, insulting and mistreating innocent human beings just because I’m pissed that I didn’t get my way and they’re convenient scapegoats that can actually help me now.

❤️🇮🇱 עמ׳ ישראל חי 🇮🇱❤️
Deleted User 1344

Unread post

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ronal ... wall-idea/
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:18 pm
There was a deal made in which Reagan would give amnesty to any/all illegals in the country, in return there would a secure border. Well, we got the amnesty, but we never did get the border secured. Reagan did not want to do the amnesty, but he did it in order to get the border secured, entirely.

I have a feeling that a lot of people have forgotten that, and think this is something new. It's not. There is supposed to be a secure border right NOW, we should have had it for +/- 30 years now.
ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:14 pm I wasn’t born for a substantial part of Reagan’s presidency... which deal was made with democrats in relation to the border that was not upheld?
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:03 pm There was a crisis at the border before Trump came along. It was handled in a very different way, one that did not follow our immigration laws.

Trump has offered more than once to work with the dems about DACA and the Dreamers, about asylum/amnesty, IF they would fund at least part of the wall. They refused. And Ryan pretty much refused to work with Trump on anything, so nothing happened with him. So, please, get something to help with the TDS and realize that there is a problem that has been there for a LONG time, and that someone is FINALLY doing something about it.

With those two facts in mind, the rest of your lecture is patronizing and self-serving. I remember the deal made with Reagan, the deal which the democrats never kept their part of, which was the beginning of the border crisis we have today. This crisis didn't happen in a mere 2 years, you know...

User avatar
ReadingRainbow
Princess Royal
Princess Royal
Posts: 5057
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 11:01 am

Unread post

On the border patrols website it says :

The 1980s and 1990s saw a tremendous increase of illegal migration to America. The Border Patrol responded with increases in manpower and the implementation of modern technology. Infrared night-vision scopes, seismic sensors, and a modern computer processing system helped the Patrol locate, apprehend, and process those crossing into the U.S. illegally.

In an effort to bring a level of control to the border, Operation "Hold the Line" was established in 1993 in El Paso, and proved an immediate success. Agents and technology were concentrated in specific areas, providing a "show of force" to potential illegal border crossers. The drastic reduction in apprehensions prompted the Border Patrol to undertake a full-scale effort in San Diego, California, which accounted for more than half of illegal entries. Operation "Gatekeeper" was implemented in 1994, and reduced illegal entries in San Diego by more than 75% over the next few years.


So it seems like border security has increased since then. What would you have liked to see done that would increase security?
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:39 pm There was supposed to be border security along with it. It is mentioned in the NPR article I posted.
Also, in 87, he EO the children of the adults he gave amnesty to to also be legalized. For some reason, the children weren't included in the original bill. So, Reagan made that right.
ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:34 pm From what I’m reading I can find that he gave amnesty to “ undocumented immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously with the penalty of a fine, back taxes due, and admission of guilt; candidates were required to prove that they were not guilty of crimes, that they were in the country before January 1, 1982, and that they possessed at least a minimal knowledge about U.S. history, government, and the English language“

But it made it illegal to hire an illegal immigrant, and it lowered crime by 5%


I don’t see which stipulation Democrats did not adhere to though. Is there something they did that went against what they said they would do?
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:18 pm There was a deal made in which Reagan would give amnesty to any/all illegals in the country, in return there would a secure border. Well, we got the amnesty, but we never did get the border secured. Reagan did not want to do the amnesty, but he did it in order to get the border secured, entirely.

I have a feeling that a lot of people have forgotten that, and think this is something new. It's not. There is supposed to be a secure border right NOW, we should have had it for +/- 30 years now.

29again
Regent
Regent
Posts: 4288
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:56 pm

Unread post

That "new and improved" technology is now 25+ years old. But, yes, they tried. As far as I understood things from then, there was supposed to be some kind of barrier, possibly a fence, all along the border. I'm pretty sure it was in a bill, but the funding was just somehow never there in the dem-run Houses we had.

