Discussion in 'General Topics' started by Seggy, Mar 8, 2017.
Can't you let a guy enjoy some irony, Buzz Killington?
Build the wall and they'll ride a boat around or tunnel under it
How about cutting back on the weekly trips down to Florida. I bet that would save money.
But it sounds awesome to West Virginia coal miners.
Open that slide rule factory back up!
Yeah, unfortunately I've had a cocktail. Sorry folks.
No single defense is an effective defense and even the Trump administration has acknowledged this.
A "wall" is a greater piece of a layered defense same as it has always been in any age of warfare. A wall by its self is useful, but it forces a potential opponent to expend resources, time, and effort to circumvent it. In reality it ends up being a very effective tool to funnel that opponent into means you can secure.
But it's easier to just call it stupid when your a critic of it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Agreed. And as well, there are areas a physical wall will be more effective than others, areas where it won't be geographically feasible such as in TX where Lakes Amistad and Falcon are the dividing line between the international boundaries, and areas where a virtual wall rather than a physical wall would be more effective.
It takes a little bit of actual homework and analytical thinking, to see what works and what doesn't. And for anyone wanting 100% effectiveness, in regards to anything man-made, is a pipe dream.
Certainly, we could use something more in the area Im in, than the 2 to 3 foot high "Normandy barriers" pictured below from the other week, that make up the border between Arizona and Mexico for a few hundred miles here. Take 2 seconds to hop over this or a few minutes to cut through it for vehicle access, and is nothing more than a geographical marker in reality.
Depends. It's not an instant yes or no. Like anything, it depends on what areas are being proposed for cutting.
It's like when someone proposes cuts to that sacred cow the Department of Defense. Truth be told, there are areas of large overspending or needless spending in the DoD. I'm all for making cuts in portions that fall into this category. Such as infrastructure....base closings that we've needed to have done for a very long time for real estate we don't need and keep spending money on, but no Congressman will let happen in his district. Or other parts of the bureaucracy that is the DoD. DHS can come under the same scrutiny, so it all depends. Cut it our of SAR or LE? I'd say no. Are there are parts of the USCG that could potentially be wasteful? I would hope that if so, its being properly identified and proper justifications for any proposed cuts are made.
The funniest thing about people who go on tirades about "Trump's wall" do not even realize that it was in fact Clinton and the Democrats who literally doubled the budget and built the current wall.
but hey let's fake some moral outrage so our sjw friends all like our fb page
Yes. The walls were built in the urban areas where cities/towns shared the international border. Is it perfect? No. Is it better than what there was? Yes.
It's an interesting irony that Presidents Clinton and Trump were/are tough on illegal immigration crime and were generally pro law enforcement; while Presidents Bush43 and Obama were weaker on illegal immigration and not very pro law enforcement at all.
In Clinton's State of the Union address from the mid-1990s, he and Trump are saying about the same exact thing:
Holy poopies do I not care. In fact I can't believe I'm even taking the time to type th
That's quite racist of you.
Not for nothing, but if more people knew how to actually use a slide rule, maybe the country wouldn't be so jacked up. Just a thought.
The e6b is a slide rule of sorts. Not claiming that most people who bought one ever learned how to use it, but it makes my head hurt how opaque what is really simple math is to so many. "Math is the language of nature" or something. Anyone who managed to complete high school ought to be able to use some if not most of the functions of a slide rule, IMHO. Also, get off my lawn.
If that's what triggered you, well BLAYSS YOWER HARRRRT!
I didn't remember "West Virginia" being a race on any pilot application!
Make paper Jepps great again. Bring back those printing jobs.
Their mansion and helipad in Chandler is quite nice.
Well, most of our border is water, not the southern land border. It would seem to me that a wall, if highly effective, would funnel the opponent to a much less defended entrance. I just spent 3 days at sea in the Gulf of Mexico and crossing the Florida Straits. The only interactions with the Coast Guard were them making the nautical equivalent of "You're on guard" radio calls from a few hundred miles away, from land.
The impression I have taken away from everyone I have spoken to in the Coast Guard around here is that if you keep your lights on and answer your radio, there is about a zero percent chance they will ever stop or board you, as they can barely inspect the vessels they do suspect now. There are a lot of boats around here. And their budget for interdiction is in all likelihood being cut.
We have 90,000 miles or so of shoreline, and vast oceans beyond that. I suspect 30 billion dollars of wall will just result in nefarious smugglers investing in hundred thousand dollar boats.
Snugglers aren't going to do what's not economically viable to do, so much of that 90,000 miles of shoreline is moot insofar as being utilized from origins far distant, with small cargoes, this making their routes more predictable. Additonally, the USCG isn't the only marine interdiction out there in the Gulf of Mexico, Pacific and southern Atlantic. Again, nothing is perfect, but contingencies known. Whether they are going to be acted upon and accounted for, will be seen I suppose.
Nope, cuz Snugglers just want to snuggle!
Separate names with a comma.