(03-19-2019 12:41 AM)king king Wrote:  The sheriff of the largest county on the border has gone on record as saying that there is no need for a wall. The river has 100 ft cliffs. He has instead called for more technology. This is the approach I agree with too.

Perhaps his section of the border actually doesn't require a barrier since it has a natural one. What else ya got? There are sections of the border that already have effective barriers in place, do you want to tell them they can no longer have their walls but rather have to trade them in for technology when those walls are working quite well? See San Diego and El Paso. See Israel for that matter, tell them their wall is ineffective and watch them laugh at you.

I want a DNA test. I think we may have adopted you rather than your sister and got the two moments confused while in a coke fueled haze.

(03-19-2019 06:55 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 12:41 AM)king king Wrote:  The sheriff of the largest county on the border has gone on record as saying that there is no need for a wall. The river has 100 ft cliffs. He has instead called for more technology. This is the approach I agree with too.

Where the river has 100-foot cliffs, or higher, which is the case in Big Bend, I agree. But it doesn't have 100-foot cliffs in the lower valley. I don't think a wall is really a workable solution along much of the river. But I do think a barrier makes some sense in other areas. I support a mix of barriers, technology, equipment, and manpower.

I don't think Trump seriously wants a border along every foot of the border, but that's the way that he has allowed his idea to be portrayed. I don't think democrats want any kind of barrier anywhere. It appears to me that democrats simply view a steady stream of illegals as a steady supply of new democrat voters. Everything they do support--catch and release, sanctuary cities, adding illegals to the welfare rolls, giving non-citizens the vote--supports the idea that they want to bring illegals in, get them hooked on welfare, and get them the vote. "Keep 'em dumb, keep 'em poor, keep 'em dependent on handouts, and you will keep 'em voting democrat."

yeah, I'm pretty sure that this whole notion the left is spreading about a border wall along the entire southern border is simply hyped up rhetoric. He's never said he wants a continuous wall that spans the entire border.

(03-19-2019 12:41 AM)king king Wrote:  The sheriff of the largest county on the border has gone on record as saying that there is no need for a wall. The river has 100 ft cliffs. He has instead called for more technology. This is the approach I agree with too.

Then that person is an ill informed, never been there, or simply lying moron. Yes, the river has 100 ft cliffs. In some areas. It also has very nice beaches on the US side for a late spring lunch.

Guess what! Now the hombres are on American soil, can claim asylum and will never be seen or heard from again unless they get in trouble in a normal city/state.

It’s gonna take ALL aspects of this thing, as this is no longer just the guys hopping over from ol Mejico and washing dishes or picking the avocados.

It’s an entire migration from Central America, fully a quarter/third of El Salvador now lives here. Do they contribute? Some do. Some don’t.

Should they be here other than the lady from Lichtenstein? Why?

No problem with immigration, LEGAL immigration.

Rest of this schit, and we can’t send our own kids to college cause the state budgets are so wrecked?

Yea, no. Enough already.

(03-19-2019 07:07 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 12:41 AM)king king Wrote:  The sheriff of the largest county on the border has gone on record as saying that there is no need for a wall. The river has 100 ft cliffs. He has instead called for more technology. This is the approach I agree with too.

Perhaps his section of the border actually doesn't require a barrier since it has a natural one. What else ya got? There are sections of the border that already have effective barriers in place, do you want to tell them they can no longer have their walls but rather have to trade them in for technology when those walls are working quite well? See San Diego and El Paso. See Israel for that matter, tell them their wall is ineffective and watch them laugh at you.

I want a DNA test. I think we may have adopted you rather than your sister and got the two moments confused while in a coke fueled haze.

There's this Latin phrase where instead of looking at the message and offering a thoughtful reply (see Owl's reply) the poster calls the other person stupid and attacks them instead of their message. Ad hominem I think?

If a border makes sense, do it. However, more technology could eliminate ANY need for a border. I've already posted at length about potential ways tech could eliminate this problem. But, that's makes me bad instead of calling out a collosal waste of taxpayer money.

Where's all that infrastructure we were promised was going to fix our "terribly broken and hugely broken and ginormously broken" infrastructure? Still waiting...muh promises.

(03-19-2019 08:17 AM)king king Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 07:07 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 12:41 AM)king king Wrote:  The sheriff of the largest county on the border has gone on record as saying that there is no need for a wall. The river has 100 ft cliffs. He has instead called for more technology. This is the approach I agree with too.