I really would like to have a barrier, more than just a fence, though, along the border. I just believe it is necessary to delineate somehow the line between two sovereign countries. Either that, or armed guards every 20 feet or so.... Or maybe moats and alligators along the border for the parts that a fence/barrier won't do??? (sarc.) I'm not pretending to have all the answers, but I also don't believe this is a problem that just came up in the past 24 months. I think it is a fluid kind of thing -- crossings are up in this area, but down over there because of X, then up over there and down over that way... always changing depending on what tech is where, how many agents in an area, etc. Whatever the answer may be, we have to try to stop the millions of illegal crossings. As you are well aware, we don't have the necessary space, supplies, or manpower to effectively deal with the ones we have now.... I am glad that Trump got Mexico on board to help stop some of the migration northwards... that should be a huge help!! (Way past due, but still glad to have it now!)

ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:09 pm On the border patrols website it says :

The 1980s and 1990s saw a tremendous increase of illegal migration to America. The Border Patrol responded with increases in manpower and the implementation of modern technology. Infrared night-vision scopes, seismic sensors, and a modern computer processing system helped the Patrol locate, apprehend, and process those crossing into the U.S. illegally.

In an effort to bring a level of control to the border, Operation "Hold the Line" was established in 1993 in El Paso, and proved an immediate success. Agents and technology were concentrated in specific areas, providing a "show of force" to potential illegal border crossers. The drastic reduction in apprehensions prompted the Border Patrol to undertake a full-scale effort in San Diego, California, which accounted for more than half of illegal entries. Operation "Gatekeeper" was implemented in 1994, and reduced illegal entries in San Diego by more than 75% over the next few years.


So it seems like border security has increased since then. What would you have liked to see done that would increase security?
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:39 pm There was supposed to be border security along with it. It is mentioned in the NPR article I posted.
Also, in 87, he EO the children of the adults he gave amnesty to to also be legalized. For some reason, the children weren't included in the original bill. So, Reagan made that right.
ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:34 pm From what I’m reading I can find that he gave amnesty to “ undocumented immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously with the penalty of a fine, back taxes due, and admission of guilt; candidates were required to prove that they were not guilty of crimes, that they were in the country before January 1, 1982, and that they possessed at least a minimal knowledge about U.S. history, government, and the English language“

But it made it illegal to hire an illegal immigrant, and it lowered crime by 5%


I don’t see which stipulation Democrats did not adhere to though. Is there something they did that went against what they said they would do?

Expand your thinking


It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.
User avatar
ReadingRainbow
Princess Royal
Princess Royal
Posts: 5057
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 11:01 am

Unread post

The main problems I had with building a 40 ft wall is that I didn’t think it would help much ( I mean, they sell 50ft ladders at Walmart) and I think it was way too much money to spend on something that wasn’t going to work... plus the whole “ we’ll get Mexico to pay for it” line was just causing a fight between nations that was not going to be helpful to anyone.

I do think there should be border security and I do think we need to vet everyone coming over and make sure there are no dangerous criminals getting in, but I don’t think we’re going about it in a right or moral way right now.
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:28 pm That "new and improved" technology is now 25+ years old. But, yes, they tried. As far as I understood things from then, there was supposed to be some kind of barrier, possibly a fence, all along the border. I'm pretty sure it was in a bill, but the funding was just somehow never there in the dem-run Houses we had.

I really would like to have a barrier, more than just a fence, though, along the border. I just believe it is necessary to delineate somehow the line between two sovereign countries. Either that, or armed guards every 20 feet or so.... Or maybe moats and alligators along the border for the parts that a fence/barrier won't do??? (sarc.) I'm not pretending to have all the answers, but I also don't believe this is a problem that just came up in the past 24 months. I think it is a fluid kind of thing -- crossings are up in this area, but down over there because of X, then up over there and down over that way... always changing depending on what tech is where, how many agents in an area, etc. Whatever the answer may be, we have to try to stop the millions of illegal crossings. As you are well aware, we don't have the necessary space, supplies, or manpower to effectively deal with the ones we have now.... I am glad that Trump got Mexico on board to help stop some of the migration northwards... that should be a huge help!! (Way past due, but still glad to have it now!)

ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:09 pm On the border patrols website it says :

The 1980s and 1990s saw a tremendous increase of illegal migration to America. The Border Patrol responded with increases in manpower and the implementation of modern technology. Infrared night-vision scopes, seismic sensors, and a modern computer processing system helped the Patrol locate, apprehend, and process those crossing into the U.S. illegally.

In an effort to bring a level of control to the border, Operation "Hold the Line" was established in 1993 in El Paso, and proved an immediate success. Agents and technology were concentrated in specific areas, providing a "show of force" to potential illegal border crossers. The drastic reduction in apprehensions prompted the Border Patrol to undertake a full-scale effort in San Diego, California, which accounted for more than half of illegal entries. Operation "Gatekeeper" was implemented in 1994, and reduced illegal entries in San Diego by more than 75% over the next few years.


So it seems like border security has increased since then. What would you have liked to see done that would increase security?
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:39 pm There was supposed to be border security along with it. It is mentioned in the NPR article I posted.
Also, in 87, he EO the children of the adults he gave amnesty to to also be legalized. For some reason, the children weren't included in the original bill. So, Reagan made that right.

29again
Regent
Regent
Posts: 4288
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:56 pm

Unread post

Honestly, I didn't think you felt that way, I took you for an open borders supporter.... I don't think I ever asked, and just assumed based on some of your other views. I apologize for that, I really shouldn't have assumed.

One thing, I don't think we can do much better with what we have now... congress won't do a thing, won't authorize more money to help. We don't have the money for more agents, if we even have the applicants. I don't know how that works, tbh. But in any case, we simply don't have the manpower, the money, the supplies, or the space to do what we really NEED to do right now. So, can we tell them the border is shut, we can't take any more??? That really doesn't work... and we can't leave them in the desert, nor can we just let them go off to the wild blue yonder. I don't know what to do for the "right now" except to get on Congress' ass to get something done.

I always took that "Mexico will pay for it" as new trade deals, or tariffs, not that Mexico would roll over and cut us a check for a wall. And I don't care if it is a wall, a moat, an electric fence, or what... but we definitely need something! I'm not as certain as you that a 40' wall would not work at all... I just don't know if it would or not, but I'm ready to try anything at this point.
ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:39 pm The main problems I had with building a 40 ft wall is that I didn’t think it would help much ( I mean, they sell 50ft ladders at Walmart) and I think it was way too much money to spend on something that wasn’t going to work... plus the whole “ we’ll get Mexico to pay for it” line was just causing a fight between nations that was not going to be helpful to anyone.

I do think there should be border security and I do think we need to vet everyone coming over and make sure there are no dangerous criminals getting in, but I don’t think we’re going about it in a right or moral way right now.
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:28 pm That "new and improved" technology is now 25+ years old. But, yes, they tried. As far as I understood things from then, there was supposed to be some kind of barrier, possibly a fence, all along the border. I'm pretty sure it was in a bill, but the funding was just somehow never there in the dem-run Houses we had.

I really would like to have a barrier, more than just a fence, though, along the border. I just believe it is necessary to delineate somehow the line between two sovereign countries. Either that, or armed guards every 20 feet or so.... Or maybe moats and alligators along the border for the parts that a fence/barrier won't do??? (sarc.) I'm not pretending to have all the answers, but I also don't believe this is a problem that just came up in the past 24 months. I think it is a fluid kind of thing -- crossings are up in this area, but down over there because of X, then up over there and down over that way... always changing depending on what tech is where, how many agents in an area, etc. Whatever the answer may be, we have to try to stop the millions of illegal crossings. As you are well aware, we don't have the necessary space, supplies, or manpower to effectively deal with the ones we have now.... I am glad that Trump got Mexico on board to help stop some of the migration northwards... that should be a huge help!! (Way past due, but still glad to have it now!)

ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:09 pm On the border patrols website it says :

The 1980s and 1990s saw a tremendous increase of illegal migration to America. The Border Patrol responded with increases in manpower and the implementation of modern technology. Infrared night-vision scopes, seismic sensors, and a modern computer processing system helped the Patrol locate, apprehend, and process those crossing into the U.S. illegally.

In an effort to bring a level of control to the border, Operation "Hold the Line" was established in 1993 in El Paso, and proved an immediate success. Agents and technology were concentrated in specific areas, providing a "show of force" to potential illegal border crossers. The drastic reduction in apprehensions prompted the Border Patrol to undertake a full-scale effort in San Diego, California, which accounted for more than half of illegal entries. Operation "Gatekeeper" was implemented in 1994, and reduced illegal entries in San Diego by more than 75% over the next few years.


So it seems like border security has increased since then. What would you have liked to see done that would increase security?
Expand your thinking


It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.
Deleted User 276

Unread post

I wish people would take more offense that the US is detaining people, including children, in horrible conditions rather than how we label the facilities.
User avatar
Valentina327
Princess
Princess
Posts: 16075
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 2:23 am

Unread post

ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:39 pm The main problems I had with building a 40 ft wall is that I didn’t think it would help much ( I mean, they sell 50ft ladders at Walmart) and I think it was way too much money to spend on something that wasn’t going to work... plus the whole “ we’ll get Mexico to pay for it” line was just causing a fight between nations that was not going to be helpful to anyone.

I do think there should be border security and I do think we need to vet everyone coming over and make sure there are no dangerous criminals getting in, but I don’t think we’re going about it in a right or moral way right now.
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:28 pm That "new and improved" technology is now 25+ years old. But, yes, they tried. As far as I understood things from then, there was supposed to be some kind of barrier, possibly a fence, all along the border. I'm pretty sure it was in a bill, but the funding was just somehow never there in the dem-run Houses we had.

I really would like to have a barrier, more than just a fence, though, along the border. I just believe it is necessary to delineate somehow the line between two sovereign countries. Either that, or armed guards every 20 feet or so.... Or maybe moats and alligators along the border for the parts that a fence/barrier won't do??? (sarc.) I'm not pretending to have all the answers, but I also don't believe this is a problem that just came up in the past 24 months. I think it is a fluid kind of thing -- crossings are up in this area, but down over there because of X, then up over there and down over that way... always changing depending on what tech is where, how many agents in an area, etc. Whatever the answer may be, we have to try to stop the millions of illegal crossings. As you are well aware, we don't have the necessary space, supplies, or manpower to effectively deal with the ones we have now.... I am glad that Trump got Mexico on board to help stop some of the migration northwards... that should be a huge help!! (Way past due, but still glad to have it now!)

ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:09 pm On the border patrols website it says :

The 1980s and 1990s saw a tremendous increase of illegal migration to America. The Border Patrol responded with increases in manpower and the implementation of modern technology. Infrared night-vision scopes, seismic sensors, and a modern computer processing system helped the Patrol locate, apprehend, and process those crossing into the U.S. illegally.

In an effort to bring a level of control to the border, Operation "Hold the Line" was established in 1993 in El Paso, and proved an immediate success. Agents and technology were concentrated in specific areas, providing a "show of force" to potential illegal border crossers. The drastic reduction in apprehensions prompted the Border Patrol to undertake a full-scale effort in San Diego, California, which accounted for more than half of illegal entries. Operation "Gatekeeper" was implemented in 1994, and reduced illegal entries in San Diego by more than 75% over the next few years.


So it seems like border security has increased since then. What would you have liked to see done that would increase security?
Valid point. Walls can be scaled or dug under. I guess it's the same thing as locking your car - yes the window can be broken and your car can be breached, however, it will deter a large amount of would be thieves. Why make it easy, right?

I was watching a video talking with some people who have farms on the border. It was pretty interesting. They took a walk to the actual border and there are many miles where there is no clear line of demarcation. It's literally a 2x4 laying in some dust. There truly is a lack of barrier.

One farmer stated that they've caught about half a million people crossing illegally and hiding out on his land the last 25 years. That's just one guy.