Perhaps his section of the border actually doesn't require a barrier since it has a natural one. What else ya got? There are sections of the border that already have effective barriers in place, do you want to tell them they can no longer have their walls but rather have to trade them in for technology when those walls are working quite well? See San Diego and El Paso. See Israel for that matter, tell them their wall is ineffective and watch them laugh at you.

I want a DNA test. I think we may have adopted you rather than your sister and got the two moments confused while in a coke fueled haze.

There's this Latin phrase where instead of looking at the message and offering a thoughtful reply (see Owl's reply) the poster calls the other person stupid and attacks them instead of their message. Ad hominem I think?

If a border makes sense, do it. However, more technology could eliminate ANY need for a border. I've already posted at length about potential ways tech could eliminate this problem. But, that's makes me bad instead of calling out a collosal waste of taxpayer money.

Where's all that infrastructure we were promised was going to fix our "terribly broken and hugely broken and ginormously broken" infrastructure? Still waiting...muh promises.

jfc....how many times do I and others need to point out how "channeling" allows efficacy for tech....

it's a simple concept of creating a barrier to choke 'em down to a narrower point of entry...

you guys have bought into the cluster-finger-bang that is the dippos in washtub....

have fun with that...

(03-19-2019 07:00 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-06-2019 02:04 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Fake News. Just to make it look like there's a crisis.

And no, I don't have to prove it...anymore.

Thanks trump!

BS, and you call yourself a conservative, what a joke.

Can you please link the post in which I did this?

Hint: You won't find one.

I'm a proud liberal.

(03-19-2019 08:17 AM)king king Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 07:07 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 12:41 AM)king king Wrote:  The sheriff of the largest county on the border has gone on record as saying that there is no need for a wall. The river has 100 ft cliffs. He has instead called for more technology. This is the approach I agree with too.

Perhaps his section of the border actually doesn't require a barrier since it has a natural one. What else ya got? There are sections of the border that already have effective barriers in place, do you want to tell them they can no longer have their walls but rather have to trade them in for technology when those walls are working quite well? See San Diego and El Paso. See Israel for that matter, tell them their wall is ineffective and watch them laugh at you.

I want a DNA test. I think we may have adopted you rather than your sister and got the two moments confused while in a coke fueled haze.

There's this Latin phrase where instead of looking at the message and offering a thoughtful reply (see Owl's reply) the poster calls the other person stupid and attacks them instead of their message. Ad hominem I think?

If a border makes sense, do it. However, more technology could eliminate ANY need for a border. I've already posted at length about potential ways tech could eliminate this problem. But, that's makes me bad instead of calling out a collosal waste of taxpayer money.

Where's all that infrastructure we were promised was going to fix our "terribly broken and hugely broken and ginormously broken" infrastructure? Still waiting...muh promises.

People keep saying how technology could eliminate any need for a border. Frankly, I think technology can help—-but folks who think tchnologoy by itself will work—-are just as nuts as those that think we need a wall for the entire US-Mexico border. Thechnology can be easil6 overwhelmed, broken, disabled, destroyed, jammed, etc. Technoloy is has weakenesses just like a wall. We have all seen cameras lenses spray painted. Iran has jammed drones causing crashes.

Israel has a giant network that literally shoots missiles out of the sky when they're fired toward them.

You could fly drones over the entire southern border equipped with FLIIR and sound or light technology to immobilize people until the CBP gets there. The wall does nothing for tunnels yet the tech exists to find them underground from the sky. Use that. Set up sonic horns with detection capabilities in the places where it makes sense and paralyze them. Train it with ML and AI to differentiate between humans and animals. Ever and anon. We don't need just a wall. We need to use that money to develop tech that makes it impossible to cross.

(03-18-2019 11:21 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Interesting idea. Comments?

https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases...PQzT9Y5Zx4

As an academic study it's interesting... but the amount of money and infrastructure, not to mention the requirement for seizing private lands would be enormous.

This to me is like two guys who need to get across the river. One works for a deacde building a bridge and the other buys some waders.

(03-19-2019 10:41 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 08:17 AM)king king Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 07:07 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 12:41 AM)king king Wrote:  The sheriff of the largest county on the border has gone on record as saying that there is no need for a wall. The river has 100 ft cliffs. He has instead called for more technology. This is the approach I agree with too.

Perhaps his section of the border actually doesn't require a barrier since it has a natural one. What else ya got? There are sections of the border that already have effective barriers in place, do you want to tell them they can no longer have their walls but rather have to trade them in for technology when those walls are working quite well? See San Diego and El Paso. See Israel for that matter, tell them their wall is ineffective and watch them laugh at you.