I can't imagine how uneasy and vulnerable these people must feel that live in these border towns. They must never rest easy, not knowing who's hiding in their shed, who's crawled into their car to lay low, who's broken into their barn to take a nap. I'm just very grateful to be in the Midwest.
Let's Go Brandon!
#FJB

https://openvaers.com/
Momto2boys973
Princess
Princess
Posts: 20108
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 5:32 pm

Unread post

You realize that you’re talking about nearly 2000 miles of border and that the terrain isn’t a nice flat, dry, easily maleable surface and therefore it’s impossible to build a wall along the whole border, right? You also do know that more than half the area is privately owned, right? And how exactly do you expect to build a wall along the Rio Grande?
Are you aware that most illegal immigrants don’t enter through the border illegally and that those that do usually don’t jump the fence. They use tunnels.
And if you claim there’s not enough money for more agents (I would love to see where you got that fact from), where do you expect the alleged $25 billion required for Trump’s wall to come from? And where do you expect to get the millions that will be required for the required maintenance and patrolling of that wall?
It seems Trump and his followers think building a wall IRL is as easy as doing it on Clash of Kings. You just click on a point in the map, drag the cursor and let go where you wall your wall to end and voila! It drops from the sky!
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:53 pm Honestly, I didn't think you felt that way, I took you for an open borders supporter.... I don't think I ever asked, and just assumed based on some of your other views. I apologize for that, I really shouldn't have assumed.

One thing, I don't think we can do much better with what we have now... congress won't do a thing, won't authorize more money to help. We don't have the money for more agents, if we even have the applicants. I don't know how that works, tbh. But in any case, we simply don't have the manpower, the money, the supplies, or the space to do what we really NEED to do right now. So, can we tell them the border is shut, we can't take any more??? That really doesn't work... and we can't leave them in the desert, nor can we just let them go off to the wild blue yonder. I don't know what to do for the "right now" except to get on Congress' ass to get something done.

I always took that "Mexico will pay for it" as new trade deals, or tariffs, not that Mexico would roll over and cut us a check for a wall. And I don't care if it is a wall, a moat, an electric fence, or what... but we definitely need something! I'm not as certain as you that a 40' wall would not work at all... I just don't know if it would or not, but I'm ready to try anything at this point.
ReadingRainbow wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:39 pm The main problems I had with building a 40 ft wall is that I didn’t think it would help much ( I mean, they sell 50ft ladders at Walmart) and I think it was way too much money to spend on something that wasn’t going to work... plus the whole “ we’ll get Mexico to pay for it” line was just causing a fight between nations that was not going to be helpful to anyone.

I do think there should be border security and I do think we need to vet everyone coming over and make sure there are no dangerous criminals getting in, but I don’t think we’re going about it in a right or moral way right now.
29again wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:28 pm That "new and improved" technology is now 25+ years old. But, yes, they tried. As far as I understood things from then, there was supposed to be some kind of barrier, possibly a fence, all along the border. I'm pretty sure it was in a bill, but the funding was just somehow never there in the dem-run Houses we had.

I really would like to have a barrier, more than just a fence, though, along the border. I just believe it is necessary to delineate somehow the line between two sovereign countries. Either that, or armed guards every 20 feet or so.... Or maybe moats and alligators along the border for the parts that a fence/barrier won't do??? (sarc.) I'm not pretending to have all the answers, but I also don't believe this is a problem that just came up in the past 24 months. I think it is a fluid kind of thing -- crossings are up in this area, but down over there because of X, then up over there and down over that way... always changing depending on what tech is where, how many agents in an area, etc. Whatever the answer may be, we have to try to stop the millions of illegal crossings. As you are well aware, we don't have the necessary space, supplies, or manpower to effectively deal with the ones we have now.... I am glad that Trump got Mexico on board to help stop some of the migration northwards... that should be a huge help!! (Way past due, but still glad to have it now!)


❤️🇮🇱 עמ׳ ישראל חי 🇮🇱❤️
Locked Previous topicNext topic