I want a DNA test. I think we may have adopted you rather than your sister and got the two moments confused while in a coke fueled haze.

There's this Latin phrase where instead of looking at the message and offering a thoughtful reply (see Owl's reply) the poster calls the other person stupid and attacks them instead of their message. Ad hominem I think?

If a border makes sense, do it. However, more technology could eliminate ANY need for a border. I've already posted at length about potential ways tech could eliminate this problem. But, that's makes me bad instead of calling out a collosal waste of taxpayer money.

Where's all that infrastructure we were promised was going to fix our "terribly broken and hugely broken and ginormously broken" infrastructure? Still waiting...muh promises.

People keep saying how technology could eliminate any need for a border. Frankly, I think technology can help—-but folks who think tchnologoy by itself will work—-are just as nuts as those that think we need a wall for the entire US-Mexico border. Thechnology can be easil6 overwhelmed, broken, disabled, destroyed, jammed, etc. Technoloy is has weakenesses just like a wall. We have all seen cameras lenses spray painted. Iran has jammed drones causing crashes.

Agree with Owl here...

ALso agree that tech alone isn't the answer. Tech should deter, delay and divert

Deter some from crossing which reduces the size of the force needed
Delay their crossing so that people can arrive and
Divert them away from 'easy' crossings into more difficult ones, and then of course more closely monitor those.

(03-20-2019 11:43 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-18-2019 11:21 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Interesting idea. Comments?

https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases...PQzT9Y5Zx4

As an academic study it's interesting... but the amount of money and infrastructure, not to mention the requirement for seizing private lands would be enormous.

This to me is like two guys who need to get across the river. One works for a deacde building a bridge and the other buys some waders.

(03-19-2019 10:41 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 08:17 AM)king king Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 07:07 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 12:41 AM)king king Wrote:  The sheriff of the largest county on the border has gone on record as saying that there is no need for a wall. The river has 100 ft cliffs. He has instead called for more technology. This is the approach I agree with too.

Perhaps his section of the border actually doesn't require a barrier since it has a natural one. What else ya got? There are sections of the border that already have effective barriers in place, do you want to tell them they can no longer have their walls but rather have to trade them in for technology when those walls are working quite well? See San Diego and El Paso. See Israel for that matter, tell them their wall is ineffective and watch them laugh at you.

I want a DNA test. I think we may have adopted you rather than your sister and got the two moments confused while in a coke fueled haze.

There's this Latin phrase where instead of looking at the message and offering a thoughtful reply (see Owl's reply) the poster calls the other person stupid and attacks them instead of their message. Ad hominem I think?

If a border makes sense, do it. However, more technology could eliminate ANY need for a border. I've already posted at length about potential ways tech could eliminate this problem. But, that's makes me bad instead of calling out a collosal waste of taxpayer money.

Where's all that infrastructure we were promised was going to fix our "terribly broken and hugely broken and ginormously broken" infrastructure? Still waiting...muh promises.

People keep saying how technology could eliminate any need for a border. Frankly, I think technology can help—-but folks who think tchnologoy by itself will work—-are just as nuts as those that think we need a wall for the entire US-Mexico border. Thechnology can be easil6 overwhelmed, broken, disabled, destroyed, jammed, etc. Technoloy is has weakenesses just like a wall. We have all seen cameras lenses spray painted. Iran has jammed drones causing crashes.

Agree with Owl here...

ALso agree that tech alone isn't the answer. Tech should deter, delay and divert

Deter some from crossing which reduces the size of the force needed
Delay their crossing so that people can arrive and
Divert them away from 'easy' crossings into more difficult ones, and then of course more closely monitor those.

fk that....tech is only valuable once you choke it down to a null set....

unless one wants to use drones with a 'kill setting'...

until macro immigration policy changes, once they're in, they're in....why do you think they're coming en masse now.....

your third platitude defines why a wall is req'd....

Build the wall? Mexican thieves in Tijuana say no problemo. They just cut it down and re-sell to Mexicans who want a fence for their own homes.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019...ll-tijuana

(03-20-2019 05:18 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Build the wall? Mexican thieves in Tijuana say no problemo. They just cut it down and re-sell to Mexicans who want a fence for their own homes.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019...ll-tijuana

electrify and shoot the mothertruckers on site...

it's a simple solution that works...

I'm personally all about laying mines...uninvited flesh blown works every single time....

this nation has become a cocktail of cucks....